Searching \ for '[OT]: RFID & Spectrum Management (was: Self-serve' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/io/serials.htm?key=rfid
Search entire site for: 'RFID & Spectrum Management (was: Self-serve'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[OT]: RFID & Spectrum Management (was: Self-serve '
2003\06\13@135430 by Nate Duehr

face
flavicon
face
> The problem I see is the DSP algorithms needed to overcome all the
> effects of metal and other RF changing fields in the basket (cans, foil,
> liquids, etc).
>
> RFID isn't going to come for quite some time.
>
> -Adam

Not to mention the inevitable interference complaints from other licensed
users of all the bands they've decided to use in the so-called "unlicensed"
spectrum.

(I love it when manufacturers make it out like they're using this wide open
spectrum that no one else is licensed in.  Example, I got a flyer for a
broadband Internet company moving into my neighborhood using the "unlicensed
portion of 900 MHz".  I went to the device manufacturer's site, and they say
they're going to cover large areas with indoor non-line-of-sight antennas
and total output power of 320 or so mW.  Obviously to do that their
recievers are going to be very sensitive.  And they're probably not going to
spend much money making them super-selective, plus they won't want the
resulting loss in sensitivity... so they'll build broad-door wide front-ends
that are highly pre-amplified -- and then they're going to have a really
hard time figuring out why their devices front-ends are blown away when I
fire up a fully licensed, 11W 900 MHz FM repeater at 921.2 in my backyard...
and the entire broadband provider in the neighborhood goes dead.  Oh well...
you're unlicensed... and your recievers are too broad... sorry.)

At least here in the U.S. the FCC seems bent on offering up spectrum for use
without licensing for these types of applications but then they shirk their
old more "traditional" responsibility of mediation of interference --
stepping back and allowing the unlicensed spectrum users duke it out on
their own -- no longer are they interested in supporting the spectrum use
plans with the teeth of enforcement like they used to.  Or creating
reasonable plans to keep incompatible services from interfereing with each
other.  The only folks that they do that for is public safety systems,
really.  It comes across as amazingly lazy.

Of course, when they do offer up real licensed spectrum they auction it off
for millions and millions of dollars.  When did spectrum management become a
revenue source for the Feds?  (And then they learned that a bunch of these
companies went under, the spectrum is unused, and the bills are not paid.
Ahh... surprise surprise.  And they even got their arse's handed to them on
a platter by a Federal Court when they tried to re-auction off spectrum of a
company in bankruptcy protection -- oops -- you're no longer in charge of
that bandwidth Mr. FCC, because the company's "assets" are protected from
you as their "creditor" while they're in bankruptcy.  Smooth move that one
was!)

With cordless phones, baby monitors, and stuff -- 900 MHz here in the U.S.
is already a mess -- but now higher power systems like the 900 MHz tags for
motorists driving on a local toll-road and these broadband data systems are
already throwing crud all over the band through transmitters that have gone
a little... uhh... let's just say they're broken and it shows up nicely on a
spectrum analyzer...

Here locally there's at least two Internet bandwidth providers fighting over
900 MHz with others duking it out in 2.4 and 5.8 GHz.  And guess where the
newest batch of cordless phones is already at?  Ha... this is laughable
spectrum management!

Governmental spectrum managers are taking the easy way out allowing this
"everyone dogpile on"-mentality to reign in these bands... it *will* come
back to bite them.  And they're encouraging it by making the "cost of entry"
to licensed spectrum impossible for anyone smaller than a multi-national
conglomerate corporation to afford.

In light of all that, I think RFID is slated to just be more noise...
literally.

It'll also be interesting to see some anti-social young person create the
first "supermarket jammer" device just to create havok when RFID starts to
get widespread deployment.  I'll be watching for it as a cheesy "hax0r
Walmart's checkstands and be a l33t d00d!" article in publications like 2600
magazine... as I'm sure it'll be there, eventually.  And I'm sure lots of
kids will build them just to be annoying.

Nate Duehr, spam_OUTnateTakeThisOuTspamnatetech.com - WY0X

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2003\06\13@140303 by David VanHorn

flavicon
face
These tags operate with inductive coupling, narrow band, on relatively low frequencies.  Check the microchip RFID docs.  There are other players, but they are all similar in this regard.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2003\06\13@141801 by Nate Duehr

face
flavicon
face
> These tags operate with inductive coupling, narrow band, on relatively low
frequencies.  Check the microchip RFID docs.  There are other players, but
they are all similar in this regard.

Yes, but the manufacturers of these devices have repeatedly asked for
spectrum in the 430 MHz range, which is chock full of licensed users.  It's
been blocked at the Request for Comment stage at least once now, but they'll
keep asking...

Nate Duehr, .....nateKILLspamspam@spam@natetech.com

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2003\06\13@171252 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
> > These tags operate with inductive coupling, narrow band, on
> relatively low
> frequencies.  Check the microchip RFID docs.  There are other players, but
> they are all similar in this regard.
>
> Yes, but the manufacturers of these devices have repeatedly asked for
> spectrum in the 430 MHz range, which is chock full of licensed
> users.  It's
> been blocked at the Request for Comment stage at least once now,
> but they'll
> keep asking...

       I don't think there are ANY plans to do RFID at that high a frequency.
Remember, with RFID the carrier is supplying power as well as info, it's
much easier to power a device from a 120kHz signal then one at 430MHz, cost
is of upmost concern here. TTYL

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2003\06\13@222959 by Larry Williams

flavicon
face
Hate to tell you but there are tags that work @ 900mhz and higher.  We
found them when working on a couple of RFID projects. Check out the
antennae on truck scales and toll tags for bridges. Ponchartrain bridge
across Lake Ponchartrain in Louisiana uses 900mhz.

Herbert Graf wrote:
{Quote hidden}

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2003\06\13@223637 by Herbert Graf
flavicon
face
> Hate to tell you but there are tags that work @ 900mhz and higher.  We
> found them when working on a couple of RFID projects. Check out the
> antennae on truck scales and toll tags for bridges. Ponchartrain bridge
> across Lake Ponchartrain in Louisiana uses 900mhz.

       Those are completely different apps where the cost per tag isn't supposed
to be <$0.10, apples vs. oranges. We are talking about, essentially, a
replacement for the UPC barcode on items. Cost per tag has to be in the "few
cents" range, I just don't see higher frequency techniques getting there
before lower frequency solutions. TTYL

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2003\06\18@221710 by Andrew Warren

flavicon
face
Herbert Graf <PICLISTspamKILLspammitvma.mit.edu> wrote:

> We are talking about, essentially, a replacement for the UPC
> barcode on items. Cost per tag has to be in the "few cents" range,
> I just don't see higher frequency techniques getting there before
> lower frequency solutions.

   Hmm, the RFID system which I helped to develop a few years ago
   used 5-cent tags operating in the 2.4 GHz area.  It was a bit
   faster than the low-frequency systems, too; read speed was about
   a thousand tags per second in the best case, and a cart
   containing a few-hundred tagged items could easily be read in the
   time it took to pass it through a doorway.

   -Andy

=== Andrew Warren -- .....aiwKILLspamspam.....cypress.com
=== Principal Design Engineer
=== Cypress Semiconductor Corporation
===
=== Opinions expressed above do not
=== necessarily represent those of
=== Cypress Semiconductor Corporation

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2003\06\19@043908 by Katinka Mills

flavicon
face
{Quote hidden}

I remember testing these in the warehouse of a former employer, a customer
wanted to see how well they worked, so a few items at a time would get added
to the basket, and I had to move them through a doorway as quick as possible
:o) we maxed out at about 300 tags and me running as fast as I could through
the door way. I wondered why I had a nice green glow since that experiment
;o)

Regards,
Kat.

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.443 / Virus Database: 248 - Release Date: 10/01/2003

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email KILLspamlistservKILLspamspammitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body


'[OT]: RFID & Spectrum Management (was: Self-serve '
2005\03\12@055305 by Omer YALHI
flavicon
face
I don't understand something.  If the range of the RFID is about 10-20cm,
how can they be utilized at supermarkets, wouldn't you need thousands of
readers spread around the cashiers?  Or how can you use them in a warehouse,
the range seems so limited, are there longer range RFIDs , maybe 10-20
meters or so?

Regards, Omer

{Original Message removed}

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2005 , 2006 only
- Today
- New search...