Engineering RAI N RFI D Solutions Chris Diorio RAIN Chairman - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Engineering RAI N RFI D Solutions

Chris Diorio RAIN Chairman Impinj CEO

Agenda

• Reason for this presentation

– Describe technical requirements for solutions – Accelerate industry adoption – Understand the physics

• Topics this presentation will cover

– RAIN system dynamic range and inlay selection – Tag backscatter strength and portal sensitivity – Standards for delivering performant solutions

• Call-to-action

– Education Working Group – Solutions Working Group

RAI N System Dynamic Range and I nlay Selection

Start with a RT Link Test

• 100 clothing items
• Two 70×14mm inlays per item

(right/left cuff) – Inlay1 uses IC1 – Inlay2 uses IC2

• Chamber measurements

show inlay1 is 2dB more sensitive than inlay2

• Alternated inlay1 and inlay2

cuff orientation in rack

• Portal sensitivity = –83dBm

3.2m 3.3m 4.6m

Test Data and Key Observations

• Real-world sensitivity

difference is 4.6dB – Not 2dB as measured in chamber – Difference is due to IC detuning in application

• Chamber sensitivity

does not tell whole sensitivity story

Inlay1 chamber sensitivity Inlay2 chamber sensitivity Inlay1 Inlay2

4.6dB

Plot Data on a Gaussian Axis

Preader (dBm) 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 1% 10% 50% 90% 99% 99.9%

4.6dB

g g y

R6 data R6 gauss_fit U7 data U7 gauss_fit

• 97.5% readability (2σ) requires (mean + 6dB) power

Inlay1 data Inlay1 fit Inlay2 data Inlay2 fit

Read reliability versus power for two 70×14mm inlays

Evaluating System Performance

Preader (dBm)

18 20 22 24 26 28 30 1% 10% 50% 90% 99% 99.9% 4.6dB

MonzaR6 vs Ucode7 70x14mm and R6 41x16mm Read Reliability

R6 data R6 gauss_fit U7 data U7 gauss_fit R6_41x16mm data R6_41x16 gauss_fit

Inlay IC Type Inlay Size Test Range Tx power (50% reads) 2σ Margin to 4.6m Range Read range (97.5% reliability) Inlay1 1 70×14 4.6m 20dBm 6.2dB 3.8dB 7.1m Inlay2 2 70×14 4.6m 25dBm 6dB –1dB 4m Inlay3 1 40×15 4.6m 26dBm 7.4dB –3.4dB 3.1m

Read reliability versus power for two 70×14mm and one 40×15mm inlay

Inlay1 data Inlay1 fit Inlay2 data Inlay2 fit Inlay3 data Inlay3 fit

Observations

• Two parameters describe inlay sensitivity in

an application

– Tx power for 50% tag readability – Standard deviation

• Chamber sensitivity does not tell whole story
• Small inlays have greatly reduced sensitivity

– 40mm inlay 7.2dB less sensitive than 70mm inlay

Tag Backscatter Strength and Portal Sensitivity

Start with a Link Test

• 100 sweaters
• Inlay2 has a more modern IC than Inlay1

Inlay 2 Inlay 2 Inlay 1 Inlay 1

Surprising Results

• Inlay2 is ~2dB more sensitive than Inlay1
• Reducing portal Rx sensitivity degrades Inlay2 read

performance more than it does Inlay1 !!

Portal Rx Sensitivity = –83dBm Portal Rx Sensitivity = –65dBm

4dB

12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Reader Power [dBm] Read Percentage [%] Inlay 1 Inlay 2 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Reader Power [dBm] Read Percentage [%] Inlay 1 Inlay 2

RIP = POTF (dBm)

• 20
• 18
• 16
• 14
• 12
• 10
• 8
• 6
• 4
• 2
• 50
• 45
• 40
• 35
• 30
• 25
• 20
• 15
• 10

Backscatter vs Tag Chip Generation

Let’s Use a Graphical Tool

Typ Handheld Performance Typ Fixed Performance

Portal Received Power Contours

• RIP – Received Isotropic Power
• EIRP – Modulated Equivalent Isotropic Radiated Power

RIP = POTF (dBm)

• 20
• 18
• 16
• 14
• 12
• 10
• 8
• 6
• 4
• 2
• 50
• 45
• 40
• 35
• 30
• 25
• 20
• 15
• 10

Perfect Reflector Modulation Loss = - 6dB

Backscatter vs Tag Chip Generation

Backscatter vs I C Generation

• Theoretical result, with 6dB modulation loss (for a perfect reflector)

– 3dB loss due to tag reflecting power half the time – 3dB loss from half power in modulation and half in CW

2006 IC 2016 IC Modulation loss

RIP = POTF (dBm)

• 20
• 18
• 16
• 14
• 12
• 10
• 8
• 6
• 4
• 2
• 50
• 45
• 40
• 35
• 30
• 25
• 20
• 15
• 10

Backscatter vs Tag Chip Generation

Backscatter vs Overdrive

• Theoretical result, with typical m = 0.25

– IC consumes near-constant energy so inlay detunes as RIP increases – Inlay detuning means more power is lost to CW scattering – Scattered CW energy cannot be modulated

Perfect modulation loss = 6dB

Low-sensitivity portals prefer

• lder-generation tag ICs

(i.e. higher cost inlays!!)

Tag Performance Grades

RIP = POTF (dBm)

• 20
• 18
• 16
• 14
• 12
• 10
• 8
• 6
• 4
• 2
• 50
• 45
• 40
• 35
• 30
• 25
• 20
• 15
• 10

M25B M20D M15B M10B ARC_KEU ARC_MUS ARC_NUS

Sensitivity and Backscatter vs Tag Standards

• ARC and TIPP grades are point solutions that represent or derive from

fielded deployments

RIP = POTF (dBm)

• 20
• 18
• 16
• 14
• 12
• 10
• 8
• 6
• 4
• 2
• 50
• 45
• 40
• 35
• 30
• 25
• 20
• 15
• 10

M25B M20D M15B M10B ARC_KEU ARC_MUS

865MHz 902MHz 915MHz 930MHz

Measured Data

70× 14mm inlay with modern I C

• Inlay manufacturers must degrade inlay sensitivity by 4dB to pass M20D
• –65 dBm sensitivity portals lose 70% read range on modern tags
• Newly proposed ARC_Nus penalizes modern tags

4dB degradation

Typical modulation loss for real systems is 12dB Typical m for real tags is 0.25

ARC_Nus

Thoughts on a Methodology

RIP = POTF (dBm)

• 20
• 18
• 16
• 14
• 12
• 10
• 8
• 6
• 4
• 2
• 50
• 45
• 40
• 35
• 30
• 25
• 20
• 15
• 10

M25B M20D M15B M10B ARC_KEU ARC_MUS ARC_NUS

Sensitivity and Backscatter vs Tag Standards

• Tags defined by a contour [sensitivity, modulation loss, m]
• Portals defined by a contour [portal sensitivity]
• Can easily calculate read range

Max Range in RIP

Standards for Delivering Performant Solutions

Tag Sensitivity Keeps I mproving

12 14 16 18 20 22 Monza 1 G2XL Monza 3 Higgs 3 G2iL Monza 4 Monza 5 Ucode 7 Monza R6

• Sensitivity has followed an exponential trend

– Prediction: Trend will continue for another 10 years

• Want solutions to benefit from this improvement

Tag Sensitivity in –dBm

20 18 16 14 12 10

2005 IC Generation 2014

Observation

• Existing inlay grades are point solutions

– Can view point solutions as single data points in a more comprehensive methodology

• Industry doesn’t have any portal grades
• Thoughts on a methodology (needs work)

– Suppliers measure:

• Tags: Tag contour and application standard deviation (σ)
• Portals: Portal sensitivity (need measurement standard)

– End users input:

• Tag and portal type
• Application
• Desired read reliability

– Calculator outputs application read range

Example

RIP = POTF (dBm)

• 20
• 18
• 16
• 14
• 12
• 10
• 8
• 6
• 4
• 2
• 50
• 45
• 40
• 35
• 30
• 25
• 20
• 15
• 10

M25B M20D M15B M10B ARC_KEU ARC_MUS ARC_NUS

Sensitivity and Backscatter vs Tag Standards

Max Range in RIP 2σ = 6dB Application Read Range

Call-to-Action

• Solutions Working Group tackle RAIN system-

performance methodology

– Goal: Include both inlay and portal – Goal: Maximize benefits from industry innovations – Goal: Simplify system analysis for suppliers and end users

• Education Working Group educate end users

about RAIN systems

– Goal: Best practices and industry guidelines to allow solution providers and end users to specify solutions

• Simple white paper available to end users
• Detailed (technical) white paper for RAIN members