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 3.2m 4.6m show inlay1 is 2dB more sensitive than inlay2 • Alternated inlay1 and inlay2 cuff orientation in rack • Portal sensitivity = –83dBm 3.3m

Test Data and Key Observations • Real-world sensitivity difference is 4.6dB – Not 2dB as measured in chamber 4.6dB Inlay1 chamber – Difference is due to IC sensitivity detuning in application • Chamber sensitivity does not tell whole Inlay2 chamber sensitivity sensitivity story Inlay1 Inlay2

Plot Data on a Gaussian Axis Read reliability versus power for two 70×14mm inlays g g y 99.9% Inlay1 data R6 data Inlay1 fit R6 gauss_fit Inlay2 data U7 data 99% Inlay2 fit U7 gauss_fit 90% 4.6dB 50% 10% 1% 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 P reader (dBm) • 97.5% readability (2 σ ) requires (mean + 6dB) power

Evaluating System Performance Read reliability versus power for two 70×14mm and one 40×15mm inlay MonzaR6 vs Ucode7 70x14mm and R6 41x16mm Read Reliability 99.9% R6 data Inlay1 data R6 gauss_fit Inlay1 fit 99% Inlay2 data U7 data Inlay2 fit U7 gauss_fit Inlay3 data R6_41x16mm data Inlay3 fit R6_41x16 gauss_fit 90% 4.6dB 50% 10% 1% 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 P reader (dBm) IC Inlay Test Tx power Margin to 4.6m Read range Inlay 2 σ Type Size Range (50% reads) 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

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 Inlay 2 Inlay 1 Inlay 1 Inlay 2 • 100 sweaters • Inlay2 has a more modern IC than Inlay1

Surprising Results Portal Rx Sensitivity = –83dBm Portal Rx Sensitivity = –65dBm 100 100 Inlay 1 Inlay 1 90 90 Inlay 2 Inlay 2 80 80 70 70 Read Percentage [%] Read Percentage [%] 60 60 4dB 50 50 40 40 30 30 20 20 10 10 0 0 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 Reader Power [dBm] Reader Power [dBm] • Inlay2 is ~2dB more sensitive than Inlay1 • Reducing portal Rx sensitivity degrades Inlay2 read performance more than it does Inlay1 !!

Let’s Use a Graphical Tool Backscatter vs Tag Chip Generation -10 -15 Portal Received Typ Handheld -20 Power Contours Performance -25 -30 Typ Fixed Performance -35 -40 -45 -50 -20 -18 -16 -14 -12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 RIP = POTF (dBm) • RIP – Received Isotropic Power • EIRP – Modulated Equivalent Isotropic Radiated Power

Backscatter vs I C Generation Backscatter vs Tag Chip Generation -10 Perfect Reflector Modulation Loss = - 6dB -15 2006 IC Modulation -20 loss -25 2016 IC -30 -35 -40 -45 -50 -20 -18 -16 -14 -12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 RIP = POTF (dBm) • 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

Backscatter vs Overdrive Backscatter vs Tag Chip Generation -10 Perfect modulation loss = 6dB -15 -20 -25 -30 Low-sensitivity portals prefer -35 older-generation tag ICs (i.e. higher cost inlays!!) -40 -45 -50 -20 -18 -16 -14 -12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 RIP = POTF (dBm) • 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

Tag Performance Grades Sensitivity and Backscatter vs Tag Standards -10 -15 -20 -25 ARC_N US M20D -30 ARC_K EU ARC_M US -35 M15B M10B -40 M25B -45 -50 -20 -18 -16 -14 -12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 RIP = POTF (dBm) • ARC and TIPP grades are point solutions that represent or derive from fielded deployments

Measured Data 70× 14mm inlay with modern I C -10 865MHz Typical modulation loss for real systems is 12dB 902MHz -15 Typical m for real tags is 0.25 915MHz 930MHz -20 ARC_N us -25 M20D -30 ARC_K EU ARC_M US -35 4dB degradation M15B M10B -40 M25B -45 -50 -20 -18 -16 -14 -12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 RIP = POTF (dBm) • 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_N us penalizes modern tags

Thoughts on a Methodology Sensitivity and Backscatter vs Tag Standards -10 -15 -20 -25 ARC_N US M20D -30 ARC_K EU ARC_M US -35 M15B M10B -40 M25B Max Range -45 in RIP -50 -20 -18 -16 -14 -12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 RIP = POTF (dBm) • Tags defined by a contour [sensitivity, modulation loss, m] • Portals defined by a contour [portal sensitivity] • Can easily calculate read range

Standards for Delivering Performant Solutions

Tag Sensitivity Keeps I mproving • Sensitivity has followed an exponential trend – Prediction: Trend will continue for another 10 years • Want solutions to benefit from this improvement 20 22 Tag Sensitivity in –dBm 18 20 16 18 14 16 12 14 10 12 Monza 1 G2XL Monza 3 Higgs 3 G2iL Monza 4 Monza 5 Ucode 7 Monza 2005 IC Generation 2014 R6

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 Sensitivity and Backscatter vs Tag Standards -10 -15 -20 -25 ARC_N US M20D -30 ARC_K EU ARC_M US -35 M15B M10B -40 M25B Application Max Range Read Range -45 in RIP 2 σ = 6dB -50 -20 -18 -16 -14 -12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 RIP = POTF (dBm)

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