RFID

Posts 1-10 of 10

Philippe Fabre
The company name is only visible to registered members.

A new step toward interoperability?
Omron RFID Monday (Feb. 13) introduced the V750 Series Gen 2 (C1G2) "wave" tag, designed to deliver high-read performance in all UHF RFID frequency spectrums.

According to Omron (Schaumburg, Ill.), UHF RFID communication bands are specified for use between 860 and 960 megahertz by international standards.

"Acceptable read/write performance has only been possible through the use of a different tag design optimized for each regional frequency band," said Bill Arnold, Omron RFID chief strategist. "Demand is growing for a single RFID tag that can perform in all UHF RFID frequencies. RFID-fueled global commerce will benefit because product manufacturers can choose just one tag design for use around the world."

Omron RFID plans to display V750 Series tags, along with other products, at the AutoID Expo, Feb. 16-17, 2006, in Osaka, Japan, and at RFID World in Dallas Feb. 27 to March 1.

(RFID News).

Is it another fake novelty? or is it more serious?
If someone has information on this, I' d be very interrested as I am currently working on a project for which the interoperability of the tag is a big concern...
- 20 Feb 2006, 10:19 pm
Philippe Fabre wrote: > Omron RFID Monday (Feb. 13) introduced the V750 Series Gen 2 (C1G2) > "wave" tag, designed to deliver high-read performance in all UHF RFID > frequency spectrums. > > According to Omron (Schaumburg, Ill.), UHF RFID communication bands > are specified for use between 860 and 960 megahertz by international > standards. > > "Acceptable read/write performance has only been possible through the > use of a different tag design optimized for each regional frequency > band," said Bill Arnold, Omron RFID chief strategist. "Demand is > growing for a single RFID tag that can perform in all UHF RFID > frequencies. RFID-fueled global commerce will benefit because product > manufacturers can choose just one tag design for use around the > world." > > Omron RFID plans to display V750 Series tags, along with other > products, at the AutoID Expo, Feb. 16-17, 2006, in Osaka, Japan, and > at RFID World in Dallas Feb. 27 to March 1. > > (RFID News). > > Is it another fake novelty? or is it more serious? > If someone has information on this, I' d be very interrested as I am > currently working on a project for which the interoperability of the > tag is a big concern...
Patrick Bonneau
The company name is only visible to registered members.

Re: A new step toward interoperability?
Hi Philippe,

Happy to see you again as one of my looking for “trouble” compatriots ! Are you sleeping some times ?
Well, if it is UHF and it is Omron, then it says EPC RFID Class 1 Generation 2.
Again it has something of the Philips Plastic tag announcement but not totally.
Don’t get me wrong, there is no false report, only misleading ones.
EPC has still a lot to prove, more than C1G2 specs since December 2004.
I’m sorry there is no one-size-fits-all RFID solution, we are far from it and is it really needed !? I’ll explain below why.
Last year Philips, Omron, ASK, Intermec, SAMSys, and a few others put together a special taskforce, called EPC G2, in order to obtain quicker a complete solution around Philips C1G2 chips.
The real advantage I find today in those specs tags is the bandwidth spectrum as it covers worldwide UHF frequencies regulations, even European ones !
For the rest, I’m not sure if you want to go through the theoretical advantages and inconveniences that are arising as people are starting to test those chips.
However, UHF gives you 10th time range of HF RFID and faster data rates but we still have to check this in a dense-reader environment against a fixed or variable number of operational channels with thousand of active chips having to yell in order to be seen, sorry to be heard by this readers network…

Then I come back, again, to my “favourite” (not at the time I experienced it…) scenario, the 802.11 story; notwithstanding which is far to be complete !
From the moment the IEEE produced the first 802.11 specs and the day we could have different make base stations communicating “smoothly” with different make terminals, we had during all those years to continue to make sure our corporate clients haven’t invested in the wrong technology and explain to their CIOs why all those delays, mainly when the suppliers Marketing boys were announcing every days that everything was going according to plans, and even better !
Sure, it had to be my fault, even if a quick radio site survey and an oscilloscope would show evidences…!
Before 802.11 we had proprietary systems: Narrow Band, Spread Spectrum, Frequency Hoping.
Mainly, Symbol and Intermec got their act together, that time; IBM went for it; so everybody “had” to follow.
And what do we have ten years down the road ?
Nearly all letters of the alphabet for 802.11 (a,b,d,…) and sure the newest ones got the answer ! ya, well…

Coming back to Omron, can Omron America tells us why there is no public V750 specs available, and why at the time they are supposed to provide solutions around Philips G2 chips they come with their own ones ??
Surely they’ve got good reasons, but still confusing ones.

Then if you believe what I’m saying, you’re gonna say, this is not serious we’ll wait for that technology to mature.
And I’ll answer not a good idea.
Call it RFID, RF IC, contactless smart chips, SAW, Polymer, EPC, whatever and all the ISO, IEEE “standards”, they all share the same concepts that will make real sense of Product Lifecycle Management and real-time assets management in the following decades.
Coming back to the retail scenario; not my favourite, but if you make it work there, it will work everywhere.
I am not sure I’ll go the Wal-Mart route, imposing their views to their suppliers, otherwise no more business…
Not the Carrefour way, wait and see, it won’t be never too late to go for it…
But the Metro way, go for all sort of pilot tests, learn and grasp the technology, then understand better the implications on your supply-chain, sell it internally, prepare your workforce to the future procedures, in the mean time Mr Right-RFID-Solution-Provider will come up with the goods.
So, I’m sure you don’t, but if eventually you need any assistance in getting a pilot that will prepare your client to its specific RFID interoperability needs, because they have to be specific, then you’ll be totally welcome to contact me or one of my partners in crime !

Kind regards,
Patrick
- 22 Feb 2006, 06:14 am
Patrick Bonneau wrote: > Hi Philippe, > > Happy to see you again as one of my looking for “trouble” compatriots > ! Are you sleeping some times ? > Well, if it is UHF and it is Omron, then it says EPC RFID Class 1 > Generation 2. > Again it has something of the Philips Plastic tag announcement but > not totally. > Don’t get me wrong, there is no false report, only misleading ones. > EPC has still a lot to prove, more than C1G2 specs since December > 2004. > I’m sorry there is no one-size-fits-all RFID solution, we are far > from it and is it really needed !? I’ll explain below why. > Last year Philips, Omron, ASK, Intermec, SAMSys, and a few others put > together a special taskforce, called EPC G2, in order to obtain > quicker a complete solution around Philips C1G2 chips. > The real advantage I find today in those specs tags is the bandwidth > spectrum as it covers worldwide UHF frequencies regulations, even > European ones ! > For the rest, I’m not sure if you want to go through the theoretical > advantages and inconveniences that are arising as people are starting > to test those chips. > However, UHF gives you 10th time range of HF RFID and faster data > rates but we still have to check this in a dense-reader environment > against a fixed or variable number of operational channels with > thousand of active chips having to yell in order to be seen, sorry to > be heard by this readers network… > > Then I come back, again, to my “favourite” (not at the time I > experienced it…) scenario, the 802.11 story; notwithstanding which is > far to be complete ! > From the moment the IEEE produced the first 802.11 specs and the day > we could have different make base stations communicating “smoothly” > with different make terminals, we had during all those years to > continue to make sure our corporate clients haven’t invested in the > wrong technology and explain to their CIOs why all those delays, > mainly when the suppliers Marketing boys were announcing every days > that everything was going according to plans, and even better ! > Sure, it had to be my fault, even if a quick radio site survey and an > oscilloscope would show evidences…! > Before 802.11 we had proprietary systems: Narrow Band, Spread > Spectrum, Frequency Hoping. > Mainly, Symbol and Intermec got their act together, that time; IBM > went for it; so everybody “had” to follow. > And what do we have ten years down the road ? > Nearly all letters of the alphabet for 802.11 (a,b,d,…) and sure the > newest ones got the answer ! ya, well… > > Coming back to Omron, can Omron America tells us why there is no > public V750 specs available, and why at the time they are supposed to > provide solutions around Philips G2 chips they come with their own > ones ?? > Surely they’ve got good reasons, but still confusing ones. > > Then if you believe what I’m saying, you’re gonna say, this is not > serious we’ll wait for that technology to mature. > And I’ll answer not a good idea. > Call it RFID, RF IC, contactless smart chips, SAW, Polymer, EPC, > whatever and all the ISO, IEEE “standards”, they all share the same > concepts that will make real sense of Product Lifecycle Management > and real-time assets management in the following decades. > Coming back to the retail scenario; not my favourite, but if you make > it work there, it will work everywhere. > I am not sure I’ll go the Wal-Mart route, imposing their views to > their suppliers, otherwise no more business… > Not the Carrefour way, wait and see, it won’t be never too late to go > for it… > But the Metro way, go for all sort of pilot tests, learn and grasp > the technology, then understand better the implications on your > supply-chain, sell it internally, prepare your workforce to the > future procedures, in the mean time Mr Right-RFID-Solution-Provider > will come up with the goods. > So, I’m sure you don’t, but if eventually you need any assistance in > getting a pilot that will prepare your client to its specific RFID > interoperability needs, because they have to be specific, then you’ll > be totally welcome to contact me or one of my partners in crime ! > > Kind regards, > Patrick
先生郭
The company name is only visible to registered members.

Re: A new step toward interoperability?
hello
- 22 Feb 2006, 06:20 am
先生郭 wrote: > hello
Post visible to registered members
Patrick Bonneau
The company name is only visible to registered members.

Re^2: A new step toward interoperability?
Hi Dennis,
Effectively, as UPM Rafsec participates actively in the EPC G2 taskforce; Feig also does and ASK and Deister Electronic…
But again, I am still reserved for the utilization of such technology in a typical industrial, warehouse environment.
The higher the frequency, UHF, even worse microwave 2.45 GHz and I don’t even mention 5.8 GHz, and the worse ability to read near metal and/or wet, water-condensed surfaces…
This is just plain Physics.
And then you should see your read range and your data rate far from EPC G2 theory…
Believe me, RFID means solutions; a brochure isn’t good enough.
It works, only when it is tailored properly, and then it’s a pure pleasure!
Regards,
Patrick
- 23 Feb 2006, 03:44 am
Patrick Bonneau wrote: > Hi Dennis, > Effectively, as UPM Rafsec participates actively in the EPC G2 > taskforce; Feig also does and ASK and Deister Electronic… > But again, I am still reserved for the utilization of such technology > in a typical industrial, warehouse environment. > The higher the frequency, UHF, even worse microwave 2.45 GHz and I > don’t even mention 5.8 GHz, and the worse ability to read near metal > and/or wet, water-condensed surfaces… > This is just plain Physics. > And then you should see your read range and your data rate far from > EPC G2 theory… > Believe me, RFID means solutions; a brochure isn’t good enough. > It works, only when it is tailored properly, and then it’s a pure > pleasure! > Regards, > Patrick
Post visible to registered members
Patrick Bonneau
The company name is only visible to registered members.

Re^4: A new step toward interoperability?
Hi Dennis,
I don’t see how I am reinventing the wheel in raising suspicions on EPC G2 ability claims of one-size-fits-all.
That is my main point today and I’m coming across that issue everyday with clients and even technical boffins.
You proved my point in solving only “some” Metro’s applications which is already a fair success, and as such I am grateful towards your company !
Regards,
Patrick
- 23 Feb 2006, 10:43 am
Patrick Bonneau wrote: > Hi Dennis, > I don’t see how I am reinventing the wheel in raising suspicions on > EPC G2 ability claims of one-size-fits-all. > That is my main point today and I’m coming across that issue everyday > with clients and even technical boffins. > You proved my point in solving only “some” Metro’s applications which > is already a fair success, and as such I am grateful towards your > company ! > Regards, > Patrick
Patrick Bonneau
The company name is only visible to registered members.

Re: A new step toward interoperability?
Philippe,

To finish off on that UHF RFID issue, as far as I am concerned, Japan doesn’t accept the 868 – 915 MHz frequency range, so no more worldwide bandwidth claims.
When the States permits it at 915 but at higher power levels than Europe which recommends more the 868.
Easy, boys !

Kind regards,
Patrick
- 23 Feb 2006, 11:22 am
Patrick Bonneau wrote: > Philippe, > > To finish off on that UHF RFID issue, as far as I am concerned, Japan > doesn’t accept the 868 – 915 MHz frequency range, so no more > worldwide bandwidth claims. > When the States permits it at 915 but at higher power levels than > Europe which recommends more the 868. > Easy, boys ! > > Kind regards, > Patrick
Philippe Fabre
The company name is only visible to registered members.

Re^2: A new step toward interoperability?
Hi Patrick,

Agree with you that RFID in most cases is a tailor-mading business. I also keep on telling this to our customers and mostly to our sales consultants. I had a meeting this afternoon with a supplier who proudly showed us a "one tag fits all" solution. I answered I would be very glad to run a few tests with that tag...

A good point in my opinion is that all these true or false novelties prove that there is a great hopes and , cetainly, some confidence in the future of RFID!
- 23 Feb 2006, 10:59 pm
Philippe Fabre wrote: > Hi Patrick, > > Agree with you that RFID in most cases is a tailor-mading business. I > also keep on telling this to our customers and mostly to our sales > consultants. I had a meeting this afternoon with a supplier who > proudly showed us a "one tag fits all" solution. I answered I would > be very glad to run a few tests with that tag... > > A good point in my opinion is that all these true or false novelties > prove that there is a great hopes and , cetainly, some confidence in > the future of RFID!
Patrick Bonneau
The company name is only visible to registered members.

Re^3: A new step toward interoperability?
Hello Philippe,

I agree with you 200%! and also with Dennis as he makes it work, you do and I do, and as we are becoming more and more professional with this technology.
Sorry, but I am still very nervous of having our good work spoiled by some quick bucks, big bucks “guru” or Mr know-it-all.

Best regards,
Pattrick
- 24 Feb 2006, 03:13 am
Patrick Bonneau wrote: > Hello Philippe, > > I agree with you 200%! and also with Dennis as he makes it work, you > do and I do, and as we are becoming more and more professional with > this technology. > Sorry, but I am still very nervous of having our good work spoiled by > some quick bucks, big bucks “guru” or Mr know-it-all. > > Best regards, > Pattrick