Simultaneous Programming of Selected RFID Tags
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Existing RFID technologies face inefficiencies in programming large groups of tags, particularly passive RFID tags, due to the need for individual power provisioning and the inability to specify unique data for each tag during broadcast writes, leading to prolonged programming times and data verification challenges.
Innovation Solution
An interrogator performs an inventory to specify groups of tags for simultaneous programming, sets a BeingAddressed state to prepare tags, and sends separate data and addressing commands, allowing multiple tags to write data simultaneously within a shared programming interval.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Manufacturing precision
If individual programming is used for each Tag, then data can be written to specific Tags with unique information, but programming time increases significantly
Solution Approach 1:
The patent segments the programming process into two distinct phases: a setup phase where data is prepared and transmitted to Tags, and a programming phase where Tags simultaneously write the data to their memory. This segmentation allows the interrogator to send data to multiple Tags in parallel during the setup phase, then trigger simultaneous writing during the programming phase, thereby reducing overall programming time while maintaining data accuracy for each individual Tag.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent implements preliminary action by requiring Tags to enter a setup state before the actual programming occurs. During this setup state, Tags prepare their memory buffers and receive data transmission from the interrogator. This preliminary preparation enables the subsequent programming phase to execute simultaneously across multiple Tags without data transmission conflicts, thus reducing total programming time while ensuring each Tag receives its unique data correctly.
2Loss of time
If broadcast write is used to program all Tags simultaneously, then programming time is reduced, but unique data cannot be specified for each Tag and verification becomes impossible
Solution Approach 1:
The patent divides the programming process into a setup phase and a programming phase. During the setup phase, the interrogator transmits data to specific Tags identified by their unique identifiers, allowing each Tag to receive its own unique data. During the programming phase, Tags simultaneously write the received data to their memory. This segmentation enables both simultaneous execution (reducing time) and unique data specification (maintaining precision).
Solution Approach 2:
The patent introduces an intermediary setup state that acts as a buffer between data transmission and actual programming. Tags enter this setup state upon receiving a setup command, during which they receive and store data in temporary buffers. This intermediary state allows the interrogator to transmit unique data to multiple Tags simultaneously without conflict, then trigger coordinated writing afterward, enabling both time reduction and data accuracy.
3Force
If intent to write flag is used to prepare Tags for programming, then Tags can be prepared in advance, but the process becomes inefficient due to verification and clearing overhead
Solution Approach 1:
The patent extracts the data transmission step from the traditional intent-to-write flag mechanism. Instead of using a flag that requires separate verification and clearing operations, the patent directly transmits data to Tags during the setup phase and incorporates the writing trigger into the programming phase. This extraction eliminates the overhead of flag verification and clearing, maintaining the benefit of advance preparation while improving overall programming efficiency.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent merges the data transmission function and the programming trigger function into a unified two-phase process. The setup phase combines data transmission with Tag preparation, and the programming phase combines the writing trigger with simultaneous execution. This merging eliminates separate verification and clearing steps required by traditional flag-based approaches, thereby improving productivity while maintaining effective Tag preparation.
4Productivity
If multiple Tags respond simultaneously to broadcast command, then programming speed increases, but response verification becomes impossible due to signal collision
Solution Approach 1:
The patent segments the communication process into setup commands sent during the setup phase and programming commands sent during the programming phase. During the setup phase, the interrogator sends setup commands to multiple Tags, and Tags respond individually with their unique identifiers, allowing verification without collision. During the programming phase, Tags simultaneously write data to their memory without needing to transmit responses, eliminating verification collision while maintaining programming speed.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent ensures continuous useful action by having Tags write data to their memory during the programming phase without interrupting for response verification. The simultaneous writing operation continues uninterrupted, maintaining high programming speed. Verification of successful programming occurs after the programming phase through subsequent read operations, separating the verification function from the programming execution to avoid signal collision.
Data Source
AI summary
An apparatus and method for simultaneous programming of data to individually addressed Tags. Tags contain a being addressed indicator that allows for processing of simultaneous programming commands. Specified Tags are individually pre-addressed to receive simultaneous programming. Tag data is programmed simultaneously for all Tags in a specified group of Tags. Data is individually verified for each specified Tag in the group of Tags.