Print page

Email page

Is RFID technology a real need?

ControlDesign.com

Machine builders might be better off to put their money on improving existing installations and new machines for new plants rather than worrying about jumping into the RFID circus.

By Loren Shaum

CONSIDERING THE media hype and the glowing and imaginative forecasts made by many industry analysts, you’d think not being involved in RFID applications at some level must mean you’re missing the boat—a veritable luxury liner if you listen to the analysts. Some of them say RFID technology undoubtedly will transform the way business is done, much like the effect of PCs and the Internet. In reality, a check on the state of RFID in industry, and in machine automation in particular, suggests the RFID boat is little more than a dinghy.

For most machine builders, barcode and 2-D matrix code placement in the machine environment still dominate part, assembly, pallet, and carton/package identification and tracking. The cost of implementation, reliability, sensing distance, data accuracy and other limitations apparently have slowed the projected stampede to immediate RFID installations, originally suggested by the initial U.S Department of Defense (DoD) and Wal-Mart initiatives.

For reference, General Motors recently built a comparison between RFID and barcode technologies. Automotive companies have been using RFID technology for many years to identify, track, and sequence parts on assembly lines. Two-dimensional (2-D) matrix technology is added to the mix for a more complete comparison (See Figure 1).

FIGURE 1: GM’s RFID, BARCODE, 2-D MATRIX COMPARISON

The figure suggests some significant advantages in implementing RFID. No line of sight, distance, and read/write capability seem to separate RFID technology from the others. However, for many users, tag costs are a huge initial investment.

According to AMR Research, more than half of potential users looking at RFID implementation indicate that cost savings is the key driver behind possible implementation.

Because RFID’s tag costs are still relatively high, ROI is stretched over a longer period than for 2-D matrix or barcode. In particular, 2-D matrix has been most effective when embedded on parts and assemblies (direct part marking or DPM). These embedded labels can track parts and assemblies through an entire manufacturing process.

RFID technology appears stronger in inventory management applications. Supply chain management, tracking, warehouse control, location ID, and work-in-process ID are applications where RFID is recommended. Industrial OEMs that build conveying and other automated material handling equipment could find warehouse systems and assembly lines impacted by this implementation trend.

Another key factor is interference. Since RFID readers collect data from tags several times a second, false readings can accumulate very quickly creating a database mess. If labels are reasonably clean, 2-D and barcode readers are considered far less susceptible to false reads. To that end, barcode and some 2-D printers have built-in verification to ensure that the label just printed meets all specifications of the reader used in the application.