Durable Asset Tag Supply Chain Logistics Operations Tests

Mixed Pallets with an RFID Enabled Portal & Handheld RFID Reader

Test Overview and Configuration

The purpose of these tests is to determine how well an RFID tag performs in real-world supply chain logistics operations. More specifically, evaluate the ability of each RFID tag to be read when passing through a fixed portal or scanned with a handheld RFID reader.

During the tests the environmental conditions measured an ambient temperature of 72.1°F (22.3°C) and ambient humidity of 32 percent.

Assets / Containers Used

Three different assets / container types were used:

Military Ammunition

Beer Kegs

Wooden Containers

  • metal containers used for storing and transporting United States Department of Defense Military Ammunition; specifically, 4-inch rockets;
  • wood over metal:
    a crate assembled from ½-inch plywood using standard crate construction methods, within which was placed an empty aluminum keg;
  • and wood (an identical crate of ½-inch plywood that remained empty).

The tags are placed in various locations including:

  1. directly on the metal containers (on-metal);
  2. on the wooden container near the beer keg (near metal);
  3. and on the empty wooden container (away from metal).


These combinations allow us to obtain a more accurate representation of how the RFID tags are used in actual operations.

Configuration of Single and Double Layer Mixed Pallets

The assets / containers were erected into three different mixed pallets configurations each with the RFID tags placed in different locations:

  • Single Layer Pallet
    with all of the tags facing towards the RFID reader antennas with no physical obstructions;

 

 

 

 

  • Single Layer Pallet
    with all of the tags facing away from the RFID reader antennas to ensure physical obstruction;

 

 

 

 

  • Double Layer Pallet
    with two metal containers on the lower layer and two each of the wood-over-metal and wood containers on the upper layer. All of the tags are facing away from the RFID reader antennas to ensure physical obstruction.

 

 

 

 

RFID Enabled Portal Tests

The fixed portal was constructed to represent a reasonable and customary single-sided dock door configuration. Although many implementations use antennas on both sides of the portal, our team elected to use a single-sided portal for a worse-case-scenario. As shown in the picture (right) there is also acoustic absorbing material behind the antennas to prevent possible reflections that result faux-improved performance.

Our test team used an Alien ALR9800 reader with two 6dbi Alien circular polarized antennas mounted at 24- and 48-inch heights. In relation to the above pallet configuration diagrams, the RFID antennas are mounted to the left. See above image

The Alien reader firmware was the latest available as of date of testing. Reader transmission power was attenuated to 29dB.

Each pallet configuration was passed through the fixed portal, by use of a pallet jack, 100 times, for a total of 300 portal passes per tag. Remember, multiple tags are tested. When a tag is read during a portal pass, it counts as a successful read. The average travel time through the portal is between 19 and 20 seconds.

RFID Enabled Portal Test Results

For each test, the team captured two metrics:

Average # of Successful Reads
This is the average number of times the tag was read when going through the portal.

Average Number of Interrogations per Successful Read
This number is important because it indicates how strong the RFID tag responds to the reader when being read. The higher the number of interrogations per successful read, the better the performance.

The Average Read Percentage is calculated.

RFID Enabled Portal with Mixed Pallet Configuration 1

Manufacturer /
Product Name

Average # of Successful Reads

Average
Read %

Average number of interrogations per successful read

Confidex Ironside FCC

Confidex Ironside™ (U.S. Version)


49

48.67%

2.81

Confidex Survivor FCC

Confidex Survivor™ (U.S.Version)

90

89.50%

2.29

Intermec IT65 Large Rigid

Intermec Large Rigid (Global Version)

100

100.00%

9.08

Omni-ID Max ABS US

Omni-ID Max™ ABS (U.S. Version)

98

98.33%

9.08

Omni-ID Max HD ABS

Omni-ID Max HD

100

100.00%

9.71

Omni-ID Ultra

Omni-ID Ultra™

100

100.00%

15.35

RFID Enabled Portal with Mixed Pallet Configuration 2

Manufacturer /
Product Name

Average # of Successful Reads

Average
Read %

Average number of interrogations per successful read

Confidex Ironside FCC

Confidex Ironside™ (U.S. Version)


98

98.67%

3.47

Confidex Survivor FCC

Confidex Survivor™ (U.S.Version)

23

23.00%

1.22

Intermec IT65 Large Rigid

Intermec Large Rigid (Global Version)

100

100.00%

6.43

Omni-ID Max ABS US

Omni-ID Max™ ABS (U.S. Version)

100

99.67%¹

8.88

Omni-ID Max HD ABS

Omni-ID Max HD

100

100.00%

7.24

Omni-ID Ultra

Omni-ID Ultra™

100

100.00%

13.28

¹ This is due to the average across multiple tag tests. One tag was missed in over 900 tag read opportunities.

RFID Enabled Portal with Mixed Pallet Configuration 3

Manufacturer /
Product Name

Average # of Successful Reads

Average
Read %

Average number of interrogations per successful read

Confidex Ironside FCC

Confidex Ironside™ (U.S. Version)


98

98.67%

5.87

Confidex Survivor FCC

Confidex Survivor™ (U.S.Version)

94

94.00%

3.25

Intermec IT65 Large Rigid

Intermec Large Rigid (Global Version)

100

100.00%

6.08

Omni-ID Max ABS US

Omni-ID Max™ ABS (U.S. Version)

100

100.00%

11.69

Omni-ID Max HD ABS

Omni-ID Max HD

100

100.00%

8.92

Omni-ID Ultra

Omni-ID Ultra™

100

100.00%

14.23

RFID Enabled Portal Cumulative Results with All Mixed Pallet Configurations

Manufacturer /
Product Name

Cumulative
Average Read %

Cumulative Average number of interrogations per successful read

Confidex Ironside FCC

Confidex Ironside™ (U.S. Version)


82.00%

4.05

Confidex Survivor FCC

Confidex Survivor™ (U.S.Version)

68.83%

2.25

Intermec IT65 Large Rigid

Intermec Large Rigid (Global Version)

100.00%

5.66

Omni-ID Max ABS US

Omni-ID Max™ ABS (U.S. Version)

99.33%

9.88

Omni-ID Max HD ABS

Omni-ID Max HD

100%

8.62

Omni-ID Ultra

Omni-ID Ultra™

100%

14.29


Handheld RFID Reader Tests

For these tests, our team used an Intermec CN3e Handheld Reader with IP30 add-on passive UHF RFID handle.  The firmware was the latest available as of date of testing.

The handheld reader was used at a distance of 6 feet perpendicular to the length of the test pallet. Each pallet configuration was scanned using the handheld reader 50 times, for a total of 150 handheld reader scans.

Handheld RFID Reader Test Results

Manufacturer /
Product Name

Mixed Pallet Configuration 1

Mixed Pallet Configuration 1

Mixed Pallet Configuration 1

Cumulative Results

Confidex Ironside FCC

Confidex Ironside™ (U.S. Version)


50/50

48/50

47/50

96%

Confidex Survivor FCC

Confidex Survivor™ (U.S.Version)

40/50

39/50

35/50

76%

Intermec IT65 Large Rigid

Intermec Large Rigid (Global Version)

50/50

50/50

50/50

100%

Omni-ID Max ABS US

Omni-ID Max™ ABS (U.S. Version)

50/50

47/50

40/50

91%

Omni-ID Max HD ABS

Omni-ID Max HD

50/50

49/50

47/50

97%

Omni-ID Ultra

Omni-ID Ultra™

50/50

50/50

50/50

100%

Durable Asset Tag Benchmark Table of Contents
Introduction, Defining 'Durability' and the RFID Tags Evaluated
Vibration Survival Tests
Supply Chain Logistics Operations Tests: Mixed Pallets with an RFID Enabled Portal & Handheld RFID Reader
Asset Tracking Tests: Maximum Read Range Outdoors with a GPS enabled Handheld RFID Reader
Manufacturing Work-In-Progress Tests: Maximum Read Range Indoors with a Fixed Position RFID Reader
Overall Benchmark Test Analysis
Important Considerations When Selecting RFID Tags

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Add comment


Security code
Refresh