Dear Arduino community,
Hi there,
I’ve got an IR+RFID guided robot. I have to target many objects in a room, one after the other. All are in a random position. Each one is RFID passive-tagged.
I proceed like that: I target an object with the IR, I reach it, and I check if the target is the right one with an RFID validation.
Now, I would like to validate the objective before to totally reach it
A way for that is to roughly compare the IR measured distance and the RFID measured distance, and to conclude if the target where we are going is the right one. I even think that compare evolution of the IR-distance and evolution of the RFID distance should be sufficient.
I understood that all methods to get distance from RFID are more or less at a “research” level. (is it still true ?)
I know 2 of these methods: The “RSSI method”, that measure the signal strength, and the “radar” method, that measure the time between signal emission and Tag answer reception.
The RSSI sounds not easy to use, so I’m looking for a signal transit time measuring.
Now, my questions
Programming feasibility :
In your opinion, how can I recover the time between signal emission and Tag answer reception?
Is there conditions to fulfil to get it (particular material, tags, etc) ?
Physical feasibility:
I know that the two way trip should greatly depend of the Tag response time.
The field is clear, no obstacles between reader and tags.
I assume that the response time should be more or less constant in same condition of field / same Reader/ same Tag. Is it stupid ?
Consequently, I believe that a calibration should be sufficient to reduce the error. Is it stupid ?
global feasibilty
Do you know tips to make the method more reliable?
Do you think I should be reasonably easy to combine RSSI and radar method to improve reliability ?
Thanks a lot to all the RFID experts of the community!
Kind regards,
Meric.
[edit]
Material I consider for this project is :
- Cottonwood Long Range UHF RFID Reader
- LinkSprite PCB UHF RFID Antenna
computed on an Arduino MEGA2560.
... Is it a pertinent choice ?