| When selecting a tracking technology to track assets | | | | contour of a surface also affects readability when |
| there are several factors to consider. First, what is | | | | using RFID technology; whereas bar code tags and |
| your objective? If the objective is to collect and | | | | labels can be designed for radius or curved surface so |
| manage data you should select the technology that is | | | | as not to affect readability. Other environmental |
| best suited to help you achieve that objective – not | | | | factors that can have an impact on the type of |
| let the technology dictate how you go about collecting | | | | tracking technology you use may include heat, UV |
| your information. Second, what type of asset are you | | | | exposure, abrasion, chemicals and solvents. Many of |
| going to be tracking – fixed or mobile? Examples of | | | | these factors may cause RFID not to work while bar |
| fixed assets may include furniture, machinery, | | | | code tags and labels can be designed to resist |
| computers, etc. Mobile assets, on the other hand, may | | | | exposure to harsh environments. |
| include pallets, returnable containers, racks, etc. Will one | | | | After reading the above information you might think |
| technology work better for fixed versus mobile | | | | RFID may not be the answer. However, there are |
| assets? | | | | numerous benefits to using RFID as your tracking |
| OK, once you have your objective identified and your | | | | technology. First, RFID allows users the ability to read |
| assets defined it is time to take a closer look at | | | | multiple items in a short period of time (i.e. case lot unit |
| factors that may have an impact of the type of | | | | containers, pallets, etc.) unlike bar code where you can |
| technology you plan to use. For example, consider the | | | | only scan one at a time. Second, line-of-site isn’t |
| material composition of the item being tracking, i.e. | | | | needed when reading an RFID tag unlike bar code |
| metal, plastic, wood, etc. If we are looking specifically at | | | | where you have to physically scan each bar code |
| bar code and radio frequency identification | | | | image. Third, depending on the type of inlay and |
| technologies we need to consider that RFID, more | | | | readers used, RFID has a much longer read range. |
| specifically passive ultra high frequency (UHF) RFID, | | | | So, bar code has its advantages and RFID has its |
| has limitations when attached to metal assets and | | | | advantages too. Why not use both? Really there is a |
| assets containing liquids. Metal surfaces reflect RF, | | | | minimum additional investment for bar code and utilizing |
| detuning the antenna, thus affecting readability. | | | | both technologies will allow locations that are not able |
| Likewise, liquids absorb RF also affecting readability. | | | | to support RFID infrastructure to utilize the data simply |
| On the other hand, surface composition for bar code | | | | by integrating the bar code information into the RFID |
| products is not a factor. In addition, the radius or | | | | inlay. |