• State TI Thinks Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 3 replies
  • Answers 1 answer
  • Subscribers 16 subscribers
  • Views 973 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Support feedback
Options
Options
Related

This thread has been locked.

If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.

RI-TRP-DR2B: RI-TRP-DR2B

Orjen de Guzman
Prodigy 20 points
Part Number: RI-TRP-DR2B

Hi,

I am an equipment engineer working at Deca Technologies. I am working with tools with FOUP and RFID tags. We are currently using the RI-TRP-DR2B part # which has clear epoxy inside the glass - this works fine on all our tools. Lately, we ordered additional RFID tags of the same part # but now the tags have the black epoxy in it. We tried using these new tags but we have failures using these.

What are the differences between the two tags? And what's the reason why we can't order the old type (with clear epoxy)? See below images of the two types of tags.

Let me know your inputs.

thanks,

Orjen

RFID tags.pptx

  • 0
    TI__Guru*** 135355 points
    Hello Orjen,

    There shouldn't be any functional difference between the RI-TRP-DR2B-30 (old type) and RI-TRP-DR2B-40 (new type). The only change was changing the clear silicon oil inside to a solid black silicone filler.

    Are you seeing changed behavior at the edge of the read range? If the tag position is adjusted, does the issue go away, and if so, how much of an adjustment needs to be made? Based on this I can ask the product team to comment regarding the issue you are observing.
  • 0 in reply to Ralph Jacobi
    Prodigy 20 points

    Hi Ralph,

    Thanks for taking time to answer my inquiry.

    Yes. if the tag position or orientation is adjusted, the issue goes away but if we do this, a lot of changes we will do on our current FOUPs. We currently have our tags positioned vertically while the antenna sits horizontal. I attached illustration showing the tag position between the old and new type tag. Our main goal is to do nothing on our tools or FOUPs - plug and play scenario.

    Hope you understand our situation.

    Thanks,

    Orjen

  • 0 in reply to Orjen de Guzman
    TI__Guru*** 135355 points

    Hello Orjen,

    Thank you very much, the detailed image was just what we needed to understand the issue. I received feedback from the product team and in turn learned something I hadn't known before about the differences between the -30 and -40 versions of the tag.

    Aside from the silicone filling change, there is another minor difference in that a slightly longer but thinner ferrite is used for the antenna

    As a result of this the antenna pattern for the -40 version is slightly different.

    Going from your displayed image, if you draw out the pattern for the RF field, the result will indicate that the tag is right at a blind spot as it is exactly at the edge of the antenna pattern.

    Due to the slight difference between the -30 and -40 antenna pattern, the issue you are observing can occur.

    Moving the tag slightly (~1 mm) to the side should result in proper results once again.

    Note that when in ideal orientation, the performance between the -30 and -40 is the same, it is only in non-ideal orientations with poor coupling such at the edge of the read range like this, where there can be slight differences in performance due to the antenna pattern.