Hand Hygiene

October 5, 2009

Cleaning up the distance signal

Filed under: Uncategorized — gthomas @ 11:58 am

Although we’re still collecting data, it is beginning to look like the RSSI signal is messy for reasons that are going to be tricky to clean up. We have a number of ideas that we can pursue:

1. Track the badge-dispenser signal for longer periods and a faster rate, hope that we get enough enough experimental power to reliably distinguish the mean signal strength at .75 and 1.0 m.
2. Change the antenna design within the dispenser unit to provide a more robust signal within the range of interest.
3. Use a pointing antenna mounted above the dispenser to create a zone of detectability right around the dispenser.
4. Add another transducer, like a sonar sensor to provide alternative distance estimate.

Here are the strength and weaknesses of each approach.

Statistical Inference
Ultimately this comes down to the power of a t-test. Based on Russel Lenth’s one-sample t-test power calculator, if we want to detect a difference of 6 rssi units with a reliability of 95% when the standard deviation of the rssi values read is 15, we need 69 samples, which is probably more than we can get practically. If the std dev is only 3, we need just 6 samples. If we think we can get 12 samples reliably (three seconds of rapid sampling), for the 95% confidence we need to achieve a std dev of about 6.  Alternatively, it might be convenient to think of one standard deviation of the error being equal to the resolution that we can achieve.

Antenna Design
One of our theories about the high sensitivity of the signals is that that the signal has a strong polarity. That could cause signal power to be very sensitive to the orientation of the mote receiver relative to the mote transmitter. We’re looking at the possibility of setting up single dipole transmitters with known polarity and seeing if we can get a more robust signal transmission that way. A 1/4-wave diopole antenna is about 4 cm long, so we could perhaps make this work.  The problem may turn out to be that such antennas are too good, making it difficult to attenuate the signal over the range of interest.

Pointing Antenna Design
We’ve constructed a pointing antenna with a coil of wire and that seemed to provide good signal in an area of interest just somewhat smaller than what we want.  The principle question is whether or not we can get the antenna to be an inconspicuous part of the device we’re building and have a reliable field for detection.

Sonar Design
Years ago, I participated in a project in which we used the time of flight of an ultrasonic signal timed with an optical signal.  We could use a similar approach here, combining a radio transmission and an acoustic signal to provide a distance estimate.  We could mount a transmitter in the hand sanitizer and a receiver in the badge. 

4 Comments »

  1. I’m worried about cost for a really great solution. Cost of extra sensor (takes up space, uses battery) if it’s acoustic. Similarly, for having many radio transmissions, there is a cost of perhaps being awake longer on the badge. But this may turn out OK, depending on the numbers.

    Comment by Ted Herman — October 7, 2009 @ 6:01 pm

  2. Another thought – really short term – we could associate two motes with each dispenser. For the puck, it would mean stacking two motes maybe, or having another mote (very) nearby. This would be easier actually than say making two antennas selectable by the software (set a pin high for antenna 1) and sending on both.

    Comment by Ted Herman — October 7, 2009 @ 6:06 pm

  3. Good comments, Ted. I was thinking that the sonar would only activate when the dispenser was engaged and the badges were looking for a signal. Once the radio signal was established we could move onto the detailed position estimate.

    Comment by gthomas — October 7, 2009 @ 7:11 pm

  4. We are still a few years, at best, from the ultimate RF-only solution: UWB ranging. For example,

    802.15.4a
    UWB based localization
    10cm
    $2 for radio in high volume (ad)
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEpNbdzWmWU

    Turns out to be just hot air, not a real product. But the idea, time-of-flight in the RF domain entirely, seems quite attractive. I wonder if it’s robust to reflections and passing through clothing, bodies, etc, but it does sound like a great thing.

    But for us, we need something soon that’s at least somewhat better than what we have for the handcleaner situations.

    Comment by Ted Herman — October 9, 2009 @ 11:49 am

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Powered by WordPress