Item-Level RFID At One Cent? By 2015, Printed Tags Could Do It

Written by Evan Schuman
March 20th, 2010

In the earlier days of RFID item-level enthusiasm, the talk was that item-level would soar once the per-tag price dropped to five cents. When pricing finally approached that touted-nickel goal, some chains—especially Wal-Mart—upped the ante, insisting on tags for one penny or less. Last week (March 18), a joint U.S.-Korean university research project announced a new approach to item-level RFID, one that is already delivering 3-cent tags and could easily hit 1-cent in volume production.

The engineering differences are extensive, with the approach (a collaboration between Sunchon National University in Korea and Rice University in Houston) abandoning silicon-based tags for printed tags. Printed passive RFID, which could easily be woven into paper and plastic product packaging, has been a common RFID experiment for years, but the universities’ 13.56-MHz 1-bit approach also abandons ink-jet printers for a gravure process. It uses single-walled carbon nanotubes for printing thin-film transistors. The schools have crafted a very specific methodology, even down to non-traditional cleaning liquids to prep the dielectric layer.

But even setting aside the price, the technology still has several technical hurdles to clear. The current footprint is about three times larger than today’s barcode and it’s been testing with a read distance of anywhere from 2 centimeters to 10 centimeters whereas project leaders say that it needs to read at about a full meter—at the very least, a half-meter—to be effective. The current version is 1-bit, but a 16-bit version in the labs will likely address the data storage weakness plus potentially help with the read distance.

“We’re one-tenth of the way in distance,” said James Tour, a chemistry professor at Rice and one of the leaders of the project. “The Koreans are saying five years and it will be commercial, somewhere around 2015.”

The new item-level approach will require different readers, but they won’t need to be radically different. “The frequencies may change a little bit, but the reader cost will be no more than it is now,” Tour said.


Comments are closed.


StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 60,000 retail IT leaders who subscribe to our free weekly email. Sign up today!

Most Recent Comments

Why Did Gonzales Hackers Like European Cards So Much Better?

I am still unclear about the core point here-- why higher value of European cards. Supply and demand, yes, makes sense. But the fact that the cards were chip and pin (EMV) should make them less valuable because that demonstrably reduces the ability to use them fraudulently. Did the author mean that the chip and pin cards could be used in a country where EMV is not implemented--the US--and this mis-match make it easier to us them since the issuing banks may not have as robust anti-fraud controls as non-EMV banks because they assumed EMV would do the fraud prevention for them Read more...
Two possible reasons that I can think of and have seen in the past - 1) Cards issued by European banks when used online cross border don't usually support AVS checks. So, when a European card is used with a billing address that's in the US, an ecom merchant wouldn't necessarily know that the shipping zip code doesn't match the billing code. 2) Also, in offline chip countries the card determines whether or not a transaction is approved, not the issuer. In my experience, European issuers haven't developed the same checks on authorization requests as US issuers. So, these cards might be more valuable because they are more likely to get approved. Read more...
A smart card slot in terminals doesn't mean there is a reader or that the reader is activated. Then, activated reader or not, the U.S. processors don't have apps certified or ready to load into those terminals to accept and process smart card transactions just yet. Don't get your card(t) before the terminal (horse). Read more...
The marketplace does speak. More fraud capacity translates to higher value for the stolen data. Because nearly 100% of all US transactions are authorized online in real time, we have less fraud regardless of whether the card is Magstripe only or chip and PIn. Hence, $10 prices for US cards vs $25 for the European counterparts. Read more...
@David True. The European cards have both an EMV chip AND a mag stripe. Europeans may generally use the chip for their transactions, but the insecure stripe remains vulnerable to skimming, whether it be from a false front on an ATM or a dishonest waiter with a handheld skimmer. If their stripe is skimmed, the track data can still be cloned and used fraudulently in the United States. If European banks only detect fraud from 9-5 GMT, that might explain why American criminals prefer them over American bank issued cards, who have fraud detection in place 24x7. Read more...

Our apologies. Due to legal and security copyright issues, we can't facilitate the printing of Premium Content. If you absolutely need a hard copy, please contact customer service.