Using RFID Tags Around the House?

Attacked-by-gremlins writes "I have a larger family and various items in the house (some tools, some pieces of clothing) 'travel' unexpectedly. We joke about gremlins doing that, but it's tiring never to be sure that I'll find an object where I left it two days ago. For the sheer hacking fun of it, I'm thinking of sticking RFID tags on some and trying to triangulate a position with several tranceivers placed in the house. Has anyone have any suggestions for this amateur 'Google Home'? Thanks."

Why Not?

[FurtiveGlancer (1274746)]

Beats the heck out of everyone learning to be considerate of each others' property. What benefit would that have in real life? ~

Re:

[Romancer (19668)]

"Beats the heck out of everyone learning to be considerate of each others' property. What benefit would that have in real life? ~"

Seriously, moderated flaimbait? Now you've got to be kidding. Funny or insightful at least, come on meta mods, please catch this one if it's not fixed now.

Mod me down for off topic if you must but I'm actually willing to take a hit if it gets this parent back into the +
The parent is a valid point about the topic.

Re:Why Not?

[ciaohound (118419)]

You obviously don't have young children, or if you do, turn in your geek card now for dismissing appropriate technology for a problem that has vexed geek dads for generations. My dad attached his scissors to his desk with a chain. We learned to subvert that by using his letter opener to pry open the link. Voila, scissors walk off and disapper. With kids of my own, I find that anything of value must be physically secured, with lock and key. It is irritating when they pull out the entire set of pots, pans, and storage containers and build a barricade in the kitchen, but that's what kids do, and it is kind of cute, after all, and it's probably just a phase that they go through. But no matter what, the door to my basement office stays locked.

Re:Why Not?

[lisaparratt (752068)]

Yeah, can't have the kids finding the gimp locked in the "office".

Re:

[RanCossack (1138431)]

I agree, as far as introducing kids to open source software goes, the Gimp is probably a bad choice. Something simpler -- maybe tux paint -- would be best.

Re:Why Not?

[jdgeorge (18767)]

Bullshit. I had young children (growing up now). Proper discipline and parenting is what is called for. Sure, locking up things like tools just makes sense and is part of proper parenting. What is most lacking today however is proper discipline. By the age of 2 they should know to NEVER touch Dad's stuff.

Hmmm... That comment is phrased as a disagreement, but it sounds as if you generally agree with the parent.

I will second your view, in any case; it's one thing for your kids to grab your nose, pat your back, pull on your shirt, but I agree that it is absolutely essential that people forbid their their kids from touching "Dad's stuff".

On the other hand, if by "stuff", you are referring to the various possessions you have stored around your house, you are completely deluded if you think your kids with "NEVER" touch it, regardless of what kind of "discipline" you impose. If it's interesting to them (for example, because it is forbidden), they will get to it, eventually. On the other hand, if it's boring, well then, you have nothing to worry about.

Re:

[hoggoth (414195)]

> Misbehaving children seems to be a western phenomenon

That's because Western adults value people who can think for themselves and challenge authority.

Re:Remember 'The Meaning of Life"

[flaming error (1041742)]

> Your problem is a human problem that CANNOT be solved by technology

Huh? My cordless phone at home is rarely in its cradle. But I can push the pager button, it beeps, and I found the phone. I'd say technology can help find misplaced items.

Or you could use technology to abuse your children (just kidding, kind of) until they bend to your will. That might work too.

Re:

[dcsmith (137996)]

Beats the hell out of throwing technology at a problem, don't you think?

What the hell kind of comment is that to make on Slashdot? Most people here LIVE to throw technology at a problem...

Re:

[metlin (258108)]

There are some things where throwing technology is fun. A lot of fun. And there are other things where people should just learn to understand the root cause and fix the issue at heart. A new fancy alarm isn't going to magically make you punctual. Learning to be punctual is going to make you punctual.

Likewise, using technology isn't going to make finding things better. If anything, it encourages bad habits (i.e. not being organized) and makes it harder down the line when you may not always have the said tech

Range

[Cyner (267154)]

There's some equipment out there with decent range, but it's usually quite expensive. My $50 do-it-all tranciever has a range of about 6 inches. With the lower frequency tags you get better range, but still I don't think I've seen trancievers with anywhere-in-the-house type range.

Re:

[uniquename72 (1169497)]

Besides, if there are in fact gremlins moving around your stuff, you're probably better off not knowing.

Re:Range

[isleshocky77 (962627)]

I would have to agree. I just had to do a project for a senior class on tracking people on RFID. It's so bad that decided to use another technology. RFID is just too expensive for anything over centimeter ranges. We ended up going with Zigbee devices from Texas Instruments. If you want to read about our setup it's all here. http://peopletrackerinc.com/ [peopletrackerinc.com] Their really cheap and small, accurate up to 1-2 meters with about 100 yard range. It uses something similar to 802.11 for wireless transmission. It's extremely cool if you want to look into. We have the entire setup up and running to track people within a building.

Re:Can RFID triangulate at short ranges?

[Eristone (146133)]

My current employer (i.e. disclaimer - I work for 'em) has stuff [wherenet.com] that does this -- it's definitely not cheap though. Uses active RFID tags and wireless access points to do the triangulation stuff.

Re:

[logicnazi (169418)]

Why not screw triangulation and just install enough readers around the house to locate it by which reader response?

Re:Can RFID triangulate at short ranges?

[choseph (1024971)]

Maybe buy a a bunch of cheaper receivers and put them on every door jamb in the house. At least then you'll have a "last seen in this room" style locator.

To do it effectively won't be cheap....

[barc0001 (173002)]

Really. Most sub $100 readers have a range that can be measured in millimeters. To get something with about 3' or 4' of range for a single reader will cost four figures. I've done some fairly extensive testing with these readers, and it is possible to boost the range by adding external antennas (for more money). So I guess what I am saying is that what you are planning on doing is technically possible, but is not feasible for most peoples' "tinkering" budgets.

Re:To do it effectively won't be cheap....

[mcmonkey (96054)]

Don't be put off by the nay-sayers. It's actually not too hard and not too expensive.

I've been playing with RFID for about 5 years, and it's great for remote controls, tape measures, and other easy to misplace items.

I also managed to get it to work with the Collectorz [collectorz.com] software, so I can 'check out' a book or movie.

The hand-held reader I have is powerful enough so that I can stand in middle of a small room (approx. 10' x 10') and get a reading if the item I'm looking for is in the room. Handy for finding stuff. It was around $200, and that was a year ago.

I'd post the make and model number of the reader, but I haven't been able to find it for a couple days. I probably should have tagged it.

$$$ budget?

[gnick (1211984)]

I don't know what your budget is like, but the readers can be pricey. The ones we use that are able to triangulate (2-D with two readers, 3-D with 3 readers) ran about $4k apiece. But, they would easily cover a standard sized home.

Of course, we had different needs than you, so there are probably considerably cheaper alternatives.

Re:$$$ budget?

[agurk (193950)]

Depending on the size of the home he might consider using readers which only covers every door. So the system atleast keeps track of which room contains said item.

I do not know if this would be cheaper, just a thought.

Re:

[shogun (657)]

Assuming of course noone just threw the item in question out the window.

Re:

[Red Flayer (890720)]

The ones we use that are able to triangulate (2-D with two readers, 3-D with 3 readers)

Huh? How does one triangulate in n dimensions without n+1 receivers?

For two dimensions, I understand it as follows... place one reader in the plane of the objects, and one outside the plane. The circle you get from combining the data from the two readers will intersect the plane in two points, so at best you can get a set of two possible locations for the object. If the readers are sufficiently accurate (and precise!)

Now, where dd I put that RFID scanner?

[MessyBlob (1191033)]

Now, where dd I put that RFID scanner?

Re:Now, where dd I put that RFID scanner?

[eln (21727)]

Well obviously you'd put an RFID chip on the scanner as well. Christ, do I have to think of everything around here?

Re:Now, where dd I put that RFID scanner?

[jblake (162981)]

Me too!

Patent it and sell it.

[Palmyst (1065142)]

I've had the same thought. From TV remotes to your spectacles, there are lot of things that bear some tracking. No reason why it can't be a commercial product.

Serious suggestion (don't use RFID)

[BadAnalogyGuy (945258)]

Buy two hammers separately. Make sure they are identical. Make sure you also have two receipts.

Next time someone misplaces your stuff, use one hammer to break their hand. If the skin breaks and blood gets on the hammer, throw it in your neighbor's yard and find a way to plant the receipt over there.

When the police come to find you, explain that you found your spouse, kid, dog, whatever in a crazed state with broken fingers. They must be hallucinating because they are blaming you. Hey, look at that! Maybe your neighbor just went inside, and, oh my god, there's a bloody hammer right next to his birdbath! Well, case closed, officer.

You'll never have anything misplaced again.

Use the other hammer to beat a dead horse

[beegle (9689)]

It seems like only one hammer is needed for you scenario.

So, what's the second hammer for? A redundant array of independent hammers?

Re:Use the other hammer to beat a dead horse

[bugnuts (94678)]

So, what's the second hammer for? A redundant array of independent hammers?

No, it's so that everyone knows you still have a hammer, and you're not afraid to use it.

X-mark

[RobertNotBob (597987)]

I used products from a company called XMARK at my previous job. They make locater tags and equipment. It works well, but even being in that business for the last 5 years... I don't remember any company selling residential equipment.

.

Maybe they (or their competitors) have a smaller unit that would work.

You might want to try a loc8tor

[samael (12612)]

http://www.loc8tor.com/ [loc8tor.com]

Sure, I have some advice.

[Jane Q. Public (1010737)]

Have a lot of money available. Tranceivers that can detect small tags in a house-sized area are very large and expensive. Further, you would need at least two, and probably three depending on the house.

It would be less cost and trouble to just buy triplicates (or more) of everything you commonly misplace.

didnt Wozniak try this?

[peter303 (12292)]

He was selling some device that could tag and find things in the home. It was more like car-key radios than RFID with a longer range.

Remote Beeping Device

[MrMunkey (1039894)]

I haven't looked yet, but I'm pretty sure there's got to be some products out there that you attach the speaker/receiver to and then a remote that makes it beep. I know that some cordless house phones have that ability in case you misplace the phone. I've often wanted to put something similar on my remotes/keys/wallet/shoes/etc. Then you can have fun running around the house trying to find the sound.

You will need

[geekoid (135745)]

many readers stashed around the house and go by lats read locations.
Getting a reader that can do a whole room will be many hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars.

Garage Sale

[Setherghd (942294)]

Have a garage sale, and get rid of everything you don't need.

If you're losing items in messy closets or bedrooms, then you probably need to clean up the clutter. That or you own way too many valuable possessions that may be stolen or permanently lost. Live simple.

I live in a small, energy-efficient home. I own exactly what I need and no more. I have a computer, a desk, a chair, books, an acoustic guitar, a bike, and a couch. And that's about it.

All of my cookware and utensils stay in the kitchen and never leave. Cleaning supplies stay in a closet. My toothbrush in the medicine cabinet.

I never lose a thing. Ever.

Re:Garage Sale

[wampus (1932)]

Good for you, I'd offer you a cookie, but you apparently have no facility to eliminate waste from your body.

Re:Garage Sale

[IpalindromeI (515070)]

You clearly do not have children. It's easy to find everything when you're the only one using it, and you make sure to put it back where it belongs after every use. Add a few more people into the mix, not so easy.

Ah, yes, I remember that Blessed State

[jeko (179919)]

Once upon a time, I too was single. When I put things down, they remained there until I picked them up again.

Then I got married, and the sudden Alzheimer's onset began. Things... Things began to move. It began small, tv remotes, car keys and the like. Soon it extended out to clothing, kitchen appliances. And then things began to just -- I'M NOT CRAZY DAMMIT! STOP LOOKING AT ME LIKE THAT! -- things began to DISAPPEAR. Treasured old jeans, t-shirts I'd had since high school, important tax receipts from 1992, they all began to just go away with no explanation.

Then the poltergeists came, and my wife insisted on calling them children. I fiercely hold my TV remote in my hand, knowing that if I loosen my grip on it it will fly across the room. Change on the desktop, shiny hand tools, anything that beeps, whistles or lights up, DVDs of any stripe, anything less than 60 lbs of dead weight can fly away in a heartbeat.

But I'm safe now, here in my closet. I got my favorite Leatherman, my surefire flashlight, my solid brass Zippo lighter and MY TV REMOTE DAMMIT and I am NOT LETTING GO OF THEM! NOT LETTING GO!

And I am not opening the door. They're MINE, YA HEAR ME? MINE!!!!!!

Last room entered

[SoundGuyNoise (864550)]

Instead of trying to triangulate a position, you might be able to put a receivers on doorways, and log to a network each RFID signal received. This way when you look up your hammer, you can tell which doorway it last passed.

hah

[jjshoe (410772)]

It seems most people here don't seem to understand active rfid vs. passive rfid.

Passive:

pro - Tags are extremely small, readers are cheap, tags are cheap
con - Range, non-existant

Active:

pro - Range
con - expensive tags, tags are large, tags are battery powered

Re:

[tknd (979052)]

A little off-topic but one thing that annoys the hell out of me is maintaining food in the fridge. Just how far is the range on a passive RFID?

For example it would be really cool if things like mayonnaise jars came with RFIDs and your refrigerator had an RFID reader + internet connection. Then you could run a database on the fridge and when you were away from home you could figure out hold old the mayonnaise is without having to open the fridge. In fact we could go one step further and have the fridge e

active vs. passive rfid

[pointbeing (701902)]

As others have mentioned the range for passive RFID detection is painfully short - to do what OP wants he needs active tags and readers.

A passive RFID tag is powered by the reader - hence its short range. An active tag carries its own power supply - like the toll booth speedpass tags.

Active tags run from about the size of a dime to about the size of a paperback book - in my job I deal with the paperback book-sized tags.

Simple: BUY BIG STUFF

[xant (99438)]

Our obsession with making everything small leads directly to this problem. Smaller things get lost more easily.

They sell those giant-sized remote controls at Walgreens or your local random-crap-mart. Buy one, you'll never lose it again. It can't fall between the cushions of the couch because it's friggin huge. If the thing you don't want to lose doesn't come in giant-size, permanently attach it to something which is too large to lose but still portable. Gas stations have learned this lesson, that's why the bathroom key is attached to a huge plank.

To make it even easier, paint it something bright and garish.

Why triangulate?

[MarkvW (1037596)]

Why not have a portable reader that you can carry around with you. When you enter the room, you can get a printout of all the stuff in the room. If the printout does not correspond with your organizational directives--that's what kids are for!

The RFIDHouse

[CopaceticOpus (965603)]

For this to be really useful, I think you need an RFID tag on every item in the home. First, construct a new home with a single entry point (you can add emergency exits for fire safety.) The front entry room will contain a computer and an RFID tagging device. Every single object that comes through the door gets tagged, named, photographed, and described in the computer system before it is allowed into the house.

It's a little work upfront, but think of the advantages. No time wasted organizing your possessions. No time wasted "tidying up." Nothing can ever be out of place, because nothing BELONGS anywhere. The mixing bowl might not be in the kitchen, but it's no trouble. Just search for it using any of the dozens of wall terminals installed around the house, and a series of flashing arrows will direct you right to your desired object.

Just *DON'T* find missing socks

[jnadke (907188)]

Whatever you do, *DON'T* put RFID tags on your socks.

They're missing for a reason. If you find them, a paradoxical black hole will open up in your dryer and engulf the entire planet. Trust me, I've done the math.

For the love of god... not the socks.

Homeseer

[wpiman (739077)]

I use a product called Homeseer and alot of people are already doing this. There are two types of tags people are using, iAutomate tags and cheaperRFID tags. The iAutomate tags are more complex, and hence more expensive. I have the Cheaper RFID tags. I have one in our laptops bags-- if no laptops are present-- no wifi. I don't believe they do triangulation. The iAutomate ones do- but are far more expensive-- at least when I last looked.

Suggestions?

[rueger (210566)]

"I'm thinking of sticking RFID tags on some and trying to triangulate a position with several tranceivers placed in the house. (Does) anyone have any suggestions(?)"

When you have people over for a dinner party, turn off the speaker that says "PLEASE RETURN TO THE STORE!"

Re:TOP SECRET FACT:Most cars tracking RFID ALREADY

[zienth (890583)]

So now we need to wrap tinfoil around our tires?