Exploring Received Signal Strength

Indication within an Location

Based System
Tarei King and Thorsten Ziller
BCT 2010

1
 Abstract

Wireless technology has become ubiquitous in modern day life. WiFi networks cover
most of Auckland CBD and supplies internet to those within range of the wireless
access point.

All wireless technology has distribution points and connected nodes who share
information between each other if there is a perceived Received Signal Strength
Indication (RSSI) value greater than zero.

Therefore, is it possible to create a measure of distance and therefore, specific

location with wireless technology and how what factors affect the outcomes of such
a system?

This paper uses RFID as the chosen method of testing RSSI indications and gathering
location based system (LBS) information.

The results conclude that RFID as the chosen mechanism for tracking is not sufficient
enough to arrive at a usable LBS and Real Time Location System (RTLS). Also, the
reporting of RFID RSSI using Wavetrend technology in our research results it quite
temperamental RSSI values, requiring a large amount of data and mapping
requirements.

It should be noted however, this was originally mentioned to us by Brian @ AUT RFID
LAB AURA.

Keywords: RTLS, RFID, LBS, Processing 1.0, Creative Technology, RSSI, Trilateration.

Introduction
Radio Frequency Identification (RFID)
technology has been in existence over
70 years and although it has strayed
far from its initial inception of being a
covert tracking system for black ops
missions[1 – Leon Theremin] to avenues
including shipping and logistics to
intruder detection.
RFID consists of 2 parts, a tag and a
reader. Active RFID tags have their
own power source and can transmit at
longer distances than their passive
counterparts.
Active reader and tag combinations
share signal information in the form of
an Received Signal Strength Indication
or RSSI value.
Therefore in theory, once linear
distance is proved or assumed within
reason, a second sensor node can be
introduced in order to attempt a 2
dimensional trilateration value and
report an Euclidean x and y value.
This Euclidean x and y value can be
displayed on a 2 dimensional plane to
present a position on a map or other
such visual aid.
Outside Interests
This project was undertaken to gather x
and y coordinates of people based
within a predetermined area for the
purposes of a project named eTend[2
web link].

It is assumed that placing distance eTend was designed to track people at

between the tag and readers reports tradeshow events and provide
a lower RSSI value and therefore it is meaningful and realtime information to
theoretically possible to map this all opted-in participants.
distance accurately.

2
Equipment and Usage
AUT’s AURA LAB agreed to lease the
following equipment:
3 x WaveTrend RX300 sensors
433.92 mhz auto poll
3 x WaveTrend TG801 tags
2 x WaveTrend TG100 tags
The sensors were connected to a
laptop server running a Processing 1.2
(Java) sketch recording serial event
data for collection and calculations.
As a side note, serial application
“Cornflake” was also used to initial
gather serial data and confirm
operation of the hardware.
approx. 10 meters without much
interference (explained later).
Once a tag enters the coverage area,
an RSSI level is reported by each sensor
and a linear distance from known
sensor location can be determined.
RSSI value therefore becomes the
radius of the resultant circles for each
sensor node.
It is assumed that the resultant circles
(based on RSSI radius) will intersect at
some point and a correlating x,y value
can be formulated at this time by using
circle intersection formulae.

Sensors would report tag information

including ID and RSSI values to the
laptop.

RSSI values were then map with real-

world distance measurements and
recorded in varying environments.

Once mapped, the data was then

placed into a circle intersect formula to
ascertain an x, y coordinate. Figure 1 Circle Intersection Diagram

Receiving tag information e =c −a

With the sensors connected to the f = d −b
laptop and using a processing 1.0
sketch a serialEvent() is opened to p = (e 2 + f 2 )
report the values of each tag.

Tags send a 38 byte packet to the

k = ( p 2 + r 2 − s2 ) /(2 p)
sensors. Full detail on the array is Figure 2 setting up variables based on
located in the appendix. RSSI readout and known sensor
centerpoints.
Only 2 of these bytes are used for our
project byte 26 (tagID) and 28 tag ek f
RSSI. € x = a+ + ( ) (r 2 − k 2 )
p p
Acquiring a tag location fk e
y =b+ − ( ) (r 2 − k 2 )
When the sensor array is setup, two p p
resultant ‘coverage’ circles will be Figure 3 Calculating x,y coordinates post
evident based on the strength of each RSSI acquisition
sensor node.

For the WaveTrend hardware, an

assumed maximum read distance is €
3
Distance calculations Results in an ideal setup
The first step to testing was to formulate
230.0
a linear distance equation measurable
against RSSI signals received.
172.5

These values ranged from 0 – 255 and

therefore distance mapping was 115.0
assumed as:
57.5
Max Sensor Range: 15m
Max RSSI Value: 255
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 7 10m
Distance (in metres) equals
Figure 4 RSSI values outside 1m

This calculation was never accurate.

230
Limitations
225 225
224
It is important to note here the 225

limitations of the study as witnessed

before showing results. 220

215
Interference: All radio signals are 215
subject to varying degrees of 211
interference, a general rule is the higher 210
the frequency, the less prone to 0 30 500 600 1000
interference and the greater distance it
Figure 5 RSSI values within 1000 cm
can cover.

Throughout this study, the following

196
factors were noted to ‘skew’ sensor 200
data: 168 165 164 163
161 161
1. Orientation of the sensors and
150
tags
2. Other electronic devices within
read range 100
3. Physical obstacles: Tables,
doors, people and paper. 50
4. The time of day

Sensor hardware: Attributed too by 0

1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 1900 2000
interference, RFID and the hardware
itself would play a role in reporting Figure 6 RSSI values between 1 and 2
dummy values, 0 weighted values and meters
completely obscure values. RFID is not
effective to perform RTLS functions by The data witnessed in the figures 4-6
itself and needs augmentation with are taken in an ideal environment –
other technology. outdoors and with no other electrical
interference. One tag and sensor pair
Processing and Java: Although these was used to formulate the cleanest
languages have native libraries data read reported.
attached for serial interpretation of
data, it is encumbered by the
Wavetrend data arrays which are
written in HEX. The result is an increase
in processing data to merely extract
RSSI values.

4
Conclusion
One last minute addition to the study
was the implementation of Time
Distance of Arrival (TDoA) calculations,
unfortunately the tags from wavetrend
do not perform this natively.

The RFID process of acquiring

positioning is not effective by itself within
a RTLS system and is deemed unusable
for implementation within the eTend
framework.

Further work is required to include other

technologies such as OpenCV, wimax,
wifi, infrared and passive RFID to
increase location acquisition and
accuracy.