Can Magic Bands be used to locate people?

[Simba77]

read the case study i posted. they use the wirleless network (in this case Disney-Guest) to track active RFID (magic bands) to a few meters. This is possible. I think you are basing your information from misinformation on message boards and your interpretation of FCC documentation. My post is a real world case that is being used in hospitals, labs and government facilities.

I am not saying Disney is doing this and I personally do not care but it is possible as I have sent you real proof, not just quotes from Disboards.

Right - a few meters - which happens to be the limit of how far the band can transmit its broadcast signal, like I said. It's not about the range of Disney's wireless network or the power of that network... the network receives a signal from the band in order to identify it, which means the band must transmit at least as far as the nearest wireless access point of the Disney-Guest network. And the band (with its incredibly low power transmitter) must not be hidden behind any objects or it would effectively nullify any significant transmission range.

 

[bwang123]

Right - a few meters - which happens to be the limit of how far the band can transmit its broadcast signal, like I said.

great, you agree, so if my child is lost, they could know within a few meters where the kid is located.

well, if they have the back-end part (just a few servers) in place which no one on here knows for sure.

 

[Simba77]

great, you agree, so if my child is lost, they could know within a few meters where the kid is located.

well, if they have the back-end part (just a few servers) in place which no one on here knows for sure.

No, not at all. You're not understanding this. Your child could only be located if he/she is within a few meters of an access point. Wireless (wifi) access points are NOT located within a few meters of each other across all of WDW. You are mistaken as to what's taking place here. Wireless access points have a long range when communicating with a "true" wifi device like an ipad or a cell phone (because the transmitters on those devices are much, much stronger, and have a much longer range). This means Disney's access points (the wireless routers) are far apart (probably 25+ meters apart). You could very easily have a magic band "between" those access points and not be nearly close enough to be detected by them. You must be within a meter or two at most.

And that's if the band is "in the open." If stored inside a bag or hiding behind a crowd of people, the range is lessened. If your child is hiding in a bathroom, the walls would stop the band's signal from getting to a wireless access point, for example. (So even though the SSID would "reach" the band inside a bathroom, the band can not say "I'm here!" because it's not loud enough - the signal isn't strong enough - to reach back to that said access point which is likely far more than 1-2 meters away).

Again, to summarize: You can only be "located" on the network if you are within a few meters of an access point, which are spaced very far apart from each other in relation to the band's transmission range. This does not mean you can be located within an accuracy of a few meters.

 

[chartle]

great, you agree, so if my child is lost, they could know within a few meters where the kid is located.

well, if they have the back-end part (just a few servers) in place which no one on here knows for sure.

But only if they are a few feet away from a receiver which would require a mesh of receivers in a grid every 15 to 20 feet everywhere.

Also by this point in time the kid should have already found a CM or a CM found him and be looking for you.

This system would only be needed if a kid wanted to be lost and not found.

 

[bwang123]

But only if they are a few feet away from a receiver which would require a mesh of receivers in a grid every 15 to 20 feet everywhere.

Also by this point in time the kid should have already found a CM or a CM found him and be looking for you.

This system would only be needed if a kid wanted to be lost and not found.

They do have receivers EVERYWHERE. It's called wireless access point coverage (Disney-Guest). I am not sure why you keep insisting that they do not have wireless coverage everywhere. Wireless signal from their already installed wireless access points can be used to track RFID. I am not making this up, I even posted a real world implementation. If you like, you can fly or drive down to our medical center and I can arrange a walk-through to show you an actual installation. It may even blow you mind to know that these servers can keep historical information about where those assets were located on imported maps.

 

[Simba77]

But only if they are a few feet away from a receiver which would require a mesh of receivers in a grid every 15 to 20 feet everywhere.

Also by this point in time the kid should have already found a CM or a CM found him and be looking for you.

This system would only be needed if a kid wanted to be lost and not found.

Right. The best (only?) way to implement a "lost child" system that takes advantage of the magicbands would be in the event that a child who doesn't know his parents' names or is too young to speak is discovered by a cast member. The magicband could then be scanned to identify his "traveling party" (parents' names) and an announcement be made over the PA. That's assuming the parents are as of yet unaware of what to do after losing their child.

 

[Simba77]

They do have receivers EVERYWHERE. It's called wireless access point coverage (Disney-Guest). I am not sure why you keep insisting that they do not have wireless coverage everywhere. Wireless signal from their already installed wireless access points can be used to track RFID. I am not making this up, I even posted a real world implementation. If you like, you can fly or drive down to our medical center and I can arrange a walk-through to show you an actual installation. It may even blow you mind to know that these servers can keep historical information about where those assets were located on imported maps.

I don't want to sound mean, but you're wrong. The wireless access points are not located within 1-2 meters of each other across the entire park. That would be one every TEN feet or less. That's how close they'd need to be to remain in constant contact with a magicband. I'm sorry, but you are not aware of the nature of a wireless wifi network.

Just because your ipad can connect to the wifi network "everywhere" in the Magic Kingdom does NOT, by any means, imply that a magicband has the signal strength to ALSO be identified "everywhere" in the MK. Your understanding of the technology is not correct.

This has nothing to do with servers or historical information or imported maps. I majored in engineering, took many computer programming classes, and have a degree in Mathematics. I understand information technology.

It's not about the computer system. It has everything to do with the fact that Disney does not and CAN NOT have wireless access points every 10 feet in the Magic Kingdom. They'd be in the trees, under your feet, in the bathrooms, all over the face of Space Mountain, in the bushes... this is not the case.

 

[chartle]

Right. The best (only?) way to implement a "lost child" system that takes advantage of the magicbands would be in the event that a child who doesn't know his parents' names or is too young to speak is discovered by a cast member. The magicband could then be scanned to identify his "traveling party" (parents' names) and an announcement be made over the PA. That's assuming the parents are as of yet unaware of what to do after losing their child.

Well yes to everything but they would not make an announcement over the PA unless an absolute dire emergency.

The current system assumes that kids want to be found and that the parents want to find them. Of course if this would ever occur the authorities would then be called.

 

[bwang123]

No, not at all. You're not understanding this. Your child could only be located if he/she is within a few meters of an access point. Wireless (wifi) access points are NOT located within a few meters of each other across all of WDW. You are mistaken as to what's taking place here. Wireless access points have a long range when communicating with a "true" wifi device like an ipad or a cell phone (because the transmitters on those devices are much, much stronger, and have a much longer range). This means Disney's access points (the wireless routers) are far apart (probably 25+ meters apart). You could very easily have a magic band "between" those access points and not be nearly close enough to be detected by them. You must be within a meter or two at most.

And that's if the band is "in the open." If stored inside a bag or hiding behind a crowd of people, the range is lessened. If your child is hiding in a bathroom, the walls would stop the band's signal from getting to a wireless access point, for example. (So even though the SSID would "reach" the band inside a bathroom, the band can not say "I'm here!" because it's not loud enough - the signal isn't strong enough - to reach back to that said access point which is likely far more than 1-2 meters away).

Again, to summarize: You can only be "located" on the network if you are within a few meters of an access point, which are spaced very far apart from each other in relation to the band's transmission range. This does not mean you can be located within an accuracy of a few meters.

yes, the access points are located many feet apart but their wireless signal they are sending goes all the way to the ground and overlaps with each other providing coverage everywhere.

I guess you haven't read the Cisco case study i posted. They are doing EXACTLY what i am explaining. There are hospitals doing exactly this with active RFID and existing wireless (yes, the same wirleess that provides internet access) with Cisco location manager appliances to track assets. For example, some hospitals only have a certain number of some medical equipment, so the nurses were hiding them in closets so they would always have access and wouldnt have to wait or be without one. they fitted the equipment with the same technology in the magic bands and now they can see exactly where their equipment is at all times on maps of the hospital that were imported into the server.

 

[chartle]

They do have receivers EVERYWHERE. It's called wireless access point coverage (Disney-Guest). I am not sure why you keep insisting that they do not have wireless coverage everywhere. Wireless signal from their already installed wireless access points can be used to track RFID. I am not making this up, I even posted a real world implementation. If you like, you can fly or drive down to our medical center and I can arrange a walk-through to show you an actual installation. It may even blow you mind to know that these servers can keep historical information about where those assets were located on imported maps.

Please see Simba77 much better explanation above.

 

[Simba77]

yes, the access points are located many feet apart but their wireless signal they are sending goes all the way to the ground and overlaps with each other providing coverage everywhere.

I guess you haven't read the Cisco case study i posted. They are doing EXACTLY what i am explaining. There are hospitals doing exactly this with active RFID and existing wireless (yes, the same wirleess that provides internet access) with Cisco location manager appliances to track assets. For example, some hospitals only have a certain number of some medical equipment, so the nurses were hiding them in closets so they would always have access and wouldnt have to wait or be without one. they fitted the equipment with the same technology in the magic bands and now they can see exactly where their equipment is at all times on maps of the hospital that were imported into the server.

Yes, coverage for WIFI devices. The magicband does not have two-way communication that can range as far as an IPad or a cell phone with wifi. The transmitter is not that strong.

Hospitals have corridors and hallways that you are predictably going to walk down. Every so often, you will pass an access point which can then "read" you. I would also wager that the RFID transmitters have a stronger signal transmitter than magicbands which are powered by a watch battery. This medical equipment you talk of likely has rechargeable, on-board transmitters to broadcast over a much longer range. A magicband hidden in a closet without a wireless access point inside it would be invisible to the wifi network.

The Magic Kingdom has areas of 30-40 yards of nothing but landscaping. There are no wireless access points there. Just because your ipad can "reach" those access points, does NOT mean your magicband's weak singal can also travel those 20 yards to connect to it.

 

[bwang123]

From 2007: (yes, this has been around for a while now)
http://www.pcworld.com/article/132105/article.html


"At Interop, the high tech industry's major networking conference, a little-noticed partnership announcement between WhereNet, designers of active RFID location systems, and Cisco may be far more significant than anyone realizes.

The agreement itself will allow the industry standard ISO 24730 transmission signal used by WhereNet in its active RFID chips to be read by Cisco Wi-Fi access points.

Active RFID chips, as opposed to passive chips, send a signal out to readers rather than having to be woken up by a reader, at which point the information is uploaded.

In essence, an upgrade to Cisco software, Release 4.1 for the Cisco Unified Wireless Network, available this week gives WLANs the ability to format and read data generated by sensors. 

The immediate benefit will be seen in that a special antenna to hear the signal from tag is no longer needed. Instead, the WhereNet tag can use the existing Wi-Fi access points that are already in place. This in turn lowers the cost of an implementation and gives users a broader area of location visibility, according to Dan Doles, vice president and general manager, WhereNet Business Unit, Zebra Technologies."

 

[Simba77]

Well yes to everything but they would not make an announcement over the PA unless an absolute dire emergency.

The current system assumes that kids want to be found and that the parents want to find them. Of course if this would ever occur the authorities would then be called.

I think anything other than what they currently do to help lost children would be impractical or impossible (at this point in time).

 

[bwang123]

also, from the FCC filing for the bands:
“wrist worn arm band that transmits a 2.4GHz signal to an indoor wireless infrastructure.”

2.4ghz is EXACTLY what wireless cards in laptops, etc use. (also 5ghz in some)

what more proof do you want?

 

[Simba77]

From 2007: (yes, this has been around for a while now)
http://www.pcworld.com/article/132105/article.html


"At Interop, the high tech industry's major networking conference, a little-noticed partnership announcement between WhereNet, designers of active RFID location systems, and Cisco may be far more significant than anyone realizes.

The agreement itself will allow the industry standard ISO 24730 transmission signal used by WhereNet in its active RFID chips to be read by Cisco Wi-Fi access points.

Active RFID chips, as opposed to passive chips, send a signal out to readers rather than having to be woken up by a reader, at which point the information is uploaded.

In essence, an upgrade to Cisco software, Release 4.1 for the Cisco Unified Wireless Network, available this week gives WLANs the ability to format and read data generated by sensors.*

The immediate benefit will be seen in that a special antenna to hear the signal from tag is no longer needed. Instead, the WhereNet tag can use the existing Wi-Fi access points that are already in place. This in turn lowers the cost of an implementation and gives users a broader area of location visibility, according to Dan Doles, vice president and general manager, WhereNet Business Unit, Zebra Technologies."

I'm not saying RFID location technology can't work. The limiting factor here is the power of the magicband's transmitter. These systems you reference are the same technology, but not necessarily the same implementation. Those RFID locators/transmitters may very well have stronger batteries and stronger broadcast signals than a magicband which is powered, again, by a watch battery. A magicband has limited range. But even so, the Magic Kingdom is not a medical center with hallways and limited areas where a RFID locator can possibly go. The MK is vast with open areas that can't have an access point every 10 feet. It's both impractical and would cause interference problems with the standard wifi signals of people connecting to the network. You'd need a 25 routers in just a 50x50 foot area to have the kind of coverage you'd need to have a reliable person-locator. The RF interference created by such a grid would kill the wifi network, and probably kill people

 

[Simba77]

also, from the FCC filing for the bands:
wrist worn arm band that transmits a 2.4GHz signal to an indoor wireless infrastructure.

2.4ghz is EXACTLY what wireless cards in laptops, etc use. (also 5ghz in some)

what more proof do you want?

Frequency is irrelevant. We're talking about transmission range. Show me something about the power output and transmission range of the RFID system in use in these hospitals and medical centers you speak of.

The magicband has a range of 10-15 feet. Wireless access points are not located every 10-15 feet in the Disney parks. It has nothing to do with the software or hardware backbone, the computer system, or the transmission frequency of a device. It's power and range.

 

[chartle]

also, from the FCC filing for the bands:
“wrist worn arm band that transmits a 2.4GHz signal to an indoor wireless infrastructure.”

2.4ghz is EXACTLY what wireless cards in laptops, etc use. (also 5ghz in some)

what more proof do you want?

OK, proof that it has enough power to transmit more than 10 feet BACK to the receiver. Its a two way street. The access points are plugged in to a wall. The bands have a small 3.7 volt lithium battery.

 

[Simba77]

From 2007: (yes, this has been around for a while now)
http://www.pcworld.com/article/132105/article.html

The WhereNet tags have this spec:

Typical Locate Range, Indoors 120 m (400 ft)
Typical Locate Range, Outdoors 1000 m (3200 ft)

That is ridiculously beyond the range that a magicband is stated to have (10-15 feet vs. 400 - 3200 feet)

The WhereNet device is powered by a "AA Lithium Thionyl Chloride cell" (it's the size of a AA), which is significantly stronger than a button cell battery = significantly longer range.

 

[doconeill]

Getting caught up in this thread...but...

They do have receivers EVERYWHERE. It's called wireless access point coverage (Disney-Guest). I am not sure why you keep insisting that they do not have wireless coverage everywhere. Wireless signal from their already installed wireless access points can be used to track RFID. I am not making this up, I even posted a real world implementation. If you like, you can fly or drive down to our medical center and I can arrange a walk-through to show you an actual installation. It may even blow you mind to know that these servers can keep historical information about where those assets were located on imported maps.

Yes, they do have receivers everywhere. But they are NOT within 10-15 feet of you at all times. You can see the SSID of the network on your phone because it is a full Wi-Fi specification device with a receiver - it can receive the signal (MagicBands do NOT have a receiver), so if the signal is strong enough ("typical" Wi-Fi is about 300 feet in clear sight), you can receive it. You an also transmit on that network because your phone is a "high power" device capable of transmitting that distance as well. It's also why that rather large battery is lucky to last a day in a Disney park, while a MagicBand is rated for 2-3 years with a tiny one.

The MagicBand's active transmitter does operate at 2.4 GHz...which is in the Wi-Fi spectrum. I think that is why it's being called a "Wi-Fi" transmitter, but it doesn't meet the specs, and Wi-Fi is more than a frequency, but a series of protocols, etc. So the use of the term is a misnomer. But by operating on one of the Wi-Fi channels, they can potentially take advantage of the existing radio repeater infrastructure (I don't know that they are/will, or if it is truly possible).

At any rate, any sort of tracking would require the band coming close enough to the receiver for the receiver to pick up the band's beacon - 10-15 feet ideally. THEN the ID can be read. ONLY a unique ID is transmitted - that is the ONLY thing on the device.

So, at best, they know which receiver and when that band was last seen.

The stated reasons for this is for "enhanced experiences", which are not totally defined (the common example is that the princesses at the M&G will know the child's name and be able to greet them by name as they approach) and to be able to direct crowd flow. Lost children and location tracking has not been stated.

I think, as others have stated, that the advantage of the MBs will be more geared towards being able to contact parents - I know there are procedures in place that work, but that doesn't mean they can't be made better. I also don't believe the front-line CMs will have readers, but supervisors might, or they will be brought to the "lost children" locations where they can be read.

 

[bwang123]

OK, proof that it has enough power to transmit more than 10 feet BACK to the receiver. Its a two way street. The access points are plugged in to a wall. The bands have a small 3.7 volt lithium battery.

http://store.tagsense.com/products/zt-500-long-range-active-rfid-tag
Here is an example of an active RFID tag with an Operating Voltage: 2.2 - 3 V that has range up to 70meters. See the datasheet for voltages.