Performance Tests and Test Reports of HLT UHF Laundry Tags

Here are the performance tests and test reports of HLT UHF Laundry Tags.

Remarks

U8: With NXP UCODE 8 chip (eg. HLT7015U8)
U9: With NXP UCODE 9 chip (eg. HLT7015U9)
M: Cube (eg. HLT7015U8M)
Q: Wire type with circle (eg. HLT5815QU9)
HS: Heat-sealed on textile (single-layer structure) (eg. HLT7015U9-HS)
HSD: Heat-sealed on textile (double-layer structure) (eg. HLT7015U9-HSD)
MV: Mean value of 3 or 5 tags
Free air: tag only / no textile
In textile: tag was put in some textile layers

TEXBIT HLT UHF Laundry Tag HLT7015U8 vs. HLT7015U9M

HLT7015U8 laundry tags’ performance is about 25% better in the ETSI than in the FCC.
HLT7015U9M laundry tags’ performance is about 40% better in the FCC than in the ETSI.
Conclusion: HLT7015U8 is a broad band RFID linen tag, HLT7015U9M is better choice in the FCC.

As the report shows, the performance of HLT5512U9 in various textiles, in jeans > in knitted T-shirt > in towel > in outdoor jacket > free air, furthermore, this 55*12mm small size laundry tag in jeans and outdoor jacket can up to 9 meters reading range.

As you can see, all the tags characteristics are changed significant when they are put in textiles. For example the HLT5512U8M tag seemed to have a bad performance but in textile the performance is very good.

We started a washing test with HLT5512U8-HS and HLT7015U8M-HS
The tags were attached by heat sealing. (204°C 14s) After 200 washing cycles all of them worked fine.

To check if something changed during these washing cycles we repeat the measurements. (Tags are still on the bed sheet where we placed but not in between of multiple textile layers)

It seems that the tags lost a little bit of performance.

To check, if the module or the wire causes this change we measures a 200x washed tag and a new one and changes their module for another measurement.

This shows, that the change caused by the external antenna (wire) but not by the module.

The result seems very similar compared to the U8 measurement.

We start a washing test with several U9 samples. Measurement after 75 cycles.

The performance in the ETSI: HLT5512U9 ≥ HLT5512U8 > HLT5512U8M
The performance in the FCC: HLT5512U8M > HLT5512U8 ≥ HLT5512U9
These laundry tags’ performance improved in textile. However, the HLT5512U8M has a less backscatter range than other two tags in the ETSI.

Laundry tags tested inside flat linen.
Tags’ reading range is 6~8 meters in the ETST and FCC.
However, HLT5815QU9’s reverse sensitivity is better than HLT5512U9’s.
Conclusion: HLT5815QU9 > HLT5512U9