Standard

Comparing three different passive RFID systems for behaviour monitoring in grow-finish pigs. / Brown-Brandl, Tami; Maselyne, Jarissa; Adrion, Felix; Kapun, Anita; Hessel, Engel; Saeys, Wouter; Van Nuffel, Annelies; Gallmann, Eva.

Papers presented at the 8th European Conference on Precision Livestock Farming. ed. / Daniel Berckmans; Alassane Keita. Vol. 2017 Nantes, France, 2017.

Onderzoeksoutput: Hoofdstuk in Boek/Rapport/CongresprocedureC1: Artikels in proceedings van wetenschappelijke congressen, die niet inbegrepen zijn in A1, A2, A3 of P1Onderzoekpeer review

Harvard

Brown-Brandl, T, Maselyne, J, Adrion, F, Kapun, A, Hessel, E, Saeys, W, Van Nuffel, A & Gallmann, E 2017, Comparing three different passive RFID systems for behaviour monitoring in grow-finish pigs. in D Berckmans & A Keita (eds), Papers presented at the 8th European Conference on Precision Livestock Farming. vol. 2017, Nantes, France, 8th European Conference on Precision Livestock Farming, Nantes, Frankrijk, 12/09/17.

APA

Brown-Brandl, T., Maselyne, J., Adrion, F., Kapun, A., Hessel, E., Saeys, W., ... Gallmann, E. (2017). Comparing three different passive RFID systems for behaviour monitoring in grow-finish pigs. In D. Berckmans, & A. Keita (editors), Papers presented at the 8th European Conference on Precision Livestock Farming (Vol. 2017). Nantes, France.

Vancouver

Brown-Brandl T, Maselyne J, Adrion F, Kapun A, Hessel E, Saeys W et al. Comparing three different passive RFID systems for behaviour monitoring in grow-finish pigs. In Berckmans D, Keita A, editors, Papers presented at the 8th European Conference on Precision Livestock Farming. Vol. 2017. Nantes, France. 2017

Author

Brown-Brandl, Tami ; Maselyne, Jarissa ; Adrion, Felix ; Kapun, Anita ; Hessel, Engel ; Saeys, Wouter ; Van Nuffel, Annelies ; Gallmann, Eva. / Comparing three different passive RFID systems for behaviour monitoring in grow-finish pigs. Papers presented at the 8th European Conference on Precision Livestock Farming. editor / Daniel Berckmans ; Alassane Keita. Vol. 2017 Nantes, France, 2017.

Bibtex

@inbook{6d37345918e7417e8a3c2af31c2d065a,
title = "Comparing three different passive RFID systems for behaviour monitoring in grow-finish pigs",
abstract = "Animal facilities are increasing in size making it difficult for animal caretakers toensure the health and well-being of all animals under their care. Radio FrequencyIdentification (RFID) systems have been successfully used in animal facilitiesand research has identified potential applications in behaviour monitoring forautomated problem detection. Low Frequency (LF), High Frequency (HF), andUltra-High Frequency (UHF) are the three frequency ranges most commonlyused. The objective of this paper is to compare and evaluate the application ofthese three different RFID systems within grow-finish swine facilities in terms ofhardware characteristics, system design, and data processing and usage.Differences in tag construction, availability and cost are evident, but also basicdifferences in reader and antenna function, such as physics of data exchange,speed of detection, and anti-collision procedures exist. The systems can havesignificant differences in read ranges and also showed varying influence ofmaterials, especially water and metal, on the performance of the systems.However, the data streams as well as methods of data processing and the creationof events (e.g. visits to a feeder) are similar for all systems. The characteristicsmentioned do not necessarily identify an ideal RFID technology, but revealpositive and negative aspects of each system. The three different RFID systemshave been successfully applied in pig facilities. Current research is focussed onthe utilisation of the RFID data in prediction and decision models for illness,animal welfare and management actions.",
author = "Tami Brown-Brandl and Jarissa Maselyne and Felix Adrion and Anita Kapun and Engel Hessel and Wouter Saeys and {Van Nuffel}, Annelies and Eva Gallmann",
year = "2017",
language = "English",
volume = "2017",
editor = "Daniel Berckmans and Alassane Keita",
booktitle = "Papers presented at the 8th European Conference on Precision Livestock Farming",

}

RIS

TY - CHAP

T1 - Comparing three different passive RFID systems for behaviour monitoring in grow-finish pigs

AU - Brown-Brandl, Tami

AU - Maselyne, Jarissa

AU - Adrion, Felix

AU - Kapun, Anita

AU - Hessel, Engel

AU - Saeys, Wouter

AU - Van Nuffel, Annelies

AU - Gallmann, Eva

PY - 2017

Y1 - 2017

N2 - Animal facilities are increasing in size making it difficult for animal caretakers toensure the health and well-being of all animals under their care. Radio FrequencyIdentification (RFID) systems have been successfully used in animal facilitiesand research has identified potential applications in behaviour monitoring forautomated problem detection. Low Frequency (LF), High Frequency (HF), andUltra-High Frequency (UHF) are the three frequency ranges most commonlyused. The objective of this paper is to compare and evaluate the application ofthese three different RFID systems within grow-finish swine facilities in terms ofhardware characteristics, system design, and data processing and usage.Differences in tag construction, availability and cost are evident, but also basicdifferences in reader and antenna function, such as physics of data exchange,speed of detection, and anti-collision procedures exist. The systems can havesignificant differences in read ranges and also showed varying influence ofmaterials, especially water and metal, on the performance of the systems.However, the data streams as well as methods of data processing and the creationof events (e.g. visits to a feeder) are similar for all systems. The characteristicsmentioned do not necessarily identify an ideal RFID technology, but revealpositive and negative aspects of each system. The three different RFID systemshave been successfully applied in pig facilities. Current research is focussed onthe utilisation of the RFID data in prediction and decision models for illness,animal welfare and management actions.

AB - Animal facilities are increasing in size making it difficult for animal caretakers toensure the health and well-being of all animals under their care. Radio FrequencyIdentification (RFID) systems have been successfully used in animal facilitiesand research has identified potential applications in behaviour monitoring forautomated problem detection. Low Frequency (LF), High Frequency (HF), andUltra-High Frequency (UHF) are the three frequency ranges most commonlyused. The objective of this paper is to compare and evaluate the application ofthese three different RFID systems within grow-finish swine facilities in terms ofhardware characteristics, system design, and data processing and usage.Differences in tag construction, availability and cost are evident, but also basicdifferences in reader and antenna function, such as physics of data exchange,speed of detection, and anti-collision procedures exist. The systems can havesignificant differences in read ranges and also showed varying influence ofmaterials, especially water and metal, on the performance of the systems.However, the data streams as well as methods of data processing and the creationof events (e.g. visits to a feeder) are similar for all systems. The characteristicsmentioned do not necessarily identify an ideal RFID technology, but revealpositive and negative aspects of each system. The three different RFID systemshave been successfully applied in pig facilities. Current research is focussed onthe utilisation of the RFID data in prediction and decision models for illness,animal welfare and management actions.

M3 - C1: Articles in proceedings

VL - 2017

BT - Papers presented at the 8th European Conference on Precision Livestock Farming

A2 - Berckmans, Daniel

A2 - Keita, Alassane

CY - Nantes, France

ER -