Cycsee Feasibility Report

8/2/2019 Cycsee Feasibility Report

1/12

IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON

CYCSEECyclist Detection Systems

2/27/2012

TEAM

Ali, Zaeed

Arif, Bilal Mohammad

El-Turk, Hazem

Khalab, Ibrahim

Liu, Jia

Suddle, Ali

Tan, Xiao

Wu, Jiarui

Xue, Zeping

SUPERVISOR: Dr. Timothy G. Constandinou


2/12

CYCSEE

Page 1

Contents

Introduction ................................................................................................................................................. 2

Project Aim .............................................................................................................................................. 2Project Motivation .................................................................................................................................... 2

Background .............................................................................................................................................. 2

Cycsee technical report ................................................................................................................................ 2

High Level description ............................................................................................................................... 3

Low Level Analysis .................................................................................................................................... 3

Frequency allocation ............................................................................................................................. 3

C-Sense (Reader and Alert System) ...................................................................................................... 4

C-Tag .....................................................................................................................................................5

Active tag classification .........................................................................................................................5

Data Processing Subsystem ..................................................................................................................5

Device level analysis and communication ..............................................................................................5

Timing considerations .......................................................................................................................... 6

Cycsee business report ................................................................................................................................. 6

Market Background .................................................................................................................................. 6

Environmental Considerations .................................................................................................................. 7

Nature of market ....................................................................................................................................... 7

Market Research and Commercial Feasibility ........................................................................................... 8

Product Cost Analysis ............................................................................................................................... 8

Financial Projections ................................................................................................................................ 8

Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................... 9

References .................................................................................................................................................. 10

Appendix ..................................................................................................................................................... 11

Note:Throughout the report, Figure App.x refers to a figure in the Appendix, where x represents a number


3/12

CYCSEE

Page 2

Introduction

Project Aim

To make cycling a safer and more viable means of transport in congested cities, through the development of acyclist proximity detector system.

Project MotivationWith an increase in the number of road accidents and roads becoming more congested, cyclist safety has

become a real issue for governments and local councils. Every year there are hundreds of cyclist deaths and

serious injuries on city roads which could be easily avoided if the right precautions were taken. With the 2012

Olympic Games coming to London, the Mayor and numerous cyclist campaign groups are looking for new

systems to provide the safety and security necessary to complete their vision of a green London. To this end,

we have proposed a product which aims to create a safer cycling environmentCycsee. This is a concept that

utilises Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) technology to alert drivers of the proximity of nearby cyclists.

Background

Over the last decade, cyclist casualties have been steady

around the 20,000 per year mark, with a notable increase after

2008. Unlike the decrease in car casualties during the last few

years, cyclist casualties have remained constant (refer to

Figure App.1). A system is therefore needed to reduce the

cyclist casualty rate. Looking more closely at the cyclist

casualty figures, we observe that between 19942007, the

total number of cyclists killed or seriously injured drops, but

since 2007 there has been a trend of increasing deaths, making

cyclist safety a priority issue.

Cycsee technical report

Cycsee is an RFID based cyclist detector system which comprises two key components; the C-Tag and the C-

Sense. The C-Tag is an RFID tag which attaches to the bicycle, and its counterpart is the C-Sense which

integrates an RFID reader with an alert system, to be fitted onto vehicles. The two components communicate

with each other to ultimately inform the driver of a nearby cyclist.

Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) is considered a Wireless Sensor Network (WSN) and is based on

radio frequency communication between a transmitter and a detection device. The three core components of

an RFID based system are:

RFID tag (transmitter) RFID reader (detector) Data processing subsystem

In principle, data is stored within the tag and the reader is able to read/write this data when the tag is within

its range. The subsystem is then used to manipulate the data in a predefined manner.

Figure 1: Cyclist casualty figures over the past decade1

C-TagConsists of an RFID tag C-SenseConsists of three main blocks

RFID

Tag

RFID reader

Processor

Driver Alert

Figure 2:

Cycsee

consisting of

C-Tag and

C-Sense


4/12

CYCSEE

Page 3

High Level description

Cycsee requires the C-Sense system to be fitted onto a motor vehicle, and will have two RFID readers located

in each of the two rear corners of the vehicle. Each reader will continuously emit RF signals within a

specified range. Once a bicycle equipped with a C-Tag (most likely to be incorporated within the bicycle

frame) enters the detection zone, it will be registered by the reader and thus its location will be identified. The

driver is then alerted of the nearby cyclist. The C-Tag and C-Sense are designed to operate in variousenvironments.

The step by step functionality of our system is summarised in the flow diagram below:

1. The reader continuously sends an RF probe wave in search of a tag.2. When a cyclist enters the detection range of the reader, the tag receives the probe wave3. Modulates it and emits a response to the reader.4. The reader receives this wave and demodulates it.5. The processing unit (microprocessor) operates on the received signal from the reader6. The alert system then informs the vehicle driver of a nearby cyclist.

Low Level AnalysisFrequency allocation

One of the major considerations of Cycsee is the selection of an operational frequency. Considering a number

of laws and regulations in place in different countries concerning the usage of different frequency bands,

coupled with the chance of interference with other communication systems, the 2.42.5 GHz frequency

band was deemed the most suitable.

This is due to three main attributes of this frequency band:

- It is a worldwide unlicensed band (ISM) which means there are no governmental regulations on theusage of this band.

- It has a bandwidth greater than other frequency spectrums which makes a larger number ofcommunication channels available for its use.

- It exhibits good reflection off metal surfaces (which) allows for good propagation in clutteredenvironments.

2

1 2 3

6 5 4

TagReader Processor Alert

Key


5/12

CYCSEE

Page 4

Since the 2.42.5 GHz band is an unlicensed frequency band; it is widely used and considered to be too

crowded. Devices such as radio LANs and Bluetooth

utilise this band which leads to an increase in the

probability of interference from such devices3. The

problem of interference can be solved by using a

technique called Frequency Hopping Spread Spectrum

(FHSS). FHSS works such that readers hop from

channel to channel in a pre-assigned, pseudo-random

sequence to avoid bumping into each other4. This

procedure is particularly appropriate for the 2.42.5

GHz band and allows a 100MHz frequency bandwidth to

be used.

FHSS is suitable for Cycsee because itis a very robust

technology, with little influence from noises, reflections,

other radio stations or other environment factors.5 An

alternative technique, Direct Sequence Spread Spectrum(DSSS) was considered, but discarded because of its lack

of robustness. For example, in the worst case, a foreign

device such as Bluetooth will only block some hops in an

FHSS system while a DSSS system will not work at all

under such conditions6.

Another significant factor that was considered is the

operation of multiple tags at the same time, i.e. when more than one bicycle is present in the vicinity of the

vehicle. This situation is known as multi-tag operation and there are anti-collision procedures that can be used

to effectively differentiate tags that enter the same reader zone. We have chosen the ALOHA anti-collision

algorithm due to its advantages of speed and simplicity.7

The basic ALOHA procedure is such that eachtag sends its entire ID and then waits for a pseudo-random period of time before broadcasting again. The

reader simply receives the IDs depending on chance to ensure that each tag will eventually broadcast during a

period when all other tags are quiet.8 The problem with this method, in general, is that it becomes unreliable

when eightor more tags9 are present in the vicinity of the reader. The probability of eight or more cyclists

entering the range of a vehicle at any one time is almost zero; therefore this disadvantage is nullified for our

application and we can benefit from the speed of this procedure, while keeping the solution less complex in

comparison to using other possible methods.

C-Sense (Reader and Alert System)

The RFID reader interrogates (or reads) an RFID tag when it enters the readers RF portal (reading zone). The

RFID reader consists of three main components; an antenna to send and receive RF signals, a microprocessor

which is designed to decode the obtained information, and a controller to communicate with the processing

subsystem. C-Sense will utilise a circular polarized antenna as this is unaffected by tag orientation10(Figure

4). The advantage of this is that it also has a larger read range and is preferred for an RFID system that

operates in the UHF or microwave frequency range11 (Cycsee operates in the microwave region2.4 GHz).

The microprocessor in the reader will decode and process signals received from the tag. The information is

then passed on to a controller which is linked to the subsystem through a communication interface, and this

controls the alert system. The alert system then informs the driver of the presence of a cyclist, and the side

from which the cyclist is approaching.

Figure 4: Visual representation of Cycsee in action. The bike

has entered the operating range of the Reader, and the

driver is alerted via a flashing bike icon on the dashboard


6/12

CYCSEE

Page 5

C-Tag

For the C-Tag, two possible RFID tag technologies were considered: active and passive. The table below

summarises their main differences relevant to our application:

Property Passive tag Active tag

Read range 3m Up to 100m

Power source Powered by RF waves Battery attached

Required signal strength High Low

Set infrastructure cost High for fixed readers Cheap interrogator (reader)

Cost 0.10 to 3 9 to 30

The table demonstrates that an active tag is more appropriate for Cycsees application. An active tag provides

a read range of up to 100m which is an important factor for alerting the driver of the presence of a cyclist and

giving them enough time to take any necessary action. In addition, being battery powered means that an

active tag has a constant source of energy available for its operation, whereas a passive tag is unreliable in

this aspect because it depends on the RF signal strength of the reader. Although the active tag is more costly,

the advantages of using it outweigh those of the passive tag. On the basis of this analysis, an active tag is wellsuited for Cycsee and fulfils the necessary requirements for reliable operation.

Active tag classification

Active tags can be of two types; wake-up or awake (beacon) systems. The table below highlights the main

differences between them12:

Wake-up tag system Awake (beacon) tag system

Asleep until activated by a coded message fromthe reader

Awake all the timebattery power used evenwhen the tag is not being interrogated

High data transfer rate Lower data transfer rate and memory sizeconserves energy

Lower component costs

Cycsee will be implemented using awake tag systems, as awake tags have proven to be effective in Real

Time Locating Systems (RTLS). RTLS are similar to the Cycsee system as they are able to locate a moving

object, in our case a cyclist. Awake tag systems also have the advantage of lower component costs and will

therefore reduce the cost of the C-Tag. Minimal data will require transfer within the Cycsee system, as such,

the awake systems low data transfer rate and memory size are irrelevant.

Data Processing Subsystem

C-Sense is designed such that it analyses the information received by the two reader antennas on either side

of the vehicle. This requires a controller to gather information from the reader and link it to a host processingsystem. A serial communication interface will provide the host system with the information stored in thereader13. When a cyclist enters the reading zone, tag-reader communication commences and the host systemtriggers C-Senses alert system to provide a visual and audible warning to the driver.

Device level analysis and communication

The two tag-reader communication routes that take place in the 2.4 GHz band are Uplink and Downlink.

Uplink is from reader to tag and utilises Amplitude Shift Keying (ASK) modulation, whilst Downlink is from

tag to reader, and uses backscatter modulation. Figure App.2 provides more detail.

The reader within C-Sense continuously emits RF signals. After the C-Tag detects the signal from the reader,

it modulates the signal using Downlink modulation. The form of Downlink modulation used is backscatter

modulation (also known as On-Off keying). As shown in Figure 5, the modulator (a MOSFET) acts as aswitch and is controlled by the output data from the CHIP. When the transistor turns on, it is connected in

Table 1: Passive tag vs Active tag

Table 2: Active RFID system classification


7/12

CYCSEE

Page 6

parallel with the antenna and as a result causes a mismatch in the tag antenna. 14 The output data of the

CHIP controls the modulation of the signal and the result is reradiated back to the reader.

The receiver on the reader detects this stream of bits and passes it to a Low Noise Amplifier (LNA). This

LNA amplifies any weak signals within the stream of bits. The signal is then filtered to remove any noise and

oscillations present. A mixer shifts the frequency of the signal and the demodulator uses ASK to represent the

binary digits as sinusoidal signals, i.e. recovering the original signal (Figure 5). Finally, this signal is passed

on to a Digital Signal Processorthe microcontroller part of the reader. This converts the signal into humanreadable information, which for our application will be both a visual and audible signal alerting the driver of

an approaching cyclist. The table below summarise the main characteristics of the C-Tag and C-Sense

products.

Timing considerations

Timing is a vital consideration and it is important to consider the overall RFID system timing in order for

Cycsee to work reliably. For example, a MOBY U reader-tag data transfer occurs at a rate of 384kbit/s17.

MDS U315 tags have a size of 32 bits and this corresponds to a tag read time of approximately 0.1ms. This

means that an RFID reader placed on a vehicle should take approximately a millisecond to read a tag on an

approaching cyclist.

As mentioned above, Cycsee uses the FHSS method to avoid the problem of interference from other devices.In the 2.42.5 GHz frequency band, frequency hopping takes place at a rate of >2.5 hops/sec (Figure

App.2). Although this speed depends on the number of foreign devices present in the frequency band, it is a

fast enough rate not to cause delays in tag reading for our application. We can conclude that reader-tag

operation time is in the order of a few milliseconds. At distances of approximately 3m (our operating range),

this communication time will be fast enough for drivers to react to the presence of a cyclist.

Cycsee business report

Market Background

There is currently no widespread implementation of cyclist detection systems on the vehicle market. Productssuch as blind spot detection systems and See-mi offer similar functionality to Cycsee; however Cycseeholds certain advantages over these applications. Blind spot detection systems aid drivers to avoid hittingother vehicles/objects in their blind spot. These systems consist of two sensing units attached to both sides of

C-Tag C-Sense

Main feature Active and Awake Integrated antenna (circular polarized),controller and alert system.

Operating Range 3m 3m

Quantity 1 per cyclist 2 per vehicle

Cost 9-30 315-600 plus installation costs

Device suitable for Cycsee Siemens -MDS U315 Siemens-SLG U9216

Antenna

Figure 5: RFID Active Tag Circuit15

Table 3: Main Characteristics of C-Tag and C-Sense


8/12

CYCSEE

Page 7

the back bumper and tend to be costly, varying from 40 to 300, with high-end systems such as that builtinto the Audi A7 costing over 300.18

See-Misystems, which also use RFID technology, are currently used in Gren, Denmark. In this system,RFID tags are placed on the bicycle, and the receivers are set at accident-prone crossroads, with drivers beingalerted of a nearby cyclist by an additional traffic light. Recently, this system has been incorporated into anurban cycle sharing business venture with Citybike and has brought See-Mi technology to London.19

Cycsee can be viewed as an extension of both these existing technologies. With Cycsee, drivers are alerted ofa cyclists presence within larger vicinity. Drivers are informed of a bicycle before it enters their blind spot,allowing adequate time to react. It is therefore a more comprehensive safety system.

Environmental Considerations

Over the past forty years, the number of people who cycle to work has greatly increased, with a particularly

steep increase from 2004 onwards (Figure App.3). No doubt this has meant a larger demand for bicycles and

is very promising for Cycsees prospects. The more bicycles on the roads, the less the pollution and

congestion levelsan objective the government has been trying to pursue recently, notably visible when Ken

Livingstone introduced the London Congestion charge in 2003. In 2010, the economic cost of road casualties

and accidents reported to the police came to an estimated 15 billion. This is a huge cost to the tax-payer,

which could be reduced by making cycling safer.

Looking at the table above, we see that each fatal accident costs the tax payer approximately 1,800,000, anenormous sum. Cycsee will seek to minimise the casualty rates of cyclists by making roads a safer

environment for cycling, and therefore reduce the total financial burden on the government and tax-payer.

With regards to the environment, pollution is rampant in many major cities across the world and London is no

exception. According to Londonair.org.uk, a website set up by the Environmental Research Group at Kings

College London, London has one of the highest pollution levels in the UK, and is currently the main area

failing to comply with the legally binding limits set by the EU.21 One way to curb this long term issue is

through a greener method of commutingcycling. Cycling can also significantly reduce our carbon footprint,

via fewer greenhouse gases being emitted, which minimises the contribution to climate change. More cyclists

in London imply fewer vehicles on the road, which results in a cleaner and less congested environment.

Nature of market

The commercialisation of Cycsee can be realised through two possible approaches. The first is by seeking

government backing in a bid to make it a legal requirement for all bicycles to have a C-Tag attached, and all

vehicles to have a C-Sense system fitted. This proposal will require a public bill to be passed, as it will have

an effect on all members of the public and thus must be passed through the Houses of Parliament.

The second approach is to sell it on the retail market. This can be done by selling C-Tag and C-Sense

products to high street outlets, cyclist and vehicle specific stores. An approach such as this will require

effective advertising to create the required consumer demand for Cycsee. In addition to stores, the C-Tag

could be licenced to bicycle manufacturers and the C-Sense to motor vehicle manufacturers.

Table 4: Table showing the

financial cost of casualties/

accidents, relative to how

serious they are. Note that

casualtyrelates to only the

human cost, and accident

relates to the total cost20


9/12

CYCSEE

Page 8

Willingness to pay

0 - 20

20 - 40

40 - 60

60+

Market Research and Commercial Feasibility

We conducted a survey targeted at both cyclists and drivers, with our sample size consisting of 66 cyclists

and 57 drivers. From the results, we gathered that cyclists deemed their personal safety on the road as their

main concern, with 66% also indicating interest and willingness to purchase a safety device similar to Cycsee.

Of the 57 drivers surveyed, 79% acknowledged that cyclists safety was of notable concern to them whilstdriving, and 77% agreed that a device such as Cycsee would be beneficial. The most popular alert system

amongst drivers (38%) was both flashing lights on the vehicle dashboards with accompanying warning

sounds. A promising 36% of our entire sample group showed willingness to buy a safety device such as C-

Tag within the range of 20 - 40. This follows well as our product is estimated to be within this price range.

Ultimately, the results of the survey showed that there is adequate interest among both cyclists and drivers for

a safety device such as Cycsee, reaffirming that the pursuit of this product has great potential.

Product Cost Analysis

The table below shows the estimated costs of both the C-Tag and C-Sense when produced in bulk of 20,000C-Tag devices and 4,000 C-Sense systems. The cost breakdown is:

Financial Projections

The manufacturing cost and retail price of the C-Tag are estimated at 10 and 15 respectively. Similarly, C-

Sense will cost 50 to manufacture and will retail at 70. The following figures reflect the forecasted

profitability of Cycsee in the first five years of production.

C-Tag / cost per unit C-Sense / cost per unit

Circuit

Components2.25 29.50

Assembly 3 10

Packaging 1.40 3

Branding 2 2

Storage 0.50 3

Transportation 0.85 2.50Total Cost 10 50

Figure 6: Pie charts displaying the results from our survey

Main concern regarding cycling

Personal Safety

Cycle Security

Pollution

Lack of cycling

infrastructure

Table 5: Table showing the cost breakdown of C-Tag and C-Sense


10/12

CYCSEE

Page 9

Year 1 2 3 4 5

C-TagC-

SenseC-Tag

C-Sense

C-TagC-

SenseC-Tag

C-Sense

C-Tag C-Sense

Projected Sales

(units)2,000 400 7,000 2,200 26,000 6,500 50,000 12,000 130,000 25,000

Turnover 30,000 28,000 105,000 154,000 390,000 455,000 750,000 840,000 1,950,000 1,750,000

Gross Profit 10,000 8,000 35,000 44,000 130,000 130,000 250,000 240,000 650,000 500,000

Overheads 15,000 12,000 28,000 35,000 91,000 97,000 165,000 145,000 300,000 280,000

Net Profit -5,000 -4,000 7,000 9,000 39,000 33,000 85,000 95,000 350,000 220,000

Total Net

Profit-9,000 16,000 72,000 180,000 570,000

SWOT Analysis

ConclusionBased on the technical and market analysis conducted, it is evident that there is demand for a cyclist safety

device, the criteria of which Cycsee will satisfy. No such safety system is currently available across London,

and so in line with the Mayors future transport strategy and goal of making a greener London, Cycsee has a

very promising potential in this otherwise undeveloped market. In conjunction with the current product

proposal being put forward, Cycsee can be expanded to resolve many other issues cyclists face, other than

their personal safety. For example, C-Sense hubs can be set up across the capital to mark popular cyclist

routes and accident hotspots, in a similar manner to the See-Mi system in Denmark.

Analysing statistics has shown us that there has been a slight increase in cyclist casualties over the past few

years, which the successful implementation of Cycsee should see the reduction of, and thereby reduce the

human costs as well as the financial costs to the government. This should act to encourage commuters to

choose cycling over other means of transport, thus reducing both pollution levels and congestion. Cycsee has

the potential to revolutionise road transport and provide cyclists with an almost risk-free cyclingenvironment.

(100,000)

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

0 2 4 6

Amount

Year

First Five Year Profit Projections of Cycsee

C-Tag Net

Profit

C-Sense

Net Profit

Total NetProfit

Table 6: Net Profit for both C-Tag and C-Sense in the first five years of production.

Figure 7: Graph showing the expected profit trends for

Cycsee in the first five years

Figure 8: SWOT Analysis identifying internal and external

factors that affect our objectives


11/12


12/12

CYCSEE

Page 11

Appendix

Parameter Value

Reader-Tag communication (Uplink) ASK modulation

Tag-Reader communication (Downlink) Backscatter modulation

Operating channels 79 channels from 2422.5 MHz to 2461.5MHz

Bandwidth Maximum of 0.5MHz

FHSS Hop rate > 2.5 hops/sec

Figure App.1: Graph showing road casualties by road users, from Quarter 2 2002

Quarter 2 201122

Figure App.3: Graph showing an increase in cycling24

Figure App.2 2.4GHz standard parameters and values23

Cycsee Feasibility Report

Documents