Re[6]: RE: RFID Human Implants - Occupancy Detection

["Pete Shew" <ukha_d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Ah, looks like some experimentation is called for. Pity their IR keys are =
=A315 as that's the tricky bit to get small and petproof.

I'd still rather not have another dangling thing though. She's already got
=
a tag and a bell, any more and she'd be applying for a job as a St
Bernard.=
http://www.shew.org/images/mitzi.jpg
- the Staywell 'key' looks uncomforta=
ble but she's not made a fuss.

Pete

*********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********

On 08/02/2005 at 16:26 Ward, David wrote:

>http://www.staywell.co.uk/pages/small.php
>
>500 Infra Red Cat Flap
>
>Dave
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Pete Shew [mailto:ukha_d@xxxxxxx]
>Sent: 08 February 2005 15:48
>To: UKHA
>Subject: Re[4]: [ukha_d] RE: RFID Human Implants - Occupancy Detection
>
>
>
>Mm, I'm not convinced. The PIC is fine and would probably=20
>outlast the battery shelf life, but getting an IR LED with a=20
>wide beam angle, and the mechanics of trying to avoid being=20
>obscured by fur, might defeat me.
>
>Has anyone done work on retinal scans of cats? :-)
>
>Pete=20=20
>
>*********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********
>
>On 08/02/2005 at 13:56 Ward, David wrote:
>
>>I have seen commercial electronic Cat flaps that use a fob=20
>that has an IR
>>emmitter in it
>>If you were crafty with a PIC10F microcontroller you could make one
>>
>>Dave
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Pete Shew [mailto:ukha_d@xxxxxxx]
>>Sent: 08 February 2005 13:38
>>To: UKHA
>>Subject: Re[2]: [ukha_d] RE: RFID Human Implants - Occupancy
Detection
>>
>>
>>
>>Our cat is chipped, but my understanding is that the antenna on=20
>>the chip is so small that the reader has to be essentially in=20
>>contact with the animal. That's why I'm looking at an=20
>>alternative to hang on her collar to operate the cat flap.=20
>>
>>One thing that concerns me is that an external RFID would=20
>>possibly mask the internal one if she got lost, but I suppose=20
>>if she still had her collar on, then her email address and=20
>>phone number would still be with her.
>>
>>We didn't have to bother with this nonsense until we found a=20
>>recent new neighbours cat coming down our stairs!!  :-(
>>
>>Pete
>>
>>*********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********
>>
>>On 08/02/2005 at 12:58 Mark Kaye wrote:
>>
>>>Ward, David wrote:
>>>> Well,  these ones I bought from QTEKNOLOGY certainly
detect* the
>>>presence of
>>>> the 'PetLog IdentiChip'  in our animals
>>>>=20
>>>>  <http://home.btconnect.com/QTEKNOLOGY/>
 (Check ebay as he=20
>>sometimes has
>>>> stuff on aution)
>>>>=20
>>>> When I say detect*, I mean that as a quick bodge I bunged
an=20
>>LED on the
>>>> data-out line of the RFID reader IC,  when I run the
aerial over the
>>>chip in
>>>> our Cat or the fobs it was supplied with the LED
lights.....
>>>>=20
>>>> I have yet to determine if hte code it's spurting out
is=20
>>valid or just
>>>> garbage that's not repeatable=20
>>>> Also the read range of the small antenna supplied with
the=20
>>board is about
>>>> 10mm (measured from the OUTSIDE of the aminal ;-)
>>>
>>>How cool,  I'd be very interested if, somehow the detection=20
>>range could=20
>>>be extended.  How practical would it be for a catflap if the=20
>>cat has to=20
>>>get its chip within 10mm or so of the reader?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>=20
>>>Yahoo! Groups Links
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>=20
>>Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>>=20
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>=20
>>Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>=20
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>=20
>
>
>
>
>
>=20
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>