Add a Comment  E-mail for more information Company's other products E-mail to a colleague Printer friendly format

Brainstorm is a new editorial addition to WDD designed to bring together multiple viewpoints on a single issue. Each month Brainstorm will pose a question on a controversial topic and will feature multiple viewpoints from experts across a variety of industries.

The topic for June is "Wireless Sensors." IR, infrared transmission systems and RF, radio frequency transmission systems perform differently in a given environment, which leads to this month’s Brainstorm question: What is the best choice for near-field remote control applications, IR or RF?

Four industry experts provided their thoughts in response to this question. Their comments are included below.

David Donovan, BitWave Semiconductor, Inc.

RF transmission systems are best for near-field remote control applications and data transfer. The RF platform is widely used, reliable, low power, low cost and doesn’t require line of sight engagement. Consumers who don’t necessarily differentiate by technology type have an expectation for any remote controlled device that it "just works", and RF fits that expectation.

RF platforms are pervasive, with devices ranging from key fobs for automobiles, garage door openers, cell phones, WiFi access points, femtocells and cellular base stations etc. These platforms transmit data at a wide range of rates and modulation complexities. Efficient use of the frequency spectrum is dependent on how efficient the modulation schemes are for a given number of users who are sharing the spectrum. Hardware and software R&D investments by semiconductor manufacturers and OEMs continue to push the data density and efficiency envelope to evolve RF platform for voice, video and high speed data use.

Joerg Borchert, Infineon Technologies North America

RF and IR have co-existed for some time in mobile computing, where potential use cases make the added (albeit small) investment to support IrDA-compliant connectivity acceptable. In smart phones and similar personal communications devices, cost pressure makes it advisable to eliminate any connectivity device that can be made redundant. In systems where only one connectivity choice is economical, RF-based NFC is the clear choice.

Remote control for applications such as secure facility access is one of many use cases for a near field control technology. RF connectivity meets the requirements for remote control, while supporting many other end-user applications. For example, near-field RF enabled handsets can support payment/debit (transactions and transportation access), building/room access, and data exchange ("smart poster," peer-to-peer, etc.). RF provides a greater level of swipe-and-go convenience compared to IR links, since the link is not dependent on line-of-sight alignment. The robust nature of the link, proven security, and greater application flexibility, are significant for system designers working to deliver convenience to end users.

Basim Noori, RF Division Freescale Semiconductor

At what point did the mobile phone become a way of life; a necessity? Currently, there are close to 3 billion subscribers worldwide and that number is growing. Radio Frequency (RF) technology enabled this ubiquitous trend in today’s world.

Another technology which is considered dominant in everyday segments such as thermal imaging, night vision and household appliance remote control is Infra-Red (IR).

I asked myself the question: If I had to choose, which technology would I be able to live without, Infrared or RF? Well, I simply cannot live without my TV remote control, so I would choose IR to stay and RF to go, oops; I just lost my TV signal, Shshshsh….

Although adjacent in the EM spectrum, IR and RF frequencies perform differently in a given environment. For low data rate directional near-field applications, IR by far is the more useful of the two. While for high bandwidth long range communication that does not require line-of-sight, RF is the overriding technology.

IR and RF are saving lives through night vision headlights and anti-collision radar enabling automobile manufacturers to shift their focus from making safe cars to avoiding a collision altogether. In the medical arena, Near Infra-Red Spectroscopy (NIRS) and Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) are two common examples of IR and RF respectively.

So in conclusion, yes, I concede, I need them both! Not only to enjoy watching and controlling my television set, but may be one day, to save my life.

Sean Newton, STMicroelectronics

Infrared remote control has been around for what seems forever, and there is no shortage of remotes, at least in my house. However, the main disadvantage of IR is its limit to direct line-of-sight to the target appliance, limiting its use when you move to another room. Technology has progressed to where low-cost low-power RF solutions can bring additional benefits to remotes, including greater data-rate and networking capabilities.

The technology exists to integrate a remote with other appliances such as a thermostat or garage door opener. Imagine: you head to the bedroom for the night. You check your RF remote and see that the garage door was left open. You click the remote and close it with out having to get out of bed. And if your spouse complains about the temperature in the bedroom, you can use your RF remote to adjust the thermostat. You hear the kids watching TV after bedtime, and you can turn it off from your room. Going one step farther, the same RF technology can be integrated into your cell phone; you can check the status of any appliance in your home from anywhere.

Through technologies like Zigbee and other low data-rate RF solutions, RF will increasingly replace IR remote control, and challenges such as prolonged battery life, channel interference, and secure communications will be overcome.


Wireless Design & Development