Wired PoE

Most RTLS projects underestimate total cost because they price hardware, not operations. The real cost drivers are (1) power delivery, (2) backhaul management, (3) battery and SIM workload, and (4) how failures are isolated.<br /> <br /> PoE anchors usually have the lowest long-term cost when wiring is allowed. 4G reduces construction time but adds recurring SIM and coverage risk. Gateway-based designs are essential when public networks are restricted. Wiring-free UWB beacons accelerate retrofit deployments, but the battery lifecycle becomes a measurable operational workload that must be budgeted and scheduled.

Most RTLS problems are not “accuracy issues.” They are system reliability issues caused by one of five breakpoints: power, time sync, geometry, network latency/loss, or event logic.<br /> <br /> Troubleshooting should follow a strict triage order: confirm anchor health → confirm time sync → confirm anchor participation in worst zones → confirm network end-to-end latency → only then tune filters or thresholds.

Most RTLS projects fail not during installation, but during commissioning and handover.<br /> A successful deployment follows a disciplined sequence: site survey → anchor layout → calibration → worst-zone testing → acceptance → operational handover.<br /> <br /> Skipping steps or compressing them into a “demo day” produces systems that look correct on maps but behave unpredictably in real operations.

RTLS failures are rarely caused by positioning accuracy alone. In real deployments, power supply, data backhaul, and failure isolation determine whether a system runs for years or becomes unmaintainable.<br /> <br /> Wired PoE architectures offer the highest stability, 4G architectures trade wiring for operational cost, gateway-based architectures solve “no public network” constraints, and hybrid architectures exist to balance indoor precision with outdoor coverage. The right choice depends on site constraints, maintenance model, and acceptable failure modes—not on radio technology alone.

RTLS-grade UWB positioning is not “magic accuracy”—it is time measurement plus geometry plus clock discipline. Your best-case accuracy is set by anchor geometry (angles and visibility), while your worst-case accuracy is dominated by NLOS/multipath and time synchronization drift.<br /> <br /> If a deployment looks inconsistent, debug in this order: (1) anchor geometry and “anchors-in-view” count, (2) NLOS sources and first-path visibility, (3) time sync stability across anchors, then (4) update rate/filtering and coordinate calibration.