Washable RFID Tags
Washable RFID Tags
Commercial Launderers and Dry Cleaners present specific challenges when implementing RFID tracking solutions for Garments/Linen.
Evolution of RFID Transponder technology to ones suitable for Washing Applications
Standard RFID Transponders (Chips) were designed for warehouse and
logistics applications typically used to scan static boxes on warehouse
racking. They work wonderfully if you have static pieces evenly spaced
out across a warehouse. However they were never meant to be used in the
harsh moving environments typically encountered in a Laundry setting.
RFID Transponder manufacturers such as ThermoTex went back to the
drawing board to design specific transponders to suit washing and
Transponders that can handle repeated Washing!
This led to the establishment of the F1 and F2 standard transponders
currently in use today. These chips can handle repeated washing (usually
tested for over 200 cycles), high pressure water extraction as well as
sustained heat and pressure resitance which is a prerequisite when
irnonig using a Calander. Specialised chip antennae arrays as well as
heat applied adhesives complete the suitability of these transponders.
Add to this RFID’s technology’s specific requirements, careful
consideration needs to be utilised to get the best from RFID tracking.
The two prevalent systems are HF (High Frequency) and UHF (Ultra High
High Frequency Systems
HF has a reading distance, for Laundry Processing of 300-500mm. It is
suitable for single item or small bundle (Less than 20 pieces)
scanning. HF has a distinct advantage over UHF in that it can be read
even if the item is damp or even wet.
Ultra High Frequency Systems
UHF has a reading distance, for Laundry Processing, of up to 3
metres. As it has a faster read rate than HF, around 50 items per
second, it is more suitable for bulk scanning. Entire cage trolleys with
250 items can be scanned within 5 Seconds. Manual counting can take up
to twenty minutes and is prone to human error in correctly counting
and/or identifying the type of items returned.
How RFID Technology allows for Inventory Tracking
An area of difficulty for most laundries is to check that their
customers are returning all of the soiled linen. With UHF Technology,
this is achieved at the entrance to the Laundry, usually through a RFID
Gate or Cabinet. Gates/Cabinets are sized so that full cage trolleys can
be rolled through/in as part of the Driver’s offload duties. The
Transponders (often called Chips) are automatically scanned and the
relevant information transferred to a Laundry Management Software
When using HF technology, antenna are normally placed on conveyors or
suitable alternate sorting areas. As items are offloaded onto the
conveyor/sorting table, they are automatically scanned in. UHF
Technology can also be used in this instance but careful adjustment of
the Antenna’s read range and profile is required to avoid inadvertently
scanning items nearby.
For further information about how TEX-ID can help you, please call us now on 020 8749 6610
Following the mass availability of RFID and associated bulk
reading systems, Laundries are now able to integrate various methods of
automation previously carried out by manual labour. This automation
provides a much higher level of accuracy, dependability and speed when
compared to manual processes.
Manual Counting of Laundry Items
The first area of automation occurs at the entry point to the Laundry, where garments are counted on arrival into the laundry process. Laundry items include:
- Duvet Covers
All these are very time consuming, requires in depth knowledge of every item processed and is typically only 85-90% accurate.
By adding RFID Antenna and readers at entry, Laundries are able to
digitally “count” 50 items per second, to an accuracy rate of 99%+ as
all the items are fitted with chips which relate its specification to a
How RFID Antennas Track items
Following on from this entry scans, strategically located RFID
Antennas can digitally track items as they are processed throughout the
facility and arriving at the packing/sorting area.
Packing and Sorting Laundry
Packing and sorting is sped up with greatly improved accuracy
provided by Laundry Management Software (LMS) which creates a “pick”
list of items required for delivery and directs the staff on how much
and what to pack into hampers and cages. A final exit scan using RFID
confirms the items are ready for despatch to the Client.
For further information about how TEX-ID can help you, please call us now on 020 8749 6610
Tuning laundry to the right radio frequency
It started with the Managing Director of White Rose Laundries, Ejaz Osmani, asking me to look into RFID technology to further reduce his already low loss rate of customer flatwork.
At first the request puzzled me as we had already upgraded to Barcode
Technology and I couldn’t see the benefit of using a different asset
tracking system. Was barcoding failing us in some way? Did we
incorrectly implement the technology? An investigation was required.
My first stop was our sorting and tagging area. After observing our
processes, I discovered that the barcode tags were technically doing
their job and registering the items correctly into our ePOS system,
SPOT. The first issue I noticed was the time it took to find the barcode
labels on a large bed sheet or duvet cover. The operators had been
trained to place the barcode label in a suitable corner of the linen. As
we had decided on a small form factor Heat Seal Label (HSL) of 7mm x
25mm, sometimes the labels themselves weren’t being spotted during
sorting, resulting in the operator applying an unnecessary second label.
I must stress this happened very rarely.
This in itself wasn’t a real issue as SPOT registered the item as a
new item. The problem arose when we scanned the item after it had been
folded and was ready for packing. If the operator at the packing station
scanned the first barcode label, then we couldn’t figure out which lot
the item belonged to. As a workaround, the packing operator started
looking at the customer name, which we also had on the HSL.
Over time, when the packing station operators were under time
constraints, they bypassed reading the barcodes and would just look at
the customer’s names and pack the lots accordingly; we were moving
Wash, Press & Fold
The next area I looked at was the wash and pressing processes. I had
heard horror stories from other Laundries of HSL’s being unreadable
after an 85 degree wash cycle as well as coming off when being put
through their ironer. Luckily we had worked very closely with ThermoTex,
to choose the correct label specification and Thermal Transfer
Printers. We had perfectly readable labels throughout the wash/press
Moving onto folding, I noticed that the staff were making an effort
to expose the barcode label so that packing could read it. Though I
applaud the team handover courtesy, it did mean that one corner of the
folded linen was slightly askew. We learnt a long time ago that when it
comes to retail flatwork; presentation is everything.
Coming back to the packing area, I was relieved to see the staff were
scanning the barcodes and then “tidying” the folding. They did have to
look for the labels on a few of the larger linen pieces.
Overall we were doing a pretty good job but as I had been given the
assignment, I had to learn what benefits Radio Frequency Identification
(RFID) could give us.
Introduction to RFID
Working closely with ThermoTex, I learnt that everything starts with
what type of transponders you use. The transponders themselves range
from 7mm to 16mm diameter. They are attached to linen either by being
placed in a pouch and then, either sewn in place or heat sealed much
like a HSL.
The way they work is to lie dormant waiting for an antenna to send
out a signal asking them if they are “there”. When they receive the
signal, the transponder wakes up and sends a return signal saying, “Yes,
I’m here”. The return signal from the transponder is an alphanumeric
digit set usually 15 characters long, but this can vary. Some
transponders also have the ability to be encoded with a small amount of
user defined data.
The oldest technology, Low Frequency (LF) was discounted due to very
limited performance and controllability (mis-scanning). Current
technology is either High Frequency (HF) or Ultra High Frequency (UHF).
LF and UHF are subdivided into performance categories typically grouped
as F1 and F2. The main physical differences are that UHF adds antenna
wires to the transponder giving it incredible read distances and better
bulk scanning properties. A high quality HF transponder can be read from
up to 30cm away and a high quality UHF transponder from up to 3 metres
Once you have chosen the appropriate transponders, you then have to
decide on what type of antennae and readers you need. These range from
compact combined units that mount under a packing table to tunnels
mounted on conveyors or Gates/Cabinets where the trolleys are either
passed through or parked allowing everything in the trolley to be
If we were doing large quantities of similar flatwork, such as those
from a Hotels or Medical institutions, UHF wins hands down. The speed at
which it can scan when presented with a trolley full of linen can be
measured in seconds to a few minutes. Compare that to hand counting and
it is really the only way to go.
HF can bulk scan but the design of the antennae and readers is more
restrictive (limited reading distances) than UHF. If anything it seems
that UHF product designers at ThermoTex spend most of their time
shielding the antennae from reading transponders that are near the
antenna but not to be scanned.
As this article is not an in depth analysis of the technologies, I thought the above is sufficient.
RFID in Action
Bearing in mind we wanted to apply RFID to customer’s linen, I
started putting together a process which could address the bypassing of
barcoding which I discovered during my investigation, in addition to
seeing if we could reduce the number of steps and save some time.
received the linen in plastic bags with individual lots of customer’s
cleaning. Customers sent linen only bags as well as assorted garment
bags. I needed a system that could individually scan the linen RFID as
well as the barcodes on the garments. Mark Reynolds from SPOT guided me
on how to set this up and it took all of five minutes.
Though UHF can be detuned to scan individually, I feared it might
read items other than the one I wanted to be scanned. In the end I went
for an HF system. Using a mid-range table antenna mounted under the
sorting table and a separate reader mounted on the wall and connected to
a SPOT terminal, we were able to pass the linen over the table area
over the antenna. If it already had an RFID transponder then this
entered automatically into our ePOS. If it didn’t scan we then knew to
put one on.
The reason we went with a mid-range antenna was that this had better
scanning ability to the full height of HF transponders (30cm). A
crumpled up, soiled king size duvet cover could be taken straight from
the plastic bag and passed over with very accurate read results. The
construction of the antenna was very robust with metal shielding on the
bottom to prevent interference from metal objects below the antenna and
any possibility of mis-scanning any items not on top of the table.
At the packing station, I chose a compact combined antenna/reader
with smaller height readability. As the items were already folded and
had very little height, I was able to save a little money compared to
the separate mid-range antenna and separate reader.
I presented my findings and was asked to proceed. Once the product
arrived, we installed it with relative ease and connected it via plug
and play on our Windows based PC’s in the sorting/tagging and packing
At this stage, a bit of a panic set in. Early adopters of this
technology have typically been laundry owned/rented or Hotel/Medical
Institution linen. We were going to put it on customers linen. Would
they accept this? What if the transponder failed? How will I know which
customer the item belongs to?
When we implemented barcoding I had similar concerns, which turned
out to be unfounded. As for the possibility of transponders failing, we
decided to put the 16 digit alphanumeric character set in both human
readable and 128 barcode form, from the transponder onto a HSL. While
we’re at it, why not continue to put the customer’s name on as well.
Again working with Mark Reynolds at SPOT and ThermoTex’s excellent support team we devised a system to do this automatically.
was swiftly put in place but at the last minute, our production
supervisor raised an objection; the HSL was too long. We had been using
8 digit 128 barcoding prior to this exercise. When we switch to 16
digit alphanumeric characters to match the transponder’s set, the
barcode was twice as long as our old labels.
After a bit of head scratching, I remembered looking into 2D barcodes
a while back. As the scanner prices were higher than 128 scanners, we
decided at the time to stick with 128. By shelling out for two new
scanners, one for the sorting area and one for the packing area, I could
use a 2D Datamatrix code.
The label size shrunk back to the size we used previously. In
addition, the 2D scanner did not need to line up horizontally (as they
do with 128) to read the code.
One niggling concern remained on customer acceptance. We made the
decision to go ahead and if any customer complained, we would remove the
transponder and just use the new, 2D barcodes. For any items that may
be wiped across a person’s face, such as napkins or towels, we decided
also to only use barcodes. The concern being the customer experience of
wiping a transponder across their mouth at the end of a meal or after
shaving might not be too pleasant.
We implemented the system several weeks ago. On the customer side, I
am pleased to report no one has complained yet nor have we mis-delivered
a single linen item.
On the production side, no other upgrade has received such a positive
response from staff. Usually I get comments from staff such as “I
liked the old way better” or “did we really need to change?” This time, I
actually got compliments on how it had made their lives easier.
The sorting process when compared to barcode scanning is much
faster. A quick wipe over the table and it’s done. No longer hunting
around looking for an HSL barcode label.
Same with the packing station. A quick wipe and you instantly know
which cubby hole to place the item in. The best experience was the one
that didn’t come up, namely, teething – there wasn’t any. Perhaps we
were extremely lucky or the combined project team with ThermoTex and
SPOT had the tacit knowledge to make this happen without the usual
hiccups. All I know is that I am extremely grateful for this result.
We are now looking into the ePOS side of assisted assembly for linen.
This will direct the operator to which cubby hole to place the linen
and alert the operator when a lot is complete. With great excitement, I
shared this with Ejaz Osmani. His response, “Could you look at an
assisted assembly hardware system with light bars, for linen that works
as well as Metal Progetti does for garments? Well, I guess I know what
my next project is.
What have you got to lose? A look at garment loss at retail dry cleaning shops
That sinking feeling you get when you have spent the better part of
the day carefully tagging, spotting, cleaning and pressing your
customers’ clothes only to assemble the order to find one blouse is
missing from their lot.
Where could it go?
You know you received it. The ticket says so. You go back to the
tagging area and work your way through the processing areas and if
lucky, you find the blouse has slipped behind the spotting table or left
at the bottom of a basket. Phew, disaster averted. If you’re not that
lucky, you start checking the completed lots, maybe the “9” was
actually a “6” on the tag, and I misallocated the blouse?
quizzed the staff and they don’t recall seeing it, the sinking feeling
turns into one of resignation of the inevitable to inform the customer.
Sound familiar? Unfortunately it should.
Lost items might account for up to 3 in every 100 pieces we process.
Looking at the root causes of misplaced garments, let’s start from the
beginning of the process.
When booking customer garments into your system, the simplest system
is with a ticketing book with tear off tags. Hand written tickets show
what garments have been received, a copy is handed over to the customer
and the numbered “tags” are pinned to the garments.
As this is a slow
system, during busy periods, the person on the till hands the customer
their copy and puts the tags in the bag the clothes came in. Later, when
the counter is less busy, tags are pinned to each garment. As there are
only a fixed amount of tags per ticket, sometimes it is necessary, with
larger lots, to use additional pre-printed paper tags to make up the
difference. Some cleaners use prep-printed paper tags instead of the
ones that come with the ticket books.
The problem with this manual system are threefold. The first issue is
the lack of durability with paper based tags. If the tags disintegrate
or is pulled of the safety pin/staple in modern day cleaning processes,
there is no way of knowing who the garment belongs to. The second is
mixing and matching tags. When piecing up, the tacit knowledge required
to match up two sets of numbers, one from the ticket book tags and the
other from the pre-printed tags, represents a memory challenge which may
result in incorrect lot completion.
The third is the environment
where the tags are attached. Space is always at a premium in a Retail
unit. Usually tagging takes place at the counter. Unless a strict
methodology of only tagging one lot at a time is adhered too, one lot
gets mixed with another. The error is only discovered at the piecing up
For those of us fortunate enough to have invested in an ePOS system,
the “cash register” itself prints the tickets and the required number of
tags, while the customer is still in the shop. Higher quality ePOS
system allow you to enter descriptive of the garment (Manufacturer,
type, i.e. trousers, colours, patterns, etc.), the due date and perhaps a
bar code on the tags themselves, as well as keeping a “memory” of the
lot. Provided the tags don’t come off during the washing processes,
piecing up becomes very straightforward. Even if the odd tag does come
off, matching the garment to the lot is still achieved by looking into
the ePOS record for the customer.
Moving on to the inspection and spotting areas, it seems the major
issue lies with the space we allocate. As previously stated, space is
always at a premium. Items can drop down the side or back of a spotting
station or be left behind when segregated for a more intense spotting
Garments are often segregated depending on wash processes (lights,
darks, delicates, etc.) and/or promised delivery dates. A plethora of
baskets, bins, and trolleys are available in the market to hold these
segregated batches. How often do garments get left behind in the bottom
of one of these containers? Perhaps we “conveniently” place net bags
at the bottom of the basket, for the person loading a washing or dry
cleaning machine, to have to hand. Those same net bags end up hiding
garments underneath them.
Rewashes and represses are an interesting area of loss. As we expect
things to start at one end and finish at the other in a given time,
anything that is delayed due to reprocessing, is wrongly identified as
lost as it does not arrive at piecing up at the same time as the rest of
the lot’s garments. If one hasn’t set up quarantine rails to hold
these items, they could be hanging anywhere.
At the piecing up area, the employee is under a time pressure to
complete the lots in time for the customer to collect. If their
fortunate, J hooks segregate lots as the printed tickets hang on a clip
directing the piecing up. If the J hooks are too close together, than
there is the possibility of putting the garment in the wrong place.
Split lots, offer their own challenges. Some of the items are on
hangers, and the others folded. Using a manual system requires an in
depth knowledge of how things work. Modern ePOS system can split the
tickets at booking in, allowing the lots to be treated separately. This
greatly reduces errors at this stage.
For those of us that have to physically move garments from the
piecing up area to the bagging area, great care is required so one
doesn’t pick up too many or too few hanging pieces during the move. With
multiple piece lots, the bagger needs to ensure he is tying the correct
items together during the polyrobe process. This mistake is a difficult
one as it only comes to light when a customer gets his lot home and
discovers too many or too few pieces.
Once packed, lots have their tickets attached with tape or staples.
The tags are sometimes removed and either discarded or attached to the
polyrobe. Should the ticket fall off due to the tape failing, care is
needed to make sure it is attached to the particular lot it came off
of. Finally the customer hand over may be a stage whereby the incorrect
lot is delivered or multiple lots are delivered.
The above is by no means an exhaustive list but areas where we can
all study in greater detail to reduce the risk of Garment loss.
recommendation is for a thorough examination of the processes and
consideration given to upgrading our systems, space utilisation and
processes to mitigate the chances of losing garments in the first place.
So how much is losing garments actually costing us as a business? The
obvious answer is the amount of compensation we pay customers but this
is only part of the whole amount. In addition to the compensation, will
we lose a loyal customer? Will the unhappy customer tell others within
the local community of their poor experience? Indeed, will they post a
bad review on the numerous ratings systems now available on the
Compensation hits our financial bottom line our net, not gross
profitability. The lost man/woman hours searching for the garments,
dealing with irate and disappointed customers as well as our hurt pride
of not delivering the best service all lead to a significant issue in
Sitting down and examining how much compensation has been paid over a
quarter, or even the last year, will highlight how serious the issue
Trade organisations have developed fair calculation methods of how
much we should compensate customers for losses. The start point is the
original purchase price. Not surprisingly, most customers don’t keep
their clothes shopping receipts, so an amount of good faith is required
during negotiations. Again, the records held in ePOS can help reinforce
the good faith by providing a history of how many times the items was
cleaned, over what time period, the manufacturer, etc.
When customers can see from their ePOS generated ticket, the name of
their garment’s manufacturer, it becomes rather difficult for them to
claim it is from an exclusive Italian boutique!
Developing a friendly and informed customer relationship is one of
the keys to deal with lost garment compensation. We all know the
difficulties in enforcing a “ten times cleaning value” contract term
printed on the customer ticket. Would it make sense to print an A4 sheet
of paper demonstrating your fair and reasonable compensation policy and
hand/explain this to a customer with a potential loss? Is now the time
to consider joining/finding out more about the reconciliation and
compensation schemes provided by trade organisations?
deliberately stayed away from attaching values to the losses we incur
when garments are lost. That number will be unique to each business and
this article is meant to highlight the issue for you to carry out a more
depth financial analysis. If you find that you are getting it more or
less right, then great. If not, I hope I have been able to shed some
light on where it could be improved and how to better deal with it.
Deciphering the code – A look at barcoding to aid in garment cleaning from a layman’s prospective
For most of us the first we become aware of a bar code is when an
item doesn’t scan at the till during a shopping trip. We watch bemused
as the item is tilted one way and the next until the till attendant gets
fed up and enters the numbers at the bottom of the bar code.
This is in fact the end of the technology cycle and whether it is a
can of soup or a shirt from a loyal customer given for washing, the
processes are much the same. An item is assigned a series of numbers
and/or letters in a particular sequence and then that assigned set of
alphanumeric digits are given attributes. Depending on which type of
barcode system is used, this set of numbers only or alpha numerical
sequences are the turned into a series of lines of different thicknesses
forming a bar code.
This is where the similarities end. The needs of the food industry
are very different from the needs of the Cleaning industry. We want to
track the garment to be cleaned through our facility and make sure they
are returned to their rightful owner and therefore, need to assign
attributes relating to the owner of the garment as well as any physical
attributes of the garment itself. Even if the exact same garment came
in from two different owners we need to know which one belongs to which
In the case of the soup can it is usually the manufacturers name,
contents, weight etc. Every soup can of the same manufacture, weight,
contents etc. has the same bar code. The sequence of digits is then
assigned (leased) to the owner of the code by a relevant controlling
body. It cannot be duplicated by another manufacturer so the
supermarkets are assured. The controlling body also sets up the way
sequences are set up and assigns numbers.
So who’s the controlling body for the cleaning industry?
Well, there isn’t one that I could find. We are left to our own
devices which, on the one hand, saves us from having to lease barcodes
but then leaves it to the industry to decide the best type of bar code
and best use.
Looking at the bewildering array of bar code types out
there, our options were the result of polling two suppliers, SPOT
Computerised Systems for our ePOS system, and Renzacci UK Plc for our
Metalprogetti Assisted Assembly system. The resulting shortlist of bar
code types where 128, type 39 and 2/5 interleaved.
Examining the benefits of each reveals that type 128 is a very robust
code as it has a check digit in front and at the end of the main code.
These check digits are a mathematical value of the numbers present in
the sequence and when read with a scanner, will confirm that the entire
code has been read. If the maths don’t add up then the sequence is not
entered. The operator can then represent the garment in a different
position and/or check if the barcode itself is damaged.
Type 39 or Code 39 has an option for a single check digit but mainly
relies on a start and end character thereby “Self Checking”. Both 128
and 39 have been adopted by the US’s Health Industry Business
Communication Council for use in the Health Care Products industry.
2/5 Interleaved is a little different in that most other codes, 128
and 39 included, only read the width of the black bars. 2/5 Interleaved
also reads the spaces between the bars. An option is available for
check digit as well. I understand that some other ePOS providers prefer
this code above all others due to its accuracy of reading. The actual
barcode is very compact compared to 129 or 39.
At the time, we took
the recommendation of our supliers and went with type 128. Since then,
we have seen the emergence of Data Matrix codes or as I like to call
them, bar codes for the 21st century. You may know them as QR codes.
These are very compact and rarely misread. At the time of our
installation, we rejected Data Matrix as the 2D scanners they required
were much more expensive than standard ones. Since then, the price has
Once we had chosen the barcode type we were then set to start
integrating it with our ePOS and Assembly systems, or so we thought.
Turns out choosing the barcode is a single step into what became a bit
of a journey.
The first question to answer was who was going to supply the printed barcodes.
For expediency we purchased pre-printed barcode permanent labels and a
heat seal machine. These were sequentially numbered so when reordering
we would have to advise the supplier of the last number used so we
didn’t duplicate numbering. We have since purchased a dedicated thermal
transfer printer from ThermoTex and their specialist software, so we
can preprint rolls and have the added benefit of putting the customer’s
name on the label. Our next step is to do away with the specialist
software and actually use SPOT to generate the heat sealed permanent
labels complete with the customer’s name and a bar code.
We then had to address what information to assign to the bar code in our ePOS software.
We ended up assigning the owner’s name, garment colour/pattern,
manufacturers name and any specific issues (delicate, tear on sleeve,
etc.) SPOT was especially suited for this application and stored the
information with relative ease.
The final step was to make sure that the bar code was assigned to the
individual lot. Again this was something that SPOT handled with
Collaborating with SPOT and Renzacci made the entire process pretty
straight forward. The last thing we needed to do was to set up a system
for the operators in the tagging area.
When garments were received from regular customers, the operators
were trained to look for the bar code heat seal labels in predetermined
locations on each type of garment (i.e. bottom of shirt buttonhole
seam…). If we had already applied a label, we simply scanned the bar
code and the tagging process ended. This saved us enormous amounts of
time. If no label was present we simply applied one in the same time it
took us to pin a tag onto a garment and registered its attributes into
At the end of the pressing cycle, we simply scanned the garment and
the automatic sorting and bagging stations from MetalProgetti took care
of the rest. We experienced an immediate reduction of misplaced items,
lost items and mixed lots. In addition we started to notice some
Having the ability to assign specific attribute to a garment via the
bar code meant we were able to alert customers of issues with their
garment at a much earlier stage. With this even if a customer had
forgotten we had advised them of a tear in their garment three clean
cycles ago, when they called to complain we had a record in our ePOS of
when we first alerted them and their response at the time.
been providing a dirty clothes bag to our most loyal customers but had
no way of making sure the same bag went back with their cleaned lot. By
applying bar code labels to these bags they were simply added to the
lot in our ePOS and this ensured they were recycled time and time again.
Analysing our customer’s patterns, namely, what frequency their
garments were cleaned, how long/how many washes before they discarded a
garment, what types of garments did they get cleaned/never send by
omission, etc. helped us to identify promotions which were very specific
and of most benefit to our customers. All this was the result of some
lines of different thicknesses called a bar code.
As I stated in the beginning, I am no expert when it comes to this
technology and urge you to seek the advice of those in the know to
properly guide. In my case, they were the suppliers of the machinery,
Renzacci UK Plc and ePOS software, SPOT Computerised Systems.
So what’s next?
We are looking at implementing both a RFID and Data Matrix code for
our customer’s domestic linen. Hopefully I will be in a position to
share my experiences with these new systems in a future article.