07 — 方案比較Comparison

和既有方案
差在哪裡。

How this differs from
what already exists.

從覆蓋範圍、基礎建設需求、容錯能力與成本比較各類方案。

A comparison across coverage, infrastructure requirements, fault tolerance and cost.

通訊方案Communication approaches

比較項目Criterion LinkGuard 衛星通訊器Satellite messenger 一般 LoRa Mesh 救災系統Generic LoRa mesh system
覆蓋範圍Coverage 節點對指揮中心的長距鏈路,加上空中/地面載具擴大搜索面;四次實驗測得最大通訊距離為 1.96 公里。 Long-range node-to-centre links, extended by air and ground vehicles; four tests measured a maximum range of 1.96 km. 近乎全球,但需要開闊天空視野,樹冠層與室內/廢墟下容易失效 Near-global, but needs open sky; unreliable under tree canopy, indoors or under rubble 依節點密度而定,需要佈夠多中繼點才能連成面 Depends on node density; needs enough relays to form continuous coverage
離線能力Offline ● 完全離線;AI 於指揮中心本地端運算,全程不需網際網路 Fully offline; the AI runs on the command center device, no internet at any point ○ 需訂閱服務與衛星鏈路,多數機種仰賴雲端轉送訊息 Needs a subscription and a satellite link; most devices relay messages through the cloud ● 通常可離線,但決策與資料整合多半仍需另接後端 Usually offline-capable, but decision-making and data fusion often still need a backend
資料型態Data 生命徵象(心率/血氧)+ 環境資料(含水/坡度/水位)+ 載具影像,結構化進同一個儀表板 Vital signs (HR / SpO₂) + environment data (soil / slope / water) + vehicle video, all structured into one dashboard 以簡訊、座標與 SOS 為主,無生理與環境感測 Mostly text, coordinates and SOS; no physiological or environmental sensing 多半只傳位置與文字訊息 Usually position and text messages only
部署難度Deployment 節點以 模組化零件組成,可快速複製與維修;載具需操作人員 Nodes are built from modular parts, quick to replicate and repair; the vehicles need operators 開箱即用,個人裝置門檻最低 Works out of the box; the lowest barrier as a personal device 需事先規劃節點佈點與中繼拓撲 Requires planning node placement and relay topology in advance
成本Cost SBN 單一節點物料成本約 NT$2,000,無月租費;其他模組依配置計價 SBN bill of materials ~NT$2,000 per node, no subscription; other modules vary by configuration 裝置費約 NT$12,000 + 月租約 NT$450–2,000 Device ~NT$12,000 plus ~NT$450–2,000 / month 硬體成本低,但整體佈建成本隨節點數線性上升 Cheap hardware, but total build-out cost scales linearly with node count
主要限制Limitation 頻寬小,只能傳結構化短封包;影像須靠載具鏈路 Very little bandwidth — short structured packets only; video depends on the vehicle link 無法感測受困者狀態,也無法整合現場資訊 Cannot sense a victim’s condition, and cannot integrate on-scene information 缺乏統一的指揮與決策層 Lacks a unified command and decision layer

註:本表中他方案的描述為通則性比較,未逐一對應特定商品型號。填入實際型號與報價後可信度更高。

Note: the other two columns describe categories in general terms, not specific products. Naming actual models and quoting real prices would make this table stronger.

地震搜救模式 · LinkGuard-EEarthquake mode · LinkGuard-E

與現有搜救技術及商用 USAR 工具比較。

Against current rescue techniques and commercial USAR tools.

以下兩張表取自第 66 屆全國科展作品說明書(表七、表八):先從原理層面比較傳統無線電/LINE 與聲納、蛇管光學;再與市售都市搜救(USAR)裝備逐項對照。

The two tables below come from our National Science Fair report (Tables 7 and 8): first a principle-level comparison with radio/LINE and acoustic or camera probes, then an item-by-item comparison with commercial urban search-and-rescue (USAR) equipment.

搜救技術Search techniques

比較面向Criterion 傳統無線電/LINERadio / LINE messaging 聲納/蛇管光學Acoustic / snake camera LinkGuard-E
通訊可用性Link availability 基地台中斷即失效Fails when cell towers go down 不涉及通訊No communication function LoRa 自組網Self-organised LoRa network
RC 結構穿透能力RC penetration 高頻訊號全阻High-frequency signals blocked 無法穿牆Cannot see through walls 923 MHz 長波長繞射穿透923 MHz long-wavelength diffraction
受困者生理數據Victim vital signs ✗ 無None ✗ 無None ✓ 即時心率回傳Live heart rate
檢傷排序依據Triage basis 到達現場後目視Visual, on arrival 到達現場後目視Visual, on arrival 抵達前已依生理數據排序Ranked by vitals before arrival
指揮資訊整合Command integration LINE+無線電分散Scattered across LINE and radio 獨立設備無整合Stand-alone device ICS 分層單一平台Single ICS-layered platform
離線可用性Offline use 需網路Needs the internet 不適用Not applicable Offline First,本地暫存自動同步Offline-first with local cache and auto-sync

商用 USAR 工具Commercial USAR tools

比較面向Criterion Delsar LD3 SearchCam 3000 Lifeseeker LinkGuard-E
廠商/國別Vendor / country Savox 集團(芬蘭)Savox Group (Finland) Savox/Con-Space(芬蘭)Savox / Con-Space (Finland) CENTUM(西班牙)CENTUM (Spain) 本研究(台灣)This project (Taiwan)
物理原理Principle 地震波+聲波被動聆聽Passive seismic and acoustic listening 240° 關節攝影機+雙向語音240° articulating camera with two-way audio 空載偽基地台(2G–5G)Airborne pseudo base station (2G–5G) LoRa 923 MHz+BLE 生理感測LoRa 923 MHz + BLE vital sensing
基礎建設依賴Infrastructure 無None 無None 需空載平台Needs an aircraft platform 無None
受困者需具備Victim must 能敲擊或發聲Be able to tap or call out 位於攝影機可達之孔隙Be within reach of a camera void 持有開機手機Carry a powered-on phone 配戴信標或智慧手錶Wear a beacon or smartwatch
即時生理數據Live vital signs ✗ ✗ ✗ ✓ 心率(BLE HR Service)Heart rate (BLE HR Service)
ICS 指揮平台整合ICS command integration 獨立硬體Stand-alone hardware 獨立硬體Stand-alone hardware 部分 MMS 整合Partial MMS integration 原生 ICS 五角色介面Native five-role ICS interface
適用場景Best suited to 瓦礫深層聆聽Deep-rubble listening 可探孔隙搜索Void searches 戶外大範圍山難Wide-area outdoor mountain SAR 都市倒塌+預先部署Urban collapse with pre-deployment
商業售價量級Price class 約 US$25–40k(零售)≈US$25–40k (retail) 約 US$15–25k(零售)≈US$15–25k (retail) 高階國防/SAR 級High-end defence / SAR class BOM < US$200(原型階段)BOM < US$200 (prototype)

資料來源:Delsar LD3 之物理原理、感測器配置與認證資訊取自 Savox 官網;SearchCam 3000 之關節活動範圍、ClearSearch 螢幕與雙向語音取自 Savox/Con-Space 官網;Lifeseeker 之機載平台、頻段涵蓋與 5 公尺定位精度取自 CENTUM 官網。GSSI LifeLocator TRx(UWB 雷達,偵測深度 12 m)已於 2026 年停售,僅作為 USAR UWB 雷達技術參考,未列入直接比較。「商業售價量級」為依公開資訊與業界經驗估算之區間,實際售價因配置、認證需求與地區而異;LinkGuard-E 為原型階段,所列為料件成本(BOM)估算值。

Sources: Delsar LD3 principle, sensor configuration and certification from the Savox website; SearchCam 3000 articulation range, ClearSearch display and two-way audio from Savox / Con-Space; Lifeseeker airborne platform, band coverage and 5 m positioning accuracy from CENTUM. The GSSI LifeLocator TRx (UWB radar, 12 m detection depth) was discontinued in 2026 and is kept only as a technology reference. Price classes are ranges estimated from public information and industry experience and vary with configuration, certification and region; the LinkGuard-E figure is a prototype-stage bill-of-materials estimate.