# Tick 21 — 2026-05-22 08:10 UTC **Thread:** R6.2.1 (3D antenna placement extension) **Verdict:** Counter-intuitive finding — **ceiling-only mounting gives 0% coverage**. Mixed-height (one low, one high) gives the best result. ## What shipped - `examples/research-sota/r6_2_1_3d_placement.py` — pure-numpy 3D Fresnel ellipsoid placement search. - `examples/research-sota/r6_2_1_3d_results.json` — strategy comparison. - `docs/research/sota-2026-05-22/R6_2_1-3d-placement.md` — research note. ## Headline strategy comparison 3D room (5×5×2.5 m), three 3D target zones (bed at z=0.3-0.6, chair at z=0.5-1.2, standing at z=1.0-1.7): | Strategy | Coverage | |---|---:| | Desk-height (0.8 m walls) | 22.2% | | Wall-mount (1.5 m walls) | 17.4% | | **Ceiling-only (2.5 m grid)** | **0.0%** | | **Mixed walls + ceiling** | **25.7%** ← best | ## The physics Ceiling-only fails because both antennas at 2.5 m create a Fresnel ellipsoid sitting **at ceiling height** (2.1-2.9 m vertically). Target zones at 0.3-1.7 m are below the envelope by 0.4-2.0 m. The 39 cm transverse radius is symmetric around LOS, so a flat horizontal link at any height misses targets at any other height. **This is the 3D version of R6.1's on-LOS-degeneracy finding.** A horizontal link at any single height has its envelope concentrated at that height. ## Why mixed wins Best placement: Tx at (5.0, 4.0, 0.8) desk-height + Rx at (0.0, 4.0, 1.5) wall-mount. The **diagonal-in-z** link tilts the ellipsoid through multiple elevations. Covers chair AND standing AND bed simultaneously. **Vertical link diversity is the 3D insight 2D analysis missed.** ## Installation-guide updates | Use case | Recipe | |---|---| | Single Tx-Rx pair | One low (0.8 m), one high (1.5 m), opposite walls | | 4-anchor R6.2.2 | 2× low corners + 2× high opposite corners | | 5-anchor knee | Mix 0.8 / 1.5 / one ceiling (2.5) for top-down | | Bed-only sleep monitoring | Both LOW (0.5-0.8 m), opposite sides of bed | | Standing-only (gym, kitchen) | Both HIGH (1.5 m) | | **NEVER** | Both ceiling without low anchor | ## Why coverage numbers are lower than R6.2's 51% 3D target zones are *volumes*, not 2D *areas*. A point must be inside the ellipsoid in all 3 axes. Volumetric coverage is inherently lower; the 22-26% range is honest 3D physics. ## Composes with prior threads - **R6.2** (2D) — incomplete; height matters as much as horizontal - **R6.2.2** (N-anchor) — N=5 knee should distribute across heights - **R6.1** multi-scatterer — needs 3D body model (head/chest/legs at different z) for proper composition - **R14** V1/V2/V3 — each vertical needs height-recipe specific to its sensing zone - **ADR-029** — anchor placement is (x, y, z), not (x, y) - **R12 PABS** — sensitivity to intruders inherits the coverage; mixed-height detects standing/sitting/lying intruders alike ## Honest scope - 3-zone discrete approximation of continuous human occupancy - Single-pair only; multi-anchor 3D = R6.2.2.1 (next) - No furniture occlusion - 0.1 m resolution - Greedy single-pair search (brute-force feasible at this scale) ## Coordination `ticks/tick-21.md`. No PROGRESS.md edit. Branch `research/sota-r6.2.1-3d-placement`. ## Remaining work - **R6.2.2.1**: 3D N-anchor union coverage - **R6.2.3**: chest-centric zones (per R6.1 chest = 27.6% of signal) - **R12.1**: pose-PABS closed loop - **ADR-107**: cross-installation federation ~3.8h to cron stop. **21 ticks landed.** Loop covered R1-R15 + 2 ADRs + 6 deferred follow-ups + 3 negative-result categorisations.