A large Midwest flexo label printer was struggling with an order for 6 million UDI labels for an important medical device customer. The press was sitting, the clock was ticking, and the grading was not what the customer required. ISO Modulation was driving the failing grades. The X-axis print gain was acceptable, but the Y-axis gain was too high. We recommended remaking the plate with Y-axis bar width reduction. The grades did not improve.

When Gain is Not the Issue

We suspect that printers will find themselves in this scenario. UDI label printers are most likely to encounter this issue, but non-medical applications using clear or reflective substrates will also experience it. And the solution is so obvious, it will be overlooked—we did at first.

Before the obvious solution occurred to us, other possible solutions were considered:

  • Increase the X dimension and increase the final size of the Data Matrix symbol to add print gain tolerance
  • Reduce the synthetic aperture
  • Use a different substrate

Back to Basics

Each of the possible solutions had insurmountable problems. The label design couldn’t tolerate a larger symbol. Although a smaller aperture did improve the grading, the printer’s verifier was using the required GS1 UDI aperture. And going to the customer at the last minute to require a change in the substrate was unacceptable. Having reached an apparent impasse, we decided to go back to basics and review all of the verifier settings:

  • X dimension
  • Each ISO parameter
  • Application Validation
  • Verifier calibration
  • Software version

Bingo! The verifier software had not been updated since the release of ISO/IEC 15415:2024. There was silence in the customer’s team meeting room, but they all heard the sound of one palm whacking a forehead in my office. They had to engage IT to update the software—another delay—but I promised it would be worth it.

ISO/IEC 15415:2024 was a significant update to the print quality standard for 2D barcodes. This 2024 edition updates the methodologies for measuring and grading the quality of 2D bar code symbols, including both multi-row and matrix symbologies. It also provides guidance on diagnosing and correcting issues that affect symbol readability.

 

How was this possible? What changed with the ISO standard that could result in this dramatic change in grading? Several things.

Value Rounding

The pre-2024 version of ISO 15415 reported grades in whole numbers. Graded parameters like Modulation were rounded to the lower whole number. If your barcode got a C grade, you didn’t know if it was a low C—almost a D, or a high C—almost a B. The 2024 update states grades to one decimal place. Fractional grading makes ISO grades more accurate—and often higher.

Other technical changes also improved grading—these are explained in greater detail here.

With some begging and pleading, IT updated the customer’s verifier software on a late Friday afternoon and—voila! The F grades were now B grades. Perfectly acceptable to the customer and a huge relief to the label printer.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3db Barcode Testimonial

Our company (an advanced software company) recently worked with Barcode Test to source a barcode verifier.  Not long ago, we were awarded a contract requiring products to be marked with IUIDs in accordance with MIL-STD-130.  For that standard, marking labels must pass a verification test that evaluates many variables (contrast, size, clarity, syntax, modularity, and more).  After a thorough search, we reduced our options to a select few.

In our search for a verifier, the Axicon line caught our attention.  Barcode Test is our regional reseller for this product.   From the beginning, they were very prompt with their responses.  We ended up having a quick call with John Nachtrieb to go over our needs.  John was extremely easy to work with and provided a lot of great information.  He was very knowledgeable on the matter and was quick to offer up a demo unit (free of charge).

Upon receiving the demo verifier and testing it, a few questions arose.  John joined a call with us and answered all our questions.  Ultimately, the Axicon verifier wasn’t the best fit for us, so we shipped the demo back.  John was completely understanding.  A few weeks later, Barcode Test reached back out with another possible verifier for us to try.  While they didn’t sell that brand, they just wanted to help us find the best option that met our needs. They even offered to send us the unit that they have in-house to see if it worked to our liking. 

Barcode Test is truly a great company to work with.  Their service and willingness to help the customer are far beyond what you typically get from other companies.  They are experts in barcode quality assurance and seem willing to help in any way they can (even if that means not getting a sale and recommending another option that better fits the customer’s needs).  If anyone is in the market for barcode verification/scanning services or products, I would highly recommend giving Barcode Test a call.

Regards,

Production Manager