Different people will read this headline and draw different conclusions about what it means. I’ll cut to the chase. While it is sometimes possible to tweak verifier settings and improve the ISO grade, this rarely helps and usually makes a very small difference. In most cases, unless one of the verifier settings is dead wrong, playing with the settings will not change the final grade or make it worse.

But, to the original agenda, it is important that verifier settings be correct. Here is how to do that.

  1. Do not enable all the plugins. Verifiers cannot distinguish a distribution barcode from a retail barcode. Verifying GS1 healthcare barcodes is a good example. GS1 healthcare UDI barcodes for distribution h
    pexels-bijou-baby

    ave larger X dimensions and therefore should be verifier with larger apertures; the smaller X dimensions in retail and bedside barcodes are properly verified with a smaller aperture.

One Size Fits Some

This is just one area in which a “one-size-fits-all” method of verifier configuration does not apply.

  1. Check digits is another. Most barcodes use check digits—but not all do. Code 39 and ITF are exceptions: check digits are optional. All GS1 barcodes (including Code 39 and ITF) must have check digits but other Code 39 and ITF applications may or may not have them.

What Does “Best Results” mean?

pexels-anete-lusina

Properly setting the verifier is the best way to make sure the grade reflects scan performance most accurately. Don’t forget—that is what a verifier is designed to do. If “Best Results” means getting the highest possible grades, you are missing the point.

GS1 specifications can cause verification grads to be lower. The ISO standard recommends an aperture of 80% of the X dimension. GS1 conflicts with this. For example, UPC-A barcode X dimensions can range from .0104” to .0260” yet GS1 recommends verifying all with a Number 6 (.006”) aperture. While this may not make s significant difference with most barcodes, the small aperture is more sensitive to defects (voids in the barcode or spots in the spaces and quiet zones) that an 80% aperture cannot see.

GS1 or ISO?

GS1 specifications for DataMatrix do the same thing with the same result. The verification report will be needlessly downgraded.

Why does GS1 deviate from ISO recommendations? It is unclear. One guess is that they minimize the range of verification apertures to keep it simple. The recommended apertures are always smaller than X dimensions, which is an important consideration. But too small can cause problems, as we have indicated.

Final Form

  1. Verify the barcode as it will be seen by the end-user’s scanner.

A barcode will probably grade better before the laminate or the shrink-wrap is applied. If the lam or shrink cause a problem, the time to fight that battle is before the supply chain breaks, before the retailer’s frontline triggers chargebacks, before a fatal mistake is made at bedside dosing In the ICU or maternity ward. Never optimize a barcode to achieve a higher verification grade under non-authentic or test conditions. That’s not where the barcodes do their important work. Barcodes work in the real world—that’s where their performance matters.

Questions and comments are welcome. Contact us here.

 

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