Posts Tagged ‘RFID’

A Case for “Case-Level Serialization”

April 15th, 2010

Can you have traceability without serialization?   I’d say it depends on what granularity you want. For instance, you can’t have case-level traceability without case-level serialization – the application of a unique serial number on each case.

Traceability initiatives want GTIN + Lot Number, but no serial numbers

There are several current industry initiatives for traceability in North America which are, in part, including GS1 bar code requirements.  These recommend incorporating two main components into the bar code: GTIN and the Lot Number.  In at least one initiative, a date code is also required.  Most plans exclude or even discourage the use of serial numbers at the case level.

People involved in setting the standards and consulting with the industries involved have told me that while serialization at the case level would be desirable and will likely be adopted in the future, it’s probably too big a step at this stage.  That’s unfortunate, I think.

I agree that implementing GTINs and Lot Number bar codes is a good step forward, and it’s better than doing nothing.  This will give a level of traceability – to the lot.  But I believe that there are significant benefits to going one step further – to the case.

GS1 case serialization has been around for awhile

Case-level serialization with GS1 bar codes is by no means a new thing.  Meat and poultry companies in Canada were required to supply Canada’s largest grocery retailer with GS1-128 (formerly UCC/EAN-128) bar codes for random (catch) weight cases already back in 1993. Most of these companies implemented serial numbers in the bar codes.  Each case iss individually processed and has a database record applied to it.

Below are scanned samples of serialized case bar code labels from years ago incorporating the following GS1 Applicator Identifiers (AIs):

(01) GTIN

(13) Pack Date  – could instead use (11) Production Date, (15) Best Before Date, or (17) Receive By Date

(3202) Weight in kg to 2 decimal places – could instead use (31xx), where 31 is weight in lbs to xx decimal pts

(21) Serial number – up to 12 digits to stay within the maximum total 48 digits for the entire bar code

With 17 years of experience with case-level serialization using GS1 bar codes, including sitting on the bar code sub-committee for GS1 Canada (formerly ECCC) back in the mid-1990s, I’d like to share a few points about why I believe case-level serialization is a good idea.

Case-level serialization will

  • Help isolate supply chain issues from processing, or production issues.

    • - For instance, a storage-related problem (such as inadequate cooling) would affect only products in that location, not an entire lot.  With just the GTIN and lot number, there would be no way after the fact to determine which affected cases had been in that location.  Using serialized cases with a warehouse management system that supports them will offer you this capability.

  • Give more granular traceability than by the lot:
    - With case serial numbers, you can track every movement, location, and each transformation or co-mingling event performed – for complete, detailed traceability.
  • Enable trace-back to production details: line, time, etc.
    - You will know with precision which items were produced from which production source, and at what time.  You will be able to contain problems to a more precise level.
  • Offer increased flexibility in pallet handling

    • - You will be able to accurately track multiple SKUs and/or lots on a pallet.

    - By scanning just the serialized pallet label,  you will track all the individual cases as well.

  • Support 100% verification of items shipped

    • - You will be able to associate specific cases with customer shipments – i.e. know exactly which cartons were shipped on which order.

    - Due to each and every carton being accounted for, you will be able to identify lost product accurately due to issues such as loss or theft.

  • Prevent duplicate scanning and avoid quantity errors. Without serial numbers at the case level, a person will
    1. not know if a bar code has been scanned already and may accidentally scan the same case twice, causing a quantity error.  With serial numbers, the scanning system will detect that the case was already scanned and either ignore the duplicate scan, or alert the person that the case data was already captured.
    2. either be prompted to type in the quantity of cases of that SKU (leading to potential quantity errors), or be tempted to scan the same bar code several times to match the quantity that is believed to be on the pallet (also a source of errors).  With serial numbered cases you will avoid these problems by forcing the operator to scan each case on a mixed SKU pallet, ensuring better accuracy.
  • Enable detailed aged inventory by location and better stock rotation

    • - You will be able to see in the warehouse management system the specific cases that are approaching expiration, showing the specific locations of those products for easy retrieval.

    - Product age can be more precise than by the lot – for example, by time – so that even within the lot, you will be able to identify older products.  This is helpful particularly with the produce industry due to the perishable nature of its products.

Use the printing step to your advantage

You can take advantage of the label printing step by performing the following functions:

  • Monitor production with a printing system that also offers real-time visibility of what’s printed
  • Tie in your orders and production scheduling with the printing solution
  • Use the printing process to record and build into finished goods inventory
  • Build pallets off the printing process or production line automatically without the need to scan each case, since that data is already captured.

The downsides of case-level serialization are minimal

From a cost perspective, since all cases will be labeled, there does not need to be additional cost to add serialization of cases other than perhaps due to a slightly larger label.

Obviously there needs to be printing and scanning/inventory systems that support case serialization.  But such systems already exist, although they are not altogether common.  Less than 5% of Warehouse Management Systems (WMS), for example, can handle serialized cases.

Data storage is cheap

There’s no need to worry about the amount of data storage required.  And with the extra data comes a wealth of information that can really help a company manage its business better and achieve complete, detailed traceability. Without that data, however, traceability will be limited.

While there are relatively few software solutions for product tracking that can support serialized case tracking, industries can look to meat and poultry solution providers who have successfully implemented solutions with case-level serialization for a number of years.

The good news is that there are also initiatives that are pursuing serialization

Serialization will happen.  There is a lot of development in this area.  For example, the SGTIN (serialized Global Trade Identification Number) will support item level serialization.  RFID will further drive serialization.  It’s my prediction that the industries not currently pursuing the precision of serial numbers at the case level will eventually get on board with it.  It’s just a matter of time.  The forward-thinking companies will adopt it sooner when they understand the benefits to their own organization.

Comments Off »

Posted in General, Industry Trends, Solutions

Tags:

Traceability and the Hype Cycle

February 16th, 2010

Oh, the fun of hyped-up technologies. Do you remember just a few years ago how big RFID was? Or, more accurately, how big it was going to be? It didn’t roll out as expected. This is a good example of the hype cycle, often called the Gartner Hype Cycle.

Here’s a look at how the cycle works:

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hype_cycle

A new technology hits the marketplace. The media picks up on it, and suddenly it’s all the rage. Investors jump on the bandwagon, and the crowd gets all excited about it.

But somewhere along the way, reality sets in, and it begins to dawn on people that it will take more work (oh, no – work!) than originally expected to implement what’s needed to make the technology actually work or become widely adopted.

What’s happening with RFID?

I work in the technology field for in-plant productivity, data acquisition and visibility solutions. We have been implementing bar code solutions for over 20 years, and we have done RFID projects since the early 1990s. Prior to that, while I was in university in the late 80s, I worked on a large dairy farm that implemented wearable RFID transponders for cows to monitor and control their lactation cycles and their milking and eating status.

When RFID started to become big news, (I know it’s easy to say now) but it was clear to me with a university physics background that the idea of tagging and reading RFID on cases was going to be difficult and nearly impossible, especially with items like meat that absorb the RF signals, and metal cans that reflect signals.

This diagram from Gartner (http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=1124212) illustrates where some technologies are on the hype cycle:

Do you see RFID in the “Trough of Disillusionment”?

As it turns out, there are definitely valid, workable applications for RFID, but they’re different from what many folks thought 5 years ago.

Carlisle Technology, for example, offers RFID solutions for food plants to track carts, tubs, and combos. The solutions can be short-read-range with passive tags, or long-range to do location tracking within a warehouse or cooler. So the technology is still valid, but for the right applications. As time goes on, we’ll see more uses and adoption for RFID along the more gradual upward curve.

Traceability and the growing hype

I have my Google News alerts set to look for Food Safety and Traceability, so I watch what’s going regarding this topic. I think we’re on the early steep rising side of the Hype Cycle when it comes to Traceability. And I’ll tell you why I think this.

Take Fresh Produce, for instance. Some of the produce associations have done a good job of setting up an initiative that will help their industry achieve traceability. See www.producetraceability.org. They’ve clearly outlined the steps that produce pickers/packers need to follow. And it’s a good move. The huge recalls in produce need to be reduced, contained, and eliminated.

Produce Traceability Initiative (PTI) Compliance

There are numerous companies out there (including Carlisle) that are now boasting that they/we have PTI compliant solutions. It’s not always clear what they everybody is offering, but initially, a PTI compliant solution means the tools that will enable produce companies to put bar code labels on each and every case of produce, displaying and encoding the GTIN and Lot number.

This is the easy part. Almost anyone can do that.

Another PTI step in a couple of years will be the ability to read and store the case and pallet bar code labels.

Again, this not a big deal. Several companies have solutions for this. Carlisle Technology’s meat and poultry customers have been doing this for a couple of decades already with case-level serialization and detailed pallet handling.

But what’s not easy, and this is where it separate the men from the boys, so to speak, is providing an integrated solution that enables each organization to positively track and have complete real-time visibility of all items within their enterprise.

The reality is that produce packing houses are more complex than simply receiving products in one door and shipping them out another. Quality checks, inventory management, proper stock rotation and sortation are required. There are mixed lots and grading of products within lots according to parameters such as quality, size, and color. Product can be received from outside suppliers with or without the proper information. Product from their own fields or greenhouses need to be received by recording several attributes. Market pricing affects what gets shipped to whom and when. Grower payment is dependent on the price paid downstream, so there needs to be accurate tracking throughout of where grower-specific product was sold.

This requires not only the right kind of system including equipment and software, but the following of the necessary procedures.

What we’ll see in the next few years, I expect, is that companies will realize that applying labels and scanning bar codes won’t be enough. They will have to work with a solution provider to do the hard work of tracking products accurately at each step in their processes.

Traceability is Not the Goal

I fully expect that traceability itself won’t be the goal; rather, in-plant productivity solutions that incorporate registering every product movement and transformation, along with capturing quality details and doing the appropriate checks at each control point, and then having real-time visibility into the product movements and related activities will be the goal. And in reaching that goal, traceability will come along for the ride and be a by-product of achieving those objectives.

We’ll see the traceability topic continue to rise meteorically, and then reality will set in and something else will be big news. And those of us who have solutions and are committed for the long term will continue past the trough of disillusionment to work on implementing the needed solutions that will provide the benefits (link to benefits) that are surely out there.

Watch or ride the cycle. Then let’s talk about real solutions that really work.

Comments Off »

Posted in Industry Trends, Solutions

Tags: