Introduction of new bank note security features using a quality system approach

Authors: Dr B A Hardwick, Technical Development Manager, Note Printing Australia Limited; Mr D Reid, Printing Operations Manager, Note Printing Australia Limited

Note Printing Australia Limited (NPAL) has a policy of developing new and innovative security features for polymer banknotes. Since many of these features are integrated with substrate characteristics, much of this work involves close communication with Securency Pty Ltd, the manufacturer of Guardian® substrate.

Management of the development process, as can be imagined, is extremely difficult and requires detailed systems. Fortunately, NPAL is accredited to ISO 9001 and is thus used to developing and adhering to quality systems and procedures. As a result, policies and procedures have been developed for control of both the development of security features and for the transfer of the technology into the manufacturing environment. Needless to say, the most difficult element of the process is the latter, the transfer of concepts developed on the bench into the manufacturing environment.

1. Technology development and transfer process

In developing the procedures around the Technology Development and Transfer Process with respect to security concepts, it was decided to use a system which relied on a "gating" process. Such processes are often used in the R&D environment, although there are many drawbacks with respect to what could be termed rigid "gating" systems. For example many gating systems require that the projects stop at each gate and all expenditure cease until approval has been granted for entry into the next phase. It was decided that our system would depend on regular rigorous project reviews rather than a rigid gating system.

The procedure has two clear goals - to foster concepts through the laboratory development phase and to foster developments which successfully pass through this development phase into the technology transfer phase, i.e. into manufacturing.

1.1 Technology development

In our case the key to the technology development portion of the procedure is a Reviewing Committee which consists of relevant internal managers, including managers from the R&D and production areas, and an eminent external scientist. Each project is reviewed prior to commencement and at quarterly intervals. The review is based on a report submitted by the project champion, which covers:

* Progress against objectives

* Expenditure, including expenditure against budget.

* Adversarial analysis of the feature

* Intellectual Property review

* Banknote design constraint issues (if any)

* The perceived weaknesses of the feature

* The current estimated final cost of the feature (or deliverable)

* The current estimate of the chance of success, and

* Current R&D matrix score, a score assessing the importance of the feature in terms of durability, company strategy, production ease, safety/environmental issues and anti-counterfeiting capability.

1.2 Technology transfer

The Technology Transfer phase is critical to the success of all development projects. Many projects falter because the Technology Transfer process has failed to address the ownership issue. Thus, the Technology Transfer phase of our procedure addresses all issues around the manufacturing process as far as can be determined with the information at hand. For instance the process must cover:

* Design constraints

* Specification of raw materials and finished product

* Manufacturing process parameters and allowable variations

* Safety issues (MSDS, Safe Working procedures, etc)

* Environmental issues

* Product Liability issues

* Estimated manufacturing costs

Finally, there is the sign off/acceptance step where all interested parties commit to the new feature.

2. Lessons learnt

At NPAL there have been a number of new features transferred into manufacturing. Thus, we have a fair idea of the parameters necessary for success.

By far the most important parameters are personnel issues. There must be a disciplined R&D team involved in the transfer process who understand the pressures and quality assurance issues in manufacturing. Perhaps, the most important parameter for success is a team of manufacturing personnel who are forward thinkers, and who are prepared to take a measured risk.

3. Examples

It is worth describing issues around the transfer of two security concepts into manufacturing at NPAL. In the first case the feature consisted of a self-authenticating MicroSAM*. This feature is based on a wet offset printed MicroSAM feature which can be authenticated via a screener applied in the window of the polymer banknote during the substrate manufacturing phase by Securency Pty Ltd. Thus, it had to integrate production parameters within Securency Pty Ltd with banknote printing parameters within NPAL. It required the establishment of quality control techniques which are quite unique. Issues around these techniques will be described in more detail during the presentation.

The other interesting feature recently transferred into production for use on the 500,000 Lei Romanian note, is the patented Transparent Intaglio Disappearing Effect (TIDE) feature. This feature consists of an image printed in a "clear" intaglio over a gold patch which exhibits interesting effects when tilted. Again, this feature required integration of a substrate feature (the gold patch) with a feature printed by NPAL. A more detailed description of the features and the issues addressed during the technology transfer phase will be presented at the Conference.

Guardian® is a registered trademark of Securency Pty Ltd

* MicroSAM is a patented feature from Joh Enschedé