CPM Forum
Canadian Notes => Bank of Canada Notes => Topic started by: eyevet on May 15, 2004, 02:50:32 am
-
I was looking at a sheet of 1973 $1 bills and the numbering pattern was as follows:
1000001 1000501 1001001 1001501 1002001
1002501 1003001 1003501 1004001 1004501
1005001 1005501 1006001 1006501 1007001
1007501 1008001 1008501 1009001 1009501
1010001 1010501 1011001 1011501 1012001
1012501 1013001 1013501 1014001 1014501
1015001 1015501 1016001 1016501 1017001
1017501 1018001 1018501 1019001 1019501
Is this pattern consistent across other denominations and note series?
I am still quite mystified how (especially in the discussions recently of *V/V and *Z/Z notes) some of you are able to tell which notes came from the same sheets and can thus figure out how many sheets are represented by the known notes.
Thanks for any wisdom you can share.
-
I've done some excel spreadsheets trying to break the *Z/Z dilemma. Using the above pattern, I've come up with the following sheet layouts with the known notes highlighted in red. Am I on track with this?
6380000 6380500 6381000 6381500 6382000
6382500 6383000 6383500 6384000 6384500
6385000 6385500 6386000 6386500 6387000
6387500 6388000 6388500 6389000 6389500
6390000 6390500 6391000 6391500 6392000
6392500 6393000 6393500 6394000 6394500
6395000 6395500 6396000 6396500 6397000
6397500 6398000 6398500 6399000 6399500
8320499 8320999 8321499 8321999 8322499
8322999 8323499 8323999 8324499 8324999
8325499 8325999 8326499 8326999 8327499
8327999 8328499 8328999 8329499 8329999
8330499 8330999 8331499 8331999 8332499
8332999 8333499 8333999 8334499 8334999
8335499 8335999 8336499 8336999 8337499
8337999 8338499 8338999 8339499 8339999
8880499 8880999 8881499 8881999 8882499
8882999 8883499 8883999 8884499 8884999
8885499 8885999 8886499 8886999 8887499
8887999 8888499 8888999 8889499 8889999
8890499 8890999 8891499 8891999 8892499
8892999 8893499 8893999 8894499 8894999
8895499 8895999 8896499 8896999 8897499
8897999 8898499 8898999 8899499 8899999
8300499 8300999 8301499 8301999 8302499
8302999 8303499 8303999 8304499 8304999
8305499 8305999 8306499 8306999 8307499
8307999 8308499 8308999 8309499 8309999
8310499 8310999 8311499 8311999 8312499
8312999 8313499 8313999 8314499 8314999
8315499 8315999 8316499 8316999 8317499
8317999 8318499 8318999 8319499 8319999
6240000 6240500 6241000 6241500 6242000
6242500 6243000 6243500 6244000 6244500
6245000 6245500 6246000 6246500 6247000
6247500 6248000 6248500 6249000 6249500
6250000 6250500 6251000 6251500 6252000
6252500 6253000 6253500 6254000 6254500
6255000 6255500 6256000 6256500 6257000
6257500 6258000 6258500 6259000 6259500
5820000 5820500 5821000 5821500 5822000
5822500 5823000 5823500 5824000 5824500
5825000 5825500 5826000 5826500 5827000
5827500 5828000 5828500 5829000 5829500
5830000 5830500 5831000 5831500 5832000
5832500 5833000 5833500 5834000 5834500
5835000 5835500 5836000 5836500 5837000
5837500 5838000 5838500 5839000 5839500
If my a$$umptions are correct, it would have required 6 sheets to account for the known notes. The CPMS newsletter suggests that "as few as five sheets" could account for this distribution.
-
I'm still trying to crack this dilemma. I've created some spreradsheets with the intent of duplicating sheet numbering layouts, so that when a seemingly random series of uncommon notes are discovered I will be able to determine the number of sheets which made it out of the Bank of Canada, as I have done above with the *Z/Z notes.
According to Charlton, in 1968 sheets of 40/on were printed. I assume a 5x8 layout? Coincident with this change the number ranges changed from 0000001 to 10000000 to 0000000 to 9999999. It would appear that this change occurred at prefix O/P in the BABN printed $1 notes, and at prefix U/O in the CBN printed $1 notes and at prefix E/U in the $2 notes, prefix A/X in the $5 notes, prefix N/T in the $10 notes, and prefix U/E in the $20 notes.
My a$$umptions then follow that in the 40/on sheets the first sheet of a series would be numbered as follows:
0000000 0000500 0001000 0001500 0002000
0002500 0003000 0003500 0004000 0004500
0005000 0005500 0006000 0006500 0007000
0007500 0008000 0008500 0009000 0009500
0010000 0010500 0011000 0011500 0012000
0012500 0013000 0013500 0014000 0014500
0015000 0015500 0016000 0016500 0017000
0017500 0018000 0018500 0019000 0019500
and the last sheet of a series would be numbered as follows:
9980499 9980999 9981499 9981999 9982499
9982999 9983499 9983999 9984499 9984999
9985499 9985999 9986499 9986999 9987499
9987999 9988499 9988999 9989499 9989999
9990499 9990999 9991499 9991999 9992499
9992999 9993499 9993999 9994499 9994999
9995499 9995999 9996499 9996999 9997499
9997999 9998499 9998999 9999499 9999999
Since the *Z/Z and *V/V notes were both Bouey Rasminsky notes, and the change to 40/on came in the Beattie-Rasminsky era, I will assume that *Z/Z and *V/V notes came from 40/on sheets.
No for the sake of completness I would like to extend my spreadsheet template to also duplicate 32/on sheets. Can I assume that 32/on sheets were 4x8? And if so my template would produce the following patterns for the first and last sheets respectively:
0000001 0000501 0001001 0001501
0002001 0002501 0003001 0003501
0004001 0004501 0005001 0005501
0006001 0006501 0007001 0007501
0008001 0008501 0009001 0009501
0010001 0010501 0011001 0011501
0012001 0012501 0013001 0013501
0014001 0014501 0015001 0015501
9984500 9985000 9985500 9986000
9986500 9987000 9987500 9988000
9988500 9989000 9989500 9990000
9990500 9991000 9991500 9992000
9992500 9993000 9993500 9994000
9994500 9995000 9995500 9996000
9996500 9997000 9997500 9998000
9998500 9999000 9999500 10000000
Now the 24/on sheets used for the devil's face notes were they 4 x 6? And if so can I assume the following template for first and last sheet?
0000001 0000501 0001001 0001501
0002001 0002501 0003001 0003501
0004001 0004501 0005001 0005501
0006001 0006501 0007001 0007501
0008001 0008501 0009001 0009501
0010001 0010501 0011001 0011501
9988500 9989000 9989500 9990000
9990500 9991000 9991500 9992000
9992500 9993000 9993500 9994000
9994500 9995000 9995500 9996000
9996500 9997000 9997500 9998000
9998500 9999000 9999500 10000000
If anyone can help me determine if the assumption I have made are correct, I would be grateful.
Thanks!!!
-
Bob Graham informs me that the '54 series was skip numbered by 1000's rather than 500's which was my a$$umption (which was made by examining a sheet of 1973 $1 notes which are skip numbered by 500's.)
This being the case here are my sheet layouts:
First sheet of a series:
0000000 0001000 0002000 0003000 0004000
0005000 0006000 0007000 0008000 0009000
0010000 0011000 0012000 0013000 0014000
0015000 0016000 0017000 0018000 0019000
0020000 0021000 0022000 0023000 0024000
0025000 0026000 0027000 0028000 0029000
0030000 0031000 0032000 0033000 0034000
0035000 0036000 0037000 0038000 0039000
Last sheet of a series:
9960999 9961999 9962999 9963999 9964999
9965999 9966999 9967999 9968999 9969999
9970999 9971999 9972999 9973999 9974999
9975999 9976999 9977999 9978999 9979999
9980999 9981999 9982999 9983999 9984999
9985999 9986999 9987999 9988999 9989999
9990999 9991999 9992999 9993999 9994999
9995999 9996999 9997999 9998999 9999999
The known *Z/Z notes would have been distributed as follows in six sheets:
5800000 5801000 5802000 5803000 5804000
5805000 5806000 5807000 5808000 5809000
5810000 5811000 5812000 5813000 5814000
5815000 5816000 5817000 5818000 5819000
5820000 5821000 5822000 5823000 5824000
5825000 5826000 5827000 5828000 5829000
5830000 5831000 5832000 5833000 5834000
5835000 5836000 5837000 5838000 5839000
6240000 6241000 6242000 6243000 6244000
6245000 6246000 6247000 6248000 6249000
6250000 6251000 6252000 6253000 6254000
6255000 6256000 6257000 6258000 6259000
6260000 6261000 6262000 6263000 6264000
6265000 6266000 6267000 6268000 6269000
6270000 6271000 6272000 6273000 6274000
6275000 6276000 6277000 6278000 6279000
6360000 6361000 6362000 6363000 6364000
6365000 6366000 6367000 6368000 6369000
6370000 6371000 6372000 6373000 6374000
6375000 6376000 6377000 6378000 6379000
6380000 6381000 6382000 6383000 6384000
6385000 6386000 6387000 6388000 6389000
6390000 6391000 6392000 6393000 6394000
6395000 6396000 6397000 6398000 6399000
8280999 8281999 8282999 8283999 8284999
8285999 8286999 8287999 8288999 8289999
8290999 8291999 8292999 8293999 8294999
8295999 8296999 8297999 8298999 8299999
8300999 8301999 8302999 8303999 8304999
8305999 8306999 8307999 8308999 8309999
8310999 8311999 8312999 8313999 8314999
8315999 8316999 8317999 8318999 8319999
8320999 8321999 8322999 8323999 8324999
8325999 8326999 8327999 8328999 8329999
8330999 8331999 8332999 8333999 8334999
8335999 8336999 8337999 8338999 8339999
8340999 8341999 8342999 8343999 8344999
8345999 8346999 8347999 8348999 8349999
8350999 8351999 8352999 8353999 8354999
8355999 8356999 8357999 8358999 8359999
8880999 8881999 8882999 8883999 8884999
8885999 8886999 8887999 8888999 8889999
8890999 8891999 8892999 8893999 8894999
8895999 8896999 8897999 8898999 8899999
8900999 8901999 8902999 8903999 8904999
8905999 8906999 8907999 8908999 8909999
8910999 8911999 8912999 8913999 8914999
8915999 8916999 8917999 8918999 8919999
And the known *V/V notes would have been distributed as follows in eight sheets:
2720000 2721000 2722000 2723000 2724000
2725000 2726000 2727000 2728000 2729000
2730000 2731000 2732000 2733000 2734000
2735000 2736000 2737000 2738000 2739000
2740000 2741000 2742000 2743000 2744000
2745000 2746000 2747000 2748000 2749000
2750000 2751000 2752000 2753000 2754000
2755000 2756000 2757000 2758000 2759000
3000000 3001000 3002000 3003000 3004000
3005000 3006000 3007000 3008000 3009000
3010000 3011000 3012000 3013000 3014000
3015000 3016000 3017000 3018000 3019000
3020000 3021000 3022000 3023000 3024000
3025000 3026000 3027000 3028000 3029000
3030000 3031000 3032000 3033000 3034000
3035000 3036000 3037000 3038000 3039000
3520499 3521499 3522499 3523499 3524499
3525499 3526499 3527499 3528499 3529499
3530499 3531499 3532499 3533499 3534499
3535499 3536499 3537499 3538499 3539499
3540499 3541499 3542499 3543499 3544499
3545499 3546499 3547499 3548499 3549499
3550499 3551499 3552499 3553499 3554499
3555499 3556499 3557499 3558499 3559499
4360500 4361500 4362500 4363500 4364500
4365500 4366500 4367500 4368500 4369500
4370500 4371500 4372500 4373500 4374500
4375500 4376500 4377500 4378500 4379500
4380500 4381500 4382500 4383500 4384500
4385500 4386500 4387500 4388500 4389500
4390500 4391500 4392500 4393500 4394500
4395500 4396500 4397500 4398500 4399500
4520500 4521500 4522500 4523500 4524500
4525500 4526500 4527500 4528500 4529500
4530500 4531500 4532500 4533500 4534500
4535500 4536500 4537500 4538500 4539500
4540500 4541500 4542500 4543500 4544500
4545500 4546500 4547500 4548500 4549500
4550500 4551500 4552500 4553500 4554500
4555500 4556500 4557500 4558500 4559500
5080999 5081999 5082999 5083999 5084999
5085999 5086999 5087999 5088999 5089999
5090999 5091999 5092999 5093999 5094999
5095999 5096999 5097999 5098999 5099999
5100999 5101999 5102999 5103999 5104999
5105999 5106999 5107999 5108999 5109999
5110999 5111999 5112999 5113999 5114999
5115999 5116999 5117999 5118999 5119999
5480999 5481999 5482999 5483999 5484999
5485999 5486999 5487999 5488999 5489999
5490999 5491999 5492999 5493999 5494999
5495999 5496999 5497999 5498999 5499999
5500999 5501999 5502999 5503999 5504999
5505999 5506999 5507999 5508999 5509999
5510999 5511999 5512999 5513999 5514999
5515999 5516999 5517999 5518999 5519999
5660999 5661999 5662999 5663999 5664999
5665999 5666999 5667999 5668999 5669999
5670999 5671999 5672999 5673999 5674999
5675999 5676999 5677999 5678999 5679999
5680999 5681999 5682999 5683999 5684999
5685999 5686999 5687999 5688999 5689999
5690999 5691999 5692999 5693999 5694999
5695999 5696999 5697999 5698999 5699999
-
I've revamped a little tool I made a while ago for determining sheet layouts. The new rendition includes formats from the 1937 and 1954 series. You can find it on my website at this address: http://www.bwjm.ca/tools_drawsheet.asp
NB: It is by no means perfect, but it seems to work in many cases. I can't exactly wrap my head around what's going on with the new notes despite reading the articles in the CPMS newsletter, so for now, they're omitted.