1. Technical Field
This invention relates to impact matrix line printers in general, and more particularly, to methods and apparatus for preventing overheating of line printer hammer bank coils.
2. Related Art
Line impact matrix printers, or “line printers,” produce letters and graphics in the form of a matrix of dots by employing a “shuttle” mechanism that runs back and forth in a horizontal direction over a page of a print medium, such as single sheet or continuous form paper, coupled with the intermittent movement of the page perpendicular to that of the shuttle. An inked “ribbon” is typically interposed between the shuttle and the page. The shuttle comprises a “hammer bank,” i.e., an inline row of “hammers,” i.e., cantilevered, magnetically retracted printing tips respectively disposed at the ends of elongated spring fingers, each of which is selectively “triggered,” i.e., electromagnetically released, and timed so as to impact the page through the ink ribbon and thereby place a dot of ink on the page at a selected position. As a result of the ability to precisely overlap the ink dots produced thereby, i.e., both vertically and horizontally, line printers can produce vertical, horizontal and diagonal lines that have a virtually solid appearance, print that closely resembles that of “solid font” printers, and refined graphics similar to those produced by graphics plotters, at speeds of up to 2000 lines per minute (LPM).
Each of the hammers of a line printer hammer bank is electromagnetically actuated at least in part by the application of a current to at least one electrical coil associated with the hammer. These coils typically comprise a long strand of an electrically conductive wire (e.g., copper) that is coated with an insulator and then wound about a spool or bobbin. During printing, the sequential application of an electrical current to the coil causes it to heat up resistively, and hence, its temperature to rise incrementally. If the temperature of the coil is allowed to rise to a critical point at which, e.g., the coat of insulation on the wire is compromised, a short could occur in the coil, causing a malfunction of the associated hammer.
During the great majority of print jobs, the thermal design of the hammer bank is such that the temperature of each of the coils remains well below the critical point. However, in a relatively small number of print job types in which a highly dense pattern is printed on only a small number of adjacent hammers (so that the overall printed dot count remains about average), such as printing an uninterrupted thick black vertical line on only one or two adjacent hammers in a relatively hot room, it is possible that the temperature of the effected coils could rise beyond a desirable level.
It is known that slowing the printing speed of a line printer, i.e., skipping printing during one or more of the left/right traverses, or “strokes,” of the hammer bank, enables the coils of the hammer bank, particularly those that are cooled by ambient air, to cool down. Thus, a need exists in the relevant industry for simple, efficient systems for preventing the overheating of the coils of a line printer hammer bank that selectively reduce the speed of the printer in a “smart,” i.e., efficient, manner during the infrequent “boundary” cases described above so as to enable the coils to cool down and thereby prevent the temperature of the coils from rising to the critical temperature, but which have no effect on performance of the printer during most typical print jobs.
In accordance with embodiments of the present invention, methods and apparatus are provided for preventing the coils of line printer hammer banks from overheating that are effective, efficient, easy and low in cost to implement.
In one embodiment, a method for preventing a hammer coil of a line printer hammer bank from overheating during printing comprises establishing a maximum allowable temperature of the coil, TS, a temperature hysteresis H value for the coil, and an initial value of a hard brake maximum dot-per-hammer density, HCDPHMax, that the coil can print per stroke of the hammer bank that will enable the coil to cool down from the maximum allowable temperature TS. The temperature of the coil is then monitored during printing, and if the temperature of the coil rises to or exceeds TS, the method flags the coil as a hot coil, “HC.” The initial value of HCDPHMax is then dynamically adjusted, based on the rate of cooling of the coil, and the rate of printing by the coil is adjusted to HCDPHMax when and for as long as the temperature of the coil is at or above TS-H.
A better understanding of the above and many other features and advantages of the novel methods and apparatus of the present invention, together with their manufacture and use, can be obtained from a consideration of the detailed description of some example embodiments thereof below, particularly if such consideration is made in conjunction with the appended drawings, wherein like reference numerals are used to identify like elements illustrated in one or more of the figures thereof.
In accordance with this disclosure, methods and apparatus are provided for effecting over-temperature protection for the coils of line printer hammer banks, which are both efficient and reliable, yet easy and relatively low in cost to implement.
In the example embodiment illustrated in
The example line printer 10 of
In some embodiments that print at a rate of 500 LPM, the hammer bank 100 can include, for example, 28 hammers that print a field of dots 13.6 inches wide, i.e., about 0.5 inches/hammer, and in other embodiments that print 1000 LPM, the hammer bank 100 can include, for example, 60 hammers, each printing a field of dots about 0.23 in. wide. However, it should be understood that, although the particular example line printers illustrated and described herein conform to the two foregoing examples for purposes of illustration, line printers that are capable of other line speeds and/or that incorporate other numbers of hammers can be realized, and that the methods described herein, with suitable modifications to accommodate these differences, can easily be incorporated in the latter.
As discussed in more detail below, a controller 200 (see
As illustrated in
In the particular example embodiment of
Referring now to the lower portions of
As illustrated in
As those of some skill in this art will understand, it is desirable that at least the back plate 102, the pole pieces 104, the flux bar 112, the shunt fret 114 and the hammer fret 124 be con-structed of a magnetically permeable material. As illustrated in
The magnetic flux acts to pull the head 126 of the hammer 122 back elastically toward and into juxtaposition with the front end of the pole piece 102 and against a forward pull or bias exerted on the hammer head 126 by the spring portion 124 of the hammer 122. The shunts 116 disposed on either side of the hammer head 126 serve to complete the flux path 132 from the pole piece 102 to the hammer head 126 while enabling the hammer head 126 to move forward freely when released from the pull of the magnetic flux. The hammer head 126 is thus retained in juxtaposition with the pole piece 102 until it is selectably released to spring forwardly in response to the forward bias of the spring portion 124 of the hammer 122. This release is effected by passing an electrical current through the coil 108 so as to induce a magnetomotive force (MMF) in the pole piece 104 that is contrary to, and thus, disruptive of the magnetic flux path 32, thereby releasing the hammer head 126, and hence, the associated printing tip 128, to spring forwardly so as to impact against an ink ribbon and thereby print a dot on a print medium.
Thus, it may be seen that each of the hammers 122 of the hammer bank 100 is electro-magnetically actuated at least in part by the selective application of an electrical current to the coil 108 associated with that hammer 122. These coils 108 typically comprise an elongated strand of an electrically conductive wire (e.g., copper) that is coated with a dielectric insulator, e.g., a polyimide, such as Kapton, and then wound about a spool or bobbin, which can be made of a similar insulative material. During assembly, a coil 108 is slipped over each hammer's associated pole piece 104, as illustrated in
As will understand by those of skill in the art, during printing, the sequential application of an electrical current to the coil 108 causes it to heat resistively, and hence, its temperature to rise. If the temperature of the coil 108 is allowed to rise to a critical point at which the dielectric coating on the wire of the coil 108 is compromised, the coil 108 could short, causing a malfunction of the associated hammer122. As discussed above, during the great majority of print jobs, the thermal design of the hammer bank 100 is such that the temperature of each of the coils 108 remains well below this critical point. However, in a relatively small number of print jobs, it is possible that the temperature of the effected coils 108 could rise beyond an acceptable level, thereby indicating a need for methods for protecting the coils 108 from a destructive overheating.
Additionally, in some prior art hammer banks, it is conventional to “pot,” or embed, the coils 108 and pole pieces 104 in a matrix of, for example, epoxy, for both structural and thermal considerations. Thus, for example, as illustrated in
However, in the particular example hammer bank 100 illustrated in
As illustrated in
Turning now to methods that can be used for preventing overheating the coils of a line printer hammer bank, one example method can be viewed as generally involving 1) establishing a maximum allowable temperature (TS) of the coils, 2) monitoring the temperature of the coils during printing, and 3) if and when the temperature of a coil (i.e., a “hot coil” or “HC”) reaches or exceeds the maximum allowable temperature TS, reducing the performance of the printer in a maximally efficient way so as to enable the HC to cool down without skipping printing strokes unnecessarily.
The third step, i.e., reducing the performance of the printer in a maximally efficient way, involves 1) establishing a maximum dot-per-hammer density of a HC (“HCDPHMax”), as a percentage of the greatest possible density of dots that the HC hammer can print during a given stroke of the hammer bank and at a given resolution, that will enable the HC to cool down from the maximum allowable temperature TS to an “acceptable” lower temperature, 3) looking ahead to the HC dot-per-hammer (“next HCDPH”) density that the HC is about to print during the next stroke of the hammer bank, 4) calculating a new HC dot-per-hammer moving average (HCDPHMA) based on the next HCDPH, and 5) either a) printing the next stroke HCDPH if it is less than or equal to the HCDPHMax, or b) skipping the printing of the next stroke HCDPH on that stroke and then printing it during the next or a subsequent stroke of the hammer bank. Thus, in this method, if the dot density being printed on a HC is reduced, the printer will not wait for the HC to cool completely, but instead, will increase its performance immediately, since the dot density being printed on that HC is adapted to allow cooling of the HC without skipping extra printing strokes.
Accordingly, the steps of the method 300 of
In regard to the latter possibility, it is important to note that the instant method can automatically require the factory to set, e.g., the maximum coil temperature TS values using, for example, a hidden “menu” generated by the software of the method and to display a suitable reminder message to the assembler on a display of the printer, such as, “Set Coil Temp TS”. Thus, if the factory fails to set or store the TS of the coils in the printer initially, the software of the protection method can easily be adapted to display a “fatal error” message at power up, for example, “CTEMP NOT SET/Set Coil Temp” to indicate that the needed values are missing and should be supplied.
However, when a new hammer bank is installed in a printer in the field, the control software may or may not know that the hammer bank has been changed, and accordingly, could continue to use the coil parameter values previously stored in the printer at the factory. Without proper coil temperature TS settings, among others, the coil overheating method might not function properly, and the coils in the new hammer bank could be damaged. Therefore, technicians who install new hammer banks in the field should be educated as to the extreme importance of accessing the “Set Coil Temp” menu and setting the new TS (and other values) for the coils any time they change out the hammer bank unit in a printer.
As illustrated in
Thus, in the particular example of
For example, regarding the coil temperature measurement error TER above, consideration should first be made to the way in which the temperature of the coils is actually measured during printing. Although each hammer bank coil could be equipped with, for example, a precision thermistor or a thermocouple that can be used measure its temperature, a less complicated and costly method, using components already at hand, can be used, viz., using, as a surrogate for its temperature, the current i flowing through the coil to actuate the associated hammer. Thus, the current flowing through the coil, i, is inversely proportional to its resistance, which in turn, varies directly with its temperature T. Since the current flowing in a hammer coil can be measured relatively quickly, easily and without effecting the operation of the hammer, this measurement can be used as a substitute for a more direct measurement of its temperature, i.e., T % 1/i.
Changes in the geometry of the coil with temperature can introduce non-linearities in the coil current/temperature relationship, but these can be accommodated empirically by, for example, equipping a representative coil that is disposed at an initial “reference” temperature of, e.g., 25° C. (77° F.), then passing increasing amounts of current through it and recording the variation in its temperature as a function of the current. Thus, at 6S2 of the method 300, these values can be stored in, e.g., a lookup table in the memory of the printer controller, or encoded directly in relationships within the software used to control the method, e.g., “if i=X, then T=Y.” As discussed above, these relationships need to be obtained only once for the particular type of coils used in the hammer bank and, absent a change in their design, should remain fairly constant over the useful life of the hammer bank.
When the mechanism for measuring the temperature of the coils has been established, then the coil temperature measurement error TER above becomes mainly a matter of the possible variation in the characteristics of the coils actually used in the hammer bank from those of the representative coil that were measured empirically. Here, past experience with measuring the temperature of hammer bank coils as a function of the current flowing in them can be useful, and shows that this method has, for a wide variety of hammer coil types, an accuracy of about ±9° C. Thus, at 6S3 of the method, a margin of safety attributable to a possible error in the temperature measurement of the coils results in a downward adjustment to the foregoing maximum allowable temperature of the coils TS of TER=9° C., i.e., a “revised” TS=185−9=176° C. As above, if this value of TS were selected as the final value, the cutoff point for throttling back performance of the printer should be chosen such that no given hammer bank coil can heat to a temperature higher than 176° C. before a fresh coil temperature reading is taken on that coil.
As discussed above, to establish the latter parameter, consideration should then be given to 2) the amount of time that a coil can heat before a measurement of its temperature is taken, and 3) the amount that the temperature of the coil can increase during that time.
The amount of time that it takes to measure a particular coil's temperature depends, as in 1) above, on the particular line printer and the method in which the temperature of the coils is measured. Since a relatively large number of coil temperature samples can be taken per unit time using the current/temperature measurement method described above, in one advantageous method, coil temperature (i.e., current) samples can be taken during every “turnaround” of the shuttle, i.e., on every “left” and “right” stroke thereof. In this manner, the firing of the hammers, i.e., printing, need not be skipped to take a coil temperature sample, so printer performance will not be affected by the measurements.
In this approach, in one embodiment, the respective temperature of the coils is measured seriatim, on a continuously repeating basis, beginning with the first coil in the hammer bank and proceeding to the last, in a “round robin” fashion. The temperature of the particular coil being measured is taken four times, i.e., once every change in shuttle direction, or stroke, for four consecutive strokes, then averaged together to provide a measurement of the current temperature of that coil, before moving to the next coil in the bank.
In addition to these measurements, the method can be adapted to perform a special coil measurement of the “hottest coil” in the hammer bank once every 0.5 second to detect hot coils more quickly. The instruction to execute this special measurement can be inserted, for example, in the shuttle direction change preceding the next round of coil temperature measurements. As with the other coils, four temperature measurements can be taken on the hottest coil and then averaged to provide a measurement of the current temperature of the hottest coil.
In accordance with the methods of the present invention, if the temperature of any coil exceeds the chosen allowable temperature TS during these measurements, 1) that coil is internally identified or “flagged” as a hot coil (“HC”), and 2) the printing speed is reduced in the manner described in more detail below until the temperature of the flagged coil drops to a level below the established set temperature TS, plus a chosen “hysteresis” (H) temperature value, as discussed in more detail below.
Using this approach, a HC will be caught or flagged in the worst case after the coil temperature measurements have cycled through the entire bank of coils in the hammer bank. In an example 500 LPM printer having 28 hammers in its hammer bank, this corresponds to a “worst case,” or maximum of 3.36 seconds (i.e., at a printer resolution of 90 dpi) before the temperature of a HC is measured again. Thus, at 6S4 of the method 300, and given that a “line” of print is equal to five rows of dots, plus one blank row (for line separation purposes), the derivation of this time is as follows: 500 lines/minute×60 seconds/minute×6 strokes/line=50 hammer bank strokes per second, or 0.02 seconds/stroke, i.e., when printing at a resolution of 60 dpi. Thus, if four strokes are used to measure the temperature of one coil and there are 28 coils in the hammer bank, the time between temperature measurements for a given coil will be 4 strokes/coil×0.02 seconds/stroke×28 coils=2.24 seconds. However, this time interval is proportionately greater at higher print resolutions, which take longer to print. Thus, at a print resolution of 90 dpi, a “worst case” for the time between successive temperature measurements for a coil will be 90/60×2.24 seconds=3.36 seconds.
A similar analysis can be performed for the example 1000 LPM, 60 hammer printer, and results in a worst case time of 3.6 seconds before a HC is read again (as above, at a print resolution of 90 dpi). As before, at less dense print resolutions, sampling is done more quickly. For example, at a resolution of 60 dpi, this time is reduced to 2.4 seconds.
Having established these maximum time-between-measurements values at 6S4, it is then necessary, at 6S5 of the method 300, to establish the rate of change of coil temperature with time, dT/dt, where T is coil temperature and t is time, in order to determine the amount that the temperature of a coil can increase during that period of time. In one example embodiment, to establish this, empirical data is developed by instrumenting the coils of the hammer bank of an example line printer with thermocouples and then recording the temperature of the coils as the printer prints different continuous print patterns, each with a different proportion of all possible dots filled in by the printer.
Each graph in
As illustrated in
As illustrated in
As summarized in Table 1 below, a TS of 162° C. would be a suitable choice for the example 500 LPM, 28 hammer line printer which is printing at a resolution of 73 dpi or greater, and a TS of 165° C. would be suitable for the same printer which is printing at a resolution of less than 73 dpi. For the example 1000 LPM, 60 hammer printer, the use of a TS of 168° C. would be suitable at resolutions less than or equal to 90 dpi.
Thus, at S65 of the method 300, in the case of the example 500 LPM printer, two values of TS are set, or stored in the printer that are dependent on the resolution being printed by the printer, and in the example 1000 LPM printer, a single value of TS that is independent of the print resolution is stored.
As those of some skill will understand, to prevent the printer from continually entering and exiting a HC condition, it is desirable to use some “hysteresis” value, i.e., some measure of the rate at which HC's cool down from an elevated temperature. Air-cooled coils cool relatively quickly when strokes are skipped; so it is not necessary to wait a very long interval for a coil to cool. Additionally, as discussed in more detail below, a hot coil dot per hammer (“HCDPHMax”) printing density can selected that, even if printed continuously by the HC, will still enable the coil to cool down, albeit more slowly than if printing by the HC were stopped completely.
This effect, referred to herein as “hysteresis” (“H”), provides a bound on the amount of time that a HC should be allowed to cool before resuming full performance printing on that coil so as to prevent inefficient “cycling” of the printer into and out of a HC condition. That is, when the printer enters a reduced print speed mode to prevent overheating of a coil, the printer will not be permitted to resume full performance printing until the temperature of the HC is less than or equal to TS−H. Thus, in the example method 300 of
As discussed above, an important aspect of the method of the present invention involves reducing the performance of the printer when a HC reaches the set maximum allowable temperature TS so as to allow the HC to cool down, yet such that it does not skip any printing strokes unnecessarily. In one embodiment, this can be effected by first establishing a maximum dot-per-hammer density of a HC (“HCDPHMax”), as a percentage of the greatest possible density of dots that the HC hammer can print during a given stroke and at a given resolution, that will enable the HC to cool down from the maximum allowable temperature TS to an “acceptable” lower temperature, e.g., ≦TS−H, then looking ahead in the print queue to the HC dot-per-hammer (“next HCDPH”) density that is about to be printed by the HC during the next stroke of the hammer bank, and either a) printing the HCDPH of the next stroke if it is less than or equal to the HCDPHMax, or b) skipping the printing of the next HCDPH on that stroke and printing it in the next or a subsequent stroke of the hammer bank if it is greater than HDCPHMax.
The HCDPHMax coil parameter can be established empirically by looking at the temperature/time profile of a representative coil as a function of the percentage of the greatest possible density of dots that the HC hammer can print during a given stroke and at a given resolution, over a period of time that is long enough to allow the coil to stabilize in temperature.
As illustrated in
It may be further noted from
As illustrated in
Thus, to cool HCs in the example 1000 LPM printer both efficiently and effectively, the HCDPHMax should be kept to a level somewhere between these two levels. Therefore, a value of 43% could safely be chosen as the HCDPHMax for the example 1000 LPM printer because it is midway between the two dot densities. Thus, at 6S8 of the method 300, an initial value for HCDPHMax of about 43% or less could be selected for the example 1000 LPM printer as a value that will allow HCs to cool effectively.
Having now fully provisioned the printer with the values of the coil parameters that are both appropriate to the particular printer and associated hammer bank at hand and necessary to effect the method for preventing hammer coil overheating of the present invention, reference is now made to
In
As discussed above, assuming that the thermal design of the hammer bank is adequate, then the temperature of each of the hammer bank coils will remain well below the critical point identified earlier, i.e., TNTE. Thus, during the great majority of print jobs, the “loop” including the steps 9S1-9S3 of the method 400 would characterize the majority of jobs printed on the printer, i.e., the remaining steps of the method described below would not need to be invoked. However, as also discussed above, in a relatively small number of print job types, it is possible that the temperature of one or more of the hammer coils could rise to or beyond the level TS at which they are invoked in order to prevent overheating of the coils.
Thus, at 9S2, if a determination is made that the temperature of a coil is equal to or greater than TS, then at 9S5, the method 400 “flags” that coil as a hot coil HC, and at 9S6, begins computing and recording a moving average HCDPHMA 402 of the number of dots printed on the associated hammer of that coil over prior strokes (with a ⅛ weight being placed on the most recent value).
The method 400 then proceeds to 9S7 (see
If at 9S11, it is determined that the next HCDPHMA is greater than HCDPHMax previously set, then at 9S12, 1) printing on the next stroke is omitted to allow the HC to cool more rapidly, 2) the print medium is not advanced to the next row for printing, but rather, remains at the same row, 3) the scheduled HCDPH that was omitted becomes the HCDPH for the next (or a subsequent) stroke of the hammer bank at that same row, 4) the next HCDPHMA is computed at 9S10 based on the last row of dots having been skipped, i.e., as if the HCDPH for the previous stroke were zero, and 5) the method 400 then proceeds to 9S13, at which the temperature of the HC is monitored.
On the other hand, if at 9S11, it is determined that the next HCDPHMA is less than or equal to HCDPHMax, i.e., can be printed and still allow the HC to cool (albeit more slowly than if printing had been completely skipped during that stroke), then at 9S14, the next HCDPH is printed during the next stroke of the hammer bank, and the method 400 proceeds to 9S15, where a determination is made as to whether the print job is complete. If so, printing and the method 400 both terminate at 9S16. If not, then the method 400 again proceeds to 9S13, as above.
At 9S13, the method 400 monitors the temperature of the HC, which as discussed above, occurs every 0.5 seconds, and proceeds to 9S17, where a determination is made as to whether the temperature of the HC, THC, has fallen to an acceptable level, viz, THC≦TS−H. If not, then the method 400 returns to 9S7, where the foregoing steps of the process are repeated, but with the values of the next stroke HCDPH and HCDPHMA being appropriately modified as described above, depending on whether printing occurred or was skipped during the previous stroke. If, on the other hand, it is determined at 9S17 that THC has fallen to an acceptable level, i.e., to <TS−H, then the method proceeds to 9S18, i.e., it returns to the first step 9S1 of the method in
Using the example method 400 described thus far, the initial or default value of HCDPHMax as selected above should be adequate to ensure that no coil ever exceeds its temperature set point, TS. However, due primarily to the possibility of poor accuracy in the coil temperature readings, a fixed value of HCDPHMax is not always adequate, and it may become necessary to manipulate this parameter as follows.
Referring to
In some embodiments, the method 400 can be configured such that, any time that a HC condition in the printer causes enough skipped strokes to reduce the overall printer performance over a given interval, e.g., 5 seconds, by a given percentage, e.g., 33% or more, the software of the method 400 can cause a “Half Speed Mode” message to be displayed on a front panel indicator or display of the printer to alert a user that the printer's speed has been reduced to cool the hammer bank. This message can be removed automatically when the printer passes through, e.g., a 5 second interval with less than, e.g., 5% of an overall reduction in speed due to a HC. This arrangement can prevent transient skipped strokes that do not appreciably affect performance from flashing spurious messages on the printer.
As those of some skill will appreciate, the foregoing methods contemplate that production hammer banks will function approximately the same as the representative hammer banks used to produce the empirically obtained coil parameters. However, different hardware, faulty hardware, or erroneous coil temperature readings, could prevent the methods from achieving their desired objects. To protect against such an eventuality, the example method 400 can be augmented to provide, for example that, if the software of the method ever sees the temperature in a coil rise higher than, for example, an average of, e.g., 8° C. per second, it will flag a fatal error, e.g., “CTEMP HW ERR/Call Service”. Such a message would indicate to users that something in the hardware or software was not behaving in the expected manner, and that it was not safe to continue printing with the printer because the hammer coils could be damaged.
Likewise, if coils do not cool properly when the correct number of strokes is skipped, the method 400 can be modified to conclude that a hardware error exists. Coils that do not cool properly will continue to rise in temperature, even when the number of dots per hammer per unit time is restricted. For example, if the software of the method ever reads a value higher than 185° C. on a coil, the method can be modified to cease all further printing and to display a fatal fault “COIL HOT ERR 1/Call Service” message to the user.
Indeed, in light of the foregoing description, it will be clear to those of skill in the art that many modifications, substitutions and variations can be made in the methods and apparatus of the present invention for preventing line printer hammer coil overheating, and in light thereof, the scope of the present disclosure should not be limited to that of the particular embodiments illustrated and described herein, which are presented merely by way of some examples thereof, but rather, should be fully commensurate with that of the claims appended hereafter and their functional equivalents.