Patent Application
20070177189
The example embodiments relate to the printing and marking arts. They particularly relate to printing systems with multiple processing units providing substantial degrees of freedom in performing print jobs, and to print job scheduling for such printing systems. However, the following relates more generally to printing and marking systems of all types, and to print job scheduling and bottleneck obviation for same.
Printing systems have generally been designed with a strong emphasis on ease of use, and a lesser emphasis on exploiting to the fullest the capabilities of the underlying printing hardware. Accordingly, the user is typically given a few pre-selected controls each having a limited number of pre-selected settings. For example, an image contrast control may have a “photo-optimized” setting, a “graphics-optimized” setting, and a “text-optimized” setting.
Additionally, printing systems have generally employed only one or a few sheet paths, and only one or a few print job destinations. For example, a typical printing system may have a single marking engine, which bottlenecks sheet processing down to a single print path. Even if multiple marking engines are provided, the print media conveyor may be configured to limit sheet processing to a single print path. In such an arrangement, the print jobs are queued and performed sequentially, in a first in-first out (FIFO) sequence.
Some more advanced printing systems provide multiple sheet paths and multiple job destinations. For example, a single job scheduler can be linked with two printing systems (tandem printing), or with three or more printing systems (cluster printing). FIFO print job queue/processing is typically employed; however, since multiple printing systems are linked to the job scheduler, the job scheduler can divide up sheets of a given job amongst two or more of the linked printing systems, so as to more efficiently process the print job. In tandem and cluster printing, each printing system is an independent printing system; accordingly, the sheets of a print job that is executed by two or more printing systems are manually collated or combined. FIFO print job queue/processing does not fully leverage the capabilities of multiple marking engines provided in tandem printing, cluster printing, and other parallel printing systems.
Integrated printing systems with multiple types of marking engines, such as color and black only engines, can assemble documents comprised of a mixture of the different IME type outputs. Productivity of such systems is optimal when documents to be assembled have a fairly uniform distribution of page types with the ratio of page type being roughly proportional to the productivity or capability of the IME types. However, severe productivity bottlenecks occur when the page type distributions within a sequence of consecutive pages of a job are substantially disproportionate from the production rate of the page types.
The following applications, the disclosures of each being totally incorporated herein by reference are mentioned:
application Ser. No. 11/212,367 (Attorney Docket No. 20031830-US-NP), filed Aug. 26, 2005, entitled “PRINTING SYSTEM,” by David G. Anderson, et al., and claiming priority to U.S. Provisional Application Ser. No. 60/631,651, filed Nov. 30, 2004, entitled “TIGHTLY INTEGRATED PARALLEL PRINTING ARCHITECTURE MAKING USE OF COMBINED COLOR AND MONOCHROME ENGINES”;
application Ser. No. 11/235,979 (Attorney Docket No. 20031867Q-US-NP), filed Sep. 27, 2005, entitled “PRINTING SYSTEM,” by David G. Anderson, et al., and claiming priority to U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 60/631,918 (Attorney Docket No. 20031867-US-PSP), filed Nov. 30, 2004, entitled “PRINTING SYSTEM WITH MULTIPLE OPERATIONS FOR FINAL APPEARANCE AND PERMANENCE,” and U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 60/631,921, filed Nov. 30, 2004, entitled “PRINTING SYSTEM WITH MULTIPLE OPERATIONS FOR FINAL APPEARANCE AND PERMANENCE”;
application Ser. No. 11/236,099 (Attorney Docket No. 20031867Q-US-NP), filed Sep. 27, 2005, entitled “PRINTING SYSTEM,” by David G. Anderson, et al., and claiming priority to U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 60/631,918, Filed Nov. 30, 2004, entitled “PRINTING SYSTEM WITH MULTIPLE OPERATIONS FOR FINAL APPEARANCE AND PERMANENCE,” and U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 60/631,921, filed Nov. 30, 2004, entitled “PRINTING SYSTEM WITH MULTIPLE OPERATIONS FOR FINAL APPEARANCE AND PERMANENCE”;
U.S. Pat. No. 6,973,286 (Attorney Docket A2423-US-NP), issued Dec. 6, 2005, entitled “HIGH RATE PRINT MERGING AND FINISHING SYSTEM FOR PARALLEL PRINTING,” by Barry P. Mandel, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 10/785,211 (Attorney Docket A3249P1-US-NP), filed Feb. 24, 2004, entitled “UNIVERSAL FLEXIBLE PLURAL PRINTER TO PLURAL FINISHER SHEET INTEGRATION SYSTEM,” by Robert M. Lofthus, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 10/881,619 (Attorney Docket A0723-US-NP), filed Jun. 30, 2004, entitled “FLEXIBLE PAPER PATH USING MULTIDIRECTIONAL PATH MODULES,” by Daniel G. Bobrow;
U.S. application Ser. No. 10/917,676 (Attorney Docket A3404-US-NP), filed Aug. 13, 2004, entitled “MULTIPLE OBJECT SOURCES CONTROLLED AND/OR SELECTED BASED ON A COMMON SENSOR,” by Robert M. Lofthus, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 10/917,768 (Attorney Docket 20040184-US-NP), filed Aug. 13, 2004, entitled “PARALLEL PRINTING ARCHITECTURE CONSISTING OF CONTAINERIZED IMAGE MARKING ENGINES AND MEDIA FEEDER MODULES,” by Robert M. Lofthus, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 10/924,106 (Attorney Docket A4050-US-NP), filed Aug. 23, 2004, entitled “PRINTING. SYSTEM WITH HORIZONTAL HIGHWAY AND SINGLE PASS DUPLEX,” by Robert M. Lofthus, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 10/924,113 (Attorney Docket A3190-US-NP), filed Aug. 23, 2004, entitled “PRINTING SYSTEM WITH INVERTER DISPOSED FOR MEDIA VELOCITY BUFFERING AND REGISTRATION,” by Joannes N. M. deJong, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 10/924,458 (Attorney Docket A3548-US-NP), filed Aug. 23, 2004, entitled “PRINT SEQUENCE SCHEDULING FOR RELIABILITY,” by Robert M. Lofthus, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 10/924,459 (Attorney Docket No. A3419-US-NP), filed Aug. 23, 2004, entitled “PARALLEL PRINTING ARCHITECTURE USING IMAGE MARKING ENGINE MODULES (as amended),” by Barry P. Mandel, et al.;
U.S. Pat. No. 6,959,165 (Attorney Docket A2423-US-DIV), issued Oct. 25, 2005, entitled “HIGH RATE PRINT MERGING AND FINISHING SYSTEM FOR PARALLEL PRINTING,” by Barry P. Mandel, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 10/933,556 (Attorney Docket No. A3405-US-NP), filed Sep. 3, 2004, entitled “SUBSTRATE INVERTER SYSTEMS AND METHODS,” by Stan A. Spencer, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 10/953,953 (Attorney Docket No. A3546-US-NP), filed Sep. 29, 2004, entitled “CUSTOMIZED SET POINT CONTROL FOR OUTPUT STABILITY IN A TIPP ARCHITECTURE,” by Charles A. Radulski, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 10/999,326 (Attorney Docket 20040314-US-NP), filed Nov. 30, 2004, entitled “SEMI-AUTOMATIC IMAGE QUALITY ADJUSTMENT FOR MULTIPLE MARKING ENGINE SYSTEMS,” by Robert E. Grace, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 10/999,450 (Attorney Docket No. 20040985-US-NP), filed Nov. 30, 2004, entitled “ADDRESSABLE FUSING FOR AN INTEGRATED PRINTING SYSTEM,” by Robert M. Lofthus, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/000,158 (Attorney Docket No. 20040503-US-NP), filed Nov. 30, 2004, entitled “GLOSSING SYSTEM FOR USE IN A TIPP ARCHITECTURE,” by Bryan J. Roof;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/000,168 (Attorney Docket No. 20021985-US-NP), filed Nov. 30, 2004, entitled “ADDRESSABLE FUSING AND HEATING METHODS AND APPARATUS,” by David K. Biegelsen, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/000,258 (Attorney Docket No. 20040503Q-US-NP), filed Nov. 30, 2004, entitled “GLOSSING SYSTEM FOR USE IN A TIPP ARCHITECTURE,” by Bryan J. Roof;
U.S. Pat. No. 6,925,283 (Attorney Docket A2423-US-DIV1), issued Aug. 2, 2005, entitled “HIGH PRINT RATE MERGING AND FINISHING SYSTEM FOR PARALLEL PRINTING,” by Barry P. Mandel, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/051,817 (Attorney Docket 20040447-US-NP), filed Feb. 4, 2005, entitled “PRINTING SYSTEMS,” by Steven R. Moore, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/069,020 (Attorney Docket 20040744-US-NP), filed Feb. 28, 2004, entitled “PRINTING SYSTEMS,” by Robert M. Lofthus, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/070,681 (Attorney Docket 20031659-US-NP), filed Mar. 2, 2005, entitled “GRAY BALANCE FOR A PRINTING SYSTEM OF MULTIPLE MARKING ENGINES,” by R. Enrique Viturro, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/081,473 (Attorney Docket 20040448-US-NP), filed Mar. 16, 2005, entitled “PRINTING SYSTEM,” by Steven R. Moore;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/084,280 (Attorney Docket 20040974-US-NP), filed Mar. 18, 2005, entitled “SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR MEASURING UNIFORMITY IN IMAGES,” by Howard Mizes;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/089,854 (Attorney Docket 20040241-US-NP), filed Mar. 25, 2005, entitled “SHEET REGISTRATION WITHIN A MEDIA INVERTER,” by Robert A. Clark, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/090,498 (Attorney Docket 20040619-US-NP), filed Mar. 25, 2005, entitled “INVERTER WITH RETURN/BYPASS PAPER PATH,” by Robert A. Clark;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/090,502 (Attorney Docket 20031468-US-NP), filed Mar. 25, 2005, entitled IMAGE QUALITY CONTROL METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR MULTIPLE MARKING ENGINE SYSTEMS,” by Michael C. Mongeon;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/093,229 (Attorney Docket 20040677-US-NP), filed Mar. 29, 2005, entitled “PRINTING SYSTEM,” by Paul C. Julien;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/095,872 (Attorney Docket 20040676-US-filed Mar. 31, 2005, entitled “PRINTING SYSTEM,” by Paul C. Julien;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/094,864 (Attorney Docket 20040971-US-NP), filed Mar. 31, 2005, entitled “PRINTING SYSTEM,” by Jeremy C. dejong, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/095,378 (Attorney Docket 20040446-US-NP), filed Mar. 31, 2005, entitled “IMAGE ON PAPER REGISTRATION ALIGNMENT,” by Steven R. Moore, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/094,998 (Attorney Docket 20031520-US-NP), filed Mar. 31, 2005, entitled “PARALLEL PRINTING ARCHITECTURE WITH PARALLEL HORIZONTAL PRINTING MODULES,” by Steven R. Moore, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/102,899 (Attorney Docket 20041209-US-NP), filed Apr. 8, 2005, entitled “SYNCHRONIZATION IN A DISTRIBUTED SYSTEM,” by Lara S. Crawford, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/102,910 (Attorney Docket 20041210-US-NP), filed Apr. 8, 2005, entitled “COORDINATION IN A DISTRIBUTED SYSTEM,” by Lara S. Crawford, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/102,355 (Attorney Docket 20041213-US-NP), filed Apr. 8, 2005, entitled “COMMUNICATION IN A DISTRIBUTED SYSTEM,” by Markus P. J. Fromherz, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/102,332 (Attorney Docket 20041214-US-NP), filed Apr. 8, 2005, entitled “ON-THE-FLY STATE SYNCHRONIZATION IN A DISTRIBUTED SYSTEM,” by Haitham A. Hindi;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/109,558 (Attorney Docket 19971059-US-NP), filed Apr. 19, 2005, entitled “SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR REDUCING IMAGE REGISTRATION ERRORS,” by Michael R. Furst, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/109,566 (Attorney Docket 20032019-US-NP), filed Apr. 19, 2005, entitled “MEDIA TRANSPORT SYSTEM,” by Barry P. Mandel, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/109,996 (Attorney Docket 20040704-US-NP), filed Apr. 20, 2005, entitled “PRINTING SYSTEMS,” by Michael C. Mongeon, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/115,766 (Attorney Docket 20040656-US-NP, Filed Apr. 27, 2005, entitled “IMAGE QUALITY ADJUSTMENT METHOD AND SYSTEM,” by Robert E. Grace;,
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/122,420 (Attorney Docket 20041149-US-NP), filed May 5, 2005, entitled “PRINTING SYSTEM AND SCHEDULING METHOD,” by Austin L. Richards;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/136,959 (Attorney Docket 20040649-US-NP), filed May 25, 2005, entitled “PRINTING SYSTEMS,” by Kristine A. German, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/137,634 (Attorney Docket 20050281-US-NP), filed May 25, 2005, entitled “PRINTING SYSTEM,” by Robert M. Lofthus, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/137,251 (Attorney Docket 20050382-US-NP), filed May 25, 2005, entitled “SCHEDULING SYSTEM,” by Robert M. Lofthus, et al.;
U.S. C-I-P application Ser. No. 11/137,273 (Attorney Docket A3546-US-CIP), filed May 25, 2005, entitled “PRINTING SYSTEM,” by David G. Anderson, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/143,818 (Attorney Docket 200400621-US-NP), filed Jun. 2, 2005, entitled “INTER-SEPARATION DECORRELATOR,” by Edul N. Dalal, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/146,665 (Attorney Docket 20041296-US-NP), filed Jun. 7, 2005, entitled “LOW COST ADJUSTMENT METHOD FOR PRINTING SYSTEMS,” by Michael C. Mongeon;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/152,275 (Attorney Docket 20040506-US-NP), filed Jun. 14, 2005, entitled “WARM-UP OF MULTIPLE INTEGRATED MARKING ENGINES,” by Bryan J. Roof, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/156,778 (Attorney Docket 20040573-US-NP), filed Jun. 20, 2005, entitled “PRINTING PLATFORM,” by Joseph A. Swift;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/157,598 (Attorney Docket 20041435-US-NP), filed Jun. 21, 2005, entitled “METHOD OF ORDERING JOB QUEUE OF MARKING SYSTEMS,” by Neil A. Frankel;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/166,460 (Attorney Docket 20040505-US-NP), filed Jun. 24, 2005, entitled “GLOSSING SUBSYSTEM FOR A PRINTING DEVICE,” by Bryan J. Roof, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/166,581 (Attorney Docket 20040812-US-NP), filed Jun. 24, 2005, entitled “MIXED OUTPUT PRINT CONTROL METHOD AND SYSTEM,” by Joseph H. Lang, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/166,299 (Attorney Docket 20041110-US-NP), filed Jun. 24, 2005, entitled “PRINTING SYSTEM,” by Steven R. Moore;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/170,975 (Attorney Docket 20040983-US-NP), filed Jun. 30, 2005, entitled “METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR PROCESSING SCANNED PATCHES FOR USE IN IMAGING DEVICE CALIBRATION,” by R. Victor Klassen;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/170,873 (Attorney Docket 20040964-US-NP), filed Jun. 30, 2005, entitled “COLOR CHARACTERIZATION OR CALIBRATION TARGETS WITH NOISE-DEPENDENT PATCH SIZE OR NUMBER,” by R. Victor Klassen;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/170,845 (Attorney Docket 20040186-US-NP), filed Jun. 30, 2005, entitled “HIGH AVAILABILITY PRINTING SYSTEMS,” by Meera Sampath, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/189,371 (Attorney Docket 20041111-US-NP), filed Jul. 26, 2005, entitled “PRINTING SYSTEM,” by Steven R. Moore, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/208,871 (Attorney Docket 20041093-US-NP), filed Aug. 22, 2005, entitled “MODULAR MARKING ARCHITECTURE FOR WIDE MEDIA PRINTING PLATFORM,” by Edul N. Dalal, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/215,791 (Attorney Docket 2005077-US-NP), filed Aug. 30, 2005, entitled “CONSUMABLE SELECTION IN A PRINTING SYSTEM,” by Eric Hamby, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/222,260 (Attorney Docket 20041220-US-NP), filed Sep. 8, 2005, entitled “METHOD AND SYSTEMS FOR DETERMINING BANDING COMPENSATION PARAMETERS IN PRINTING SYSTEMS,” by Goodman, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/234,553 (Attorney Docket 20050371-US-NP), filed Sep. 23, 2005, entitled “MAXIMUM GAMUT STRATEGY FOR THE PRINTING SYSTEMS,” by Michael C. Mongeon;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/234,468 (Attorney Docket 20050262-US-NP), filed Sep. 23, 2005, entitled “PRINTING SYSTEM,” by Eric Hamby, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/247,778 (Attorney Docket 20031549-US-NP), filed Oct. 11, 2005, entitled “PRINTING SYSTEM WITH BALANCED CONSUMABLE USAGE,” by Charles Radulski, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/248,044 (Attorney Docket 20050303-US-NP), filed Oct. 12, 2005, entitled “MEDIA PATH CROSSOVER FOR PRINTING SYSTEM,” by Stan A. Spencer, et al.; and
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/274,638 (Attorney Docket 20050689-US-NP), filed Nov. 15, 2005, entitled “GAMUT SELECTION IN MULTI-ENGINE SYSTEMS,” by Wencheng Wu, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/287,177 (Attorney Docket 20050909-US-NP), filed Nov. 23, 2005, entitled “MEDIA PASS THROUGH MODE FOR MULTI-ENGINE SYSTEM,” by Barry P. Mandel, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/287,685 (Attorney Docket 20050363-US-NP), filed Nov. 28, 2005, entitled “MULTIPLE IOT PPHOTORECEPTOR BELT SEAM SYNCHRONIZATION,” by Kevin M. Carolan;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/291,860 (Attorney Docket 20050966-US-NP), filed Nov. 30, 2005, entitled “MEDIA PATH CROSSOVER CLEARANCE FOR PRINTING SYSTEM,” by Keith L. Willis;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/292,388 (Attorney Docket 20051103-US-NP), filed Nov. 30, 2005, entitled “PRINTING SYSTEM,” by David A. Mueller;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/292,163 (Attorney Docket 20050489-US-NP), filed Nov. 30, 2005, entitled “RADIAL MERGE MODULE FOR PRINTING SYSTEM,” by Barry P. Mandel, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/291,583 (Attorney Docket 20041755-US-NP), filed Nov. 30, 2005, entitled “MIXED OUTPUT PRINTING SYSTEM,” by Joseph H. Lang;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/______ (Attorney Docket 20050330-US-NP), filed Dec. 20, 2005, entitled “PRINTING SYSTEM ARCHITECTURE WITH CENTER CROSS-OVER AND INTERPOSER BY-PASS PATH,” by Barry P. Mandel, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/314,828 (Attorney Docket 20051171-US-NP), filed Dec. 21, 2005, entitled “MEDIA PATH DIAGNOSTICS WITH HYPER MODULE ELEMENTS,” by David G. Anderson, et al;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/314,774 (Attorney Docket 20050137-US-NP), filed Dec. 21, 2005, entitled “A METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR MULTIPLE PRINTER CALIBRATION USING COMPROMISE AIM,” by R. Victor Klassen;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/317,589 (Attorney Docket 20040327-US-NP), filed Dec. 23, 2005, entitled “UNIVERSAL VARIABLE PITCH INTERFACE INTERCONNECTING FIXED PITCH SHEET PROCESSING MACHINES,” by David K. Biegelsen, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/317,167 (Attorney Docket 20050823-US-NP), filed Dec. 23, 2005, entitled “PRINTING SYSTEM,” by Robert M. Lofthus, et al.;
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/______ (Attorney Docket 20040445-US-NP), filed Jan. 13, 2006, entitled “PRINTING SYSTEM INVERTER APPARATUS”, by Steven R. Moore.
The following references, the disclosures of which are incorporated by reference relate generally to scheduling in a printing system:
U.S. Pat. No. 5,095,369 to Ortiz, et al. discloses a method for enhancing productivity in an electronic printer incorporating finishing activities and operating in a job streaming mode. Printing and collating of sets of original scanned documents are controlled so that collated sets are successively presented by the printer to the finisher nearly coincident with conclusion of the finishing activity being accomplished for a current job. The system uses a predictive algorithm which is used to increase reliability of printer components by cycling down the printer between jobs in situations where the finishing activity for a current job requires an extraordinarily long time to complete compared with the cycle down/cycle up time of the printer.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,701,557 to Webster, et al. describes an image processing apparatus with a controller and plural modules and a method to define a configuration of the image processing machine.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,856,411 to Purvis, et al. discloses a scheduler for picking an itinerary in a printing machine to schedule the processing of sheets through several modules of the printing machine. The scheduler uses hard “must have” policies and soft “desired” policies to select an itinerary.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,696,893 to Fromherz, et al. describes a method for modeling a printing machine specifying a structure model with its physical and software interface and internal resource requirements, and a behavior model to describe capabilities of a component with its description of work units, transformation of work units, timed events, resource allocations, constraints and restrictions.
U.S. application Ser. No. 10/924,458 filed Aug. 23, 2004 entitled PRINT SEQUENCE SCHEDULING FOR RELIABILITY, by Robert M. Lofthus, et al. (A3548-US-NP) discloses a scheduler for a printing system including a plurality of printers which schedules a sequence for printing a plurality of print jobs by the printers based on minimizing printer downtime or maximizing continuous printer run time.
U.S. application Ser. No. 11/137,634 (Attorney Docket 20050281-US-NP), filed May 25, 2005 entitled “PRINTING SYSTEM,” by Robert M. Lofthus, et al., discloses a scheduler for a printing system including a plurality of processing units wherein the system model indicates characteristics of each processing unit. Received print jobs are scheduled for processing via one or more job streams by optimizing a utility function that is dependent upon user selected parameters, the job schedule, and the system model.
The following references, the disclosures of which are incorporated by reference in their entireties, relate to what have been variously called “tandem engine” printers, “parallel” printers, or “cluster printing” (in which an electronic print job may be split up for distributed higher productivity printing by different printers, such as separate printing of the color and monochrome pages), and “output merger” or “interposer” systems: U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,568,246 to Keller, et al., 4,587,532 to Asano, 5,570,172 to Acquaviva, 5,596,416 to Barry, et al.; 5,995,721 to Rourke et al; 4,579,446 to Fujino; 5,489,969 to Soler, et al.; a 1991 “Xerox Disclosure Journal” publication of November-December 1991, Vol. 16, No. 6, pp. 381-383 by Paul F. Morgan; and a Xerox Aug. 3, 2001 “TAX” publication product announcement entitled “Cluster Printing Solution Announced.”
Aspects of the present disclosure in embodiments thereof include apparatus and method embodiments. The apparatus may include a printing system capable of processing a plurality of job streams and sub-jobs within a job stream. The system including one or more marking engines, a hopper, and multiple print media destinations. The system further provides a jobs scheduler for determining a schedule for processing queued print sub-jobs of a job stream using a utility function based on dwell time and a system model indicative of the plurality of interconnected processing units. The plurality of sub-jobs employing one or more of the plurality of sheet processing paths including at least one pre-print batch and at least one direct print batch. A sheet itineraries processor is provided for causing the plurality of interconnected processing units to concurrently move sheets of the concurrent sub-jobs along selected sheet processing paths to process the sheets and to deliver the at least one pre-print batch to the hopper and to deliver the at least one direct print batch to the destination.
The printing method may include determining a plurality of sub-jobs within a job stream, each sub-job having a consecutive sheet segment with disproportional page type and a dwell time and maintaining a system model of a printing system including a plurality of interconnected processing units, the system model indicating characteristics of each processing unit. The method further includes scheduling the plurality of sub-jobs for processing into direct print and pre-print batches and processing the direct print and pre-print batches using the plurality of interconnected processing units whereby at least one pre-print batch is staged in a hopper and at least one direct print batch is transported to a destination. And sequencing the sub-jobs whereby at least one pre-print batch is transferred in its entirety to the destination.
The printing method may include determining a plurality of sub-jobs within a job stream, each sub-job having a consecutive sheet segment with disproportional page type and a dwell time. The method further includes maintaining a system model of a printing system including a plurality of interconnected processing units, the system model indicating characteristics of each processing unit and scheduling the plurality sub-jobs for processing into direct print and pre-print batches. The method further provides for processing the direct print and pre-print batches using the plurality of interconnected processing units whereby at least one pre-print batch is staged in a hopper and at least one direct print batch is transported to a destination and sequencing the sub-jobs whereby at least a selected one of the sub-jobs is processed as both a pre-print batch and a direct print batch.
a is a schematic illustration of one type of print schedule (i.e. first in first out [FIFO]); and,
b is a schematic illustration of another type of print schedule according to the disclosure.
With reference to
In the printing system 6, the presently installed processing units 10, 12, 14, 16 are marking engines (i.e. xerographic). While four marking engines 10, 12, 14, 16 are illustrated, the number of marking engines can be one, two, three, four, five, or more. Providing at least two marking engines typically provides enhanced features and capabilities for the printing system, since marking tasks can be distributed amongst the at least two marking engines. Some or all of the marking engines 10, 12, 14, 16 may be identical to provide redundancy or improved productivity through parallel printing. Alternatively or additionally, some or all of the marking engines 10, 12, 14, 16 may be different to provide different capabilities. For example, the marking engines 10, 12 may be color marking engines, while the marking engines 14, 16 may be black (K) marking engines.
The illustrated marking engines 10, 12, 14, 16 employ xerographic printing technology, in which an electrostatic image is formed and coated with a toner material, and then transferred and fused to paper or another print medium by application of heat and pressure. However, marking engines employing other printing technologies can be provided as processing units, such as marking engines employing ink jet transfer, thermal impact printing, or so forth. The processing units of the printing system 6 can also be other than marking engines; for example, the processing unit 8 is a print media source processing unit that supplies paper or other print media for printing. The processing unit 18 is a finisher that provides finishing capabilities such as collation, stapling, staging, holding, sequencing, folding, stacking, hole-punching, binding, postage stamping, or so forth.
The print media source processing unit 8 includes print media sources 22, 24, 26, 28 connected with the print media conveyor 20 to provide selected types of print media. While four print media sources are illustrated, the number of print media sources can be one, two, three, four, five, or more. Moreover, while the illustrated print media sources 22, 24, 26, 28 are embodied as components of the dedicated print media source processing unit 8, in other embodiments one or more of the marking engines may include its own dedicated print media source instead of or in addition to those of the print media source processing unit 8. Each of the print media sources 22, 24, 26, 28 can store sheets of the same type of print medium, or can store different types of print media. For example, the print media sources 24, 26 may store the same type of large-size paper sheets, print media source 22 may store company letterhead paper, and the print media source 28 may store letter-size paper. The print media can be substantially any type of medium upon which one or more of the marking engines 10, 12, 14, 16 can print, such as: high quality bond paper, lower quality “copy” paper, overhead transparency sheets, high gloss paper, and so forth.
The print media conveyor 20 is controllable to acquire sheets of a selected print medium from the print media sources 22, 24, 26, 28, transfer each acquired sheet to one or more of the marking engine processing units 10, 12, 14, 16 to perform selected marking tasks, transfer each sheet to the finisher 18 to perform finishing tasks. The finisher unit 18 includes multiple print media destinations 30, 32, 34; while three destinations are illustrated, the printing system 6 may include two, three, four, or more print media destinations. The finisher 18 can also include a stager or inserter hopper 35 for holding or staging a batch of media sheets to be inserted in a job sequence at one of the print media destinations. That is, the multiple destinations may include two destinations, three destinations, four destinations, or more destinations. The finisher unit 18 deposits each sheet after processing in the print media destinations 30, 32, 34, and/or hopper 35 which may be trays, pans, or so forth.
The print media conveyor 20 passes through each intermediate processing unit 10, 12, 14, 16 to provide a bypass route by which the sheets can pass through the processing unit without interacting therewith. Branch paths are also provided in each processing unit 10, 12, 14, 16 to take the sheet off the conveyor 20 and into the functional portion of the processing unit and to deliver the processed sheet back to the conveyor 20. In the processing unit 16, the branch paths are presently removed along with the functional portion; however, the bypass portion of the conveyor 20 remains in the processing unit 16 so as to maintain continuity of the print media conveyor 20. The conveyor 20 may also include other branch junction points such as the example branch junction points 36, 38 to enable the conveyor to pass sheets along selected paths in the illustrated multiple-path conveyor configuration. This enables the illustrated arrangement in which the marking engine processing units 10, 12, 14, 16 are arranged two-dimensionally. In a linear arrangement of processing units (not illustrated), the branch junction points 36, 38 are suitably omitted.
The printing system 6 executes print jobs. Print job execution involves printing selected text, line graphics, images, machine ink character recognition (MICR) notation, or so forth on front, back, or front and back sides or pages of one or more sheets of paper or other print media. In general, some sheets may be left completely blank. In general, some sheets may have mixed color and black-and-white printing. Execution of the print job may also involve sequencing the sheets in a certain order. Further, the print job may include holding/staging a stack or batch of media sheets, to be inserted into a direct print job, as a ‘pre-print sub-job’. Still further, the print job may include folding, stapling, punching holes into, or otherwise physically manipulating or binding the sheets. The printing, finishing, paper handing, and other processing operations that can be executed by the printing system 6 are determined by the capabilities of the processing units 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20 and destination units 30, 32, 34, 35 of the printing system 6. Those capabilities may increase over time due to addition of new processing units or upgrading of existing processing units. Those capabilities may also decrease over time due to failure or removal of one or more processing units.
Print jobs can be supplied to the printing system 6 in various ways. A built-in optical scanner 40 can be used to scan a document such as book pages, a stack of printed pages, or so forth, to create a digital image of the scanned document that is reproduced by printing operations performed by the printing system 6. Alternatively, a print job 42 can be electronically delivered to a printing controller 44 of the printing system 6 via a wired connection 46 to a digital network 50 that interconnects example computers 52, 54 or other digital devices. For example, a network user operating word processing software running on the computer 54 may select to print the word processing document on the printing system 6, thus generating the print job 42, or an external scanner (not shown) connected to the network 50 may provide the print job in electronic form. While a wired network connection 46 is illustrated, a wireless network connection or other wireless communication pathway may be used instead or additionally to connect the printing system 6 with the digital network 50. The digital network 50 can be a local area network such as a wired Ethernet, a wireless local area network (WLAN), the Internet, some combination thereof, or so forth. Moreover, it is contemplated to deliver print jobs to the printing system 6 in other ways, such as by using an optical disk reader (not illustrated) built into the printing system 6, or using a dedicated computer connected only to the printing system 6.
The printing system 6 is an illustrative example of a parallel printing system. In general, any number of print media sources, media handlers, marking engines, collators, finishers or other processing units can be connected together by a suitable print media conveyor configuration. While the printing system 6 illustrates a 2×2 configuration of four marking engine processing units 10, 12, 14, 16, buttressed by the media source unit 8 on one end and by the finisher unit 18 on the other end, other physical layouts can be used, such as an entirely horizontal arrangement, stacking of processing units three or more units high, or so forth. Moreover, while in the printing system 6 the marking engine processing units 10, 12, 14, 16 have removable functional portions, in some other embodiments some or all processing units may have non-removable functional portions. It will be appreciated that even if the functional portion is non-removable, the provision of the print media conveyor 20 with bypass paths through each intermediate processing unit enables the processing unit to be taken “off-line” for repair or modification while the remaining processing units of the printing system continue to function as usual.
In some embodiments, separate bypasses for intermediate components may be omitted. The “bypass path” of the conveyor in such configurations suitably passes through the functional portion of a processing unit, and optional bypassing of the processing unit is effectuated by conveying the sheet through the functional portion without performing any processing operations. While the illustrated printing system 6 includes a complex paper handler in the form of the print media conveyor 20, in other embodiments simpler paper handlers can be used. Still further, in some embodiments the parallel printing system may be a tandem or cluster of networked or otherwise logically interconnected printing systems each having its own associated print media source and finishing components. The job scheduling methods and apparatuses disclosed herein are readily applied to substantially any parallel printing system which provides for processing of multiple job streams using sheet processing paths which can concurrently process two or more sheets.
The plurality of processing units 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20 enables the parallel printing system 6 to have a large number of capabilities and features. Each marking engine 10, 12, 14, 16 for example, has associated low-level print settings such as xerographic voltages, fuser temperatures, toner reproduction curves, and so forth. Some of these low-level print settings are optionally modified depending upon the sequence along which a given sheet passes through the printing system 6; for example, it may be advantageous to modify the fusing temperatures of serially performed xerographic processes. At a higher functional level, each marking engine has associated functional parameters such as contrast, resolution, and so forth. Similarly, tandem and cluster printing systems provide a multiplicity of capabilities by providing multiple marking engines, paper handlers, finishers, and so forth.
With continuing reference to
The printing system 6 can in general process multiple jobs concurrently or contemporaneously. Print jobs can be handled concurrently by interleaving sheets of different jobs through a single print engine. Print jobs can also be handled concurrently by parallel printing, in which different ones of the marking engines 10, 12, 14, 16 concurrently or contemporaneously mark sheets of different print jobs. In a printing system such as the printing system 6 that has more than one marking engine, jobs can also be processed concurrently using a combination of interleaving, batch printing, and parallel printing. When two or more print jobs are processed concurrently, each print job is sent to one or more print media destinations designated for that print job. If all of the sheets of a given print job are sent to the same print media destination, then fully automated collation can be performed. This is readily performed with the illustrated modular printing system 6, since the print media conveyor processing unit 20 can be controlled to deposit all sheets of a given print job in the same designated one of the print media destinations 30, 32, 34 and/or in a pre-print hopper 35 prior to deposit in the media destination. Alternatively, the sheets of a given print job can be sent to two or more different designated destinations, and then manually collated or collected. For example, in tandem or cluster printing, it may be advantageous to use two different marking engines each having its own destination for the same print job. In this case, however, the sheets at the two destinations will need to be manually collated or combined after the print job is complete.
To be described hereinafter, routing media directly to one of the media destinations, i.e. 34, and to the pre-print hopper 35 can eliminate the step of manually collating a completed print job, while, for example, the ratio of page types is not proportional to the productivity of the IME types.
In
A first-in, first-out (FlFO) jobs processing schedule in which print jobs are processed in the order they are received may be undesirable, because the FIFO ordering may fail to take advantage of parallel printing capability. Moreover, the optimal choice of allocation of print jobs amongst the job streams may differ depending upon what objectives the user wishes to achieve, and the degree of importance the user places on each objective. For example, one job scheduling allocation may optimize productivity but produces poor image quality consistency since it involves using several different marking engines for a single print job. Another job scheduling allocation may produce good image quality consistency by matching up each print job with a single marking engine, but may introduce sheet processing bottlenecks that reduce productivity. A suitable function optimizer 140 optimizes the utility function 84 respective to the scheduling of print jobs to the job streams 85, 86, 87. In some embodiments, the function optimizer 140 computes a value for the utility function 84 for each possible schedule of print jobs to the plurality of job streams 85, 86, 87, and selects the schedule of print jobs that produces an optimal value of the utility function 84.
Accordingly, the jobs scheduler 82 can schedule the plurality of print jobs queued in the jobs queue 80 to the plurality of job streams 85, 86, 87 using the utility function 84 based on user selected parameters (i.e. dwell time) and a system model 90. Each of the processing units 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20 can include its own corresponding unit controller 108, 110, 112, 114, 116, 118, 120 respectively. The unit controllers maintain a processing operation queue for corresponding processing units.
In particular, the scheduler will assess each job steam and determine potential bottlenecks. Bottlenecks will be exhibited when sequences of consecutive sheets within a job have page type distributions that are substantially different from, or not proportional to, the production rate of page types. For example, bottlenecks can result when system 6 is required to process a job stream 85 of 1440 pages having a requirement of 600 pages black only 85a, followed by 240color prints 85b, and finally 600 pages of black only 85c. If the system capabilities or production rates of page types, for example, enable 400 ppm (using 2 black IMEs) and 60 ppm (using 2 color IMEs), a first bottleneck will result while idle color IMEs wait for the black IMEs to complete the 85a. A second bottleneck occurs when the black IMEs stop as the color IMEs complete the color prints in 85b. Printing of the color prints represents a four minute (240/60) system requirement or production dwell time.
If the color print type sub-job 85b, described above, is in the middle of the entire print job 85, one way to process the job while maintaining image quality consistency is a FIFO order (refer to
In reference now to
Once the job scheduler 82 schedules print jobs queued in the jobs queue 80 to the plurality of sub-jobs 85a, 85b, 85c for job stream 85, one or more high resolution decomposition or raster image processing (RIP) engines 96 convert the first print sub-job scheduled for printing into printable images that are stored in an images buffer 98. As described, the first print sub-job scheduled or queued may correspond to the sub-job requiring the longest dwell (i.e. bottleneck) and may be scheduled for pre-print. The sheet itineraries processor 92 includes a sheet assembler 100 that assembles the printable images into sheet assembly trees or other data constructs representative of the printing operations to be performed on each sheet. A sheet scheduler 102 determines a sheet path for each sheet including information on which of the plurality of interconnected processing units 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20 will perform which sheet processing tasks. For example, one possible sheet path in the system of
Both the job scheduler 82 and the sheet scheduler 102 make use of the system model 90. The system model 90 includes information on the capabilities of the processing units 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20 of the printing system 6. For example, the system model 90 typically includes information on each of the installed marking engines 10, 12, 14, 16, such as the type of marking engine (color marking engine, black marking engine), the maximum sheet throughput rate of the marking engine, the types of print media compatible with the marking engine, the current state of the marking engine, and its range of available states, where these can be changed. For example, marking engines 10, 12 may be in a state for printing normal weight print media but can be changed to a state in which they can accept heavy weight paper with an appropriate time delay. The system model 90 may also include information on the types of print media available in print media source 8, and the characteristics of the finisher 18, such as capabilities for stapling, collating, staging, sequencing, hole-punching, binding, and the like, and other functional characteristics.
The utility function 84 is based on the system model 90, and is optimized using a constrained optimization limited by user-selected constraints 130 (or user preference weighting values 132) and by inherent constraints of the print jobs. A user selected constraint 130 can be input via an optional dedicated user interface 150 of the printing system 6. The optional dedicated user interface 150 can be used for other purposes, such as displaying the state of the printing system 6 as indicated by the system monitor 122. Optionally, a system monitor 122 monitors the printing system 6. The coordinator 104 can update the system model 90 responsive to the system monitor 122 indicating a change in the one or more monitored characteristics of the plurality of interconnected processing units 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20. Some or all of the system monitor functions may also be performed by the unit controllers 108, 110, 112, 114, 116, 118, 120.
For example, user constraints may include a minimum productivity, a minimum image quality consistency, a min/max dwell time, or so forth. In some embodiments, a reweighting processor 136 adjusts the relative weightings of the user preferences to produce reweighted weighting values 138 expressed in monetary value or another selected common metric. The reweighting processor 136 may also reweight the user weightings to promote self-consistency. With reference to
As a qualitative example, a minimum image quality consistency constraint can be set by a consistency mode setting that constrains the use of multiple marking engines within a single print job. If the minimum image quality consistency constraint is above a certain level for a particular print job, then it may be necessary for a single marking engine to be used to print all sheets of that print job so as to meet this high consistency constraint. On the other hand, if the minimum image quality consistency constraint is low for a particular print job, marking tasks for sheets of that print job are optionally divided up amongst two or more marking engines, since image quality inconsistencies between the two marking engines are tolerable. The job scheduler 82 can improve productivity by scheduling print jobs with low image quality consistency constraint values to concurrently executing sub-job streams, since the sheets of those sub-jobs can be staged or sequenced in the hopper 35 prior to transferring to a destination while maintaining sheet ordering and minimizing dwell time.
In some embodiments, the utility function 84 is a mathematical function or computational construct that embodies the dwell time of each sub-job. The sub-job with the longest dwell time can be processed first or concurrently with other sub-jobs. A given print sub-job has a minimum dwell time, defined as the fastest throughput for that print job assuming that all resources of the printing system 6 are dedicated to that print job. For example, in a print job that consists predominantly of black sheets but which also includes some color sheets, the minimum dwell time (Tdwell,min) is achieved by printing some of the black sheets using color marking engines. In some embodiments, a bottleneck will result when the dwell time of one of the sub-jobs exceeds or is of the general duration as the combined dwell times of all the other sub-jobs.
The disclosed jobs scheduling techniques are applicable to substantially any type of printing system or arrangement that provides concurrent sheet processing paths, including tandem printing systems, cluster printing systems, parallel printing systems, modular printing systems, and so forth.
It will be appreciated that various of the above-disclosed and other features and functions, or alternatives thereof, may be desirably combined into many other different systems or applications. Also that various presently unforeseen or unanticipated alternatives, modifications, variations or improvements therein may be subsequently made by those skilled in the art which are also intended to be encompassed by the following claims.
