This invention relates to single-pass inkjet printing.
In typical inkjet printing, a print head delivers ink in drops from orifices to pixel positions in a grid of rows and columns of closely spaced pixel positions.
Often the orifices are arranged in rows and columns. Because the rows and columns in the head do not typically span the full number of rows or the full number of columns in the pixel position grid, the head must be scanned across the substrate (e.g., paper) on which the image is to be printed.
To print a full page, the print head is scanned across the paper in a head scanning direction, the paper is moved lengthwise to reposition it, and the head is scanned again at a new position. The line of pixel positions along which an orifice prints during a scan is called a print line.
In a simple scheme suitable for low resolution printing, during a single scan of the print head adjacent orifices of the head print along a stripe of print lines that represent adjacent rows of the pixel grid. After the stripe of lines is printed, the paper is advanced beyond the stripe and the next stripe of lines is printed in the next scan.
High-resolution printing provides hundreds of rows and columns per inch in the pixel grid. Print heads typically cannot be fabricated with a single line of orifices spaced tightly enough to match the needed printing resolution.
To achieve high resolution scanned printing, orifices in different rows of the print head can be offset or inclined, print head scans can be overlapped, and orifices can be selectively activated during successive print head scans.
In the systems described so far, the head moves relative to the paper in two dimensions (scanning motion along the width of the paper and paper motion along its length between scans).
Inkjet heads can be made as wide as an area to be printed to allow so-called single-pass scanning. In single-pass scanning, the head is held in a fixed position while the paper is moved along its length in an intended printing direction. All print lines along the length of the paper can be printed in one pass.
Single-pass heads may be assembled from linear arrays of orifices. Each of the linear arrays is shorter than the full width of the area to be printed and the arrays are offset to span the full printing width. When the orifice density in each array is smaller than the needed print resolution, successive arrays may be staggered by small amounts in the direction of their lengths to increase the effective orifice density along the width of the paper. By making the print head wide enough to span the entire breadth of the substrate, the need for multiple back and forth passes can be eliminated. The substrate may simply be moved along its length past the print head in a single pass. Single-pass printing is faster and mechanically simpler than multiple-pass printing.
Theoretically, a single integral print head could have a single row of orifices as long as the substrate is wide. Practically, however, that is not possible for at least two reasons.
One reason is that for higher resolution printing (e.g., 600 dpi), the spacing of the orifices would be so small as to be mechanically unfeasible to fabricate in a single row, at least with current techology. The second reason is that the manufacturing yield of orifice plates goes down rapidly with increases in the number of orifices in the plate. This occurs because there is a not insignificant chance that any given orifice will be defective in manufacture or will become defective in use. For a print head that must span a substrate width of, say, 10 inches, at a resolution of 600 dots per inch, the yield would be intolerably low if all of the orifices had to be in a single orifice plate.
In general, in one aspect, the invention features a single-pass ink jet printing head having an array of ink jet outlets sufficient to cover a target width of a print substrate at a predetermined resolution. There are multiple orifice plates each having orifices. Each of the orifice plates serves some but not all of the area to be printed. The orifices in the array are arranged in a pattern such that adjacent parallel lines on the print medium are served by orifices that have positions in the array along the direction of the print lines that are separated by a distance that is at least an order of magnitude greater than the distance between adjacent orifices in a direction perpendicular to the print line direction.
Implementations of the invention may include one or more of the following features. Each of the orifice plates may be associated with a print head module that prints a swath along the substrate, the swath being narrower than the target width of the substrate. The number of orifices in each of the orifice plates may be within a range of 250 to 4000, preferably between 1000 and 2000, most preferably about 1500. There may be no more than five swath arrays, e.g., three, to cover the entire target width.
Other advantages and features will become apparent from the following description and from the claims.
The quality of printing generated by a single-pass inkjet print head can be improved by the choice of pattern of orifices that are used to print adjacent print lines. An appropriate choice of pattern provides a good tradeoff between the effect of web weave and the possibility of print gaps caused by poor line merging.
As seen in
Web weave can be measured in mils per inch. A weave of 0.2 mils per inch means that for each inch of web travel in the intended direction, the web may travel as much as 0.2 mils to one side or the other. As seen in
If avoiding the effects of web weave were the only concern, a good pattern would minimize the spacing along the print line direction between orifices addressing adjacent print lines. In such an arrangement, the adjacent lines would be printed at nearly the same times and web weave would have almost no effect. Yet, for a head with twelve modules spaced along the print line direction (see
As seen in
As seen in
For non-absorbent web materials, the spreading of a line edge is said to be contact angle limited. (The contact angle is the angle between the web surface and the ink surface at the edge where the ink meets the web surface, viewed in cross-section.) As the line spreads, the contact angle gets smaller. When the contact angle reaches a lower limit (e.g., 10 degrees) line spreading stops.
As adjacent lines merge, the contact angle of the line edges declines. The rate of lateral spread of the merged stripe declines because the reduced contact angle produces higher viscous retarding forces and lower surface tension driving forces. The reduction in lateral spreading can produce white gaps 30 between adjacent lines that have respectively merged with their neighbors on the other side from the gap.
The lateral spread rate of the edges of one or more merged print lines varies inversely with the third power of the number of lines merged. By this rule, when two lines (or stripes) merge into a single stripe, the rate at which the edges of the merged stripe spread laterally is eight times slower than the rate at which the constituent lines or stripes were spreading. However, when the spreading is contact angle limited, the effect of merging can be to stop the spreading. Consequently, as printing progresses various pairs of adjacent lines and/or stripes merge or fail to merge depending on the distances between their neighboring edges and the rates of spreading implied by the numbers of their constituent original lines. For some pairs of adjacent lines and/or stripes, the rate of spreading stops or becomes so small as to preclude the gap ever being filled. The result is a permanent undesired un-printed gap 30 that remains unfilled even after the ink solidifies.
The orifice printing pattern that may best reduce the effects of poor line merging tends to increase the negative effects of web weave.
As seen in
A useful distance along the print line direction between orifices that print adjacent lines would trade off the web weave and line spreading factors in an effective way. As seen in
In the example, the important consideration arises with respect to the printing of drop 62 (
In
As seen in
As seen in
As seen in
In the bottom array module shown in the figure, the position of the second orifice is shown by a dot, but the subsequent orifice locations in that array and in the other arrays are not shown. Also, although
In
The gap in the Y direction between the final orifice (numbered 1536) of the swath 0 module and the first orifice (numbered 1537) of the swath 1 module, 0.989 inches, violates the rule that each orifice is either upstream or downstream along the printing direction of both of the neighboring orifices. On the other hand, the gap in the Y direction between the final orifice (numbered 3072) of the swath 1 module and first orifice (numbered 3073) of the swath 2 module is 4.19 inches, which is good for line merge but not good for web weave.
Thus, in the example of
The range of distances along the web direction discussed above implies a range of delay times between when an ink drop hits the substrate and when the next adjacent ink drops hit the substrate, depending on the speed of web motion along the printing direction. For a web speed of 20 inches per second, the range of distances of 1.2 to 2.0 inches translate to a range of durations of 0.06 to 0.1 seconds.
Each swath module includes an orifice plate adjacent to the orifice faces of the array modules. The orifice plate has a staggered pattern of holes that conform to the pattern described above. One benefit of the patterns of the table of
In
The number of swath arrays and the number of orifices in each swath array are selected to provide a good tradeoff between the scrap costs associated with discarding unusable orifice plates (which are more prevalent when fewer plates each having more orifices are used) and the costs of assembling and aligning multiple swath arrays in a head (which increase with the number of plates). The ideal tradeoff may change with the maturity of the manufacturing process.
The number of orifices in the orifice plate that serves the swath is preferably in the range of 250 to 4000, more preferably in the range of 1000–2000, and most preferably about 1500. In one example the head has three swath arrays each having twelve staggered linear arrays of orifices to provide 600 lines per inch across a 7.5 inch print area. The plate that serves each swath array then has 1536 orifices.
Other embodiments are within the scope of the following claims.
For example, the print head could be a single two-dimensional array of orifices or any combination of array modules or swath arrays with any number of orifices. The number of swath arrays could be one, two, three, or five, for example. Good separations along the print line direction between orifices that print adjacent print lines will depend on the number and spacing of the orifices, the sizes of the array modules, the relative importance of web weave, line merging, and cost of manufacture in a given application, and other factors.
The amount of web weave that can be tolerated is higher for lower resolution printing. Different inks could be used although ink viscosity and surface tension will affect the degree of line merging.
Other patterns of orifices could be used when the main concern is web weave or when the main concern is line merging.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4254409 | Busby | Mar 1981 | A |
4272771 | Furukawa | Jun 1981 | A |
4463359 | Ayata et al. | Jul 1984 | A |
4520373 | Ayata et al. | May 1985 | A |
4534814 | Volpe et al. | Aug 1985 | A |
4601777 | Hawkins et al. | Jul 1986 | A |
4612554 | Poleshuk | Sep 1986 | A |
4638328 | Drake et al. | Jan 1987 | A |
4774530 | Hawkins | Sep 1988 | A |
4786357 | Campanelli et al. | Nov 1988 | A |
4829324 | Drake et al. | May 1989 | A |
4863560 | Hawkins | Sep 1989 | A |
4899181 | Hawkins et al. | Feb 1990 | A |
4935750 | Hawkins | Jun 1990 | A |
5057854 | Pond et al. | Oct 1991 | A |
5059984 | Moore et al. | Oct 1991 | A |
5079563 | Starkweather et al. | Jan 1992 | A |
5103101 | Berglund et al. | Apr 1992 | A |
5113202 | Loce et al. | May 1992 | A |
5218754 | Rangappan | Jun 1993 | A |
5239312 | Merna et al. | Aug 1993 | A |
5257043 | Kneezel | Oct 1993 | A |
5469199 | Allen et al. | Nov 1995 | A |
5625389 | Eriksen et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
5633663 | Matsubara et al. | May 1997 | A |
5696544 | Komuro | Dec 1997 | A |
5724086 | Mackin et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5734394 | Hackleman | Mar 1998 | A |
5771052 | Hine et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5793392 | Tschida | Aug 1998 | A |
5808655 | Haas et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5880756 | Ishii et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
6027203 | Campbell | Feb 2000 | A |
6042223 | Katakura | Mar 2000 | A |
6575558 | Grose et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6592204 | Beliveau et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6637860 | Madeley | Oct 2003 | B1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
40 20 129 | Jan 1992 | DE |
0 339 926 | Nov 1989 | EP |
0 422 925 | Apr 1991 | EP |
0 227 703 | Jun 1991 | EP |
0 476 860 | Mar 1992 | EP |
0 339 026 | Jun 1993 | EP |
0 571 804 | Dec 1993 | EP |
0 278 590 | Mar 1994 | EP |
10315453 | Jan 1998 | EP |
1 165 319 | Feb 2003 | EP |
03-121853 | May 1991 | JP |
3-121853 | May 1991 | JP |
H3-140634 | May 1991 | JP |
04-341856 | Nov 1992 | JP |
10-315453 | Dec 1998 | JP |
WO 9632281 | Oct 1996 | WO |
WO 9819864 | May 1998 | WO |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20050253895 A1 | Nov 2005 | US |