Document Revision No.: 6 Revised: 02/20/09 RIT KGCOE MSD Program
P09503 Electrophotographic Development and Toning Station
Test Plans & Test Results
By: David Schwartz, Min-Shi Hsiao, Rachel Chrash, Andrew Kearns,
Dan Summers, Ruth Gay and Phil Lopez
Table of contents
Test Plan 2
1.1. Overview 2
1.2. Project Description; Sub-Systems/ Critical Components Being Tested 3
1.3. Approval; Guide, Sponsor 3
1.4. Test Strategy 4
1.5. References 17
1.6 Executive Summary 18
Test Plan
1.1. Overview
1.1.1. The intent of this document is to specify the testing equipment, strategies, procedures and results to evaluate and verify the Electrophotographic Development and Toning Station specifications, derived from the needs of the customer.
1.2. Project Description; Sub-Systems/ Critical Components Being Tested
The following list specifies the functional sub-systems and critical components encompassing the Electrophotographic Development and Toning Station.
1.2.1. System Level
1.2.1.1 Operational
1.2.1.2 Is Safe
1.2.1.3 Can monitor key process parameters
1.2.1.4 Automation of Parameter Settings
1.2.1.5 Can operate and monitor machine from one interface
1.2.1.6 Easy to learn to use
1.2.1.7 Areas for system upgrades are identified and documentation for upgrade procedures available where applicable
1.2.1.8 Maintenance of system is documented
1.2.1.9 Device is documented by both drawings and Bills of Materials
1.2.1.10 Operation of Device Is Documented
1.2.1.11 Toner clean up
1.2.1.12 Inventory and Status Report of current systems
1.2.1.13 Monitor charge of the photoconductor
1.2.1.14 Minimizes user intervention during Charging
1.2.1.15 Minimizes user intervention during Discharge
1.2.1.16 Minimizes user intervention during Development
1.2.1.17 Minimizes user intervention during Transfer
1.2.1.18 Minimizes user intervention during maintenance
1.2.2 Charging
1.2.2.1 Vary charging voltage
1.2.2.2 Vary charging current
1.2.3 Exposure
1.2.3.1 Vary exposure
1.2.3.2 Improve exposure subsystem
1.2.4 Development
1.2.4.1 Can accommodate different toner materials
1.2.4.2 Vary development voltage
1.2.4.3 Vary development current
1.2.4.4 Can use multiple toner stations
1.2.4.5 Incorporate other manufacturer’s development systems
1.2.5 Transfer
1.2.5.1 Vary transfer voltage
1.2.5.2 Vary transfer current
1.2.5.3 Paper delivery system
1.2.5.4 Ability to accommodate different types of media
1.3. Approval; Guide, Sponsor
Approved by:
Team Members – David Schwartz, Min-Shi Hsiao, Rachel Chrash, Andrew Kearns, Dan Summers, Ruth Gay and Phil Lopez
Guide – Dr. Marcos Esterman
Sponsor – PRISM Lab
1.4. Test Strategy
1.4.1. Product Specification to be Tested / Unit / Marginal Performance Target / Ideal Performance Target
1.4.1.1 Human Shock/Short Faults Identified during FMEA Analysis/#/<5/0
1.4.1.2 Pinch Point Faults Identified during FMEA Analysis/#/<2/ 0
1.4.1.3 Insufficient or Not Present Warning Labels identified during FMEA Analysis/#/<1/0
1.4.1.4 Time to Shut Down System/Seconds/<2 /<2
1.4.1.5 Steps required to Shut Down System/#/1/1
1.4.1.6 Surrounding Lab Area has been organized using 5S/1, 2, 3, 4 or 5/>3/equal to 5
1.4.1.7 EDTS has been organized using 5S/1, 2, 3, 4 or 5/>3/equal to 5
1.4.1.8 Amount of ozone present in air/ppm/<0.05ppm /<.001ppm
1.4.1.9 PC/Transfer Drum Measurement Resolutions/%/20%/10%
1.4.1.10 Passes Standard "EP Process" Test/Toner Present/Yes/Yes
1.4.1.11 Charging Voltage Range/kV/0-10kV/0-10kV
1.4.1.12 Charging Current Range/Amp/0-200uA/0-200uA
1.4.1.13 ---
1.4.1.14 Number of toners useable on machine/# >=1/equal to 4
1.4.1.15 Development Voltage Range/kV /0-10kV /0-10kV
1.4.1.16 Development Current Range/Amp/0-200uA/0-200uA
1.4.1.17 Number of toner stations functioning/#/4/4
1.4.1.18 Transfer Voltage Range/kV/0-10kV/0-10kV
1.4.1.19 Transfer Current Range/Amp/0-200uA/0-200uA
1.4.1.20 LEERS Usability Test Result/Subj/Easy to Use/Extremely Easy to Use
1.4.1.21 User Manual Present/% /85%/100%
1.4.1.22 % of Toner left on Photoconductor after Transfer/%/<10%/equal to 0%
1.4.1.23 % of Toner left on Transfer Drum after Media Transfer/%/<10%/equal to 0%
1.4.1.24 Power is controllable/ Yes/No /Yes/Yes
1.4.1.25 Variable Test Mode/0-99/0-99/0-99
1.4.1.26 Variable Exposure Time/0-9/0-9 /0-9
1.4.1.27 Manual Control of Paper Feed (Part of UI)/ Yes/No /Yes/Yes
1.4.1.28 Manual Control of Lamp Exposure (Part of UI)/ Yes/No /Yes/Yes
1.4.1.29 Manual Picture Exposure (Part of UI)/ Yes/No /Yes/Yes
1.4.1.30 Manual Control of Pretransfer Lamp (Part of UI)/ Yes/No /Yes/Yes
1.4.1.31 Manual Control of Transfer Drum Drive Engage (Part of UI) / Yes/No /Yes/Yes
1.4.1.32 Manual Control of Transfer Drum Drive Bias (Part of UI) / Yes/No /Yes/Yes
1.4.1.33 Manual Control of Backup Roller Engage (Part of UI) / Yes/No /Yes/Yes
1.4.1.34 TC Measurement of Station 1-4 (Part of UI) / Yes/No /Yes/Yes
1.4.1.35 Station 1-4 Drive Control (Part of UI) / Yes/No /Yes/Yes
1.4.1.36 Station 1-4 Rate Control (Part of UI) / Yes/No /Yes/Yes
1.4.1.37 Drive Speed Control Functional (Part of UI) / Yes/No /Yes/Yes
1.4.1.38 Pneumatic Pressure Gauges Functional (Part of UI) / Yes/No /Yes/Yes
1.4.1.39 Number of screws needed to detach ozone filter for removal and cleaning/#/4/4
1.4.1.40 Charge on photoconductor after charging and exposure /% difference from Ideal Value/10%/0%
1.4.1.41 ESVM Measurement Resolution /DPI/0.254/2.5
1.4.1.42 LED Exposure System/Ratio of Intensities/<100/1
1.4.1.43 Size of imaged PC/L x W/7" x 4"/9" x 4"
1.4.1.44 Match speed of Drum to Speed of PC/% difference between speed of PC and Speed of Drum/5%/0%
1.4.1.45 UI Includes Automatic and Manual Control of Device/ Yes/No /Yes/Yes
1.4.1.46 Ability to view current status of machine during operation/ Yes/No/ Yes/Yes
1.4.1.47 Ability to control system with current controls and improved controls/ Yes/No /Yes/Yes
1.4.2. Product Specification to be Tested, Relevant Functional Sub-systems, Required Testing Equipment, Testing Procedure, Test Results
1.4.2.1 Human Shock/Short Faults Identified during FMEA Analysis
Procedure
1. Conduct FEMA analysis following the implementation of all safety measures.
2. Identify and sum up human shock/short hazard areas that are not marked.
Results
The secondary FMEA analysis was conducted in an identical manner as was performed during the initial phase of the design process. Each system where a failure or fault was identified during the first phase of the design process was revisited. Due to the nature of the modifications on the EDTS, some systems were removed due to upgrade, such as toning speed control. This control is now located on the PC as opposed to a tangible circuit board. The results of the full FMEA analysis are below. Additional safety signs were added due to additional customer need.
Old System / New System / Reduction / Reduction %Shock/Short Effect Identified / 18 / 3 / 15 / 83.33%
Pinch Point Effect Identified / 2 / 0 / 2 / 100.00%
Warning Sign Effect Identified / 4 / 0 / 2 / 100.00%
According to the specification set in 1.4.1.1 – 1.4.1.3, the test results are within the ideal value.
1.4.2.2 Pinch Point Faults Identified during FMEA Analysis
Procedure
1. Conduct FEMA analysis following the implementation of all safety measures.
2. Identify and sum up pinch point hazard areas that are not marked.
Results
See 1.4.2.1
1.4.2.3 Insufficient or Not Present Warning Labels identified during FMEA Analysis
Procedure
1. Conduct FEMA analysis following the implementation of all safety measures.
2. Identify and sum up warning labels that are not marked.
Results
See 1.4.2.1
1.4.2.4 Time to Shut Down System
Procedure
1. Turn on the EDTS
2. Begin timer.
3. Instruct test user to shut down the system.
4. Stop timer.
5. Count seconds it took for user to shut down the system.
Results
The test results of this experiment indicate that a user operating the machine from the desired location, against the wall, will be able to shut down the machine within one to two second. There is an emergency stop located next to the operator terminal as well as on the far side of the EDTS.
According to the specifications set forth in 1.4.1.4, the test results are within the ideal value.
1.4.2.5 Steps Required to Shut Down System
Procedure
1. Turn on the EDTS
3. Instruct test user to shut down the system.
4. Count movements it took user to shut down the system.
Results
A similar procedure was followed in 1.4.2.4. The results of the test indicate that in order to terminate the EP process the user has to perform one movement to shut down the system. This step is to engage one of four stop buttons located on the machine. Three of the four include an emergency stop. Two of the emergency stops are located at either end of the machine with an additional stop located next to the power button.
According to the specifications set forth in 1.4.1.5, the test results are within the ideal value.
1.4.2.6 Surrounding Lab Area has been organized using 5S
Procedure
1. Perform visual inspection of surrounding lab area to ensure that all relevant items used by EDTS are sorted, set, shined, standardized and sustained.
2. Ensure that instructions are present that show future users how to sustain the 5S System.
Results
See 1.4.2.7
1.4.2.7 EDTS has been organized using 5S
Procedure
1. Perform a visual inspection of the EDTS area to ensure that all areas, systems and controls are sorted, set, shined, standardized and sustained.
2. Ensure that instructions are present to show future users how to sustain the 5S system.
Results
The 5S methodology has been applied to the EDTS and surrounding area. The EDTS and all associated tools have been sorted based on their functionality, as all unneeded tools are not located near the EDTS. The EDTS and surrounding area has been set so that all pertinent systems are labeled as to assure maximum efficient workflow. The EDTS and surrounding areas have been shined as all parts to the system have a place, such as the relays, DAQ, PC and sensors. The standardization is represented in the consistency of all system labels, EP and High Voltage for example. Sustaining the system can be seen in the user manual. Therefore all five S’s have been met.
According to the specifications set forth in 1.4.1.7-1.4.1.8, the rest results are within specifications.
1.4.2.8 Amount of ozone present in air
Procedure
1. Select areas surrounding the charging system where ozone is emitted.
2. Select various corona and grid power levels.
3. Measure ozone at various power levels
4. Determine ozone concentration in ppm.
5. Compare to EPA level.
Results
-The device used was an ozone detector that can accurately detect O3 once it reaches amounts of 0.5ppm .
-There were no detectable ozone amounts for both tests ran.
-It is noted that around 0.2ppm is when throat and nasal irritation may occur. (This was not experienced)
-0.1ppm is the allowable amount in industrial work places, and since we hadn’t seen the effects of 0.2ppm we can assume it falls under the amount of 0.1ppm.
According to the specifications set forth in 1.4.1.8, the test results are inconclusive.
1.4.2.9 PC/Transfer Drum Measurement Resolutions
Procedure
1. Ensure that the encoders attached to the drive screw and transfer drum read the same speed during operation as so the image transferred does not smudge.
Results
The encoders were used to determine the appropriate PWM to send to the motors of the drive screw and transfer drum. During the standard EP process test, the drum and drive screw operated at the same speed.
According to the test specifications set forth in 1.4.1.9, the test results are within specifications
1.4.2.10 Passes Standard "EP Process" Test
Procedure
1. Select default settings in LabView interface.
2. Click start.
3. Ensure that the entire LabView/EP Process workflow established by team is carried out by the control system.
Results
During the project demonstration on Friday, February 13, 2009, the EP process was successfully demonstrated to the customer and guide. A photoreceptor was charged, exposed, developed and toner was transferred from the development station to paper. The process was completed automatically. The automatic execution of the EP process was completed according to workflow established by the team during concept development.
According to the specifications set forth in 1.4.2.10, the test results are within specifications.
1.4.2.11 Charging Voltage Range
Procedure
1. Turn on Corona and Grid Power Supply
2. Set potential dial to maximum possible value.
3. Measure charge observed on Corona and Grid.
Results
The power supplies for the Corona, Grid, Toner Bias and Transfer station were activated, voltage and current set to arbitrary values and then the High Voltage was engaged for each supply. The multimeter was then used to measure the voltage across each station, respectively. The voltage measured across each station, corona, grid, toner bias and transfer matched the voltage set on the power supply.
According to the specifications set forth in 1.4.2.11, et al, the test results are within specification.
1.4.2.12 Charging Current Range
Procedure
1. Turn on Corona and Grid Power Supply
2. Set current dial to maximum possible value.
3. Measure charge observed on Corona and Grid.
Result
See 1.4.2.11
1.4.2.13 ---
1.4.2.14 Number of toning stations useable on machine
Procedure
1. Count number of toning stations on machine that are functional.
Results
Currently only one development station is on the machine
According to the specifications set forth in 1.4.1.14 and 1.4.1.17, the test results are not within specifications.
1.4.2.15 Development Voltage Range
Procedure
1. Identify voltage going to Toner using multimeter.
Results
See 1.4.2.11
1.4.2.16 Development Current Range
Procedure
1. Identify current going to Development Station using multimeter.
Results
See 1.4.2.11
1.4.2.17 Number of toner stations functioning
See 1.4.2.14
1.4.2.18 Transfer Voltage Range
Procedure
1. Turn on Transfer Power Supply
2. Set voltage dial to maximum possible value.
3. Measure voltage observed on Transfer drum.
Results
See 1.4.2.11
1.4.2.19 Transfer Current Range
Procedure
1. Turn on Transfer Power Supply
2. Set current dial to maximum possible value.
3. Measure current observed on Transfer drum.
Results
See 1.4.2.11
1.4.2.20 LEEERS Usability Test Result
Procedure
1. Formulate usability test for user interface that include metrics on learn ability, effectiveness, efficiency, errors, retention and satisfaction.
2. Evaluate results.
Results
When viewing the automated user interface in conjunction with the manual test panel it was clear that test on procedural metrics were clearly met. The interface is easily viewable, easy to understand, can be used with little chance of computer error, and will easily satisfy the user. During the project demonstration, 2/13/09, the engineer responsible for designing the UI informed Dr Arney that anyone with knowledge of a computer would be able to operate the device.