Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

P10505 – Cold Pressure Fusing II Performance Review Team Fusion 5/7/2010.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "P10505 – Cold Pressure Fusing II Performance Review Team Fusion 5/7/2010."— Presentation transcript:

1 P10505 – Cold Pressure Fusing II Performance Review Team Fusion 5/7/2010

2 Introduction Two results are analyzed, standard deviation to indicate pressure uniformity and average pressure Presentation Outline – Present data – Justify ANOVA assumptions – Analyze significant factors – Analyze interactions – Conclusions

3 Comparison of Average Pressure and Standard Deviation across Skew Angles

4 Signal to Noise Ratios S/N = µ/σ = Std Dev/Mean Standard Deviation Average Pressure S/N N/S

5 Average Pressure vs. Skew Angle Note: Standard deviation is not the analysis of variance between these average pressure data points. It is the analysis of pressure variations across the entire scan.

6 Standard Deviation vs. Skew Angle

7 Main Effects Plot for Standard Deviation

8 Skew Angle Curve Fit

9 ANOVA Assumptions These assumptions must be justified to perform an Analysis of Variance. – Normal distribution – Constant variance – Constant mean – Independent data

10 Justification of ANOVA Assumptions

11

12 ANOVA Table for Standard Deviation Analysis of Variance for Average Pressure, using Adjusted SS for Tests SourceDFSeq SSAdj SSAdj MSFP Skew Angle Load Orientation Compliance Skew Angle*Load Skew Angle*Orientation Skew Angle*Compliance Load*Orientation Load*Compliance Orientation*Compliance Skew Angle*Load*Orientation Skew Angle*Load*Compliance Skew Angle*Orientation*Compliance Load*Orientation*Compliance Skew Angle*Load*Orientation*Compliance Error Total Legend Green: P-value < Orange: P-value < White: P-value > 0.010

13 Main Effects Plot for Standard Deviation

14 Interaction Plot for Standard Deviation

15

16

17

18 ANOVA Table for Average Pressure Analysis of Variance for Standard Deviation, using Adjusted SS for Tests SourceDFSeq SSAdj SSAdj MSFP Skew Angle Load Orientation Compliance Skew Angle*Load Skew Angle*Orientation Skew Angle*Compliance Load*Orientation Load*Compliance Orientation*Compliance Skew Angle*Load*Orientation Skew Angle*Load*Compliance Skew Angle*Orientation*Compliance Load*Orientation*Compliance Skew Angle*Load*Orientation*Compliance Error Total Legend Green: P-value < Yellow: P-value < Orange: P-value < White: P-value > 0.010

19 Main Effects for Average Pressure

20 Interaction Plot of Average Pressures

21 Conclusions Abaqus model was on target – Experimental results point to 1.91° as the optimal skew angle to maximize pressure uniformity The average pressure value changes based on the configuration, but several configurations fell in the acceptable pressure range

22 Optimal Design Standard Deviation – Main Effects: 1.9 deg, portrait, 130 lbs, k=270 – 2 nd Order Effects: 1.9 deg, portrait, 170 lbs, k = 270

23 Optimal Design Average Pressure – Main Effects: Load is variable but ~140 lbs, Orientation is variable, no specified preference Compliance is variable but ~415 lbs/in, by interpolation – Interaction effects agree with main effects, except landscape orientation is preferred P-value for the average pressure DOE is P-value for the standard deviation DOE is 0.000

24

25

26 Representative 1.4° skew angle pressure pattern (U4) 1.4 ° skew angle, k = 270 lb/in (gray), 170 lbs load, landscape

27 Representative 1.9° skew angle pressure pattern (U16) 1.9 ° skew angle, k = 270 lb/in (gray), 170 lbs load, landscape

28 Representative 2.4° skew angle pressure pattern (U24) 1.9 ° skew angle, k = 270 lb/in (gray), 170 lbs load, landscape

29 Average Pressure vs. Test Configuration

30 Standard Deviation vs. Test Configuration

31 Probability Plot of Average Pressure

32 Probability Plot of Standard Deviation

33 Standard Deviation vs. Test Configuration

34 Residuals vs. Test Configuration

35 Standard Deviation vs. Test Configuration

36 Customer Needs

37

38 Engineering Specifications Engr. Spec. # ImportanceSource Specification (description)Unit of MeasureMarginal ValueIdeal Value ES41Customer NeedPrototype will fuse print across 95% of the page Percentage fused, Width of unfused,90% fusing95% fusing ES61Customer NeedPrototype will vary in nip pressure less than 10% Width of Pressure Indication, Xerox Metric10% variation5% variation ES81Customer Need Prototype must be capable of adjusting to three skew anglesNumber of Settings2 anglesAnalog ES101Customer Need Prototype must adhere to Abaqus model created by XeroxYes/NoN/AYes ES121Customer NeedPrototype must be able to reach a 1.9° skew angleDegrees1.8°-2.0°1.9° ES141Customer Need Prototype must be adjustable to the same skew angle to a 1/10th degree for ~25 runsStandard Deviation 1/5th degree variation 1/10th degree variation ES32Customer NeedPrototype will minimally calendar printQualitativeModerateNone ES52Customer Need Prototype will produce trailing edge wrinkles less than once every twenty printsNumber 1 wrinkle every 10 printsNo wrinkles ever ES113Customer NeedFeed rate must not decrease by more than 15%Torque 15% reduction of speed 5% reduction of speed ES131Implied Prototype must be dimensionally stable for a load of 4000 psiForceVibrationStationary 1Customer Need Prototype vibration will be less than 3 lbs as measured by the load cells.Force5 lbs0 lbs ES94Implied Prototype will take less than 60 secs of user time to set up printTime Required120 sec0 secs ES13ImpliedPrototype must be manufacturable within ~2 weekTime Required, Y/N4 weeks2 week ES71Customer Need Prototype must accommodate both 20 and 24 lb paper while meeting all other specificationsYes/No Accomodates 20 and 24 lb paper Accomodates all paper weights ES153Implied Prototype must be able to print >1000 copies without failure Life Cycle (Number of Prints) 500 copies1000 ES24Customer NeedPrototype must cost less than $3000Dollars$3,000$1,500 Importance Scale: 1-Highest, 4-Lowest

39 Final Design

40 Recommendations


Download ppt "P10505 – Cold Pressure Fusing II Performance Review Team Fusion 5/7/2010."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google