1. Final Project Review -Senior Design 2
Low Energy Printing
Final Project Review -Senior Design 2
Josh Jones - Project Lead & ME
Jenna Kilroy - Industrial Engineer
Whitney Domigan - Mechanical Engineer
Andrzej Lubaszka - Electrial Engineer
Bill Nowak - Faculty Guide
Project P09505
1<1> 1
April 6, 2019
Senior Design I – Mid Project Review 1

2. Agenda Project Description Final Design Concept System Architecture
Project Development
Current State of Design
Summary of Test Results
Conclusions
Questions

3. Project Description
Re-consider the design of a low energy, cold pressure fuser.
Key Customer Needs and Engineering Metrics:

4. Final Design Concept Top 2 (1/2”) Stabilizing Rollers
(May be parallel or skewed)
Large Bottom (2”) Drive Roller
Bearings
(May be self aligning or flanged)
End Plates
Stabilizing Bars
Drive Shaft

5. Top 1/2” Stabilizing Rollers
System Architecture
Drive System
Coupling System
Torque Sensor
Bottom 2” Roller Shaft
Motor
Bottom 2” Roller
Bottom End Plate
Top End Plate
Top 1/2” Stabilizing Rollers
Captive Screws
Pressure
Pressure
Bottom 2” Roller
Center 1.5” Roller

6. Product Development Process
Phase 0: Planning
Define Project Goal
Develop Customer Requirements
Define Engineering Metrics
Phase 1: Concept Selection
3 Rounds of PUGH Concept Selection
Analysis of existing patens 1
Phase 2: Product Design
ANSYS Modeling
Validation using engineering calculations 2
Phase 3: Final Design
Detailed Solid Works drawings
Finalized BOM 3
MSD 1
Phase 4: Building
Order parts
Machine parts
Assembly and mounting 4
Phase 5: Testing
Multiple tests using DOE
Test parallel and skewed rollers 5
MSD 2
Current State

7. Current State of Project
Design meets all key customer needs except:
Generating a uniform pressure across the nip
Where unable to test:
Life of fuser
Fused image quality:
Gloss
Complete smear tests
Reflectivity
Partial testing with skewed rollers
Complete BOM for working prototype
$ remaining of our original $5, budget

8. Summary of Test Results (Plots of Maximum Pressure Observed by Film)
The long edge feed results in higher pressure with the 24lb paper
But the opposite is true for 20lb paper
There is no compliance in the system no matter what the applied load is
There is a significant increase in the registered pressure when there is compliance
The lower registered pressure seen when the skewed configuration is tested is likely due to the pressure being more uniformly distributed across the nip.
The same total pressure is achieved, but the maximum registered pressure is lower because the pressure is spread across the whole nip

9. Effects of Speed (rpm) on Pressure Applied and Configuration
Summary of Results
Effects of Speed (rpm) on Pressure Applied and Configuration
At higher speeds the skewed roller configuration results in significantly lower pressures than does either configuration at low speeds or the parallel roller configuration at high speeds
The speed of the motor makes a difference in the registered pressure
At lower applied pressures a larger difference is noted than at higher applied pressures

10. Conclusions Current Results: Future Work:
Demonstrate that you can successfully fuse toner to paper using pressure
Identified parameters that have the greatest effect on paper damage and uniformity of pressure
Minimal design and testing cost to customer
Demonstrate the relationship between roller skew and smearing of toner
Analyze the effect of oscillation in load has on pressure uniformity
Analyze the effect of a double hump compare to a single hump
Develop a better metric for determining the success or failure of fuser
Uniform pressure
Fused image
Determine optimal configuration
Degree of skew
Pressure
Compliance
Time constant

11. Questions?