Got to thinking is separate developer better than monocomponant toner/developer. Always thought canon was nice b/c you don't have to change developers but is there a reason other companies don't do it and is one or the other better?
-
-
[Mono-toner]
Mono-toner has developer roller problems in more than one Make and Model of machine.
I know that the old canons NP150/155 had a problems and the Kyocera's FS printer series has similar problems.
[Developer]
Developer in every make and model of machine wears out, or becomes to dirty to continue using it, which means it has to be replaced.
[Dual Developer -Toner System]
I don't have a lot to say about the Kyocera's dual development system at present. It works, the developer still wares out though.
Splitting the developer and toner in the last image phase allows for cleaner copies and less ware and tear in the PCU. In dusty and dirty environments this is a bonus for the Tech.
GDMInauguration to the "AI cancel-culture" fraternity 1997...
•••••• •••[§]• |N | € | o | M | Δ | t | π | ¡ | x | •[§]••• •••••• -
I've always been under the impression that seperate toner/dev is cheaper to run for service & therefore the client.
Monocomponent toner is either aimed at lower-end machines like desktop laser printers with easy end-user changeable items (cheaper outright purchase price), or higher end color-matching, continuous toner supply machines.
My main problem with separate toner/dev is the machines inability to maintain a continuous toner supply (using dev unit toner density sensor to detect low toner, which by then density has dropped off causing noticeable print quality issues/complaints). The monocomponent toner system handles continuous toner supply, especially over higher density pages alot better, but have always seen these machines with higher service costs.
A good point with the new Sharp MX Gemini series coming out (separate toner/dev still) is that toner supply is no longer calculated by only dev unit sensor, but per-page pixel count, laser dpi and temp/humidity sensors as well. This is going to solve alot of the toner density fade off between process control sequences as toner supply will be fairly constant. I have been asking about this for ages!!!
Both have their good points, but I think it comes mainly down to price during manufacture & then how much revenue is made during the machine's life with consumable use. Either more consumables to install/maintain with a separate toner/dev system, or less consumables & ease of service with monocomponent systems.
Good question.... bound to attract haters & fans alike........ hhhmmmmmmm lets see.........Comment
-
Thanks guys. I didn't know about the dual system nor did I know about Sharps new thing either. I thought maybe a separate system would give you more solid blacks b/c you have more developer to play with? Maybe not.
"...bound to attract haters and fans alike..."
Oh boy, I can hardly wait. You should see my post about not having a toner cartridge with a printer I sold. I was shocked at the high emotions and passion that some people (or persons) on here had about it and how horrible of a person I am b/c of it. :-p
Bring it on, I look forward to the responses.Comment
-
Toshiba's newest color series (6530c series) uses separate components but the dev unit is made in such a way that the old (smaller, lighter) dev. material 'floats' the top of the mix and sort of falls off into the waste toner system. Every new toner ctg. is premixed with some developer so you never have to change it. So far it has been a pretty big success.I will not give you service manuals or firmware.Comment
-
I'll agree with wazza on this one. Monocomponent toner systems typically run cleaner, have less toner waste, and less developer unit drive issues. The early Canons sure didn't make as black an image as the dual component systems. We certainly listened to a lot of bitching about how the Canon wasn't as dark a fill as such-and-such (usually Ricoh). Of course they didn't dump toner throughout the whole machine like Ricoh, either.
As time passed the toner particle size decreased, and the first digitals made a damn fine copy. Not as dark as the Ricoh, but it sure was nice not having to vacuum out the whole machine every visit.
IMHO that's about where the industry stands. It sure doesn't hurt my feelings not having to deal with toner density issues on the black & whites. Canon & Kyocera are the cleanest machines on the market.
Toner density issues can be quite challenging to figure out. Toner density can be thrown off by depleted or dead developer, drive gears & clutches, drive couplers, augers, toner sensors, toner sensor cleaners, developer loss due to seals and bearings, magnets breaking loose in the developing roller, developer shift mechanisms (now that goes back ...), temperature due to airflow, controller boards, harness problems, ... did I miss anything? I don't miss that one bit. =^..^=If you'd like a serious answer to your request:
1) demonstrate that you've read the manual
2) demonstrate that you made some attempt to fix it.
3) if you're going to ask about jams include the jam code.
4) if you're going to ask about an error code include the error code.
5) You are the person onsite. Only you can make observations.
blackcat: Master Of The Obvious =^..^=Comment
-
Maybe this has changed, but as far as I know Canon holds the patent for mono-component toner. Which is why only Canon or their affiliates like Selex (or possibly HP?) use mono-component toner.
I might be biased but I love the mono-toner. I work on Canon and Ricoh and Canon's are so clean inside and Ricoh, well I'll just mention part #B2969640.
I agree the dual made a better black a while back but honestly I don't see much difference between Canon and Ricoh B/W anymore. Sharp is the only one that really stands out for making a nice solid black.Comment
-
-
I remember being confused on the first Sharp machine I worked on. Prior to that I had only worked on Canon. Typically as the black started to get grey and light, I'd replace the drum and walla, nice copies again.
When I worked on my first Sharp and first dual component I was a little stumped when the prints were getting light. Do I go for the drum or the developer. Glad I picked developer first or I would have wasted money. Replaced developer and nice solid black text again.
So it makes me kind of wonder, w/o looking at the recommended drum count replacement numbers; if black isn't so dark anymore, is it just a gamble between replacing drum and developer or is there any other way to tell that it's the drum that needs replaced instead of developer?Comment
-
Are you talking about Sharps in particular with this question?
If so, there are numerous ways of adjusting the machine to get more out of the consumable drum/dev life. Most of these are done through sim 44. Also forcing halftone correction & process control will bring the quality back up. If that is still not quite good enough, a color calibration procedure usually does the trick. Almost all of the time, you can bring the machine up to spec without having to replace dev, with these adjustments and as long as the counters for each are OK.Comment
-
On Sharp, and on the color Kyocera machines you can run a simulation to agitate the developer and give current toner density readings.
For Sharp it's sim U25-01 (typically around "100")
For Kyocera it's sim U131, Automatic (difference of less than 25 points between reference and actual)
I'm sure Ricoh has their own counterpart, it's just been too many years.
Visually if you remove the developer unit and rotate it manually, overtoned developer cannot hold all the toner available, so you'll see a cloud of loose toner wafting off the developing roller while agitating. Undertoned developer will either leave you gritty copies, piles of developer beneath the mag roller, or bare spots in the developer brush.
Count is a very good, reliable reference. Perhaps the most reliable.
Just looking at image quality? You can see the same effects from developer, drum, primary, other things ... =^..^=If you'd like a serious answer to your request:
1) demonstrate that you've read the manual
2) demonstrate that you made some attempt to fix it.
3) if you're going to ask about jams include the jam code.
4) if you're going to ask about an error code include the error code.
5) You are the person onsite. Only you can make observations.
blackcat: Master Of The Obvious =^..^=Comment
-
That's interesting b/c on the Canon mag roller post that you responded too, on that mag roller if I turned it the wrong way there was a bunch of dev/toner on the roller, but if I turned it the right way then the blade was obviously smoothing it out.
I've played with the charge numbers and developer numbers and toner density at times to try and get better blacks. You know how sometimes there are positive number settings and sometimes negative ones. I couldn't exactly tell you what those mean but I can make them work. I know I've missed a lot of things from not having worked under a lot of seasoned people. For the most part, I've done a lot of theory classes and mostly self taught things but have had some factory training. What I'm saying is there's many things left to learn b/c I didn't get years to work under a seasoned technician and bug him/her with the hundreds of questions that I could come up with.
Comment
-
Well, I can only speak on the Sharp machines & specs, as I have spent 14 years of my 15 years in this game on Sharp.
Does the developer get used faster by changing the frequency of process control or manual charge settings? No.
The MX color developers are by far the best devs I have ever seen. On most machines, you can get away with replacing the drum unit, reset that particular color dev at the same time, run a forced process control and/or calibration, and the overall quality is as good as if you had changed the dev. You can usually get away with 2, sometimes 3 dev lifes over the specification life. I have many machines running adjusted process control frequencies from standard setting and there is no difference in how long the dev lasts for.
I'll always be a big fan of the separate toner/dev system. I cant speak of other manufacturer specs or general life of developer, but in theory you should be able to get more life out of the dev than specified. If the machine is correctly calibrated, and has drum units replaced at the correct intervals, the devs are usually not messy and the machine is generally clean internally.
Just dont vac a dev unit on a toner/dev separate system. The chances of blowing the dev unit toner density sensor is quite high. Once this goes, the machine will dev adjust OK, but within a few days goes so overtoned its a nightmare.Comment
-
I started working on Kyocera machines aboout 3 years ago after working on Ricoh/Lanier/Toshiba for many years before. I don't intend to go back to the toner dusting pigs.
Oh also Sharp for a very short time."Some days you get the bear, some days the bear gets you."
Cdr. William RikerComment
Comment