Set off after USPS mail

[JohnNortel]

Have any of you encountered a problem with set off from a folded piece after it has gone through the mail sorting? We are getting customer feedback that the text image is transferring onto itself.

When I look at mail I get (bills) I do see set off as well from a variety of different types of printers. I know this can't just be my presses since I see it in so many different pieces. Is there anything new in the post office?

 

[ajaylamb]

We have seen this problem too. Is this Digital printing or offset printing you are having the problems with? We have found that in digital printing the use of very smooth coated paper will help or best yet is to use uncoated paper. I have not seen a lot of offset with our offset mailing but we do tend to coat much of our coated stocks here. I will look for further information and perhaps I can help further.

 

[JohnNortel]

This is primarily with our toner based digital press. We print newsletters so it's primarily text that is landing right on top of text. It is a Canon ImageRunner 110.

 

[MailGuru]

I would rather think it is a QC issue coming off the IR-110. Toner, unlike ink, either adhere's to paper via electro-static photon charge, or, it doesn't. It may crack or rub-off if your fuser pressure and heat aren't at the correct setting for your paper, or, your are using a linen stock that prevents the toner to be fused into the paper fiber, but, it would be a physical impossibility for it to "set-off" or "adhere itself" to another sheet of paper without the application of the correct electro-charge. I have experienced instances where the USPS mail sorting equipment has scratched, rubbed or damaged our mail pieces, but, I've never seen their equipment actually transpose the print to other mail pieces or sheets of paper.

 

[ajaylamb]

I believed this same thing that with toner it was either fused or not and that is it. What I found is that the texture of the paper can create what looks like set-off. Let me explain. If you take a blank sheet of paper and double it over on itself and rub the 2 pieces of paper side to side some paper has a lot of friction due to the makeup of the top coat of the paper (matte and satins). If you print toner on a sheet then grab a far corner of the same sheet and rub it across the toner you will get some "chalking" effect or toner transfer, on a high friction paper (works like sand paper). Now if you take a high friction sheet (dull cover) and create an invitation card out of 100# cover weight stock by printing the inside then folding the sheet in half and putting it into an envelope you may get the set-off look if sent through the USPS equipment. What actually happens is not traditional set-off, from what I can tell, it is actually the equipment in the post office pressing the, now 4 sheets of paper (folded sheet and 2 sides of envelope) together very tightly, then micro-rubbing (new term) all the sheets together with all the heat built up in the sorting machine and viola you have what appears to be set-off. The only way I have found to reproduce this is to print samples and mail them, pressure and heat alone will not do this. I have found that a good uncoated sheet helps the most as the toner can sit into the fibers of the sheet eliminating raised toner areas. I hope this helps you to troubleshoot, but as you can tell, I have worked with this quite a bit and thought it was mostly impossible till I saw it with my own eyes.

 

[MailGuru]

Problem is, there is no USPS sorting equipment, (that I'm aware of), that actually "compresses" paper to the extent that a folder in the bindery would. You say you are running newsletters, mostly. Assuming that you would be running them duplex, on an 11 x 17 (simple 4-page newsletter format), that would mean your 1st fold would be in half (to an 8 1/2 x 11), then drop to the right angle where you would fold the two pre-folded sheets in half again (to a letter-size 5 1/2 x 8 1/2). The pressure on that second set of rollers, (4-panel thickness) could, conceivably, apply enough pressure to to yield the effect, especially if you've got the rollers too tight. Mail sortation equipment simply snaps a single thickness piece from the right (leading edge), one at a time, and sends it down a long OCR and sortation path (again, one at a time) as it is standing straight up on it's final folded edge. There are no pressure points at the top half of the piece, only the bottom. Have you done a random check for the set-off after folding, by unfolding a few, and checking the insides prior to being delivered to the post office?

 

[ilovemedia]

In contrary to what MailGuru said, there are actually USPS sorting machines in the United States. I know one. FSM 1000 Flat Sorting Machine. Maybe that could solve the problem.

 

[MailGuru]

I never said there are no sorting machines in the United States. All USPS sortation facilities have several. What I said was, the sorting machines that they have do not "compress" paper, or a mail piece any more than your own bindery equipment would. This would be even more true for FSM 1000 (or, Flats Sequence Method 1000) sorter. However, If JohnNortel was folding his newsletters to a "letter-size" piece, it would not be sorted by the USPS on the FSM 1000. If he is mailing them flat and unfolded, they would be processed on the FSM 1000.

 

[JohnNortel]

This is legal size 80 lb cougar folded in thirds.

It creates 6 panels for the customer newsletter.

 

[Russ_G]

I have a piece sitting in front of me now that has that exact same issue, it was a variable mailing with an insert in it besides a folded letter, the insert offset onto the letter and the security tint from the inside of the envelope offset onto the letter. It was all ran on a nexpress on coated digital stock and hand inserted after being machine folded, we have samples of the pieces before going through the mail and they are perfect. This is the first time we have seen this and have been doing this type of mailing for awhile, we have received complaints from the customer regarding this, we are going to try coating the next mailing on the nexpress, we will send ourselves samples to see if this will help.

 

[MailGuru]

Was the additional insert printed on the Nexpress also (like the letter) or, was it offset?

 

[MailGuru]

It beginning to look like all roads lead to the USPS. No new equipment that I know of at the USPS, however, they are in the midst of changing their processes, which, may, or may not, have an unintentional side effect. They are closing sortation facilities around the US and consolidating them to other sortation facilities. Without getting in to too much detail, here's what's happening:

Under the old traditional USPS model, most sortation facilities actually sat empty throughout most of the day. Mail trucks would arrive in the late evening, sortation employees would work through the night to have the mail sorted and ready for dispatch/delivery the next morning. Then employees would leave, and the facility would sit empty again, until the next evening.

Under the new model, typical mail delivery would be retarded by 1-day. Sortation facilities are staffed with sorters and machine operators 24/7 (by transferring many from other closed facilities). Trucks deliver the mail to the facilities, where the sortation process now is taking place throughout the day, as well as at night. This results in the maintaining of fewer facilities, better use of their workforce, and millions in reduced operating costs (theoretically).

However, this also means that mail sorting equipment that once ran for 8 to 10 hours a day, is now running virtually 24 hours a day. Could it be possible that the added run-time and machine-stress causes that equipment to run much hotter than usual? I don't know, but, I'll poke around and see what I can find out.

 

[Russ_G]

Was the additional insert printed on the Nexpress also (like the letter) or, was it offset?

The insert was also printed on the nexpress on coated cover stock.