Xerox Igen Speeds

[igen]

What is the rated speed of the Igen 3 printing 4/4 col on 350 Gsm (14" x 20")
Xerox don't seem to publish any exact speeds in their marketing colleteral.

 

[dave4shamrock]

iGen speed

iGen speed

Any time you go longer than 19.5", you cut the throughput by about 1/6th. Even though the press doesn't slow down you can only fit 5 images on the length of the photoreceptor belt instead of 6. Depending on the type of stock at that weight, you may also have to turn on "Enhanced Image Permanence" mode, which actually does slow the press down to allow the fuser to work better on the thick stock. I don't remember exactly how much it slows down - maybe by about 1/3? If the stock is coated you may be able to get away without enabling EIP, though printing both sides may be a challenge without it.

Assuming a 100 page per minute starting speed (letter-size, 4/0), you're looking at about 21 full size 4/4 sheets per minute. Less if you enable the EIP mode.

Hope that helps.

Dave

 

[Nels]

The iGen3 100 or 110 will print a 14 x 20 sheet at a rate of 40 images per minute regardless of weight. EIP mode is not required for any Xerox Recommended Medias.

You would produce 20 4/4 sheets per minute.

 

[Internal_R&D_Analyst]

In the cross direction it can go from 7 to 14.33 inches.

In the process direction-

up to 7.19 inches 120 ppm
up to 8.5 inches 110 ppm
up to 9 inches 100 ppm
up to 10.2 inches is 90 ppm
up to 11.69 inches 80 ppm
up to 13.61 inches 70 ppm
up to 16.18 inches 60 ppm
up to 19.76 inches 50 ppm
up to 20.5 inches 40 ppm

 

[Craig]

I guess that's why my Xerox tech. said there are a lot of 8000AP installs where iGens were, or they were looking at both.

Internal R&D, correct me if I'm using fuzzy math.
Figuring a 12x18 sheet.
iGen = 3000 impressions per hour
8000AP = 2400 impressions per hour

For half the cost the 8000AP is 20% slower, not a bad trade if you don't need the larger sheet.

 

[Bobby]

I am agree with Craig that why I didn't order the igen from Drupa. I though I'll bring two 8000 specially there is no much demand for larger sheets.

 

[Internal_R&D_Analyst]

Craig,

For the i-Gen you are correct we only have one 8000 and it is not a AP so I can not really comment on that one.

Now that the AP is out wights aren't a issue so the gap between these two engines has closed up. I suppose that's what you will get when you have one made by Xerox and one made by Fuji.

This kind of relates to our discussion we recently has with Kodak M700 and 2100, however in this case going down is potentially a better option then going up.

 

[Craig]

Internal, I agree! I wonder if Xerox is having second thoughts about getting something so close in productivity to the iGen? I know it doesn't have the monthly duty cycle, but that could be solved with 2 boxes.

 

[Internal_R&D_Analyst]

The theory out there most people have is that toner can't go much faster if at all then it is right now (110-120 ppm)

Assuming that's true the question might be is Fuji-Xerox developing a Docucolor 90 or 100? Now that would really cross over into the iGen 90 and 110 space. I'm not sure how well Fuji and Xerox really communicate and stratagize on products each develop. From an outside standpoint it would appear that a new product like this would harm the iGen market space.

My guess is that since Xerox released the iGen 4 at Drupa which featured no speed increased, but theoretical efficiency gains that would increase the number of monthly pages possible, they aren't close to getting the iGen physically faster. Now I guess you could say they did show the iGen 288 with two iGen's together but I wouldn't count that. Besides who wants to spend over a million on a device like that?

 

[Craig]

Here is a novel approach, why not make a Super iGen by increasing the sheet size to 19 x 25! That would allow 4 up 8.5 x 11 as well as 2 up 11 x 17, and make toner devices even more competitive with the DI's or smaller format offsets. Keeping the same speed of the press, you just doubled the productivity.

 

[Internal_R&D_Analyst]

Here is a novel approach, why not make a Super iGen by increasing the sheet size to 19 x 25! That would allow 4 up 8.5 x 11 as well as 2 up 11 x 17, and make toner devices even more competitive with the DI's or smaller format offsets. Keeping the same speed of the press, you just doubled the productivity.

That's a good one Craig,

As I have been told by most of the manufacturers many people propose this but there are several difficulties with developing a device like this for some reason. I know one is that it is not a platform modification but a complete new development and build because of the paper size. Maybe now that Q Press showed a B2 toner device at Drupa this will get the others going on developing this. One note the press was deathly slow for the full B2 size, but it did work. Kind of reminded me of the first indigo's with the one feeder in and one stacker out, maybe HP can pick them up too.

 

[smatros]

Here is a novel approach, why not make a Super iGen by increasing the sheet size to 19 x 25! That would allow 4 up 8.5 x 11 as well as 2 up 11 x 17, and make toner devices even more competitive with the DI's or smaller format offsets. Keeping the same speed of the press, you just doubled the productivity.

And increased the marketing potential as well, especially for posters.

 

[Carl Dunaway]

Here is a novel approach, why not make a Super iGen by increasing the sheet size to 19 x 25! That would allow 4 up 8.5 x 11 as well as 2 up 11 x 17, and make toner devices even more competitive with the DI's or smaller format offsets. Keeping the same speed of the press, you just doubled the productivity.

The Digital Color Press you are describing is a Xeikon. It can image 19 x unlimited length and includes a built in sheeter allowing you to produce the 19x25 sheet you described. It's 1200 dpi toner based and comparable output to iGen. Potentially much faster check out their website for exact throughput numbers.

 

[Internal_R&D_Analyst]

It's only faster if you are running 2 sides and it is text weight, the Xeikon slows down the higher the gsm.

Also if you are running a lot of different stocks it would be faster to use a sheetfed device with multiple drawers then having to change a roll all day.

 

[rcm355]

Here is a novel approach, why not make a Super iGen by increasing the sheet size to 19 x 25! That would allow 4 up 8.5 x 11 as well as 2 up 11 x 17, and make toner devices even more competitive with the DI's or smaller format offsets. Keeping the same speed of the press, you just doubled the productivity.

Probably because that makes too much sense. It is very obvious there are NO entrepreneurs working in the corporate world these days.

 

[Carl Dunaway]

It's only faster if you are running 2 sides and it is text weight, the Xeikon slows down the higher the gsm.

Also if you are running a lot of different stocks it would be faster to use a sheetfed device with multiple drawers then having to change a roll all day.

Actually the Xeikon can match iGen speeds up to 300gsm. I won't try to debate the web verses sheet change over times because obviously the Xeikon is designed for high volume. But if you are running 10,000 sheets spending 10-15 minutes splicing a roll is a small price to pay to eliminate paper jams and the need to touch paper for the rest of the day.

 

[Mark]

Xerox had a big digital in the 70's see an article about it in graphic arts online Feb 2009 p46 techwatch.

GAM - Olive ActiveMagazine

 

[Craig]

Xerox had a big digital in the 70's see an article about it in graphic arts online Feb 2009 p46 techwatch.

GAM - Olive ActiveMagazine

That was neat, if they could match the size with today's technology..... I wonder!