[0001] The present invention relates to ink-jet printers, and, more particularly, to a structure
for controlling fluid refill of firing chambers, minimizing meniscus travel and minimizing
cross-talk between adjacent nozzles in the printhead used to fire droplets of ink
toward a print medium.
[0002] When designing printheads containing a plurality of ink-ejecting nozzles in a densely
packed array, it is necessary to provide some means of isolating the dynamics of any
given nozzle from its neighbors, or else cross-talk will occur between the nozzles
as they fire droplets of ink from elements associated with the nozzles. This cross-talk
seriously degrades print quality and hence any providently designed ink-jet printhead
must include some features to accomplish decoupling between the nozzles and the common
ink supply plenum so that the plenum does not supply a cross-talk path between neighboring
nozzles.
[0003] Further, when an ink-jet printhead is called upon to discharge ink droplets at a
very high rate, the motion of the meniscus present in each nozzle must be carefully
controller so as to prevent any oscillation or "ringing" of the meniscus caused by
refill dynamics from interfering with the ejection of subsequently fired droplets.
Ordinarily, the "settling time" required between firings sets a limit on the maximum
repetition rate at which the nozzle can operate. If an ink droplet is fired from a
nozzle too soon after the previous firing, the ringing of the meniscus modulates the
quantity of ink in the second droplet out. In the case where the meniscus has "overshot"
its equilibrium position, a firing superimposed on overshoot yields an unacceptably
large ejected droplet. The opposite is true if the firing is superimposed on an undershoot
condition: the ejected droplet is too small. Therefore, in order to enhance the maximum
printing rate of an ink-jet printhead, it is necessary to include in its design some
means for reducing meniscus oscillation so as to minimize the settling time between
sequential firings of any one nozzle.
[0004] Previous approaches to the problem of cross-talk, or minimizing inter-nozzle coupling,
can be separated into three classes: resistive, inertial, and capacitive. The following
is a brief discussion of each method and a critique of the typical embodiments of
these methods.
[0005] Resistive decoupling uses the fluid friction present in the ink feed channels as
a means of dissipating the energy content of the cross-talk surges, thereby preventing
the dynamics of any single meniscus from being strongly felt by its nearest neighbors.
In the prior art, this is typically implemented by making the ink feed channels longer
or smaller in cross-section than the main supply plenum. While these are simple solutions,
they have several drawbacks. First, such solutions rely upon fluid motion to generate
the pres sure drops associated with the energy dissipation; as such, they can only
attenuate the cross-talk surges, not completely block them. Thus, some cross-talk
"leakages" will always be present. Second, any attempt to shut off cross-talk completely
by these methods will necessarily restrict the refill rate of the nozzles, thereby
compromising the maximum rate at which the printhead can print. Third, the resistive
decoupling techniques as practiced in the prior art add to the inertia of the fluid
refill channel, which has serious implications for the printhead performance (as will
be explained at the end of the inertial decoupling exposition which follows shortly).
[0006] In capacitive decoupling, an extra hole is put in the nozzle plate above that point
where the ink feed channel meets the ink supply plenum. Any pressure surges in the
ink feed channel are transformed into displacements of the meniscus present in the
extra hole (or "dummy nozzle"). In this way, the hole acts as an isolator for brief
pressure pulses but does not interfere with refill flow. The location, size and shape
of the isolator hole must be carefully chosen to derive the required degree of decoupling
without allowing the hole to eject droplets of ink as if it were nozzle. This method
is extremely effective in preventing cross-talk (but can introduce problems with
nozzle meniscus dynamics, as will be discussed below).
[0007] In inertial decoupling, the feed channels are made as long and slender as possible,
thereby maximizing the inertial aspect of the fluid entrained within them. The inertia
of the fluid "clamps" its ability to respond to cross-talk surges in proportion to
the suddenness of the surge and thereby inhibits the transmission of cross-talk pulses
into or out of the ink feed chan nel. While this decoupling scheme is used in the
prior art, it requires considerable area ("real estate") within the print head to
implement, making a compact structure impossible. Furthermore, since the resistive
component of a pipe having a rectangular cross-section scales directly with length
and inversely with the third power of the smaller of the two cross-section dimensions,
the flow resistance can grow to an unacceptable level, compromising refill speed.
More importantly, however, are the dynamic effects caused by the coupling of this
inertance to the compliance of the nozzle meniscus, as will be discussed below.
[0008] With regard to the problem of meniscus dynamics, there are apparently no solutions
offered in the prior art. Apparently, this is a problem that has only recently surfaced
as printhead designs have been pushed to accomodate higher and higher repetition rates.
Clearly, any method used to decouple the dynamics of neighboring nozzles will also
aid in damping out meniscus oscillations, at least from a superficial consideration.
In practice, problems are experienced when trying to use the decoupling means as the
oscillatory damping means. These problems can be traced to the synergistic effects
between the nozzle meniscus and the fluid entrained within the ink feed channel, as
outlined below.
[0009] If resistive decoupling is attempted by reducing the width of the entire ink feed
channel, the inertia of the fluid entrained within the feed channel increases. When
this inertia is coupled to the compliance of the meniscus in the nozzle, it results
in a lower resonant frequency of oscillation of the meniscus, which requires a longer
settling time between firings of the nozzle. The inertial effect and the resistive
effect are hence deadlocked, with the net effect being that settling time cannot be
reduced.
[0010] Capacity decoupling has been proven effective at droplet ejection frequencies below
that corresponding to the resonant frequency of the nozzle meniscus coupled to the
feed channel inertia. However, its implementation at frequencies near meniscus resonance
is also complicated by interactive effects. Specifically, the isolator orifice acts
as a low impedance shunt path for high frequency surges. Hence, the high frequency
impedance of an ink feed channel terminated at its plenum end with an isolator orifice
will be lower than an equivalent channel without an isolator. This means that during
the bubble growth phase, blow-back flow away from the nozzle is increased by the isolator
orifice. This robs kinetic energy from the droplet emerging from the nozzle, which
results in smaller droplet size and lower droplet velocities and thus lower ejection
efficiency. During the bubble collapse phase, the isolator orifice meniscus pumps
fluid flow back into the refill chamber, which excites a resonant mode in which the
two menisci trade fluid between themselves via the ink feed channel. Since these two
menisci are for most practical designs similar in size, and since they are effectively
"in series", the equivalent compliance of the coupled system is roughly half of that
with only one orifice in it. The two-orifice system will thus resonate at a higher
frequency, which is a benefit from a settling time point of view, but the energy stored
in the resonating system still needs to be dissipated and therefore constrictive damping
will be necessary in such an implementation. While the effects of these resonances
is poorly understood at this time, the efficiency decrease may be severe enough to
prevent the printhead from working.
[0011] It is clear that what is needed is a printhead structure that accomplishes both (1)
isolation of any given nozzle from its neighbors and (2) reduced oscillation of the
meniscus caused by refill dynamics from interfering with the ejection of subsequently
fired droplets, while limiting the severity of any side effects incurred in the implementation
of the desired structure.
[0012] According to the invention there is provided an ink jet printhead comprising a plurality
of ink propelling elements and a plurality of nozzles associated therewith for firing
a quantity of ink toward a print medium, wherein ink is supplied to an ink propelling
element from a plenum chamber by means of an ink feed channel characterised in that
there is at least one constriction in the ink feed channel.
[0013] In accordance with the invention, a localized constriction (also referred to as a
lumped resistance element) is introduced into the feed channel connecting each nozzle's
firing chamber with the main ink supply plenum. The fact that the resistive aspect
of each nozzle is localized permits these constrictions to be useful in cross-talk
control, since then quantity of inertia they introduce into the feed channels is minimal.
This overcomes the aforementioned problem of parasitic inertance present in the prior
art in which the resistive aspect is distributed along, and thereby scales directly
with, the length of the feed channel. The use of lumped resistance elements allow
the printhead designer to vary the relative amounts of resistance and inertance present
in the feed channel substantially independently of each other and thereby "tune" the
feed channel for an optimum combination of inertance and resistance.
[0014] In one embodiment, the lumped resistance element comprises a pinch point between
two opposed projections in the ink feed side walls. Since these feed walls are commonly
patterned in photoresist, the pinch points are easily implemented by including them
in the photomask which defines the ink feed channel geometries. The degree of "pinch"
possible is sensitively determined by the photochemical characteristics of the resist
film. In practical terms, when using commerically common resist films and light sources,
the ratio of film thickness (i.e., wall height) to pinch width ranges up to about
1.2.
[0015] This amount of pinch may not be sufficient for all applications. Therefore, another
embodiment comprises one or more sharp bends in the ink feed channel. Each sharp bend
acts as a lumped resistive element to generate a pressure drop equivalent to that
present in an equivalent length of ink feed channel of from about 5D to 10D, where
D is the cross-sectional dimension of the channel. This resistive enhancement is accomplished
without a proportional increase in the inertia of the feed channel, and without violating
the height-to-width limits of the film. This concatenation of serial lumped resistive
elements is applicable in principle to the pinch point embodiment as well, although
care must be exercised to avoid including any features which might behave as bubble
traps or interfere with photoresist development and subsequent washing.
[0016] In another embodiment, the ink-propelling element (resistive heating element, piezoelectric
element, etc.) is placed below the level of the feed channel, again introducing a
sharp bend in the ink feed channel.
[0017] In yet another embodiment, a pinch point is introduced into the feed channel by
partially obstructing the channel with a dike or "speed bump" lying across the width
of the channel. This feature can be photolithographically defined and deposited upon
the print head substrate using a film thinner than that used to form the side walls,
or it may be affixed to the underside of the orifice plate which forms the "ceiling"
of the ink feed channel. In this case, the dike can consist either of photoresist
film or of electrodeposited metal. In the latter instance, the electrodeposition can
be an operation separate from that used to create the orifice plate, or, in the case
of electroformed orifice plates, it can be an integral part of the electroforming
process. It is also possible in principle to electrodeposit a metallic dike onto the
printhead substrate, provided that the substrate is compatible with the electrodeposition
baths.
[0018] It should be noted that none of the speed bump implementations described above are
required to completely span the full width of the ink feed channel; free standing
structures are permissible which act as lumped resistive elements and are limited
in their application only by the practical considerations outlined in the previous
sections.
[0019] These lumped resistive elements can be used singly or in combination with elements
of the same or of different types, depending on the details of the application and
are not strictly limited to the shapes, materials, and layouts offered above as examples.
[0020] The novel printhead structures of the invention accomplish both (1) isolation of
any given nozzle from its neighbors, i.e., cross-talk reduction, and (2) reduced oscillation
of the meniscus caused by refill dynamics in any individual nozzle. This prevents
meniscus displacements from interfering with the ejection of subsequently fired droplets,
while limiting the severity of any side effects incurred in the implementation of
the desired structure. The new printhead structures have the additional advantage
of being easy to implement and easy to "tune" for maximum effectiveness. These structures
are directly applicable across the full range of ink-jet printheads.
FIG. 1 is a top plan view of a prior are resistor and ink feed channel configuration;
FIG. 2, on coordinates of distance in µm and time in µsec, is a plot of meniscus damping
of an active nozzle and an adjacent nozzle for the prior art configuration of FIG.
1;
FIG. 3a is a top plan view of a resistor and ink feed channel configuration in accordance
with one embodiment of the invention;
FIG. 3b is a side elevation view, depicting two alternate embodiments: a "speed bump"
structure that can be used in conjunction with the structure depicted in FIG. 3a and
a well structure, in which the resistor is placed below the level of the ink channel;
FIG. 3c is an enlarged view of a portion of FIG. 3a;
FIG. 4, on coordinates of volume in p1 and time in µsec, is a plot of meniscus damping
of an active nozzle and an adjacent nozzle for the embodiment depicted in FIGS. 3a-b;
FIG. 5 is a top plan view of a resistor and ink feed channel configuration in accordance
with an alternate embodiment of the invention;
FIG. 6 is a perspective view of the resistor, ink feed channel and orifice, depicting
yet another embodiment of the invention; and
FIG. 7 is a view similar to a portion of FIG. 6, depicting still another embodiment
of the invention.
[0021] Referring now to the drawings wherein like numerals of reference designate like
elements throughout, an ink feed channel 10 is shown, with a resistor 12 situated
at one end 10a thereof. Ink (not shown) is introduced at the opposite end 10b thereof,
as indicated by arrow "A", from a plenum, indicated generally at 14. Associated with
the resistor is a nozzle 16 (such as seen in FIG. 3b), located above the resistor
12. Droplets of ink are ejected through the nozzle (i.e., nornal to the plane of
FIG. 1) upon heating of a quantity of ink by the resistor 12.
[0022] While the invention is preferably directed to improving the operation of thermal
ink-jet printheads, which employ resistors 12 as elements used to propel droplets
of ink toward a print medium, such as paper, it will be appreciated by the person
skilled in this art that the teachings of the invention are suitably employed to improve
the operation of ink-jet printheads in general. Examples of other types of ink-jet
printheads benefited by the teachings of the invention include piezoelectric, which
employ a piezoelectric element to propel droplets of ink toward the print medium.
[0023] Attempts to minimize cross-talk between adjacent nozzles have included lengthening
the channel 10, as shown by the dotted lines 10'.
[0024] The straight channel 10 does not permit facile damping of the ink. As seen in FIG.
2, damping of the meniscus of ink in the active nozzle takes more than 400 µsec (Curve
16). Simultaneously, the meniscus of ink in a neighboring nozzle is adversely affected
by the action of the meniscus of ink in the active nozzle (Curve 20).
[0025] In accordance with the invention, a localized constriction 22 (also referred to as
a lumped resistance element) is introduced into the feed channel connecting each
nozzle's firing chamber with the main ink supply plenum. The localized construction
22 may comprise a sharp bend or a pair of opposed projections, and one or more such
constrictions may be present in various combinations.
[0026] For example, a pair of opposed projections 24, depicted in FIG. 3a, is employed alone
or in conjunction with locating the resistor 12 below the floor 26 (indicated by
the dashed lines) of the channel 10, as seen in FIG. 3b.
[0027] The use of one or more sharp bends, or constrictions, considerably improves the
damping of the fluid motions as seen in FIG. 4. Damping of the meniscus of ink occurs
in about 250 µm (Curve 28). Simultaneously, the fluid meniscus in a neighboring nozzle
is hardly affected by the action of the meniscus the active nozzle (Curve 30).
[0028] Preferably, the length of the channel 10 ranges from close to the resistor to about
60 µm. The height of the channel 10 ranges from about 15 to 30 µm, while the width
of the channel ranges from about 20 to 40 µm.
[0029] The considerations that govern the channel dimensions relate to the amount of ink
that has to be replaced after each firing. This amount is the sum of the quantity
of ink that is ejected out through the nozzle 16 plus the quantity of ink that moves
back through the feed channel. The latter quantity is re ferred to as the blow-back,
and is desirably as small as possible.
[0030] To get maximum performance, fast refill time in conjunction with avoiding having
to overcome below-back in the ink feed channel 10 is required. While a refill time
of 0 µsec with very fast damping (no oscillation) is ideal, it is not possible. Refill
times of about 250 µsec and less are found to provide adequate results at a frequency
of 4 kHz. For a pen operating at 6 kHz, the corrresponding acceptable refill time
is about 167 µsec and less.
[0031] The tradeoff is that increased damping implies a slower refill. Since it is desired
to maximize both refill and damping, optimizing them is the only possibility.
[0032] The shape of the projections 24 in the area of the opening 10a can contribute to
the optimization of refill and damping. Specifically, the projections can be sharp,
as shown in FIG. 3a, or rounded, as shown in FIG. 3c. The radius R of the rounding
may range from about 5 to 10 µm.
[0033] The configuration of the projections 24 affects turbulent flow of the ink in the
vicinity thereof. In particular, sharper corners increase the turbulence, thus leading
to higher resistance, in the ink feed channel 10 during the bubble growth phase. This
reduces blow-back and decreases refill time.
[0034] Sharp corners are difficult to define lithographically in some resists, such as
DuPont's VACREL. However, other resists, such as the polyimides, may permit better
definition.
[0035] Thus, it can be seen that blow-back can be minimized by constricting the opening
to the channel 10 with the opposed projections 24, by constricting the channel (such
as providing a "speed bump" 32 across the junction of the channel and the firing chamber
on the floor 26′ thereof (FIG. 3b), by placing the resistor 12 in a well below the
level of the refill channel (as alternately depicted in FIG. 3b), or by introducing
bends 22 in the ink feed channel. In the case of the speed bump 32, it may be placed
on the floor or the ceiling, partially or fully extending across the width of the
channel 10.
[0036] In its broad aspect, the invention contemplates placement of one or more constrictions
22, 24, whether employing projections or one or more sharp bends in the ink feed channel
10, between the plenum 14 and the nozzle 16. Each sharp bend 22 introduces a pressure
drop equivalent to that generated by an equivalent length of ink feed channel 10 of
from about 5d to 10d, where d is the cross-sectional dimension of the channel, without
introducing the inertia enhancement effect. This is because the resistance enhancement
swamps out and overwhelms the inertia change. Thus, the lengthening of the channel
10, depicted in FIG. 1, is avoided by adding one or more constrictions 22, 24 therein.
[0037] As shown above, the sharp bends may be introduced by setting the resistor 12 below
the channel 10 or by adding a speed bump 32 across the floor 26′ or ceiling of the
channel. In another embodiment, depicted in FIG. 5, one or more sharp bends 22 may
be introduced in the channel 10. In particular, FIG. 5 depicts two constrictions,
one at 22a and the other at 22b. FIGS. 6 and 7 depict yet additional embodiments,
such as opposed projections 24 (FIG. 6) or a free-standing pillar 22′ in lieu of a
speed bump 32 (FIG. 7).
[0038] The constricted feed channel or the labyrinth feed channel can be introduced into
the printhead architecture without lengthening the feed channel structure and without
revising the orifice plate with the addition of isolator orifices.
[0039] The mass "seen" by the nozzle meniscus as it oscillates is, for the labyrinth, predominantly
the fluid mass in the firing chamber. The resistance of the labyrinth ink feed channel
decouples this mass from that entrained in the labyrinth.
[0040] The use of lumped resistive elements in the ink feed channel to allow independent
adjustment of the feed channel's resistive and inertial parameters is useful in ink-jet
printer applications based on thermal and non-thermal ink-jet technologies.
[0041] A comparison was made between a straight ink feed channel of the type depicted in
FIG. 1 (prior art) and an ink feed channel of the invention as depicted in FIG. 3a.
In each case, the resistor was 50 µm x 50 µm square. In the prior art case ("straight"),
the ink feed channel was 150 µm long and 70 µ wide. In the configuration of the invention
("opposed projection"), the resistor was placed 25 µm below the bottom of the ink
feed channel; the ink feed channel was 50 µm long (from the edge of the resistor to
the opening to the reservoir) and had protuberances affording an opening of 35 µm
wide.
[0042] In the comparison, for a given drop size (in picoliters, pl), the refill time (in
microseconds, µsec) and the overshoot volume (in pl) and the blow-back volume (in
pl) were measured. The results are shown in Table I below.
Table I.
Barrier Type |
Drop Size, pl |
Refill Time, µsec |
Overshoot Vol., pl |
Blow-back Vol., pl |
Straight |
75 |
130 |
36 |
75 |
|
150 |
242 |
38 |
232 |
Opp. Proj. |
75 |
135 |
16 |
40 |
|
100 |
150 |
16 |
48 |
|
150 |
156 |
16 |
78 |
[0043] Table I shows that the opposed projection configuration of the invention works because
the blow-back volume is held in check. The straight barrier with 150 pl drop actually
has to refill 382 pl because of the excessive amount of blow-back.
[0044] In another example, the W and L dimensions, depicted in FIG. 3c, were varied. The
projections all had 5 µm radius (R) rounded corners. The drop volume was 150 pl in
all cases. The results are shown in Table II.
Table II.
L, µm |
W, µm |
Refill Time, µsec |
Overshoot Volume, pl |
Blow-back Volume, pl |
4 |
22 |
178 |
11 |
71 |
4 |
26 |
172 |
16 |
85 |
4 |
30 |
174 |
20 |
94 |
4 |
34 |
182 |
24 |
104 |
4 |
38 |
200 |
27 |
127 |
4 |
42 |
212 |
29 |
150 |
4 |
30 |
174 |
20 |
94 |
8 |
30 |
184 |
19 |
91 |
12 |
30 |
194 |
18 |
89 |
16 |
30 |
209 |
17 |
92 |
[0045] From the foregoing data, it appears that the dominant contributor to fast refill
is the width W provided by the opposed projections, or the amount of constriction.
The length L of the straight section should be held to a minimum, since increased
length does slow refill.
[0046] A study was also made of opposed projections with sharp corners and opposed projections
with 5 µm radius rounded corners. The refill time was found to be 20 µsec shorter
for the sharp corner configuration, but the blow-back volume was 3 pl less. Of the
20 µsec speed-up, some may be attributed to the reduction down to zero of the equivalent
straight pipe section inherent in the rounded corners.
[0047] Thus, a feed channel architecture for an ink-jet pen is provided for use in thermal
ink-jet printers.
[0048] It will be clear to one of ordinary skill in the art that various changes and modifications
of an obvious nature may be made without departing from the spirit of the invention,
and all such changes and modifications are deemed to fall within the scope of the
invention as defined by the appended claims.
1. An ink-jet printhead comprising a plurality of ink-propelling elements (12) and
a plurality of nozzles (16) associated therewith for firing a quantity of ink (A)
toward a print medium, wherein ink is supplied to an ink propelling element from a
plenum chamber (14) by means of an ink feed channel (10), characterised in that there
is at least one constriction (22,23,32) in the ink feed channel.
2. The printhead of Claim 1 wherein the ink-propelling elements comprise resistive
heating elements.
3. The printhead of Claims 1 or 2 wherein one end of the ink feed channel is provided
with a pair of opposed projections (24), thereby forming a constriction between the
plenum and the channel.
4. The printhead of Claim 3 wherein said projections are sharp.
5. The printhead of Claim 3 wherein said projections are rounded .
6. The printhead of any preceding Claims wherein at least one constriction is achieved
by setting the ink-propelling element in a plane below that of the channel.
7. The printhead of Claim 6 wherein the ink-propelling element is about 5 to 40 um
below the plane of the channel, as measured from the top of the element to the bottom
of the channel.
8. The printhead of any preceding Claim wherein at least one constriction is achieved
by formation of at least one sharp bend (22) along the length of the channel.
9. The printhead of any preceding Claim wherein said at least one constriction comprises
a projection (32) formed across at least a portion of one of the lateral sides of
said channel.
10. The printhead of any preceding Claim wherein said at least one constriction comprises
a pillar (22′) in said channel.