Self testing system for reproduction machine

• US 4,499,581 A
• Filed: 09/21/1982
• Issued: 02/12/1985
• Est. Priority Date: 09/21/1982
• Status: Expired due to Term

• Current Assignee: Xerox Corporation (Xerox Holdings Corp.)
• Original Assignee: Xerox Corporation (Xerox Holdings Corp.)
• Inventors: Dugan, Michael T., Nguyen, Tuan A., Miazga, Dennis E.
• Primary Examiner(s): ATKINSON, CHARLES
• Application Number:
  US06/420,967
• Time in Patent Office: 875 Days
• Field of Search: 371/20, 371/16, 355/14 C, 364/200, 364/900
• US Class Current: 714/44
• CPC Class Codes: G03G 15/55 Self-diagnostics; Malfunction or lifetime display
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 11/267 Reconfiguring circuits for testing, e.g. LSSD, partitioning
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 11/321 Display for diagnostics, e.g. diagnostic result display, self-test user interface
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 11/325 by lamps or LED's
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 11/327 Alarm or error message display

Abstract

A reproduction machine incorporating self test routines to test the machine operating logic, particularly at start up, to insure the integrity and operability of the component parts of the operating logic. The tests include routines for initially checking the machine master control module logic and memory. A display panel on the master control module visually identifies any fault in the event the communication link to the machine main display has failed. Once the operability of the master control module is established, self tests of the various machine remote control modules are carried out followed by a test of the communication channel between all modules. Any fault found is visually identified to facilitate repair and servicing.

Claims

1. The process of fault checking a reproduction machine having a main controller and plural remote controllers coupled together by a shared communication line through which operating instructions for said machine is transmitted, said machine including display means for visually identifying faults, the steps comprising:

(a) individually testing the operating integrity of said main controller and said remote controllers;

(b) polling said remote controllers by establishing communication between said main controller and said remote controllers when testing of all of said controllers is completed to identify to said main controller any failed remote controller;

(c) when communication by said main controller with said remote controllers cannot be established, attempting to establish communication between at least two of said remote controllers directly with one another to identify whether said communication line or said master controller is at fault;

(d) repeating testing of said controllers in the event a fault is detected in one of said controllers; and

(e) inhibiting operation of said reproduction machine in response to said fault being detected a second time in said one controller when testing of said controllers is repeated or when said communication line is identified as having a fault.

2. The process according to claim 1 including the steps of:

(a) first testing the operating integrity of said main controller memory section; and

(b) on completing testing of said main controller memory section without failure, commencing testing of said remote controllers.

3. The process according to claim 2 including the step of:

actuating said display means in response to a main controller memory fault to visually identify said fault.

4. A process for operating a reproduction or printing machine having a plurality of processing stations at least one of which is selectively operable, said machine having a main controller and the plural remote controllers, said controllers being coupled together through a shared communication line over which operating instructions from said main controller to said remote controllers and between said remote controllers are transmitted to operate said machine and produce copies, at least one of said remote controllers being dedicated to controlling said one processing station;

the steps comprising;

(a) initiating a series of self tests on said master controller;

(b) on successful completion of at least a portion of said master controller self tests, initiating a series of self tests on each of said remote controllers;

(c) on successful completion of said master controller and said remote controller self tests, polling each of said remote controllers by said master controller to determine if said remote controllers passed said self tests or not;

(d) where said remote controllers respond when polled by said master controller, identifying any remote controller having a fault to said master controller;

(e) where none of said remote controllers respond when polled by said master controller, attempting to communicate a first one of said remote controllers directly with a second one of said remote controllers bypassing said master controller;

(f) where communication is established between said first and second remote controllers, identifying said master controller as having a fault;

(g) where said one remote controller is identified as having a fault, inhibiting operation of said one processing station while permitting operation of said machine; and

(h) inhibiting operation of said machine including said one processing station where either said main controller or one of said other remote controllers is identified as having a fault.

5. The process according to claim 4 including the step of identifying said shared communication line as having a fault where communication between said remote controllers is not established, and

inhibiting operation of said machine including said one processing station where said shared communication line is identified as having a fault.