Method for analyzing printer faults

• US 20030110413A1
• Filed: 06/19/2001
• Published: 06/12/2003
• Est. Priority Date: 06/19/2001
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: Xerox Corporation (Xerox Holdings Corp.)
• Original Assignee: Xerox Corporation (Xerox Holdings Corp.)
• Inventors: Bernklau-Halvor, David I.
• Granted Patent: US 6,782,495 B2
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 714/25
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 11/0733 in a data processing system embedded in an image processing device, e.g. printer, facsimile, scanner
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 11/0748 in a remote unit communicating with a single-box computer node experiencing an error/fault remote testing G06F11/2294
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 11/2294 by remote test

Abstract

A method of diagnosing a printer problem includes correlating a wide range of printer data types with suggested solutions. Printer diagnostic data, which may include usage information and printer status information collected over a period of time, is parsed into individual components. The components are then input into a set of rules. Each rule compares each component with a corresponding reference value to generate a comparison result, correlates the comparison result with a set of actions including solutions, and if there is a correlation between the comparison result and a solution, providing the solution.

Claims

1. A method of diagnosing a printer problem, comprising:

providing printer diagnostic data, wherein printer diagnostic data comprises data pertaining to operation of a printer at a time of a printer fault;

parsing the printer diagnostic data into components;

executing a rule comprising;

comparing each component with a corresponding reference value to generate a comparison result;

correlating the comparison result with a set of actions including solutions;

wherein, if there is a correlation between the comparison result and a solution, identifying the solution.

2. The method of claim 1, where in the correlating step further includes the steps of:

determining if the comparison is true, wherein if the comparison is true, the set of actions includes going to a next statement in the rule, going to a next rule, going to a specific solution and storing a variable if the comparing step was to identify a data location; and

determining if the comparison is false, wherein if the comparison is false, the set of actions include going to a next statement, going to a next rule and going to a specific solution.

3. The method of claim 1, wherein the comparing step includes one of less than, greater than, equal to, contains, count of matches, and match location.

4. The method of claim 1, wherein the rule specifies the order of execution of the comparing step.

5. The method of claim 1, further comprising executing a plurality of rules in accordance with a hierarchical order.

6. The method of claim 5, wherein each rule has a unique identifier.

7. The method of claim 1, wherein the diagnostic data comprises usage information, wherein the usage information comprises printer operational, usage and status information generated over a period of time.

8. The method of claim 1, wherein the diagnostic data comprises data generated subsequent to operation of a printer diagnostic utility.

9. The method of claim 1, wherein the parsing step includes the steps of parsing the printer diagnostic data into components having a particular format and storing the components in a database.

10. The method of claim 1, wherein the solutions represent error conditions or symptoms within a printer.

11. The method of claim 5, wherein the plurality of rules comprise a set of rules for a particular printer type.