Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watnot!watmath!clyde!rutgers!ames!ucbcad!ucbvax!RICE.EDU!phil From: phil@RICE.EDU.UUCP Newsgroups: mod.computers.laser-printers Subject: Re: What's a duty cycle? Message-ID: <560.phil.titan@Rice> Date: Wed, 11-Mar-87 13:25:49 EST Article-I.D.: Rice.560.phil.titan Posted: Wed Mar 11 13:25:49 1987 Date-Received: Sun, 15-Mar-87 04:40:51 EST Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Distribution: world Organization: The ARPA Internet Lines: 19 Approved: laser-lovers@washington.arpa >Henry Spencer > Be careful. Experience with the Canon LBP-CX engine does not generalize > to larger engines. The LBP-CX is famous for tolerating gross violations > of its duty-cycle rating. (There are people at LBL using it at TEN TIMES > the nominal 3000/month duty cycle.)... Then I submit that the published duty cycle of the LBP/CX is wrong! If indeed a figure called "the duty cycle" actually has meaning for other print engines, and if in fact that figure is pretty "spot on", then someone miscalculated the duty cycle for the LBP/CX, because most everyone seems to agree that these little guys can be pushed way beyond 3000 pages/month. How do laser-printer/copier manuafacturers decide on this mysterious figure? Why was the LBP/CX given the rating it was? Why does it appear to be so wrong? William LeFebvre Department of Computer Science Rice University