Tractor feed fanfold paper

[Gregg Roberts]

A user group that I support has been printing to tractor-feed labels, 1-7/16"
x 4", one column on an old IBM mainframe printer. Print jobs are sent to a
print queue so an operator can feed the labels into it before starting the
job. I've managed to find all the right settings to move this process to HP
network printers, except for what happens when the end of a "page" is
reached. The printer is assuming that I'm using separate sheets of paper, so
it "waits" per page -- and pulls an entire "page" through -- instead of just
continuously printing and pulling the labels in until all the merged records
have been printed. I haven't tested it with the actual labels yet; I'm
testing with plain paper. But based on what happens with a legal-sized sheet
when I've told it that there are only four labels per page, it would keep
pulling the labels into the printer until it saw "daylight", meaning it would
pull an entire box of fanfolded labels through, but only print on the first
page.

If I were to reprogram the manual feed setting on the manual feed tray to
Off, then it might stop waiting for daylight, but it would also not wait for
me to feed the labels in the first place. Maybe users could be instructed to
prime the printer with labels in the manual feed tray BEFORE clicking Print,
but if they forget that one step, they'll have to reprint the first X labels
because there won't be any labels being fed when the printer first starts.
Also, some users will surely leave the manual feed setting in the nonstandard
position, causing issues for the next user of the manual feed tray.

I'm also not sure that the printer has enough rollers to keep the labels
aligned properly for a 1200-label run. Even if the box is pretty well
aligned, it seems that the typical office printer might not be well-designed
for this specialty use.

Any ideas on how to handle all these issues, short of researching and buying
a specialty printer for every department?

Gregg Roberts

 

[Peter Jamieson]

Difficult set of problems. Difficult nt just to ask a load more questions
that may not lead anywhere...

How committed are they to this particular stationery? What sort of volume of
labels are they printing? Could they avoid label printing altogether (e.g.
if it's addresses, switching to printing addresses on letters and using
window envelopes). Is there a "cut sheet" alternative? Did they ever print
single labels or were they always large batches (I'm partly wondering how
many labels they would be prepared to waste, on average).

How distributed are these departments - if the things were printed centrally
before, why is that not feasible any more (maybe someone took the printed
batches to their requesters?) - i.e. would /one/ dedicated printer just
doing labels on one stationery type be enough? What sort of budget do they
have?

What are they using to produce the labels? Is it just one app., or anything
that could print to this size label?

Peter Jamieson

 

[macropod]

Hi Gregg,

If:
1. the HP printer has a tractor-feed
2. you're using the right (a) driver and (b) paper setting for this printer,
the page-feed command should simply scroll the paper through the feed mechanism to the next logical (& physical) page. If those
conditions are met and the printer's not doing that, I'd suggest contacting HP about a driver update.

If you're simply trying to use the manual paper tray on a printer designed/set up only for cut-sheet stationary, then the paper feed
mechanism will use a sensor (eg IR) to detect the sheet end. If it doesn't find one in a reasonable time, it will most likely
time-out with an error. If that's what you're using and you're wedded to that stationary, someone's got a job ahead of them -
separating the sheets (and stacking them all the same way up).

Cheers

--
macropod
[MVP - Microsoft Word]


| A user group that I support has been printing to tractor-feed labels, 1-7/16"
| x 4", one column on an old IBM mainframe printer. Print jobs are sent to a
| print queue so an operator can feed the labels into it before starting the
| job. I've managed to find all the right settings to move this process to HP
| network printers, except for what happens when the end of a "page" is
| reached. The printer is assuming that I'm using separate sheets of paper, so
| it "waits" per page -- and pulls an entire "page" through -- instead of just
| continuously printing and pulling the labels in until all the merged records
| have been printed. I haven't tested it with the actual labels yet; I'm
| testing with plain paper. But based on what happens with a legal-sized sheet
| when I've told it that there are only four labels per page, it would keep
| pulling the labels into the printer until it saw "daylight", meaning it would
| pull an entire box of fanfolded labels through, but only print on the first
| page.
|
| If I were to reprogram the manual feed setting on the manual feed tray to
| Off, then it might stop waiting for daylight, but it would also not wait for
| me to feed the labels in the first place. Maybe users could be instructed to
| prime the printer with labels in the manual feed tray BEFORE clicking Print,
| but if they forget that one step, they'll have to reprint the first X labels
| because there won't be any labels being fed when the printer first starts.
| Also, some users will surely leave the manual feed setting in the nonstandard
| position, causing issues for the next user of the manual feed tray.
|
| I'm also not sure that the printer has enough rollers to keep the labels
| aligned properly for a 1200-label run. Even if the box is pretty well
| aligned, it seems that the typical office printer might not be well-designed
| for this specialty use.
|
| Any ideas on how to handle all these issues, short of researching and buying
| a specialty printer for every department?
|
| Gregg Roberts

 

[Gregg Roberts]

Thanks for the detailed feedback, Peter.

Difficult set of problems.

That's helpful feedback in itself, to know that I'm not missing something
obvious (or not too much -- see below).

How committed are they to this particular stationery?

The need for it is that, allegedly, there's a machine elsewhere in the
building that automatically peels each label off, sticks it on an envelope,
and seals the envelope. But someone just told me about a printer that prints
directly to the envelope and seals it. You're probably familiar with the
problem of people inaccurately repeating what they heard, not indicating any
uncertainty about their information, etc.

What sort of volume of labels are they printing?

Some print 1200 at a time every few days. Others, less than 200. The latter
group is hand-peeling the labels, so they don't need the tractor feed. They
are using the mainframe system only because there's a file on it that they
use to filter the data being sent from another system. They can send that to
a Windows machine and use cut sheets.

Could they avoid label printing altogether (e.g.
if it's addresses, switching to printing addresses on letters and using
window envelopes).

See above.

Is there a "cut sheet" alternative?

I'm trying to track down a user who actually has seen this legendary peeling
machine, which might well turn out to be mything in action.

Did they ever print single labels

I don't know.

(I'm partly wondering how
many labels they would be prepared to waste, on average).

I'm sure how that bears on an answer to the problem, but apparently it often
happens that someone sends a full 1200 labels to the print queue and then
never picks them up.

How distributed are these departments

Not sure yet. They would all be in this building but they could be on 6
different floors.

- if the things were printed centrally before, why is that not feasible any more

The mainframe is going away in a less than a year, and part of a system that
overlaps with it is being ported to ASP .NET. If I can replace the current
process with a purely Windows-based one, no one will have to write code to
replace the Perl/SAS/IBM print queue path. .NET code has already been written
to generate CSV files that can be used in a Word / Excel mail merge and sent
to network printers.

would /one/ dedicated printer just
doing labels on one stationery type be enough?

I think so, since they were willing to go get their labels (sometimes) from
one place, they could just as well go get them from some other single
printer. Good point.

What sort of budget do they have?

I don't know, but surely enough for one modern tractor-feed laser printer.
This is a state government agency with 1,000 employees.

What are they using to produce the labels? Is it just one app., or anything
that could print to this size label?

Just the one app.

Gregg

 

[Gregg Roberts]

If: 1. the HP printer has a tractor-feed

None of them do, that I've seen. A support guy here suggested that I check
HP's website and see if they sell one that does, since it would be on our
approved vendor list. I'll do that.

If you're simply trying to use the manual paper tray on a printer designed/set up only for cut-sheet stationary, then the paper feed
mechanism will use a sensor (eg IR) to detect the sheet end. If it doesn't find one in a reasonable time, it will most likely
time-out with an error. If that's what you're using and you're wedded to that stationary, someone's got a job ahead of them -
separating the sheets (and stacking them all the same way up).

That won't be any better than using cut sheets, since the
auto-peeler-sticker-sealer works with the long connected "sheet" with all
1200 labels.

Thanks,

Gregg

 

[Peter Jamieson]

From everything you've said, I'd say this boils down to
a. what is a good, feasible set of solutions for the organisation as a
whole?
b. what actions including technology selection and purchases are required
to get there?
c. what do they do in the interim period, if any?

I'm sure how that bears on an answer to the problem, but apparently it
often
happens that someone sends a full 1200 labels to the print queue and then
never picks them up.

The reason I asked about this is that if the accepted practice is that
everything is queued until the operator is ready to roll, then the operation
can be quite efficient in the sense that there need be no wasted labels
(apart, perhaps from some identification as to who the labels were printed
for, and the fact that people sometimes fail to collect their output
Perhaps the operator even separated the labels for the different users.

If you move to a system where there is no operator then suppose there are a
lot of 2-label jobs on 8-label stationery. if you have a page-printing laser
printer (say) then it will only be able to process 8 labels at a time - in
other words, you either
a. lose some labels for every small print job or
b. you have some queuing software that tries to wait until there are enough
labels to fill a page (that sort of thing, anyway). But if people are
actually outputting from arbitrary bits of software from Windows PCs, that
queuing software would have to understand the output and reorganise it,
which might be difficult. And people would have to split the pages of labels
up when they went to fetch them - not a procedure I'd want to count on

But I suspect that's too detailed at this point.

Peter Jamieson

 

[macropod]

Hmm,

You might need to check out if there's any suppliers producing laser printers that take continuous stock. The suppliers of your
enveloping hardware might be a good place to start.

If all else fails I've got an old NEC 24-pin dot-matrix printer I could sell you. Tractor feed, wide carriage, spare ribbons etc.
You might have trouble getting new ribbons these days, though. ;-)

Cheers

--
macropod
[MVP - Microsoft Word]


| > If: 1. the HP printer has a tractor-feed
|
| None of them do, that I've seen. A support guy here suggested that I check
| HP's website and see if they sell one that does, since it would be on our
| approved vendor list. I'll do that.
|
| > If you're simply trying to use the manual paper tray on a printer designed/set up only for cut-sheet stationary, then the paper
feed
| > mechanism will use a sensor (eg IR) to detect the sheet end. If it doesn't find one in a reasonable time, it will most likely
| > time-out with an error. If that's what you're using and you're wedded to that stationary, someone's got a job ahead of them -
| > separating the sheets (and stacking them all the same way up).
|
| That won't be any better than using cut sheets, since the
| auto-peeler-sticker-sealer works with the long connected "sheet" with all
| 1200 labels.
|
| Thanks,
|
| Gregg