Print Defect Detection via Consecutive Image Comparison

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing image inspection methods in printing often misclassify relevant defects as pseudo-defects due to substrate or camera influences, leading to increased workload and reduced transparency in identifying genuine print defects, especially when using lower-quality printing substrates.

Innovation Solution

A method that records and analyzes multiple consecutive printed products to filter out pseudo-defects by considering deviations present in all assessed products, using image sensors and computer analysis to differentiate between genuine and pseudo-defects based on positional and size similarities, and applying predefined tolerance ranges.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Object-affected harmful factors

If inspection parameters are modified to suppress substrate defects, then the occurrence of pseudo-defects is reduced, but relevant print defects may be suppressed or not displayed

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvepseudo-defects from substrateVSAvoiddetection of relevant defects
Core Design Contradiction:
Object-affected harmful factorsVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system dynamically adjusts defect evaluation by comparing the same image content across multiple printed products. Defects are evaluated based on their consistency appearance rather than static parameter thresholds, allowing the system to adapt between suppressing substrate defects and detecting genuine print defects

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system uses feedback from comparing multiple printed products to distinguish between pseudo-defects and genuine defects. By analyzing whether defects appear consistently across multiple products, the system provides feedback that helps differentiate between substrate issues and actual printing problems

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

2Ease of manufacture

If lower-quality printing substrates are used to reduce costs, then cost-efficiency is improved, but additional non-relevant defects are displayed increasing operator workload

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecost-efficiencyVSAvoidoperator workload
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of manufactureVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The system extracts and filters out pseudo-defects caused by substrate characteristics by comparing multiple printed products. Non-relevant defects that appear inconsistently across products are separated from genuine print defects, reducing the burden on operators to manually assess false alarms

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

3Reliability

If multiple consecutive printed products are analyzed to filter pseudo-defects, then detection reliability is improved, but inspection time increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedefect detection accuracyVSAvoidinspection time
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs partial analysis by comparing only identical image content across multiple printed products rather than analyzing entire images. This selective approach maintains high detection reliability while reducing the overall inspection time and computational burden

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

4Object-affected harmful factors

If tolerances are increased to suppress substrate defects, then pseudo-defects are reduced, but transparency of current status is reduced and important deviations may remain undetected

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesubstrate defectsVSAvoidvisibility of relevant defects
Core Design Contradiction:
Object-affected harmful factorsVSLoss of information

Solution Approach 1:

Instead of using fixed tolerance thresholds, the system dynamically evaluates defects based on their consistency across multiple printed products. This dynamic approach maintains visibility of relevant defects while suppressing substrate defects, preserving information transparency without losing important deviations

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Data Source

PatentUS11908126B2Method of controlling the quality of printed products by image inspection filtering
Publication Date: 2024.02.20 HEIDELBERGER DRUCKMASCHINEN AG
  • US11908126B2 patent drawing
  • US11908126B2 patent drawing
  • US11908126B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A method of controlling the quality of printed products by using a computer includes always producing multiple printed products with at least partially identical image content in a printing machine in a course of a print job to be completed. The multiple printed products are recorded by at least one image sensor and are sent to the computer as digital image data. The computer examines and assesses the digital image data in an image inspection process to find print defects and to sort out printed products that have been found to be unusable. The computer assesses the identical image content of the digital image data of at least two consecutive printed products and only takes into consideration such detected print defects that are present on the at least two assessed consecutive printed products.