Download
technology services group inc n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Technology Services Group, Inc. PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Technology Services Group, Inc.

Technology Services Group, Inc.

140 Views Download Presentation
Download Presentation

Technology Services Group, Inc.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Technology Services Group, Inc. Scanning Solutions Utilizing Documentum and the Web September 5, 2003

  2. Agenda • Who we are • Key Considerations for Imaging Solutions • Relevant client case studies • Distributed scanning • Centralized scanning • Drop-off scanning • Q & A

  3. Who we are….. TSG is a Chicago based consulting firm that designs and implements web based content and knowledge management solutions for Fortune 500 companies

  4. Documentum Imaging Experience • Centralized Image Capture • Corporate Engineering Image Processing System • Resulted in 400% growth in user base over a single year • Won a divisional IT award - in production 4 years and counting • Case Report Form Tracking System • Leveraged existing image processing infrastructure • In production 1 year – worldwide rollout planned for next year • Distributed Image Capture • Web-based Clinical Document Capture • International roll-out in a validated environment • In production for 2+ years • Fax Integration • Connectsite.com

  5. Key Considerations for Imaging Solutions • What scanning hardware and software will be used to build the solution? • What scanning process will be implemented in the solution? • What indexing process will be implemented in the solution?

  6. Scanning Hardware • Hardware Considerations • Manufacturer characteristics • Pages per minute • Feeder • Barcode recognition • Document Considerations • Size • Stock • “Reality” – stains, folds, tears, staples • What will prep time requirements be?

  7. Scanning Software • Software Considerations • Integration Requirements • Pulling from other systems • Automation of Attributing (OCR, ICR, Barcode) • Interoperability with Scanner • Document Quality Enhancement • Deskew • Despeckle • Removal of Holes

  8. Typical Software Choices • Client/Server • InputAccel - Kofax • Multiple Clients • High Volume • Centralized Scanning • Web-based • Image Basic – Pixel Translations • Web Based Scanning • Decentralized • Can support high-volume scanners as well

  9. The Scanning Process • Scanning Process Considerations • Total number of pages per day • Location of the paper • Turnaround-time for image availability • Resource requirements • Support requirements

  10. The Indexing Process • Indexing Process Considerations • How will we populate attributes? • Best done by Subject Matter Experts? • Can we minimize manual input? • Use Barcodes, OCR, etc. • Pull data from other systems automatically based on key fields • Which attributes do we need? • No optional attributes! • Determine the essential set required for retrieval

  11. Scanning and Indexing Process • Typical Choices • Centralized Scanning and Indexing • Typically involves implementation of a scan center • Distributed Scanning and Indexing • Documents captured and indexed at point of receipt • Hybrid Approach • Drop-off scanning with distributed indexing

  12. Reaching a Decision… • Proof-of-Concept • Sets expectations for quality of “real” documents • Tests assumptions regarding capture software and scanning/indexing process • Allows forecasting of operational requirements • Gets the users involved

  13. …Reaching a Decision • Typical Proof-of-Concept Findings • Document quality driven by scanner hardware, not scanner software • Prep time is always more then initially thought • Use of barcodes and separator pages fairly common • Hardware degradation after heavy use • Maintenance is always required • Accuracy rate of recognition software • Will not improve in production

  14. Web Based Image Capture Case Studies • Case Study #1 • Distributed Scanning Model • Case Study #2 • Centralized Scanning Model • Case Study #3 • Drop-off Scanning Model

  15. Case Study #1 Distributed Scanning Model

  16. Pain Points and Issues • Client required a global application • 300 Locations Around the World • Client could not justify the costs of purchasing high-end scanners • Client did not want to sacrifice the time required for locations to send in documents for centralized scanning • Volume was minimal per location • 100 pages per day

  17. Solution • Custom Web based image capture application • ASP/VB COM application • Utilizing Hummingbird ImageBasic ActiveX controls • Both TWAIN and ISIS drivers supported • Purchase low-end scanning hardware • Brother MFC 9600 (TWAIN) • HP Scanjet 7450c (TWAIN & ISIS)

  18. Scanners Used Brother MFC 9600 HP Scanjet 7450c

  19. Solution continued… • Each user has a scanner at their workstation • Fires up the application by hitting the URL in web browser • Scans pages through custom web interface • After image is satisfactory, user indexes the document and then saves in Docbase • Available imaging actions include re-scan, insert pages, replace pages

  20. Screen Shot – Scan Options

  21. Screen Shot – Pre-Scan

  22. Screen Shot - Scanning

  23. Screen Shot - Indexing

  24. Screen Shot - Distribution

  25. Screen Shot – Distribution

  26. Key Benefits • Documents can be scanned and indexed at the source of receipt • Scanner use and purchase decisions can vary based on location and volume • Subject matter experts can complete the indexing of documents directly over the web • Images are stored securely in a centralized Documentum repository for distribution • Consistency of development platforms (Microsoft) between scanning, indexing, and retrieval applications allows for better application support than traditional scanning approaches that introduce additional development tools

  27. Case Study #2 Centralized Scanning Model

  28. Pain Points and Issues • Accounts Payable department is storing documents on microfilm, after entering into AP system • Microfilm system is… • Costly • Tedious and time consuming – in particular on the retrieval side • Inconsistent with bad image quality • Inefficient to print from • Users desire access to electronic images rather than microfilm for invoices and expense reports • Ultimate goal is to open up the system to allow direct access for managers to look up invoices and expense reports themselves (secure self-service)

  29. Solution • Centralized Accounts Payable processing allowed for a centralized scanning model • TSG developed… • Proof-of-concept application • And performed scanner evaluation for client

  30. Proof-of-Concept • Custom Web based image capture application • ASP application • Utilizing Hummingbird ImageBasic ActiveX controls • Indexing completed in AP system from paper prior to scanning, minimal indexing required during scanning • Purchase Order Bar Code stuck to actual invoice/expense report • Barcode recognition software used to leverage this barcode for initial index, and then later match with AP system data send down from mainframe

  31. Application Flow

  32. Proof-of-Concept Results • Efficiency and ease of use of the custom interface became most important • With centralized scanning, scanner operator needs to spend minimal time on verifying image quality and indexing • Order of documents in a scan batch drives indexing • Support documents follow the invoice or expense report • Custom indexing screen needed • To capture scanning order requirements • Integration with AP mainframe system needed for attribute population • Success of barcode recognition is software dependent

  33. Screen Shot – Task Screen

  34. Screen Shot – Initial Index

  35. Screen Shot – Scan Results

  36. Screen Shot – Error Pages

  37. Screen Shot – No Barcode View

  38. Screen Shot – Barcode Error Correction

  39. Screen Shot – De-skew

  40. Screen Shot – De-skew (refresh)

  41. Screen Shot – Attribute Search

  42. Screen Shot – Voucher Search

  43. Screen Shot – Search Results

  44. Screen Shot – Merge Files

  45. Screen Shot – Indexing Resolution

  46. Scanner Evaluation • Since centralized scanning model, high-end scanners were evaluated • Bell+Howell 8080D • Fujitsu M4099D • “High-end” criteria • Advertised throughput of 80 PPM or greater • Daily duty cycles of 50,000 pages or greater • Duplex scanning • Support of multiple document sizes • Automatic double-feed detection

  47. Scanners Evaluated Fujitsu M4099D Bell+Howell 8080D

  48. Scanner Evaluation Tests • Paper Jam Test • Multiple batches fed through scanner and each incident of paper jams recorded • Non Standard Paper Size and Type Test • Multiple batches of documents in different sizes and paper types, each incident of paper jams and double-feeds recorded • Speed Test • Scanner was run for 60 seconds on two different DPI settings • Image Quality and File Size Test • Subjective evaluation of image quality, and objective recording of resulting file size • Overall Batch Processing • Running batches through from prep to scanning completion

  49. Scanner Evaluation Test Results… • Paper Jam Test • Both scanners were not prone to paper jams and handled all test batches well • Non Standard Paper Size and Type Test • No paper jams occurred, but one double-feed incident was observed on Fujitsu • Overall it seemed that the Bell+Howell roller was more precise at pulling separate sheets from a tight stack of papers • Speed Test • 200 DPI: Fujitsu = 85 pages; B+H = 56 pages • 300 DPI: Fujitsu = 41 pages; B+H = 37 pages

  50. …Scanner Evaluation Test Results • Image Quality and File Size Test • Bell+Howell details • Yielded good usable images right out of the box – no adjustments to image settings were required • Image quality was good with all different types of test documents – yellow and green carbon paper, various type of receipts, highlighted text • Files sizes were reasonable • Fujitsu details • Did not scan legible images out of the box – many adjustments needed to image settings • Image quality good for most document types, but had trouble with dropping out background colors (i.e. dark areas on carbon paper, highlighted text) • File sizes always larger than B+H