PDA

View Full Version : B40W ink problem



Mattie
26-04-2011, 08:06 PM
Hi Guys

Go a issue with my B40W i can not get black or yellow to work, i've tried numerous head cleans (Followed instructions not do more than 5 times), putting syringe in bottom of cartridge in case it's trapped air but still can't get them to work there is nothing at all coming out.

Anyone got any ideas what to do?

Paul
26-04-2011, 08:30 PM
i would live it for couple hours and check again nozzle chek. if nothing then I would try cleaning solution.

Mattie
26-04-2011, 08:33 PM
I'll have to try again tomoz i'm at home now.

i have saw grass kit installed, how would i use a cleaning solution?

AdamB
26-04-2011, 09:05 PM
It is worth leaving it Matthew as Paul said. A couple of years ago I would do head clean after head clean but now I let them stand for 24hrs and it often works.

As an example, I had an epson 1290m sat upstairs for a couple of years (yes couple of years). Took it down, did a few head cleans, bit of cleaning solution - left a few hours - blocked! More cleaning solution, left for 24hrs and hey presto works like new!

Mattie
26-04-2011, 09:10 PM
Cheers Adam, i'll have another go tomorrow.

It's been nightmare of a day in new shop today everything that could go wrong has gone wrong haha

AdamB
26-04-2011, 09:16 PM
Hey mate, don't need those days!

I had one last winter ............

1. Bad snow - cold, caused printers not to work
2. Heaters on, later that day power cut!
3. Got home, missis had dropped keys outside in snow, spent 2 hrs digging to find them in her shoe (in doors).
4. That night pipes froze in house, no water.
5. Next day, snow came down from roof, taking guttering and telephone cable with it .............. ahhhhhh - no internet!

Still, at least I had my family to have a go at in these times of need. I mean come on, if they wasn't here I wold have probably got into a fight!

;-)

Paul
26-04-2011, 09:28 PM
i used this one and it worked fine! after over a year my printes sat on the shelf. did not printed 3 colors. now is like new :)
LINKY (http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=380304689134&ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT)

Mattie
26-04-2011, 09:37 PM
I just hope tomorrow is better, i took it out on fiancee so think i owe her a night out to say sorry haha

JSR
27-04-2011, 01:04 AM
You may find it works if you use a different cartridge and/or ink.

I had a 1290S sitting here for ages which I decided to resurrect. Using Sawgrass ink, I just could not get all the colours to print. I was about to throw the printer out - because it's quite old now - when I decided to grab a couple of refill cartridges and put some cheap ink in them.

What do you know - one quick headclean, and it worked like a charm.

I do have a B40W here which won't print cyan, though, but I suspect that's an air bubble somewhere. I haven't yet got around to fiddling with it (because I have enough printers working that it's not a priority).

Mattie
27-04-2011, 10:39 PM
Hi guys

No look sorting printer spent most of spare time today trying to sort it, been to two local computer shops both said put a small amount of meth spirits in tube over heads and leave over night i've done that i will see what happens tomoz when i get in.

I managed to track down a brand new B40W online so i've ordered that to keep as spare or replace existing one if can't fix

Mattie
28-04-2011, 05:44 PM
We'll i'm proper sick now can't fix printer tried for last few days, ordered new one yesterday and it arrived today but instead of sending the B40W they've sent me a B40WD

AJLA
28-04-2011, 06:15 PM
Oh dear, really sympathise with you, ours took a couple of days faffing but at least it was eventually sorted. Hope things start getting better for you now

bms
28-04-2011, 08:53 PM
We'll i'm proper sick now can't fix printer tried for last few days, ordered new one yesterday and it arrived today but instead of sending the B40W they've sent me a B40WD

B40WD or a B42WD?

Mattie
28-04-2011, 09:08 PM
Hi sorry it was B42WD don't know why i keep putting 40 lol

AdamB
29-04-2011, 12:54 PM
We'll i'm proper sick now can't fix printer tried for last few days, ordered new one yesterday and it arrived today but instead of sending the B40W they've sent me a B40WD

Gutted for you Matthew - I know how frustrating things can be. Hope you get it sorted soon mate, and if I can help just give me a shout.

Adam

Mattie
29-04-2011, 05:42 PM
Gutted for you Matthew - I know how frustrating things can be. Hope you get it sorted soon mate, and if I can help just give me a shout.

Adam

Cheers Adam

This really has been the week from hell moving in to new shop.

1. Phone line not working engineer not coming for another week and a bit so behind on website orders as can't pick them up till i get home then do them the next day at work.

2. Toilet broke need to get new one

3. Alarm system keeps setting itself off

and more and more more haha

On the plus side i've gave up with B40W so i've ordered B1100 with ink kit from BMS, i still need to sort the B42WD out OfficeGiant sent me Yesterday i need to send it back to them.

AdamB
29-04-2011, 05:47 PM
I have a B1100 Matthew, it's been excellent since taking it out of the box!

This plus the B1100 is printable up to A3+ which comes in handy for things like chopping boards etc.

JSR
29-04-2011, 06:36 PM
Isn't the B42W the replacement for the B40W? It was released a few months ago. Is there still no sign of "support" for it from Sawgrass?

With the speed at which Epson discontinues their printers, I would have thought Sawgrass would get their fingers out to support them before they're discontinued. It doesn't take thirty minutes to create a profile, but it takes Sawgrass months to "support" the replacement printer. :rolleyes:

And they wonder why people look for alternatives.

bms
29-04-2011, 06:46 PM
The B42WD isn't supported yet because Epson have made the code on the chip so difficult to break and therefore make compatible chips. It isn't just Sawgrass, there are no compatible chips/ cartridges available for this model yet.

JSR
29-04-2011, 06:55 PM
Perhaps they should look for another entry-level A4 printer to support, then? Seems there are several that people on this forum use that Sawgrass don't bother with.

Or, failing that, they could support an entry-level A4 printer that doesn't rely on chips and doesn't need a CISS ... like, say, a Brother printer? :biggrin:

Mattie
29-04-2011, 07:16 PM
I'll be fine now with B1100 and other printers, hopefully don't get any problems with B1100 haha

Thanks for all the help guys!!!!!!!

bms
29-04-2011, 08:40 PM
Perhaps they should look for another entry-level A4 printer to support, then?

Or, failing that, they could support an entry-level A4 printer that doesn't rely on chips and doesn't need a CISS ... like, say, a Brother printer? :biggrin:

They already do - the Ricoh GXe3300n :)

All the new Epson printers are using the same chip set so it's not specific to the B42WD. Also, with the B1100 not being a great deal more expensive that the B42W and offering much more then I suppose there isn't huge pressure to get the B42WD supported!! Seriously though there is a huge after market for compatible cartridges so it won't be too long before some company manages to crack the code (and then Epson) will change the chip again and off we go again...

Canon never used to chip their cartridges, nor did HP, but do now so I wonder how long it will be before Brother follow suit.

Ian M
29-04-2011, 10:59 PM
The S22 has the same problem & if you follow the link it will show how it has been overcome. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0252bmYCnvw

I'm with Jonathan in that Brother would be the way to go now.

bms
30-04-2011, 11:01 AM
Good link Ian. It's getting more and more complicated with the Epson printers. Thankfully the Ricoh printers are easier to use.

JSR
30-04-2011, 12:33 PM
Good link Ian. It's getting more and more complicated with the Epson printers. Thankfully the Ricoh printers are easier to use.

It's all well and good hailing the Ricoh "use someone else's ink and we'll hang you out to dry" Printers as the saviour of the industry, but that's avoiding the issue - not solving it.

Waving around Ricoh printers is like throwing a drowning man a life-preserver. Sure, it'll save his life, but he'd rather not be drowning in the first place! If Ricoh hadn't brought out their gelsprint printers, where would we be now? What printers would we be able to use our expensive Sawgrass ink in?

Most OEM printer manufacturers take the profits they make from the ink to develop and evolve their printers. That's why inkjet printers today are so much better than they were 15 years ago.

But the profits made from Sawgrass ink do not go into developing anything. We're still using the same ink in a B40W that was used in a 3000 some ten years ago - that's why the same ink can be used in all "supported" Epson printers of the last dozen or more years - there's no dye-sub ink that's been designed for a specific printer (if there was, we wouldn't need profiles). The printers have improved and been refined, with ever increasing quality of output, while the ink has stagnated.

And this brings up the other point - the reason for blockages. It's nothing to do with the printer, and everything to do with the ink. My own experiments have proven to me that dye-sub ink is quite a bit thicker than regular dye ink - that's why Epson printers have trouble pulling the ink through so frequently.

It's easy to see why this is. Back when the most popular dye-sub printer was the Epson Stylus Colour 3000, they used a fixed droplet size so big that, unlike today, they didn't specify it. Some say that it was over 20pl - presumably with nozzles in the printhead so big you could drive a bus through them. Today, even the most budget-end printer has a droplet size below 2pl with more nozzles on the printhead than you could wave a stick at.

It's a wonder they don't "clog" more often - most often the "clogging" isn't clogging anyway, it's an air lock caused either by the (large) ink particles settling or the inability of the tiny ink pumps to draw the sludge that is dye-sub ink through the printhead. Ramming the ink through the printhead at a much higher pressure (which is essentially what the Ricohs do, I believe) isn't the solution to the problem, it's hiding a problem that'll come back to bite us real hard when Ricoh printers become as difficult to "adapt"/"support" as the Epson ones are becoming.

If those who held the monopoly on dye-sublimation ink, those who make the vast profits from it, designed their own printer suited to their own ink we wouldn't be in this situation. We wouldn't be held ransom to Epson and their tricky chips; we wouldn't be a slave to Ricoh's whims; and we wouldn't all be at the mercy of printers that are not suited to the ink.

Ideally, we'd have a choice of three printers designed for dye-sub ink - 8.5", 13", and 17" - each with large chipless and refillable stationary cartridges (of 100ml capacity), all capable of handing roll-paper, and all with user-replaceable affordable printheads.

If that happened, dye-sub for small businesses would become a proper industry and not this mickey-mouse situation we're currently kept in by a monopolistic supplier of dye-sub ink.

bms
30-04-2011, 01:31 PM
Quite agree, but back to reality...

JSR
30-04-2011, 01:51 PM
Quite agree, but back to reality...

Sadly, most of the above is reality. It's no wonder more and more people are seeking alternatives outside of the restricted boundaries imposed on us.

There's a discussion on another forum about Sawgrass' patent being due to expire within a few years. Apparently in the US, the patent only lasts for 17 years from issue (or 20 years from filing these days). Soon we'll be able to "legally" obtain ink from whomever we like at a price that doesn't cripple us.

I bet it won't be that easy, though. Sawgrass have so many patents that they'll muddy the waters for as long as possible. I just hope there's some enterprising dye-sub ink manufacturer out there who's on the ball, waiting to pounce when the day comes. Who's betting that, if/when that day comes, Sawgrass will suddenly stop producing dye-sub ink - because it won't be profitable enough (instead they'll focus on ChromaBlast, or whatever others they're working on).

That'll be handy for everyone who's bought Ricoh printers that can only have Sawgrass' cartridges used in them. At least those who are using Epson printers, or that are working on alternatives, can just "fill up a cartridge/CISS and print". How "easy" will Ricoh printers be, then? Maybe Ricoh isn't such a wise investment for the long-term user after all... Tying yourself to one supplier doesn't make business sense because your business dies with theirs.

The silly thing is that I wouldn't mind the huge cost of Artanium ink, if I knew we were getting something back for it. After all, paying £20 a cartridge for my Epson Stylus Color 600 back in the 90s meant that we eventually saw printers as fantastic as the Epson R1800 and Ultrachrome inksets. The profits went somewhere that benefited us all. The same isn't true of dye-sub ink.

Ian M
30-04-2011, 03:56 PM
Good link Ian. It's getting more and more complicated with the Epson printers. Thankfully the Ricoh printers are easier to use.

Thanks Martin. I have to agree that it does seem more & more people are now using the Ricoh printers & most do seem very happy with the results they are getting from them.

I do however have to agree with everything Jonathan says & I'm another one that is wondering if time will come fairly soon when Sawgrass decides to just go down the gel ink route. This leaves me to think that if they did this it might be a bit difficult for them to uphold their patent in a court. The reason being is if they were just supplying ink for the Ricoh printers & not supporting the printers that use a more viscous type of dye sub ink that would then bring doubt into their case. As we all know the only way to any successful prosecution is to prove beyond all reasonable doubt to the court.

As most will know I have been using a very good third party ink for sometime now with stunning results but, the best bit is since using this ink I haven't had one blockage ever. The company I get it from says they have other customers who report the same as me too. This does make me now wonder if their ink has advanced much more that the ink from Sawgrass.

I think we all have to admit that Epson are changing their printers at what to me has become quite an alarming rate & I can understand why as they want to try to keep ahead of the third party ink & cartridge suppliers. As Jonathan says it is the replacement ink that companies such as Epson make their profits with & no company wants to see their profits deminish. It was about six years ago when I spoke to an engineer from HP & he told me that they were looking at ways that if you refilled one of their tri-colour cartridges one of the colours would become blocked rendering that cartridge useless. Let's face it Epson will know what some models of their printers are being used for & will be only to aware of the patents Sawgrass have. Thing that gets me is why Epson & Sawgrass don't work together on a couple of printers just for the dye sub market.

As for someone getting around the new S22 chip problem with that USB device that poses a couple of questions for me. The first is how many more USB ports are we going to need on our PC's to connect all this hardware up? The second one is if they have a third party system such as on the link I posted working why haven't they done the same for the B42W as it was released some 7 months ago. No doubt they'll be someone in China right now trying to come up with something.

I like Jonathan do think the time is now right for a company such as Brother to step in with their printers. Let's face it they have been producing some quite good DTG machines for a number of years now. It is time we did move forward & looked at a new alternative to what we have been using for such a long time now.

JSR
30-04-2011, 04:18 PM
The S22 has the same problem & if you follow the link it will show how it has been overcome. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0252bmYCnvw
I've just watched this.

It's clear that someone has put a lot of effort into working out how to get the CISS to work. I just wish we saw as much enthusiasm to help the customer from the manufacturer of "supported" ink.

Personally, I prefer a system where no CISS is required but, if I didn't, it's reassuring to know that there are people with the ingenuity and desire to give us options. And they're the ones who don't make vast fortunes from over priced expensive ink.

Matt Quinn
30-04-2011, 04:55 PM
My main business is video production - I'm a broadcast cameraman/producer by 'trade'. That grew out of an interest in stills photography, and I've come 'full circle' to the extent of being involved in commercial, editorial and fine-art photography for many years. The latter of course being an industry that has seen MASSIVE changes with the advent of digital cameras and the near-disappearance of the traditional darkroom.

Many of the above issues surrounding printers affect the photographic industry too... Though it has been far easier for third-party manufacturers to produce inks that properly exploit the capabilities of 'inkjet' printers in that context; you'll find both photographers and artists involved in gicleé printing agonising over the many of the same issues of compatibility, profiling etc...

Having very recently decided to explore Dye-sub techniques to see if they offer anything for my own business I have to say I've been disappointed by the ink suppliers... My main interest is in printing to glass and ceramics. And I'm left wondering how serious Sawgrass actually are about the future of their technology.

I bought my first batch of (third party) Dye-Sub ink the other day. And visually it's clear that it will have severe limitations. Apparently closer to the erroneous 'primary school primaries' of Red Blue and Yellow rather than proper process colours obviously colour gamut will be seriously limited... Likewise the viscosity of the inks DOES seem highly likely to cause issues. - To the point I wondered what solvent might be added to thin it slightly.

I've examined the 'raw' Sawgrass inks too, and subjectively they look worse... That's no scientific opinion of course; but I DID wonder what the heck I am buying into! the stuff looked more like something you'd put in a fountain pen than an inkjet printer!

Indeed I was reminded VERY much of the early days of colour inkjets when we first explored printing our own short-run VHS sleeves, and the difficulties we had rendering 'decent' phototographic images comparable with what you'd see on a mainstream commercial product. - My recollection is that progress was made via the interaction of people from the printing industry, electronics enthusiasts and photographers to find ways of refilling cartridges, 'fool' the electronics and develop mixes of existing dyestuff that eventually evolved into useable systems... Quickly picked up by those involved in traditional print and photography.

I'm really NOT convinced by the argument that the profits from ink sales have driven improvements in printer technology. On the consumer side it's VERY common for an inkset to cost almost as much (if not more) than the actual printer. The net result is that these machines become pretty-much disposable with all that implies in terms of wasted resource, pollution etc... More savvy consumers go for the after-market third party inksets with varying results...

The net result of all this is an esentially self-anihilating market for printers... I also lecture a couple of days a week and it's surprisingly common to find that students don't have a printer at home - or if they do the cost of ink prevented them refilling it and it langushes under a desk. Likewise I can think of no acquaintance, who uses their computer only in a domestic context, that actually has a working printer...

The ink is too dear generally and, by the time the user gets round to replacing it the machine is often apparently 'dead' due to dried out ink paths or damaged (dirty contacts usually) cartridge connectors.

- Of course there is a demand from the entusiast/semi-pro/professional market. And I believe progress lead by people within those sectors coupled to demands for improved machines have primarily forced the hands of printer manufacturers to 'keep up'. Even so, we are all, in general, ill-served by the rip-off cost of ink, attempts to railroad us into using only OEM cartridges and the largely irresponsible avenue of building and selling entire printers that are more or less meant to be disposable...

There must then surely be a market for more robust, modular 'semi pro' printers designed to last, be economically repairable, and able to be fed with a variety of specialist inks? Though well beyond the limits of my own knowledge of electronics and fabrication skills it is not unfeasible for a good engineer to Construct such a device. - Or for that matter develop replacement electronics that worked with an existing printer chassis.

At the end of the day we seem to have TWO issues... Sawgrass, who cornered the market, used it as a cash cow (by bleeding it to death) and (IMHO) deserve everything they get from the competition. And printer manufacturers who have no interest in a sustainable market.

The sooner alternatives are found for both the better! The reality is that none of these outfits are there to do anyone but themselves any favours.