Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 57 58 [59] 60 61 ... 74 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Epson 7900 from the inside - out  (Read 350547 times)
Luca Ragogna
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 163



WWW
« Reply #1160 on: January 15, 2013, 08:55:37 AM »
ReplyReply

In the very begining of this thread, Eric made us very aware that his effort to clear his "clogs" with cleaning solution and carts were a waste of money and effort.

Here's the thing, I can't afford to have a tech come and make this repair. If the carts don't work (and I've already stated that I have little hope) the Epson goes to the highest bidder and I lease a Canon 8300s or 8400 (Kinda leaning towards the 8300s). Whatever I can get for the Epson goes towards the new printer and I get a warranty, user replaceable heads and a year warranty on replaced heads when and if I ever get to that point. It kills me that I just spent $1500 on ink.
Logged
Blue moon
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 92


« Reply #1161 on: January 15, 2013, 09:51:13 AM »
ReplyReply

Like it...daring concept.....maybe like we see a car being washed back and forward....
Logged
Eric Gulbransen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 300


never surrender


WWW
« Reply #1162 on: January 15, 2013, 10:39:55 AM »
ReplyReply

Luca, don't die about spending all that loot.  I've never really considered this before but with these X900 Epsons dying off to the scrap yard it could be that a used parts market is emerging.  For instance let's say you just bought a 700ml cart, then blew 40% of it doing power cleans and killed your head.  Printer is a total loss so it goes to the junk, and 420ml of new HDR ink goes down the toilet with it.  You go buy a Canon clinging to the only trace of happiness you can, which is knowing you won't be in this place again any time soon.  While that may be a trace of happiness, it's mostly sadness.  I don't know how reasonable it is to sell something like half used ink on craigslist, but it does still have value doesn't it?

As for your cleaning carts, they aren't cheap either - and they too may threaten to end up in the can.  I can help you here.  I have a dream to set up an X900 machine specifically for cleanings, so I'll buy them from you when/if you're done with them.  Why must we all face the daunting task of buying cleaning carts, purging all that expensive ink, filling the lines with cleaning fluid, rinsing the head, then filling the lines with ink again?  It's too much I think.  Ridiculous money down a ridiculous drain. 

I haven't thought to share this because why would I, we don't even know if it's possible yet.  But I have a dream.  In this dream we will find a way to clear clogged heads.  Once we do I will offer an X900 Rescue Package consisting of the following:  head removal video, special phillips head screwdriver, empty printhead shipping box, four Hersheys kisses. You get the package, take your head out, ship it to me, I soak it/clean it, install it in the X900 cleaning carts machine.  I do cleanings with it, print with it, confirm it is indeed clear.  I pack it up and send it back to you.  We all finally slip the knot from the noose around our necks.


Hell of a dream, I know, but that's my MO.  I am a dreamer
Logged

chaddro
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 113


« Reply #1163 on: January 15, 2013, 10:50:30 AM »
ReplyReply

one observation: in outdoor printers, like Rolands (also Epson heads), one can print with a few cloged or deflected nozzels because no one nottice from the distance. In time, the clogged nozzels "heal" themselvs, just by printing not by cleanings. I know it is not a solution for fine prints, but just an observation that clogged heads can heal by printing. Obvious, it is not a 100% solution, some clogs never cleans.

Iladi,

If we were talking about the 9800/3800/4000 heads, I'd agree with you. And running 8x10 swatches was one method I used to clear a nozzle.

However, in the last 1-1/2 years of owning my 9890, this has never worked. I have ALWAYS had to resort to a paired cleaning to clear dropped nozzles. I believe this is because the x900 heads do not generate the same kind of "firing force" that the older head do. The whole head cleaning process is vastly different than the older heads. The new heads just do not seem to be able to force the gunk out.






Logged
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6973


WWW
« Reply #1164 on: January 15, 2013, 12:03:18 PM »
ReplyReply

one observation: in outdoor printers, like Rolands (also Epson heads), one can print with a few cloged or deflected nozzels because no one nottice from the distance. In time, the clogged nozzels "heal" themselvs, just by printing not by cleanings. I know it is not a solution for fine prints, but just an observation that cloged heads can heal by printing. Obvious, it is not a 100% solution, some clogs never cleans.

On the 4900 it's a mixed bag. Some clogs do rectify themselves by printing, and some don't, requiring a "pair-cleaning". I had this experience both ways just last night.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6973


WWW
« Reply #1165 on: January 15, 2013, 12:26:38 PM »
ReplyReply

Mark

This is just a thesis and you very probably have read it as avidly as i have !

You may have noticed that around page 125 the cameras used were able to pick air bubbles tethering on the brink of the nozzle wondering whether to "stay outside" the head or go with the flow backwards into the nozzles chamber......unfortunately the bubbles were photographed "sneaking back inside "
Seemingly whats to blame (as I'm sure you know ) is pooled ink lying on the head for longer than is healthy !
The thesis attributes a lot of responsibility to poor hygiene management by the user.. .
We are also admonished on the dirt side ie rag papers flints what have you....that in these scientists opinion goes back up the head....as the air bubble seemingly can....
I sincerely do not think it impossible for drying rubber blade resins to get in on the act with the air bubbles and dirt blobs ....what actually would prevent resins ( coagulating ink in simple terms) which have not been properly washed off the blade going anywhere that the wiper blade touches..or takes them...?Unfortunately,i am using a huge amount of imagination and hunch right now....i am just a printer user mostly who is learning so much from all of your contributions...
I would love to be able to prove that this thesis is right or wrong....
But I am way out of my depth......
But thanks Chris 233 for giving me a chance to read something of a different world  Cheesy
Matt


The paper from the Epson engineers doesn't address the specific issue at hand here. As for the thesis, I don't have the engineering background to evaluate it, even if I did I wouldn't have the detailed knowledge of the Epson printhead and the system that drives it; therefore I would not make any presumption, hunch, guess or inference about the accuracy of its findings in respect of this issue for specific print heads in x900 Epson printers.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6973


WWW
« Reply #1166 on: January 15, 2013, 12:31:50 PM »
ReplyReply

........So far there is only one bit of advice that i can honestly and sincerely offer to everybody...and its this....i am certain that vibrating your cart or your printer for that matter will never do harm !
Matt

Matt, honestly, on a scale of 1 to 10, the most important piece of advice I would offer any one having clogging problems is to make prints at least twice a week, allowing no more than three days interval between. OR, do experiments, as I have done, to see for how long you can leave the printer alone without needing to clean it on next start up. In my case for the 4900 in my humidity and temperature conditions (well within Epson specs), it's up to 5 days.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6973


WWW
« Reply #1167 on: January 15, 2013, 12:36:09 PM »
ReplyReply

Iladi,
.............. The new heads just do not seem to be able to force the gunk out.


Chad, from my experience, it depends. Sometimes yes sometimes no. I'd say more often than not one does need a "pair cleaning" to get all those little lines reproducing in the nozzle check. But before cleaning, unless many lines are missing, I do try running a print and then a nozzle check to see how much printing repairs on its own.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
iladi
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 51


« Reply #1168 on: January 15, 2013, 01:25:52 PM »
ReplyReply

Sorry, my bad, I was not very clear: if some cleanings cannot totaly unclog a head, in time, after some prints, it is possible that the clogged nozzels heal themselves. So, if it is possible, avoid to many cleanings, try to better use the ink and print something not waste the ink downn the waste tank.
Logged
chaddro
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 113


« Reply #1169 on: January 15, 2013, 03:31:39 PM »
ReplyReply

Chad, from my experience, it depends. Sometimes yes sometimes no. I'd say more often than not one does need a "pair cleaning" to get all those little lines reproducing in the nozzle check. But before cleaning, unless many lines are missing, I do try running a print and then a nozzle check to see how much printing repairs on its own.

Hi Mark!

Yes, your 4900 is certainly a different creature than the 79/9900's in that your head sits horizontal in the capping station. Perhaps this helps keep the nozzles more "moist" than my 9890 with it's slanted capping station.

When I first bought my 9890 and had a bad clog, I tried to add some distilled water to the capping station for a soak. It just wasn't practical with the way it's slanted, and the individually capped channels. I had better luck with my 7800 doing this.

Kind of miss my 7800! It could go 3 months without any serious clogs. But the BIG thing I miss is once you had a good nozzle check, it STAYED that way as long as you were printing.

My 9890 has (more often that I care to think about) dropped nozzles after doing large prints. Enough so that if I do a 30x40 (or larger) I will do a nozzle check after wards. Sometimes it's okay, but too frequently it's not. I've not been able to determine any pattern to this either.

It has been better since my capping station and AID board were replaced. I turn off AID because it was just TOO sensitive and would run a cleaning for a partially deflected nozzle (even if the nozzle check looked good). Really hate wasting ink!







Logged
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6973


WWW
« Reply #1170 on: January 15, 2013, 03:43:39 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi Mark!

Yes, your 4900 is certainly a different creature than the 79/9900's in that your head sits horizontal in the capping station. Perhaps this helps keep the nozzles more "moist" than my 9890 with it's slanted capping station.

When I first bought my 9890 and had a bad clog, I tried to add some distilled water to the capping station for a soak. It just wasn't practical with the way it's slanted, and the individually capped channels. I had better luck with my 7800 doing this.

Kind of miss my 7800! It could go 3 months without any serious clogs. But the BIG thing I miss is once you had a good nozzle check, it STAYED that way as long as you were printing.

My 9890 has (more often that I care to think about) dropped nozzles after doing large prints. Enough so that if I do a 30x40 (or larger) I will do a nozzle check after wards. Sometimes it's okay, but too frequently it's not. I've not been able to determine any pattern to this either.

It has been better since my capping station and AID board were replaced. I turn off AID because it was just TOO sensitive and would run a cleaning for a partially deflected nozzle (even if the nozzle check looked good). Really hate wasting ink!


In the early days when I still had my Epson 4000, tech support recommended moistening the felt pads at the bottom of the capping station. It didn't help - at all.

On my 4900 I have also turned off all automatic cleaning. It was doing too much cleaning. My philosophy is that if a cleaning is really needed it will show up in a nozzle check, and I do those before each printing session, or during a session if I see the print coming out with obviously missed colours (this latter happened only once since I bought the printer in December 2010).
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
Blue moon
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 92


« Reply #1171 on: January 15, 2013, 06:38:33 PM »
ReplyReply

Matt, honestly, on a scale of 1 to 10, the most important piece of advice I would offer any one having clogging problems is to make prints at least twice a week, allowing no more than three days interval between. OR, do experiments, as I have done, to see for how long you can leave the printer alone without needing to clean it on next start up. In my case for the 4900 in my humidity and temperature conditions (well within Epson specs), it's up to 5 days.
Mark
Yes  I agree...
the more frequently one prints obviously the less one would hope to have to do housekeeping...and i agree it makes sense to print...thats why we buy our machines after all..as i said i will reduce my agitation program proportionately as i recommence printing...
However,  your own results are beginning to indicate to me at least that i may be on the right track after all.....
During the last 75 days i have done 5 auto cleans...and printed 2 small rgb prints..4 autos went through clean on the first run...the one reject took 3 blocked lines before cleaning itself..minor really...but a reject nevertheless...
So am i right in saying that in the last 75 days i had 1 block situation....and 2 small prints to my name....
On the other hand,am i wrong in deducting that ,in order for your 900 to remain trouble free  over 75 days ,you have either produced 25 prints in that time OR if you were not in the position to produce 25 prints that in your established cleaning method you would need to have done ( in your own words)....
15 startups and 15 cleans on startups over a 75 day period of zero printing....
Then again i may be jumping to conclusions that the inference in your post above was that your method was superior to the method i use....apologies  if i have
Matt

...
Logged
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6973


WWW
« Reply #1172 on: January 15, 2013, 08:13:03 PM »
ReplyReply

Mark
Yes  I agree...
the more frequently one prints obviously the less one would hope to have to do housekeeping...and i agree it makes sense to print...thats why we buy our machines after all..as i said i will reduce my agitation program proportionately as i recommence printing...
However,  your own results are beginning to indicate to me at least that i may be on the right track after all.....
During the last 75 days i have done 5 auto cleans...and printed 2 small rgb prints..4 autos went through clean on the first run...the one reject took 3 blocked lines before cleaning itself..minor really...but a reject nevertheless...
So am i right in saying that in the last 75 days i had 1 block situation....and 2 small prints to my name....
On the other hand,am i wrong in deducting that ,in order for your 900 to remain trouble free  over 75 days ,you have either produced 25 prints in that time OR if you were not in the position to produce 25 prints that in your established cleaning method you would need to have done ( in your own words)....
15 startups and 15 cleans on startups over a 75 day period of zero printing....
Then again i may be jumping to conclusions that the inference in your post above was that your method was superior to the method i use....apologies  if i have
Matt

...

Matt,

Here's what happens in my studio/office. Maybe I'm typical, maybe not, I don't know, but FWIW, here goes. I like making photographs and printing them. I also have a huge backlog of scanning, because I'm not a youngster and I have film going back many decades, some of which is worth digitizing and preserving (why I developed some specialization in making and processing scanned images and even wrote a book about it). So the only thing that keeps me from making prints is time and absence from home when I need to travel. So that's my "context". As I said, it is optimal to print every three days or so. Even if I only have time to turn the printer on, run a nozzle check and make a print or two, that's adequate, but normally I would be making more. If I leave the printer off for 5 days I can count on a pair cleaning, and then make several prints or more. And that's it. So yes - 25 prints minimum in 75 days, but on this rhythm, it's basically trouble free, and no waste to speak of. At five day intervals (minimum 15 prints), a pair cleaning really uses very little ink, so again, little waste relative to the volume of prints made, but if I can maintain a 3 day interval cycle so much the better. If I am away for several weeks at a time, then I can count on being into a bigger cleaning issue - BUT so far, no complete power cleans; rather I'll find it needs "Clean>Powerful" on individual pairs, with up to an hour doing the clean-print-clean routine to get the printer back to 100%. It always come back to 100%, but it wastes time, a few sheets of paper and in that case, yes, wastes ink. But there hasn't been a train-smash so far, and the print quality is excellent.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
Eric Gulbransen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 300


never surrender


WWW
« Reply #1173 on: January 15, 2013, 10:00:22 PM »
ReplyReply

I regretfully report our latest cleaning solution has about as much impact on our dried ink as I had on science homework back in 9th grade.  Head low, in my hands, thoughts of tears but nothing yet. 

WTF is this stuff made of...
Logged

davidh202
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 551


« Reply #1174 on: January 15, 2013, 10:37:00 PM »
ReplyReply

I regretfully report our latest cleaning solution has about as much impact on our dried ink as I had on science homework back in 9th grade.  Head low, in my hands, thoughts of tears but nothing yet.  

WTF is this stuff made of...

Sorry Eric we are all really rooting for ya!
I like your dream post much better  Wink

I have another thought.
My wife the artist, uses a product called Pink Soap to clean her brushes.
The label says will clean Oils Acrylics and Watercolors contains a conditioner but no chlorides, phosphates,alkalies alcohol or solvents ?
Realatively cheap and probably available at any art supply, Michaels Hobby, Lobby, etc
Here's their site and some other interesting products to use on dried paints...
http://www.speedballart.com/our-products.php?cat=71

David
« Last Edit: January 15, 2013, 10:38:33 PM by davidh202 » Logged
Blue moon
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 92


« Reply #1175 on: January 16, 2013, 05:51:28 AM »
ReplyReply

I regretfully report our latest cleaning solution has about as much impact on our dried ink as I had on science homework back in 9th grade.  Head low, in my hands, thoughts of tears but nothing yet. 

WTF is this stuff made of...
For God Sake Man
Do you not realise that you are the first human being to have discovered that a solution does not work WITHOUT HAVING TO DO A SELF DESTRUCTIVE POWER CLEANING  PROCEDURE SO TO DO .....
I am extremely envious for one !
Logged
Blue moon
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 92


« Reply #1176 on: January 16, 2013, 09:05:47 PM »
ReplyReply

Matt,

Here's what happens in my studio/office. Maybe I'm typical, maybe not, I don't know, but FWIW, here goes. I like making photographs and printing them. I also have a huge backlog of scanning, because I'm not a youngster and I have film going back many decades, some of which is worth digitizing and preserving (why I developed some specialization in making and processing scanned images and even wrote a book about it). So the only thing that keeps me from making prints is time and absence from home when I need to travel. So that's my "context". As I said, it is optimal to print every three days or so. Even if I only have time to turn the printer on, run a nozzle check and make a print or two, that's adequate, but normally I would be making more. If I leave the printer off for 5 days I can count on a pair cleaning, and then make several prints or more. And that's it. So yes - 25 prints minimum in 75 days, but on this rhythm, it's basically trouble free, and no waste to speak of. At five day intervals (minimum 15 prints), a pair cleaning really uses very little ink, so again, little waste relative to the volume of prints made, but if I can maintain a 3 day interval cycle so much the better. If I am away for several weeks at a time, then I can count on being into a bigger cleaning issue - BUT so far, no complete power cleans; rather I'll find it needs "Clean>Powerful" on individual pairs, with up to an hour doing the clean-print-clean routine to get the printer back to 100%. It always come back to 100%, but it wastes time, a few sheets of paper and in that case, yes, wastes ink. But there hasn't been a train-smash so far, and the print quality is excellent.
Mark
You know your 900  at least as well as I think i know my 800 !
i have the less sophisticated 800 that i am testing to its limits through (at the moment anyway ) INACTION...you have the more advanced 900 that you have calibrated to "purr" by intelligently matching your print production to the fluidity needs of the printer ....you have clearly demonstrated that it is possible to stay printing once you know the limits of your machine and respect them.
Now put these two methods of management together.. and what are the possibilities...?
1 your method tells us what you need to be producing in terms of regular print output with the 900. .in a going concern scenario...how many days between prints...how long is a safe vacation period ..really practical stuff...make sure your machine matches your workload....not an easy task when one takes note of the many "cries for help " all around us on this thread .....and you have been successful and thats what matters.

2  The method that i have pursued is  testing the machine itself in terms of its endurance... Basic things like ....(dormant means no printing )
How long between autos for a dormant 900 = 5 days (thanks to your research Mark )
How long between autos for a dormant 800 = 15 days ( my research )
Over 75 days I know that the 800 had a 80% success rate on its  5 dormant printer auto checks...just one clean to be done.  10 minutes cleaning in 75 days (printer not entirely dormant...2 tiny prints done in 75 days )previous 210 days had similar results....no printing ...
Hypothetically,If you were to do  5 autos on a dormant 900 over 75 days could you guess how many hours it would take to clear your clogs during the 75 day period ?
3 I am of the opinion that the obvious difference in the management of the clog characteristics of the two machines is partially as a result of the different features of the two machines but principally as a result of the way that i manage the 800 on a day to day basis as compared to conventional management methods.
4 i expect to improve on my 80 % success rate  provided that i print a photograph once every 15 days at least and continue with my existing auto check routine.
5 i expect that the rate of improvement above 80% clog free ( 10 minutes cleaning time every 75 days) will be directly correlated to
A. The amount of printing done and its frequency over the 75 day period
B  the continuation of my existing clog management program in addition to a consistent regular print program like you achieve Mark.
Matt

Logged
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6973


WWW
« Reply #1177 on: January 16, 2013, 09:11:29 PM »
ReplyReply

isn't it a hoot how we have to optimize the baby-sitting of our printers? I *almost* regret getting rid of my 3800. Never had to think of stuff like this.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
Blue moon
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 92


« Reply #1178 on: January 16, 2013, 09:31:38 PM »
ReplyReply

Mark
On the negative front,
When i start printing again with the 800,i do expect any performance gains that i make ,in my opinion anyway,to be challenged by Epsons terribly sad method of moving obsolete inks (resins) away from the printhead ably assisted (epson hopes )by gravitational forces ,in the expectation that these resins are gone away for ever.....
The resin disposal method for the 900 is not sad ....its funny
Matt
Logged
Eric Gulbransen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 300


never surrender


WWW
« Reply #1179 on: January 17, 2013, 02:48:33 PM »
ReplyReply

I am so excited I can hardly believe this.  If you've been reading along you might remember me describing watching one of the many cleaning solutions actively dissolving dried ink lodged inside the chamber walls of the piezoboard.  I had a few tests going on at the time and to be honest I lost myself in all of it.  Somehow I mixed up my test channels which devalued any of the tests I had just done that day.  But I "knew" one of the cleaning fluids actually did work.  So, I set out to do all the tests again.  Whatever, I do a lot of things twice.  But when I did this test again, and watched this fluid in anticipation of the same remarkable dried ink dissolving phenomenon, it never happened.  I tried it again on another channel.  It never happened.  WTF...?  So at this point I decided the ink that I watched dissolving must not have been that dry.  That's the only explanation I could come up with.  To date "all cleaning solutions fail to dissolve our dried ink".

A few days ago I ordered the 3M cleaner.  Another $80.  Whatever.  It takes a while to get here because they don't rush ship this stuff.  So we wait.  But all this time I am still haunted by the moving image that I know I saw, of one solution actually working.

...I woke this morning and it hit me square in the forehead.  In the beginning of my tests I went crazy aggressive, I tried Acetone, but only on a few channels.  It worked like mad, cleaned the chambers like that was it's sole purpose in life.  But it compromised the glue that sticks the channels to the head.  Done deal, Acetone is out.  One of the channels that I used for this test I let soak in Acetone for hours.  The other two only ten minutes or so, then I rinsed them off with distilled water and Dawn.  There they have sat ever since in my test cabinet.  These channels are still packed with dried ink, as the Acetone wasn't on them long.  And it is THESE channels that I used to "confirm" whether or not the fluid which I thought had worked, had actually worked.  Which now it did not.  So what "hit me in the forehead" this morning was an idea that the Acetone may have melted the outer surface of the dried ink that it started to dissolve, but then when I removed it this might have sealed the dried ink in some scientific way that I am only imagining.  So this morning I repeated the same test, for the third time, on a virgin channel.


Are you curious yet?  Do you already know what happened?  You do don't you..


...it works.  The dried ink-packed piezoboard is 100% clear of ink, and the chamber walls look lazer perfect.  This fluid did not harm the super sensitive board AT ALL.


KOWAFREAKINGBUNGA!!!!!!


I apologize for the confusion.  My mistake(s).  

Next test is to perform what I have come to feel is the safest and most effective cleaning procedure to a printhead channel, with this fluid, while it is still secured to a printhead.  Then I will perform a full autopsy.  Yes, with pics  Smiley


I love you too


ps - it was the RED fluid
« Last Edit: January 17, 2013, 02:50:21 PM by Eric Gulbransen » Logged

Pages: « 1 ... 57 58 [59] 60 61 ... 74 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad