empty Epson 11880 cartridges are not empty

[Stefan Fiedler]

We have several dozens of "empty" Epson Stylus Pro 11880 ink cartridges. Actually they are not really empty but they cannot be used anymore because the printer does not allow any more printhead cleaning below a certain ink level. That seems to be around when 2% of ink is left. A cartridge contains 700ml, so 2% is 14ml but actually it seems to be more than that. We have had Epson LFP since the first Stylus Pro 9000 but none of them had so much unusable link left in an "empty" ink cartridge. Any remedies?

Regards,
Stefan

[dgberg]

Put them back in and print with them until they go empty and the printer actually stops printing.
The only thing that you cannot do with low carts is clean. Printing it will do. At least that's how my 7900 and 9900 work. I believe it is no different for the 11880.

[narikin]

I have a bunch of them here too. and a 3880 that costs $55 for 80ml, so I'm going to buy some of those re-fillable 3880 carts, and transfer the ink from the 11880 ones into 3880 ones, use a chip reseter and carry on.  This assumes I can work out how to get the ink from one to the other, and not over me!

weight is a great way to tell whats left. anyone know what a truly empty 11880 700ml cart should weigh?

[BobShram]

As Dan says put in a new cart to clean then go back to the old one and finish it off, sounds like you do a lot of printing so it should not be a problem.

[digitaldog]

Even when the printer refused to print and the cart is said to be empty, there is still a tiny bit of ink there by design (you don’t want air bubbles and such in your hoses). But yes, print until the printer will go no farther and demands a new cartridge.

[Sven W]

Already said, my 11880 behave the same, just put the cart back and print until it stops.
/Sven

[JohnHeerema]

As I understand it, the chips in ink cartridges do not measure the ink level in the cartridge, but nozzle firings.

Now, there are manufacturing tolerances in the print head, so a droplet which is supposed to be, say, 3 picolitres, might actually be a tiny bit more, or a tiny bit less. Epson has to be somewhat conservative, and assume that the droplets are on the large side of the tolerance, or else someone is going to find that the chip reports that there is still ink left, when there really isn't. There are a lot of nozzles, and a lot of firings, but stochastic averaging makes this method of ink calculation surprisingly accurate.

However, your particular printer might on average produce slightly larger, or slightly smaller droplets than the average printer. So you might find that the amount left in your cartridges when the printer says that they are empty, is consistently  more than, or less than the nominal 2%. In your case, it seems that there's more than 14 ml left in your cartridges when the chip thinks that the cartridge is empty.

Assuming that this is true, I would be inclined consider using a chip resetter, and carefully keep using the cartridge until it gets close to being really empty. Having an accurate scale, and knowing the weight of an empty cartridge would seem to be a necessity, as nobody wants their big printer to start aspirating.

[dgberg]

As I understand it, the chips in ink cartridges do not measure the ink level in the cartridge, but nozzle firings.

Now, there are manufacturing tolerances in the print head, so a droplet which is supposed to be, say, 3 picolitres, might actually be a tiny bit more, or a tiny bit less. Epson has to be somewhat conservative, and assume that the droplets are on the large side of the tolerance, or else someone is going to find that the chip reports that there is still ink left, when there really isn't. There are a lot of nozzles, and a lot of firings, but stochastic averaging makes this method of ink calculation surprisingly accurate.

However, your particular printer might on average produce slightly larger, or slightly smaller droplets than the average printer. So you might find that the amount left in your cartridges when the printer says that they are empty, is consistently  more than, or less than the nominal 2%. In your case, it seems that there's more than 14 ml left in your cartridges when the chip thinks that the cartridge is empty.



John,
The op is taking the carts out because the printer will not clean with a low level ink warning. Low level ink warning (2%) is not an empty warning, it just will not let you clean when the warning is triggered. These printers will print until a cart is truly empty and then will stop printing in the middle of a print. Just replace the empty cart and the printer will pick up right where it left off. My green and orange low level warnings have been on for 6 months. If I need a clean I must put fuller carts in to delete those warnings before I can proceed with a cleaning. Then back in with the low carts to print.
I cut one of my 700ml carts apart after it would print no longer. Just to see if empty was really empty. Their was a tiny bit of ink in the bag but certainly not enouough to quibble about. Yep I'd call it empty.

[Ernst Dinkla]

As I understand it, the chips in ink cartridges do not measure the ink level in the cartridge, but nozzle firings.

Next to droplet counting there is an ink conduction sensor or something like that near the outlet of the cartridge. A bypass in the main channel to the cartridge valve. It is wired to the chip. I have a suspicion that it actually gives the last, empty signal if air gets there or the ink layer/mixture deviates enough from the standard. It is also the most likely cause that new, full cartridges give a wrong signal when inserted. Air or something else trapped in that sensor path. Tapping the carts on a hard surface sometimes helps then, taking out some ink with a syringe too.

In a way the oldest cartridge designs with a mechanical switch (3000-9500 printer period) were quite reliable but left about 20 ML of the 220 ML in the cart when declared empty. The first 9600 carts + firmware were a disaster, sometimes up to 40% left in the cart. That system was totally counting on droplets for the "empty" declaration etc. After user complaints Epson changed the firmware that it would waste less ink but still more than with the old carts. The successive models after that improved the system. My experience has been that Epson never filled the carts with extra ink to compensate the ink loss at the end of their use. It was a nice surprise to see that HP did overfill carts and that very little is left in the carts when declared empty. I suspect there is either a sensor on the cart pump actuators or one in the ink channel just after the pump. No sensor in the cart.


met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla

Dinkla Gallery Canvas Wrap Actions for Photoshop
http://www.pigment-print.com/dinklacanvaswraps/index.html

[Farmer]

How did you test whether there was extra ink provided, Ernst?  Did you take a brand new cartridge and empty it manually to test?

I often wonder when people make claims about how much ink was in there just how they tested it.

[Ernst Dinkla]

How did you test whether there was extra ink provided, Ernst?  Did you take a brand new cartridge and empty it manually to test?

I often wonder when people make claims about how much ink was in there just how they tested it.

It must have been 10 years ago that I started measuring the weight of cartridges, their volume and measured with a syringe, the left over ink. For a reason. The Epson 3000 and 9000 had dye inks that didn't have any fade resistance on the available matte art papers of that day. German Etching for example and the rebranded version of it offered by Lyson. So we had to refill cartridges with Lyson, Van Son, Staedtler inks etc  and eventually we found the right ink in Mediastreet's Generations. Which had a better gamut, better Dmax and better color constancy in changing light than the Epson Archival pigment that appeared right after that. Generations was also tested by Wilhelm and had way better test results than the other third party inks available then but less than Epson's Archival pigment. In a later stage I designed a CIS system for 9000´s that I also sold to other print shops and artists in The Netherlands. I continued to use third party inks in an Epson 10000. The 9600 empty cart problem was a well know issue discussed on for example the Leben list still active at that time.

See also Alan Briot´s logbook of the 9600, bottom page and then upwards.
http://www.outbackphoto.com/printinginsights/pi013/Epson9600_03.html

You learn a lot when you measure cartridge volumes, weight of full and empty carts. Refill them with water, check the weight of inkper ML, disassemble carts etc. I never had a 9600, 9800 118800, Canon iPF9000 but collected empty carts to see how they were made. I did so with the HP carts of the Z3100 that I got 4 years ago. Still measure weight of empty carts BTW.

If I write observations like in the message above I base that on good knowledge.


met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla

Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/

[JohnHeerema]

Next to droplet counting there is an ink conduction sensor or something like that near the outlet of the cartridge. A bypass in the main channel to the cartridge valve. It is wired to the chip. I have a suspicion that it actually gives the last, empty signal if air gets there or the ink layer/mixture deviates enough from the standard.

Thanks for the info Ernst - that is very interesting.
I had wondered how accurate droplet counting was in actual practice.

[Farmer]

With all due respect, Ernst, that's many generations of cartridges and printers old and hardly relates to the current environment.

Unless you purchase and measure precisely a large number of brand new and unused cartridges, you really can't comment on the average fill rates of a given line of cartridges.

[Ernst Dinkla]

With all due respect, Ernst, that's many generations of cartridges and printers old and hardly relates to the current environment.

Unless you purchase and measure precisely a large number of brand new and unused cartridges, you really can't comment on the average fill rates of a given line of cartridges.

Up to the 9800 carts we had enough evidence. About 4 generations of Epson models. The waste of ink with carts that were declared empty wasn't compensated with a cart overfill. Epson reduced that cart ink waste in time like it did reduce ink waste on more apects but it still can not  be called a champion of ink economy. I have no evidence that its cart filling policy has changed since the 9800 models, or the opposite. Let us approach it in a different way, have you evidence that Epson overfills today's carts to compensate the (small) loss of ink when the cart is declared empty?

met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla

Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/

[Farmer]

Up to the 9800 carts we had enough evidence. About 4 generations of Epson models. The waste of ink with carts that were declared empty wasn't compensated with a cart overfill. Epson reduced that cart ink waste in time like it did reduce ink waste on more apects but it still can not  be called a champion of ink economy. I have no evidence that its cart filling policy has changed since the 9800 models, or the opposite. Let us approach it in a different way, have you evidence that Epson overfills today's carts to compensate the (small) loss of ink when the cart is declared empty?

I appreciate your choice of how to move forward on this question.  The issue, for me, is that as you say there is no evidence either way with regard to the current and most common cartridges available/being used and therefore whilst discussion of the old cartridges is interesting and can and should promote discussion, it can be misleading without being suitably qualified.

I have no evidence one way or the other at the moment.  As you also have no evidence one way or the other, it is important to declare this so that people are not unintentionally mislead.

If I am able to obtain useful results, I will share them.

[Ernst Dinkla]

I appreciate your choice of how to move forward on this question.  The issue, for me, is that as you say there is no evidence either way with regard to the current and most common cartridges available/being used and therefore whilst discussion of the old cartridges is interesting and can and should promote discussion, it can be misleading without being suitably qualified.

I have no evidence one way or the other at the moment.  As you also have no evidence one way or the other, it is important to declare this so that people are not unintentionally mislead.

If I am able to obtain useful results, I will share them.

If you carefully read my first message on this subject you will see "My experience" etc. I described two older printers in that message. I think that message wasn't misleading anyone. If you provide evidence to the contrary you could make that accusation. Right now there remains a question whether recent cart models are overfilled or not. Kind of academic question as the ink waste is meanwhile minimised, something I referred to in my first and last message. It would surprise me if the recent carts are overfilled given my experience with older cart systems that wasted more and didn't have an overfill. That is my gut feeling though, not measured, but almost an educated guess.


met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla

Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/

[Farmer]

If you carefully read my first message on this subject you will see "My experience" etc. I described two older printers in that message. I think that message wasn't misleading anyone. If you provide evidence to the contrary you could make that accusation. Right now there remains a question whether recent cart models are overfilled or not. Kind of academic question as the ink waste is meanwhile minimised, something I referred to in my first and last message. It would surprise me if the recent carts are overfilled given my experience with older cart systems that wasted more and didn't have an overfill. That is my gut feeling though, not measured, but almost an educated guess.

In a discussion about 11880 (newer) cartridges, you raised the issue of older ones.  If you didn't mean to imply that the current ones suffered in the same way, then why raise the issue at all?  If you're suggesting that you mentioned it just as a piece of interesting history, then I'll accept you at your word.  Of course, you now go on to say quite clearly that your "educated guess" is that the newer carts are not over filled, so again I am left wondering as to the original intent.

[Ernst Dinkla]

Farmer,

On message content I have a gut feeling that I contributed something on topic and added to that some history on empty cart declaration methods. That would have been the sole message from my side to this discussion. What's your contribution to this thread?


met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla

New: Spectral plots of +180 inkjet papers:
http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm

[Farmer]

Scientific examination includes rigorous assessment and a requirement to prove claims and to clarify any ambiguity.  Your statement was ambiguous in my opinion and I have explained why.

I offered to accept you at your word, Ernst.  If you want to devolve this into a pissing contest, then you can do so on your own.

Gut feelings are good and well, but they have no place when making absolute claims.

[Randy Carone]

Ernst,

Thanks you for your insightful information. Valuable, as usual.

Farmer,

Use Ernst's info as you wish and move on. Slamming one of the best posters on this forum is useless and counterproductive. I think most of us on this forum can figure out how to interpret Ernst's information and will not find it misleading.