Blocked squeezy bottle needle

[websnail]

Going back to the algae issue, most of the dyes in use have some form of biological source so the inhibitor, biocide (or whatever you want to call it) has to be there to stop the algae having a dye-style lunch at your printers expense.

If you think back a little, the critical bit is going to be, not just the ink but there's all those other factors important to life which include light, heat and air. Most of us know about the exposure to light and keeping things cool (but not frozen) but I wonder how many consider what's in the air. There are plenty of spores around that differ from place to place and if you ever watch a sun beam through your curtains at home, you often see all the dust and other specks wafting around, so it's all out there.

Ultimately the biocide/inhibitor is going to degrade over time and, as Brian noted, you may be introducing contaminants from earlier ink if you suck back into the bottle (something I hadn't thought about before) so there's no such thing as the everlasting ink pot.

That said, having discussed the algae side of things this past few weeks and considering every variable under the sun, moon and stars, it's clear that some practical adjustments could be made to the supply of ink, volume, refill approach (eg: don't suck back) and a few other things.

All in all it sounds like we've all had a bit of food for thought and doubtless will be refining our refill practices some more... Every day's a school day eh?

 

[PeterBJ]

I read somewhere that HP inks and cartridges are manufactured using clean room technology. There might be a good reason for that.

In a chemistry lab it is a rule, that you never pour something back into a bottle to avoid contamination.

We might need to rethink our refill methods. Maybe a better method is to weigh the cartridges to determine how much ink should be used for a refill and transfer that amount from a squeeze bottle to a syringe and use the syringe for the refill, and never pour anything back into a bottle. Even if it might not be a proper sterilisation technique flushing the syringe and needle with isopropyl alcohol before and after use might be a good idea.

 

[stratman]

Perhaps he finds it ironic that at one moment we're looking for a better poison to kill off those nasty bugs but at the next moment we're complaining about how poisonous they are?

Except there weren't complaints in this thread when his post was made except for a tangential comment about "safe" dye inks:

It raises the question of what make and type of dye ink produces good results and is safe to use?

There are no reports of unusual retail toxic dye inks in use by hobbyist printers. Therefore, the likelihood of buying an unusually toxic dye ink cartridge or bulk ink is remote. However, the likelihood of purchasing retail dye ink that may cause or increase the risk of harm to one's printer is real and been repeatedly demonstrated anecdotally on the forum.

This thread is about dye ink potentially blocking a needle, and, dye ink with some growth in it as potential cause for blockage. No one brought up toxicity to anything other than unwanted biologicals before pharmacist's post as far as I can tell.

Maybe it is best to let pharmacist explain on his own the perplexing and incongruous emoticon.

 

[The Hat]

Because the cartridges on my Pro 1 are completely opaque, the only way to successfully refill them accurately is by weight, and here’s how !

I remove the offending cartridge at low ink time, I first change the chip, (No Redsetter) weight the cartridge, then take that weight from a full cartridge weight which is 86 grams and put the difference in weight into a 60 ml syringe to top-up the cartridge again.

The weight conversion that I use for ink from grams to millilitre is:- 1 gram in weight is equal to 1 ml of liquid ink.

There’s no mess, no worry, no ink spillage and above all no cross contamination can occur while using this refilling method and it’s accurate to within plus or minus of 1 grams, it does mean however having to clean the syringe and refill tip after every single use.

You can’t be to careful while refilling and the less time ink is exposed to the air the better, this is where SquEasy bottles come into their own, they cut the exposure time down to a minimum, I reckon..

 

[stratman]

Maybe a better method is to weigh the cartridges to determine how much ink should be used for a refill and transfer that amount from a squeeze bottle to a syringe and use the syringe for the refill

Are the inksets botched from the seller or the manufacturer now such that you need to return to syringe days of olde? Or are personal refilling habits, including storage and handling of the inksets, need to be reviewed and shorn up?

Mikling has reported issues with ink BUT websnail says he has not. Mikling tinkers with his inks to obtain better color matches while websnail does not. Mikling has changed ink and recommends changing over to the new formulation. Could there also be a difference in storage and handling of the inks by the respective sellers that may potentiate a problem?

 

[ThrillaMozilla]

Could there also be a difference in storage and handling of the inks by the respective sellers that may potentiate a problem?

Mikling says he found bacterial growth in a new bottle that came straight from the manufacturer.

 

[pharmacist]

OK Guys,

My explanation about the so-called dangerous formaldehyde: Here in Belgium it is sometimes prescribed by physicians as a foot bath to treat fungal infections. A tablespoon in 1 liter water. Yes it is poisonous and possibly carcinogenic, but used wisely it can be used as a very effective preservative. I presume most of us won't swallow it , which certainly will be very harmful and possibly carcinogenic.

 

[mikling]

What everyone has forgotten is that the only color is the dye magenta. If it had been handling procedures then all colors would be affected. Would it not? Why only magenta? QED. The few problems spanned 12 months or so.

If you understand the word TRACE then not all are affected but you will never know which ones.

I already listed the formulas.

No only was some tinted colors like my PC42M, PM and C221M BUT ALSO numerous other formulations that contain traces of this dye. I list the popular ones here. 6121, 6053, 6120, 6061. Of those the 6120 is one of the ones you need to keep a good eye on as it uses only a single dye and it is the one in question. It did take out a couple of my own Pro9000 printheads but never suspected what might have been the cause. The other one that also appears susceptible is the 6053 which is also used in HP applications as well. While the total number of incidents is small, the commonality of the shared dye is where the detective worked bore fruit. Without that knowledge, it would be a different situation as it could be said to be random. Based on my own mental recollections I would say that the affected dye go as far back as mid to late 2013. Remember , this is not something you can test for after production. You depend on the biocide to keep the microbe situation in check. Only when the biocide fails to do so, then you start seeing problems and possibly way down the road. The important part is to recognize the problem as early as possible and rectify it. The biocide used had a spotless record as best as I can tell for many many years until this particular microbe showed up.

The mfr initially claimed that they did not find similar issues within their stock but why would they inventory old stock? It takes time for spores to hatch. I also did mention the word TRACE amounts to the effect that in one batch of ink made you can have some containers completely free of the spores and some with them. I have personally witnessed this and the mfr. received samples from the same batch that they claimed they did not find any issues but I was able to isolate from the same batch.

Again others may claim to have found not problems. However, Let me say this, of the many thousands of users who have acquired the magentas less than half of 1% had reported problems. As small as that number is to many sellers of ink, that number is simply too high for my standards based on experience and I suspected there was something amiss. Thus my letter to the owner of STS in December 2014 requesting further work into this issue. Initially it was all denials that nobody else was reporting problems until I found and presented samples of ink that was not supposed to be affected. Other sellers reported NOTHING except myself. I was the odd man out and the only supplier reporting suspect ink. I halted shipments for over a week awaiting STS tests and then resumed when they gave the all clear and then I halted again when I found evidence.

My key concern to STS in December 2014 was that they ISOLATE the problem and get rid of the likely dye so that OTHER inks will not be affected in the future. Once isolated that they can take steps to prevent it. It was not one of FIX it but one of genuine concern because IS/STS still has some of the best Canon colors around for the older printers and if it were not this freak of nature then all would still be good.

Again, I had some heated discussions with STS/IS but eventually they came to a conclusion that a TOTALLY new dye source/ formulation and biocide was necessary thus confirming my case that I had mentioned since early January 2015 and it is the end of February 2015 as I write. Since early January 2015, I had STOPPED all shipments of STS/IS dye magentas and began shipping an alternate as I had strong suspicions of what the problem might be and when it was confirmed with my findings. I made a big decision that changes my total product offering and had to make large changes. Since I offer ICC profiles for my supported inks. endless testing and verfication was to be done in short notice.

I have a large stock of IS dye magenta ink awaiting action for a ride down the drain. Hundreds of pounds.

 

[stratman]

@mikling:

Thank you for the informative post. I better understand the problem and the process now from your perspective. I have an unopened inkset from you that must be well over 1 year old. It contains the 6121 ink. Will be interesting to see if it, or others, contain any microbial growth. Have not experienced that before. Your inks have always been superb.

 

[mikling]

I had not experienced it before myself and only when the dots are connected that something smelled fishy. A year ago I paid for a Pro9000 printhead that toolman indicated went bad and he had a prior one go bad as well. he was printing some targets for me. Once it was the 6121 and the other 6120. We could not determine exactly what the cause was nor was there any suspicion of what the problem was. It printed fine one evening and the next evening it was totally clogged. It simply was weird. Now if we postulate that some sort of growth had occurred, then it all makes sense. Warmer environment in the printhead, nozzles exposed to oxygen.The process of growth proceeds more rapidly. If we accept that, then one possible reason for the variation in containers could be the level of dissolved oxygen within the ink in the sealed bottles. Ink is mixed for substantial duration of time. Maybe after the mixing, the level of dissolved oxygen varies between the ink dispensed from the bottom of the vat as compared to the top.

It is only because of the extremely high level of reliability prior to these events that made me start taking notice...it was not "normal" even as low a rate as it was.