To Fit or not to Fit a Waste ink Tank on a Canon Printer ?

[PeterBJ]

This is a very elegant solution

 

[jtoolman]

Yup that is as close to perfect as I've seen!

I will have to look around.
I am currently testing my little bag on my R340 and see what happens. But I really do like your set up Mike!

Joe

 

[mikling]

Thanks. and what I did not show was the velcro used to secure the tank. The best one to use is the industrial grade available at the hardware stores in NA Home Depot I know carries it. It won't accidentally come off when junior wants to play.

 

[websnail]

Have to agree, it does look very handy for a DIY, low footprint solution, particularly when coupled with the high tac velcro.

It also comes with the added benefit of improving printer owners complexion and skin tone thanks to all that moisturiser

 

[mikling]

If you guys are thinking, you can stack ten of these on the side of something like an R2400. 8 for ink for the CISS and two for waste ink tanks.
The coaxial connection is also excellent for building pigment ink based CISS systems as well like on Epson printers. The connection allows a controlled dip tube depth AND also doubles as the intake vent and the intake vent is automatically covered to prevent the dust entering the tanks. This is superior to anything else offered on the market today and yet it is so simple.

 

[jtoolman]

I just might buy some of this product! Too bad we could not find an empty little plastic container just like this one from some manufacturer.

Joe

 

[The Hat]

If you guys are thinking, you can stack ten of these on the side of something like an R2400. 8 for ink for the CISS and two for waste ink tanks.
The coaxial connection is also excellent for building pigment ink based CISS systems as well like on Epson printers. The connection allows a controlled dip tube depth AND also doubles as the intake vent and the intake vent is automatically covered to prevent the dust entering the tanks. This is superior to anything else offered on the market today and yet it is so simple.

Your setup really does look the business alright very elegant in deed, but I have a question for you.

Now I know this setup is on an Epson printer and I might be talking through my ass here,
but would the height of your tubing in relation to the purge unit not cause a continued pressure strain on the whole purge unit itself.

It has to pump against gravity constantly (Every time) and when the purge is finished
could some of the waste ink droplets not move backwards again and lodge in the lowest part of the tubing causing a blockage.

Would your waste bottle not be better placed at the same level as the purge unit, say 4" lower than you have it at present ?

 

[ThrillaMozilla]

I think if the pump did not purge the tube with air, then some ink would run back into the pump. But he says it empties the tube with air. And besides, I guess he has a loop in there, which changes the situation.

 

[mikling]

Thrilla hit it on the head. There is an additional aspect that is left unmentioned. First there is the aspect of the purge action after the extraction of the ink during cleaning. Now what many make the mistake of is thinking that the whirring sound is the cleaning. It is not. The quiet slow whirr is the clean cycle where the ink is drawn down. During the more vigorous sound is the purge. The printer must remove the ink that has settled on the purge station pad and this is when vigorous vacuuming is done.. When this happens, the pump pushes with great pressure the ink down the line. Now if the diameter of the tubing is too small, the surface tension of the foamy ink will remain foam for a longer while than if the diameter is larger. So I prefer to use a larger diameter tube for that reason. The other benefit to using a slightly larger diameter is that the resistance of the tube will no longer be an issue ( not that it was significant in the first place).
After this I put the loop that will break any possibility of siphon effect. In fact there are two crests of a loop. At the final crest right above the bottle, I made mention to not have the tailpiece too long. Well by doing this in combination with a generous diameter tube, there is never any possibility of a siphon effect when the ink goes over the crest it goes as flow not as a column or piston which will cause siphoning. The same cannot be said for a small diameter fine tube.

In the last two generations of printers, you'll see both Canon and Epson having significantly longer clean cycles. Well the reality is that both discovered that a slow cleaning is far more effective for a clean. If it is done too quickly, there is the possibility of foaming and if the cartridge cannot recover in a short time, it will actuall pull ink back in reverse. Like the same way a syringe acts. The vigorous sound afterwards is the purge and they want to clear the line. If the purge is too long, it is not that it is detrimental but it makes the printer appear to be slow. As we know already, sometimes it already takes too long.

The 2 to 4 inches of liquid ink head is nothing for a peristaltic pump to work against. Couple that with the aspect that it is foamy and the pressure drops to a fraction of a liquid column.

It's a bit of overkill but at the same time, it is the simplest. No connectors, one hole, extra tubing in the loop for easier handling. Easy dismantling. The hardest part was finding a slick container....but any bottle can be used, it's simply a matter of footprint space.

 

[The Hat]

So you think I have being over cautious then with my idea that a few dribbles might end up rolling backwards and settling in the tube at its lowest point. (Not the pump)

I still reckon it would be worth your while keeping an eye on it because it can make one hell of a mess if one of the tubes get blown off, this of course would depend on how often the printer is used.

I know its not till you actually see and hear the purge pump in action that you come to realise its not just pumping out ink all of the time, it also would dispel the rumours that its constantly wasting ink..