CWatters wrote:
> "Susan Sharm" <susanshaarm@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1131861989.689133.299360@f14g2000cwb.googlegr oups.com...
>
>>What is the procedure for home repair of Hewlett Packard #14 print
>>heads?
>>
>>My CYAN stopped printing (even though the refilled cartridge is full)
>>and a diagnostic report from the HP OfficeJet D145 all in one printer
>>says the CYAN print head needs to be replaced.
>>
>>Since the print head has to be replaced, I may as well attempt a home
>>repair. But how?
>>
>>A friend suggested I remove the bad cyan printhead drip a solvent such
>>as alcohol or acetone or hydrogen peroxide on the top steel grid until
>>it runs clear - which might unblock the screen in case it's blocked by
>>teeny tiny honey-I-shrunk-the-kids debris.
>>
>>He said then to gently swipe the bottom of the print head with the
>>solvent so as to free up goldish metallic strips on the bottom.
>>
>>Is there a published procedure for home cleaning & repair of print
>>heads as a last ditch effort before replacing them altogether?
>
>
> This cart has the head built in right?
>
> I found the heads in the HP carts would fail after several refills for no
> obvious reason. They wern't blocked (you could see the ink when blotted) and
> there wasn't an air lock (usually cured by twirling it around in a plastic
> bag) they just wouldn't print. No solution - just suck the ink out and put
> it into another cart.
>
It may be a problem with the electrical contacts on the outside of the cartridge.They
don't stand up well to repeated removals and reinsertions of the cartridge. Cleaning the
contacts sometimes helps.

> Noble sentiments, except that most who refill have ruined at least one item
> of clothing, used solvents of dubious ecological integrity in an attempt to
> remove ink stains off of clothing and hands, used solvents of dubious
> ecological integrity in an attempt to clean an intransigent print head, used
> more than one sheet of paper while trying to get a test page that shows all
> is well..

Hate to say it but i've "never" ruined a piece of clothing... not that
I didn't once on my epson spew yellow everywhere but I have since
abandoned vacuum filling. Even so, if stained it becomes a rag.

I did have some kaki dockers on but a simple wash resolved that issue.
While some might require some harsh chemicals to clean a printhead...
for HPs boiling water seems to do the trick perfectly well. Even so a
pad with a few squirts of windex... basicly a low concentration of
ammonia from time to time beats dumping plastic with a few ml of dye
water and ammonia in the landfill *all the time*, not to speak of the
lead and other metals used in making of ink cartridges.

And let's say for example you do get a bum print... well that can be
recycled.

I'll agree if you spew ink everywhere all the time, waste reams of
paper all the time, and are totally incompetent at refilling... by no
means don't do it. I was incompetent on refilling HPs my self so I
switched to Epson then Canon. But what your speaking off is exclusivly
house refilling... not refills or refill stations which should help
reduce the waste of stained clothing. Better tools, experenced
people... less stained clothing.

It's still a superb idea. Not for everyone but for the most part it
does reduce waste... unless you prefer extra plastic with unused ink in
the landfills.

In article <cJSdf.48$Gt6.3@fed1read03>, fb@nospanm.cmm says...
> And the mess you might encounter from you first time refilling? Well
> it's nothing to be concerned about. And the pics produced from top
> quality after market inks is simply outstanding. Listen to me and all
> the others who use after market inks for decades. We know what we're
> talking about.

For some Inkjet printers refilling them is not worth the trouble. I've
always owned Epson inkjet printers because they always had better image
quality than Cannon or HP (IMNSHO). I print a lot, my kids print a lot,
and I've tried every type of refill kit with them. Most times, now
matter how careful I was (and I'm not unskilled) I got ink on the work
area, over filled the cart, found the ink bleeding out the bottom after
I had filled it, etc... After a week of not using the printer with a
refill cart, the head would have a plugged nozzle or some other problem.
It got bad enough that I kept a set of carts with Windex in them to
clean the head (since the head is in the printer not the cart)....

After more than a decade of "dealing with" inkjet printers I purchase a
Wax Thermal printer and I've never looked back, works every time, no
mess, print is better than ink, color is BRIGHT on all papers, etc...
Sure, the printer cost $950 and wax cubes for 6,000 sheets costs $100,
but, it works every time all the time and it's fast.

Some after market parts are not worth the cost you pay for them.

--

spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me

Leythos wrote:

>In article <cJSdf.48$Gt6.3@fed1read03>, fb@nospanm.cmm says...
>
>
>>And the mess you might encounter from you first time refilling? Well
>>it's nothing to be concerned about. And the pics produced from top
>>quality after market inks is simply outstanding. Listen to me and all
>>the others who use after market inks for decades. We know what we're
>>talking about.
>>
>>
>
>For some Inkjet printers refilling them is not worth the trouble.
>
AMEN

>I've
>always owned Epson inkjet printers because they always had better image
>quality than Cannon or HP (IMNSHO).
>
NOT TODAY

> I print a lot, my kids print a lot,
>and I've tried every type of refill kit with them. Most times, now
>matter how careful I was (and I'm not unskilled) I got ink on the work
>area, over filled the cart, found the ink bleeding out the bottom after
>I had filled it, etc...
>
THAT IS TRUE. WHAT A MESS

>After a week of not using the printer with a
>refill cart, the head would have a plugged nozzle or some other problem.
>It got bad enough that I kept a set of carts with Windex in them to
>clean the head (since the head is in the printer not the cart)....
>
>After more than a decade of "dealing with" inkjet printers I purchase a
>Wax Thermal printer and I've never looked back, works every time, no
>mess, print is better than ink, color is BRIGHT on all papers, etc...
>Sure, the printer cost $950 and wax cubes for 6,000 sheets costs $100,
>but, it works every time all the time and it's fast.
>
>Some after market parts are not worth the cost you pay for them.
>
>
>

Leythos wrote:
> In article <cJSdf.48$Gt6.3@fed1read03>, fb@nospanm.cmm says...
>
>>And the mess you might encounter from you first time refilling? Well
>>it's nothing to be concerned about. And the pics produced from top
>>quality after market inks is simply outstanding. Listen to me and all
>>the others who use after market inks for decades. We know what we're
>>talking about.



>. Most times, now
> matter how careful I was (and I'm not unskilled) I got ink on the work
> area, over filled the cart, found the ink bleeding out the bottom after
> I had filled it, etc...

The only time I ever got ink on my fingers was one time installing an
oem cart on one of my newly purchased canons when I accidentely applied
too much pressure on the cart pulling off the tape. Other than that one
incident involving an oem cart, refilling for almost 10 years has been
incident free. I never have clogged heads much to the regret of our
resident oem moron and I've saved enough $'s to purchase a couple of
laptops and other accessories. Refilling is obviously not for everyone,
but I'm not one of those persons.
Frank

Hi Mike,

I don't disagree with much you have stated regarding recycling programs,
or for that matter the oceans being used as a toilet (I live in Victoria
BC, so I know all about that).

I also don't disagree that using OEM ink cartridges is the "safest" way
to go, but it is neither necessarily the more economical, nor the most
environmental approach.

Since HP may well be the most environmentally evolved of all the inkjet
companies, I don't want to point fingers at them, so I will instead keep
my comments more generic about inkjet cartridges, although I believe
they were the "inventors" of the "starter cartridge" which contained 50%
or less ink in the cartridges that first came with the printer.

Advancing beyond issues of whether people ruin their clothes and use bad
solvents to clean them (both of which are somewhat red herrings, IMHO),
let's look at the inkjet cartridges themselves.

Other than in the case of some of the Canon cartridges, most relatively
current models are no longer just a plastic box containing ink. Even
those had problems with being recycled (ink, foam rubber or batting,
plastic, rubber) but newer ones add additional issues. They are made up
of complex components that include several types of plastics, rubbers,
metals, epoxies, and other components making them very difficult to
recycle into anything but end of life product or junk. Adding to this,
they contain ink, which in some cases includes those solvents you spoke
of, colorants and other components that if heated can release toxic
gases. So, each time one of these cartridges is discarded and NOT
reused, it enters either the waste stream or a pretty dead ended
recycling stream, and the recycling stream is not a pretty sight, due to
the complexity and potential toxicity of the materials.

Epson's answer to "recycling" is to have the cartridges burned by a
third party and have them use some of the energy produced.

There is also the issue of all the packaging involved in each new
cartridge purchased, the cost of shipping them around, the human energy
costs in wholesaling, warehousing and retailing them, and more
importantly, the energy debt that occurs when a highly technical product
is made and later destroyed. The manufacturing plants, machines,
workers, etc, that goes into the production of these cartridges. The
cost of moving the cartridges around from one location to the next, the
lost materials when parts cannot be recycled or reclaimed, the cost to
convert the raw materials to a manufactured good and back to raw
material, etc. The cost of birth to death for high tech items is high.
It also has considerable economic impact, in terms of where jobs go, etc.

Things indeed are never as simple as they appear.

Art

(oh, if you insist... MS-MVP Printing and Imaging) ;-)


Mike Hall (MS-MVP) wrote:

> Noble sentiments, except that most who refill have ruined at least one item
> of clothing, used solvents of dubious ecological integrity in an attempt to
> remove ink stains off of clothing and hands, used solvents of dubious
> ecological integrity in an attempt to clean an intransigent print head, used
> more than one sheet of paper while trying to get a test page that shows all
> is well..
>
> Add to the above frustration at not being able to get the printer to produce
> anything meaningful, and maybe it is not such a good idea..
>
> In the meantime, some industrial companies are still contravening every
> ecological law, garbage and sewage is still being dumped into the oceans and
> landfill sites while nobody is looking, and the absolute worst is members of
> the general public dumping medications into their domestic effluent removal
> systems which then infect the entire water system, not only for re-use by
> us, but in a way that apparently renders sea life impotent.. way to go..
>
> While I accept that every little step taken is a good one, all is not always
> as it seems, and in many cases, one step forward is followed by a couple of
> backwards steps..
>
>

To my knowledge, all thermal printheads eventually break down by the
very action that allows them to print. They heat and cool the ink at
the head each time the ink is released from a nozzle in the head.

Canon (and as I understand it, some HP models) now use a thermal
printhead that is designed to last much longer than the ones which are
part of the printhead.

They may last upwards of 2 years or more depending upon use before
failing (I have no information on the newer HP product to determine it's
reliability yet). The heads that are integrated into the cartridge will
last several refillings but will eventually fail. They are built to
last for the ink they come with, and are overdesigned, allowing them to
get several more lives, but that was never designed to be permanent.

Piezo heads, such as the Epson printers use, are designed as a permanent
head. They will typically last many years. They may clog, but almost
always, can be rescued from a clog. Some do eventually fail from use,
poor manufacturer or bad design, but they are basically designed for
several billion ink droplets per nozzle.

Art

george wrote:

> Susan,
>
> You have me confused...at least when I worked at HP, the print heads were
> in the ink cartridge (i.e., everytime you replaced the cartridge...with a
> NEW
> HP cartridge, not a refilled cartridge, you got new print heads). If you've
> been
> refilling, well...once in awhile, you need to buy a NEW HP cartridge as the
> print heads in a cartridge aren't designed to print THAT many pages.
>
> George
>
> "Susan Sharm" <susanshaarm@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1131861989.689133.299360@f14g2000cwb.googlegr oups.com...
>
>>What is the procedure for home repair of Hewlett Packard #14 print
>>heads?
>>
>>My CYAN stopped printing (even though the refilled cartridge is full)
>>and a diagnostic report from the HP OfficeJet D145 all in one printer
>>says the CYAN print head needs to be replaced.
>>
>>Since the print head has to be replaced, I may as well attempt a home
>>repair. But how?
>>
>>A friend suggested I remove the bad cyan printhead drip a solvent such
>>as alcohol or acetone or hydrogen peroxide on the top steel grid until
>>it runs clear - which might unblock the screen in case it's blocked by
>>teeny tiny honey-I-shrunk-the-kids debris.
>>
>>He said then to gently swipe the bottom of the print head with the
>>solvent so as to free up goldish metallic strips on the bottom.
>>
>>Is there a published procedure for home cleaning & repair of print
>>heads as a last ditch effort before replacing them altogether?
>>
>>Susan
>>
>
>
>

In article <Y3_df.501830$1i.394036@pd7tw2no>, e-printerhelp@mvps.org
says...
> They may last upwards of 2 years or more depending upon use before
> failing (I have no information on the newer HP product to determine it's
> reliability yet). The heads that are integrated into the cartridge will
> last several refillings but will eventually fail. They are built to
> last for the ink they come with, and are overdesigned, allowing them to
> get several more lives, but that was never designed to be permanent.

We bought a couple HP Printers for a client, they wanted to go the
refill route and found that if they didn't refill the carts BEFORE they
ran out of ink that at least one nozzle would be dead. This was proven
on at least 30 carts over a year, with the ones that were refilled
before they went empty seemed to work for a couple refills and then go
bad (more than one nozzle)....

We also have a client that has a cartridge refilling business, they sell
franchises to people. I've used their ink and toner and find that the
vendors new products produce a better image than most of the refill kits
I've used/seen. In the case of some toners, the vendors own toner has
smaller particles than the refill kits (specifically the Lexmark Optra L
series at a true 1200 dpi).

I'm not saying that all refill kits are bad or good or anything, but my
own personal experience of the last decade with them has been much less
than a good experience, and, after that many issues, it was cheaper to
purchase a wax thermal printer. Had I not bought the wax thermal I would
have bought a color laser.

--

spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me

Rita Ä Berkowitz wrote:
> > What is inside the printhead?
> I don't know since I never had one apart.
>
> > If I knew how
> >it works (and what is inside that little tank) then I could better
> >figure out how to repair it.
>
> >Once we pull the printhead out of the boiling water, should I soak it
> >with ink from the top screen or leave it filled with the hot water
> >before putting the printhead back into the HP d145 officejet? Or do we
> >empty it out and put the printhead back into the all-in-one
> >printer/fax/scanner filled with air?
>
> After removal from the hot water just place it on some paper towels several
> layers thick to wick out as much water as possible. The drier the better.
> Once dry, just reinstall the printhead in the printer/plotter and let the
> device do the rest. It will be just like new.

I tried this. It seemed to work. I boiled the HP #14 CYAN printhead for
about fifteen minutes and was surprised to find that it didn't melt
even though it is composed of plastic and strips of copper or gold.

When I put the Hewlett Packard #14 CYAN printhead back into the office
jet printer, I ran the test sequence which printed out just fine except
with a wet spot for the first ten or fifteen sheets of paper along a
one-inch-wide longitudinal line just below where I placed the printhead
back.

I'm surmising that some water dripped out into the printer just below
where I put the printhead in as the printhead slides back and forth
while printing but stays in a set spot when removing and replacing and
the water line was just below that set spot.

I say this only so that the next person can learn from me as I have
learned from most of you (except those who have nothing to say yet
still feel they can contribute to our knowledge by posting useless
banter).

I appreciate all the help from those who were trying to be helpful!
Susan

george wrote:
> You have me confused...at least when I worked at HP, the print heads were
> in the ink cartridge

The Hewlett Packard OfficeJet D145 all-in-one printer has separate
printheads from the ink tanks (commonly called a cartridge).

Here is a smallish picture of both the printheads and the cartridges:
http://www.shoplet.com/office/limages/PHEW8065.JPG
http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B0...CMZZZZZZZ_.jpg

Susan