"Cleaning Mode & Amount of Ink Purged" for specific Canon printer

[l_d_allan]

I've noticed a number of posts commenting about the cleaning cycles that Canon printers do, and wondering what controls how often it is done, and how much ink is used. That's also something I've been curious about ... sometimes it seems pretty random and excessive.

FNO? (for nerds only?)

This may or may not be of interest, but I came across specific info for a Canon iP4000 from a widely available online service manual . Under Part 2: Technical Reference, there are two very detailed pages on "Cleaning Mode & Amount of Ink Purged".

Here's some examples of the "decision tree" detail:

* Timer cleaning - 3
* (Black/Color)
* If 120 to 336 hours have elapsed since the previous
Black/Color cleaning till the start of the next printing.
Ink Used: 0.14g (Black)
Ink Used: 0.50g (Color)
Est. required time: 30 seconds (Black)
Est. required time: 35 seconds (Color)

* Timer cleaning - 4
* (All in sequence)
* If 336 to 504 hours have elapsed since the previous
Black/Color cleaning till the start of the next printing.
Ink Used: 0.45g (Black)
Ink Used: 1.00g (Color)
Est. required time: 60 seconds

* Dot count cleaning
* (Black/Color)
* When the specified number of dots are printed since the
previous Black/Color cleaning. (Cyan and magenta dots are
counted by large and small nozzles separately.)
Ink Used: 0.14g (Black)
Ink Used: 0.50g (Color)
Est. required time: 30 seconds (Black)
Est. required time: 35 seconds (Color)

My speculation is that a similar "decision tree" might apply to different printers like my iP4500, probably with different values for hours between, ink used, time required. The "Dot count cleaning" logic would cause cleaning cycles/purges between prints.

I'm a bit fuzzy on converting g (grams?) to millileters. I believe that a liter of water weighs about a kilogram (2.2 lbs), but that varies slightly based on temp and maybe pressure. So a 13 ml CLI-8 would hold approx 13 grams of ink, assuming dye ink density is close to water.

It appears that a user initiated deep cleaning uses about twice as much color ink, and 10x more black pigment ink, than a regular user-initiated cleaning.

 

[The Hat]

l_d_allan
I've noticed a number of posts commenting about the cleaning cycles that Canon printers do, and wondering what controls how often it is done, and how much ink is used. That's also something I've been curious about ... sometimes it seems pretty random and excessive.

Whats the whole point of this exercise, where is it going and what are you trying to prove anyway.

We all know that our printers waste ink like crazy its an acceptable fact of owning an inkjet and as
the cost of our ink is so miniscule in the first place, it largely becomes irrelevant to
the point of not even having to bother about it..

 

[nche11]

I would not call it a waste of ink. The cleaning cycles are designed to keep the print head from clogging. If Canon is too conservative in this you may see higher number of clogged and dead print heads from consumers. You have to look at how much ink is used by Epson printers doing cleaning cycles to appreciate Canon. An Epson cartridge that looks very large but the actual capacity can be only 7 ml. I am talking about an Epson R280 as an example. Epson actually put empty cell in the cartridge so that the actual capacity shrinks.

 

[Redbrickman]

Ink costs as The Hat says are irrelevant.

What really matters is the media we print on, and getting the best quality at the best possible price

 

[ghwellsjr]

l_d_allan
I've noticed a number of posts commenting about the cleaning cycles that Canon printers do, and wondering what controls how often it is done, and how much ink is used. That's also something I've been curious about ... sometimes it seems pretty random and excessive.

Whats the whole point of this exercise, where is it going and what are you trying to prove anyway.

We all know that our printers waste ink like crazy its an acceptable fact of owning an inkjet and as
the cost of our ink is so miniscule in the first place, it largely becomes irrelevant to
the point of not even having to bother about it..

The real issue with how much ink gets wasted is not the cost of the ink (unless you are using OEM ink, which many people do) but how quickly the waste ink pads get filled. You don't want to waste ink doing deep cleanings just because it is relatively cheap because it will hasten the day when you get that dreaded message telling you to take your printer in for service.

So Lynn's curiosity has a legitimate value and is appreciated by me and I'm sure many others.

 

[The Hat]

ghwellsjr So Lynn's curiosity has a legitimate value and is appreciated by me and I'm sure many others.

My original point was printers wasting ink doing head cleaning maintenance (fact of life)
and not individuals doing un-necessary deep head cleans at all, so I think you missed my point completely.

As nche11 pointed out also that the ink wasnt wasted but necessary to keep the heads in good condition.
The lifespan of the waste pads on a Canon printer are determined by the Canon very conservatively and will outlast the life of a printers using OEM inks.

Owners of Canon printers are very much aware of the increase in cleaning cycles but are much better off than their fellow owners with an Epson printer with its higher cleaning rituals.

So again why the need to worry about something thats outside the owners control..