Piezo vs Thermal Life.

B

bofh00

I have been doing a lot of reading ranging from personal accounts and
places like large-format-printers.org to manufacturer specs and printshop
owners claims. To date the only conclusion I have come to is noone says
the samething and its appearing either there is a total inconsistency
between what people experience or everyone is full of crap.

I am trying to find the truth as to printhead duty cycle/life expectancy.

Piezo is claimed to be permenent in general or lasting 1-2 years.

Thermal about 1000ml(colorspan 3000ml which is funny because they claim to
use HP heads and HP says 1000ml, um... WTF? although that was told to me
by a sales rep their documentation on the X-12 claims 1000ml) or 9000hours.

Obviously the Piezo claim is highly dependant on what you do in that 1-2
year span and I have also heard "permanent" is a relative word and they do
indeed go bad.

The thermal ratings seem to be closer to the truth but honestly seem
fairly pathetic to me. Am I just naive as to duty cycles of other
printing equipment in the industry?

Does anyone have real world stats on these heads? I am beginning to think
that the thermal heads from the likes of HP are somehow "programmed" to
"go bad" after X time and that the piezo heads are "semi-permanent" and no
one really knows for sure how long they last.

From Epsons Site:
28 billion shots per nozzle.
Smallest drop size claimed to be 5pl(variable though).
180 nozzels per head.

28 billion 5 picoliter shots?
0.000000000005 x 28,000,000,000 = 1.4 litres
180 x 1.4 = 252 liters

This seems far more reasonable for the printing industry.

What any of the stats I have read about though lack is real world numbers.
We have an HP5500ps and we see consistently 1000-1200ml per head.

From these quick calculations and quite possibly bad assumptions it means
that in the lifetime of a piezo head you would have to buy about 252
thermal heads. This is for lack of a better word ludicrous. At 150 bucks
a pop you will have bought the plotter 2 times over at around 37,800 US
dollars not including taxes. I understand piezo heads are more costly yet
I have found those heads for 80 dollars compared to 140 for the thermal
heads. We personally opted for the HP due to many other factors but
admittedly not enough research was done since at no point was head life
introduced into the equation of cost and maintenance. Neither Epson nor
HP debate this issue nor point it out as a pro or con in either cases
advertisements. This makes me wonder if the numbers I list above are
either outright incorrect in collection, calculation or both. If I were
Epson I would be making a HUGE point of this when comparing their
plotters. Or perhaps is there are reason they do not?
 
G

geocha

i have an epson 750 and have printed more than 2 lt x head with no
problems.Still going
 
J

jbuch

In a problem like printhead life.... picking up your data by newsgroups
is likely to cause you nothing but frustration.

There are many potential failure modes... and each is associated with
some statistics... and that means that there will or can be some "early
failures" that aren't typical.

Nozzle erosion.... the piezo will have been designed to have greater
metallurgical control over erosion of nozzles. Yet, there are bound to
be some early nozzle failures because erosion is that way, and there are
so many nozzles which can behave whacky. One nozzle failure is enough
to be head failure.

Mechanical Fatigue of the Piezo element

Electrical interconnect failure.

Other failures in the printer electronics that LOOK like printer head
failures.

More failure mechanisms.


The economics of the situation are that the customer money is there to
improve the piezo head reliability over the disposable thermal heads.

The customer money may not be there to improve the printer electronics
potential failures over the electronics in thermal head printers.

It is possible that all those dedicated buyers of piezo professional
printers are stupid, and can't figure out the truth.

But it is possible that these buyers aren't stupid too.

Jim
I have been doing a lot of reading ranging from personal accounts and
places like large-format-printers.org to manufacturer specs and printshop
owners claims. To date the only conclusion I have come to is noone says
the samething and its appearing either there is a total inconsistency
between what people experience or everyone is full of crap.

I am trying to find the truth as to printhead duty cycle/life expectancy.

Piezo is claimed to be permenent in general or lasting 1-2 years.

Thermal about 1000ml(colorspan 3000ml which is funny because they claim to
use HP heads and HP says 1000ml, um... WTF? although that was told to me
by a sales rep their documentation on the X-12 claims 1000ml) or 9000hours.

Obviously the Piezo claim is highly dependant on what you do in that 1-2
year span and I have also heard "permanent" is a relative word and they do
indeed go bad.

The thermal ratings seem to be closer to the truth but honestly seem
fairly pathetic to me. Am I just naive as to duty cycles of other
printing equipment in the industry?

Does anyone have real world stats on these heads? I am beginning to think
that the thermal heads from the likes of HP are somehow "programmed" to
"go bad" after X time and that the piezo heads are "semi-permanent" and no
one really knows for sure how long they last.

From Epsons Site:
28 billion shots per nozzle.
Smallest drop size claimed to be 5pl(variable though).
180 nozzels per head.

28 billion 5 picoliter shots?
0.000000000005 x 28,000,000,000 = 1.4 litres
180 x 1.4 = 252 liters

This seems far more reasonable for the printing industry.

What any of the stats I have read about though lack is real world numbers.
We have an HP5500ps and we see consistently 1000-1200ml per head.

From these quick calculations and quite possibly bad assumptions it means
that in the lifetime of a piezo head you would have to buy about 252
thermal heads. This is for lack of a better word ludicrous. At 150 bucks
a pop you will have bought the plotter 2 times over at around 37,800 US
dollars not including taxes. I understand piezo heads are more costly yet
I have found those heads for 80 dollars compared to 140 for the thermal
heads. We personally opted for the HP due to many other factors but
admittedly not enough research was done since at no point was head life
introduced into the equation of cost and maintenance. Neither Epson nor
HP debate this issue nor point it out as a pro or con in either cases
advertisements. This makes me wonder if the numbers I list above are
either outright incorrect in collection, calculation or both. If I were
Epson I would be making a HUGE point of this when comparing their
plotters. Or perhaps is there are reason they do not?


--
................................


Keepsake gift for young girls.
Unique and personal one-of-a-kind.
Builds strong minds 12 ways.
Guaranteed satisfaction
- courteous money back
- keep bonus gifts

http://www.alicebook.com
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top