• I want to thank all the members that have upgraded your accounts. I truly appreciate your support of the site monetarily. Supporting the site keeps this site up and running as a lot of work daily goes on behind the scenes. Click to Support Signs101 ...

in the market for an 84" solvent printer.

artbot

New Member
i am leaning toward just building my own flatbed conversion. it just looks to simple to not do it here in the states. american dollars paying americans, kind of thing.

my printer size needs to be 84" wide. the only japanese makes of printers that i know at that width were some mutoh textile printers and some solvent ones as well. if you know of any more (agfa, etc) please advise.

and of course, if you have an old mothballed 84" machine please pm me. or a rockhopper/spitfire/blizzard extreme at 90". that general size range...

i'd be glad to give a new life strapped to a gantry table.

thanks in advance

aa
 
Last edited:

artbot

New Member
i'm looking to go 84" specifically. i've located an 84" wide cnc table that will be gutting for the project. i did find a xerox 8290 so far. that would do. but it's decommissioned in a warehouse with no way to discuss the state of the printer before being mothballed.

also, if anyone can school me on the difference between a blizzard and a spitfire, spitfire extreme, i'd really appreciate it.
 
Last edited:

jhanson

New Member
The Spitfire and Spitfire Extreme are basically warmed-over and slightly improved Falcon II Outdoor printers. I think the major improvement was getting rid of the insane "symmetry" ink loading and putting one color per head.

(FWIW, the Xerox 8290 is a OEM badged Falcon II Outdoor. I would suggest avoiding it.)

The Blizzard made some pretty radical changes resulting in ridiculous output speed. The only thing is that the Spitfire and Blizzard both run 8 of the Epson DX4 heads, so if anything happens it's expensive to service.

Having said that, the ValueJet 2606 (100") also has 6 of those heads instead of the newer DX5 heads. The 2606 was originally branded as the Toucan LT 100 before the ValueJets launched.

If you can find a used Toucan LT 87" printer, they tend to be workhorses and you can pick one up used for around $2 grand, plus however many heads need to be replaced. The one part to be very careful about on any Mutoh printer is the mainboard... don't do anything that could fry it as I think the prices may be up to around $3-4 grand for new boards.
 

artbot

New Member
you must be a mutoh guru. that was very informative.

i've seen the head carriages for the spitfire have space for eight heads. but with four dx4s running. is it a spitfire extreme that gets firmware for eight heads?

also, i don't really plan on using this printer for cmyk. i need wide, clean printing, varnish, as fast as possible.

i'm wondering if any of these 87"-90" printer can have the first two black heads only running so i can get the 861 sfph? are the four head printers convertible to eight head machines? also are the carts chipped or are permanent chips available?

here's the gantry table. i bought it today! i am psyched. there are a lot of 2.2m chinese dual dx5 printers out there too that may do the trick. i just want the thing to wake up and print. it will be put through enough already being gutted and strapped to a table.
 

Attachments

  • cnc printer 2.jpg
    cnc printer 2.jpg
    53.8 KB · Views: 87
  • cnc printer.jpg
    cnc printer.jpg
    37.3 KB · Views: 97

jhanson

New Member
Yeah, I used to work as a Mutoh tech. I'm sure Randy A scratched his head when he saw my name :)

As far as I know, the Blizzard is the only model that tops out at 800 sq.ft/hr. The Falcon II series was basically capped at 400 sq.ft/hr at 360x360 1 pass. Nobody would use that mode however since the coverage was ... spotty, to say the least.

If you're just going to run varnish through the machine -- no color whatsoever -- I would suggest using a 4 head machine, telling it that it's loaded CMYK, and then run a file using 100%, 100%, 100%, 100% CMYK and no color management in the RIP. Then the 360 dpi single pass mode should work just fine for you.

Also given the requirements you have, even a used Falcon II or Xerox/Oce machine (indoor or outdoor, depending on the type of varnish) would be fine. Most of the issues with those machines were due to color contamination between print head channels, caused by inconsistent pump suction. With everything running varnish, that becomes a non-issue.

I'm fairly confident that the Xerox/Oce branded units can be zapped and reloaded with older Mutoh firmware. Mind you, you won't get any help from MAI on such a conversion, but I've seen it done before. All of the Falcon II based machines shared mainboards* and most of those boards shipped from the factory with Falcon II Indoor firmware, which was trivial to bypass the smart cards on.

* there is some extra hardware in the Spitfire, Blizzard, and Vipers; possibly in the Spitfire-based Xerox and Oce units also, such as smart card readers. Do at your own risk, caveat emptor, etc.
 

artbot

New Member
i think you are right about just the one pass at 400, i'd love to see the 800 but my throughput doesn't even allow me to get a printed board on a second table by the time a new board would be done in 2 or 3 minutes.

i plan on staggering the heads in the callibration so that every other head is a half dots width out of callibration. that should emulate a dual black head.

one other thing. does the firmware allow for "unplugging" a head? or does the firmware require "shaking hands" with all heads before a full boot?

...i did see a page on the lavaink website that had a thorough explanation about how to get a xerox or agfa to go back to mutoh firmware. why would one need to do this? ...so a chip from another cart would read?

so, sorry to reiterate, the falcon II can be permanently chipped, no problem. but the xerox 8290, blizzard, spitfire, ...not so much?

one thing, your opinion is really important here. i've seen a lot of videos of the falcon II's taken apart and such. it seems all the boards and power supplies are located in the main right hull. correct? my mimaki would make a terrible candidate for a flatbed conversion because there are so many electronics that would have be moved from below the printer (located in the stand). i'm sure that is why we don't see jv3 conversion out of china.

and also concerning the conversion. the printer "seems" bulky. but there seems to be a lot of hollow air space with the covers off. is there printer brutally heavy compared to other printers? a 90" falcon looks more tank like than most other printers.

thanks for all the info!

aa
 
Last edited:

randya

New Member
Yeah, I used to work as a Mutoh tech. I'm sure Randy A scratched his head when he saw my name :).

JP, Just found out about a week ago that you were gone.
I hope you are doing well.
I did scratch my head, the Vegas location threw me.
Drop me a PM and let me know what you are up to.
 

jhanson

New Member
i think you are right about just the one pass at 400, i'd love to see the 800 but my throughput doesn't even allow me to get a printed board on a second table by the time a new board would be done in 2 or 3 minutes.

i plan on staggering the heads in the callibration so that every other head is a half dots width out of callibration. that should emulate a dual black head.

Each pair of channels in an individual head is already staggered by 1 dot so they interleave perfectly. Mutoh printers have (up to the 1634) always run their heads in-line, while Mimaki and Roland physically staggered the heads on some models for a 2" pass width.

I wouldn't screw around with the calibration. If you're running varnish, it'll be really hard to tell the difference even if a head is 1/2 dot out of tolerance.

one other thing. does the firmware allow for "unplugging" a head? or does the firmware require "shaking hands" with all heads before a full boot?

There is a way to disconnect a channel safely; I've done it for testing before but have never actually tried to run a machine in production that way. Basically, the incoming pair of flat ribbon cables (from the umbelical) to the CR board must be disconnected and taped off to avoid accidental discharge and damage.

If you disconnect the cables coming out of the CR board instead, the machine will throw an incorrect F1-F8 fuse error which will go away once the cables are reconnected.

...i did see a page on the lavaink website that had a thorough explanation about how to get a xerox or agfa to go back to mutoh firmware. why would one need to do this? ...so a chip from another cart would read?

so, sorry to reiterate, the falcon II can be permanently chipped, no problem. but the xerox 8290, blizzard, spitfire, ...not so much?

The Falcon II, Falcon II Outdoor, and Toucan LT all allowed the chips to be bypassed in earlier firmware revisions. The I2 firmware that was released in mid 2007-2008 (usually version 3.x) blocked the smart chip override. The Spitfire, Blizzard, Xerox and Oce units never used the Falcon II style override, instead relying on a different type of smart chip unlock system.

However, if you take those units and put Falcon II Indoor firmware back on them, you can apply the old override. However, if the printer has solvent heads and you install the indoor firmware, you won't be able to set the head ranks correctly and you will just have to leave them at the default. That's a no-go for most people since the heads may fire at different voltages (throwing off the drop sizes slightly), but if you're running varnish you'd probably be OK.

one thing, your opinion is really important here. i've seen a lot of videos of the falcon II's taken apart and such. it seems all the boards and power supplies are located in the main right hull. correct? my mimaki would make a terrible candidate for a flatbed conversion because there are so many electronics that would have be moved from below the printer (located in the stand). i'm sure that is why we don't see jv3 conversion out of china.

and also concerning the conversion. the printer "seems" bulky. but there seems to be a lot of hollow air space with the covers off. is there printer brutally heavy compared to other printers? a 90" falcon looks more tank like than most other printers.

aa

I think they weigh about the same. The Falcon II series does have all electronics mounted on the side; there's nothing below the machine to worry about. Heater boards, if the machine is equipped with heaters, are located under the post-heater (the curving piece on the front). However, if you put Falcon II Indoor firmware in the machine, it will completely ignore the heater boards if I recall correctly.
 

artbot

New Member
awesome amount of info (where do i send the check?). that would be good as far as the indoor firmware goes. i've been worried how the firmware on any of these printers of any make might deal with the heaters being tossed. but then also, i read about latex solvent for epson heads is being developed. it'd be nice to have on/off and temp which i could hack with a IR bar instead. and run some sort of latex base in the future.

the only hesitation about using the 8290 is it's fast enough for now. but with a couple employees, i think we'd be waiting on the printer.

as far as the guts are concerned. putting a blizzard board in an 8290, or blizzard firmware/and slider board will not be an available speed boost in the future? or do you think this the 8290 can be "franken-printered" in the future. imagine the cost of tearing down a machine for more speed. vs. just switching out some boards. the head carriage has the space, right?

also, this printer will not be in an air conditioned setting. humidity, heat, cold, etc. it seems strange to almost run a printer outdoors but then my cnc machine and cnc computer have been in the same conditions (it's even been rained on several times...don't ask). do you think there will be any issues other than dust?

thanks again. i really appreciate it. i think i pretty much know what my options are with this model thanks to you.
 

ProWraps

New Member
i dont know if mutoh would ever give you a job again (for giving so much inside info), but i sure would hire you in a heartbeat as a mutoh tech.

i hope you find work on the side as a mutoh tech. you sure as hell know wtf you are talking about! thanks for being a hell of a resource to the board.

artbot, your threads of late are amazing. keep them coming. the knowledge they produce are great for those of us tech people that like to know how our stuff works.
 

artbot

New Member
kind of compelling firmware switch? a 90" mutoh garment plotter. maybe lucky enough to just require two heads? but the thing shows only hp-gl and hp-gl/2. i would be done looking of these stupid plotters all over the world would just print a .tiff.

http://www.mutoh.co.jp/printer_plotter/~plotter/apparel/ar8500/index.html

after a great deal of japanese translating then some algebra. it plots at 521sfph. which is grandma slow for a cad plotter. some four HP45 head plotters do 2000sfph.
 

jhanson

New Member
i dont know if mutoh would ever give you a job again (for giving so much inside info), but i sure would hire you in a heartbeat as a mutoh tech.

i hope you find work on the side as a mutoh tech. you sure as hell know wtf you are talking about! thanks for being a hell of a resource to the board.

Heh. I'm actually working at a print shop now; I never actually worked for Mutoh but did work for one of their largest dealers in California.

I don't mind giving info about the Falcon II line since it's basically an obsolete model now. I would imagine they might have issues if I started talking about ValueJets however :)

@Artbot:

Are you talking about SEPIAX ink? I did a lot of work with that ink and it has a lot of potential. The biggest thing going against it in the market is of course HP, and the fact that there really are no SEPIAX-specific printers yet in the market segments HP is in.

I would be curious to see if an Epson based printer with SEPIAX could be made to work with a heating system more like what HP did on the big LX800 series printers. Basically, they mounted two sets of strip heaters, one directly over the carriage path (which has extra covers, insulation and cooling fans inside to keep the electronics from overheating) and a second curing heater mounted afterward. I don't know what kind of patents HP has on that system, but if it's a one-off they can't really stop you.

Regarding the Blizzard, I really wouldn't screw around with it. I'm sure it still uses most of the carriage components from the earlier models, but trying to frankenstein a printer from different generation components is just begging for trouble. Then there's the fact that there are hardly any Blizzard printers here in the US, so if anything goes wrong it could be an expensive proposition.

This is the first time I've even heard of the AR-8500 plotter. I very much doubt you could even find the firmware over here, since Mutoh Japan doesn't make firmware available except to the regional dealers including Mutoh America. And assuming you could find the firmware, there's no telling how it's locked down. Even though you would be limited to 400 sq.ft/hr, I would stick with the old Falcon II indoor firmware. The worst case is you could just build another machine to double your production assuming this works.

Finally, environment... Tricky to say the least. The major environmental consideration is the ink, which can have strange results depending on temperature and humidity. I've heard of Toucan LT printers being run in warehouse shops in Minnesota where the operators were all wearing parkas and wondering why the print quality was terrible. I've also seen the same solvent printers run in 100 degree, 99% humidity weather in Puerto Rico. Basically, they will run -- but the ink just reacts differently.
 

artbot

New Member
yeah. that has me thinking too. i'm considering taking all the tools and tables out of my fabrication area, which is climate controlled, and doing fab in the heat and cold.

the sepiax ink is a great looking option. i need something that will not cross contaminate at the wiper. you can't run water based at one head and solvent at another. i tried it and the wiper makes it impossible.

...but still, an 87" falcon II can never in any way have two black heads for the 861sfph, right?

i've even been leaning toward a four head konica option. these printers are really cheap (so to speak) and commonly 2.2m, coming from china. i could start with four heads (standard dual dx5 type speed). but the printers are designed to keep adding heads. so i could be up to 12 heads (maybe 3 black heads with a firmware mod) and triple my speed (around 1400sfph). i have products in mind that would only work above 800sfph.

it will probably be a month before i'm done making myself nuts with options. i have to pay for freight and rigging etc. for the gantry table. plus i think i will get the whole table on a control board and get the z up/down built. printers are a commodity these days and it pays to wait. but this table was a very rare find.
 
I did not get too deep in all of these posts. I am posting a link of someone with a machine in Canada that may interest you.....hope it helps

http://www.digitalprintmarket.com/?menuid=9&categorieid=1&subcategorieid=6&subsubcategorieid=74&advertentieid=4878&adtitel=82" Mutoh Printer
 

artbot

New Member
mutoh KKKKx8 option?

@jhanson

i came up with an option that might be possible. today i spoke in length with a RIP engineer and he helped me understand what code is difficult to hack and vice versa.

attached is a pic of my current ink train set up. (mimaki jv3 160sp)

the second rendering is what might be possible if i could do a "user 2" (second ink set option) that i've read about occasionally in some mutoh pdfs. but i'm just not clear how dual inksets are accomplished. the user manuals don't seem to mention it. or maybe i just don't have the right model's manuals in which to read about it.

the inks require very high heat to cure so i could oddly skip the capping station mechanics. but i would build a manual syringe based offset capping station (as in "stick it" on by hand) for priming the heads.

of course i'd need a RIP engineer to modify the rip and firmware in order to multiply the K channel and offset the rasterization across a different distance plus quadruple the x distance per pass. but at least after building the flatbed knowing it's currently too slow for future production, i'd have this option in my back pocket to speed things up. the printer would do 1200-1600 sfph 1 bit printing nicely.

so, my question is, what models and with those models, how is the dual ink set up in the firmware?
 

Attachments

  • JV3160SP INK TRAIN MOD.jpg
    JV3160SP INK TRAIN MOD.jpg
    49.8 KB · Views: 118
  • MUTOH 8 HEAD CARRIAGE MOD  KKKKx8.jpg
    MUTOH 8 HEAD CARRIAGE MOD KKKKx8.jpg
    32.8 KB · Views: 86
  • mutoh 8head.JPG
    mutoh 8head.JPG
    28.1 KB · Views: 73
Last edited:

jhanson

New Member
You're going to need an 8-head machine, either a Falcon II Indoor 87, Falcon II Outdoor 87, or basically any other derivative model with 8 print heads. Then you'll need to run the Falcon II Indoor firmware (latest is 1.31) and set it to the dual inkset mode.

Once that's done, it's just a matter of determining which slots correspond to which heads. The slots are supposed to be loaded (Set 1) K C M Y (Set 2) Y M C K for the dual ink option on the Falcon II Indoor. However, the ink lines going to the heads on those machines are run in symmetry, leading to this channel order -- 2 colors per head:


(1KY) (1CM) (1MC) (1YK) (2KY) (2CM) (2MC) (2YK)


Where things get really fun is that the engineers played around with different ink line routings for the various derivative printers. The eco-solvent Outdoor models did away with the symmetric load. The textile models (Viper) screwed up the symmetry even more. So if you get a non-indoor model, you'll have to play with the plumbing to make it match what the firmware expects.

Basically, you're going to have to have the first 4 heads loaded identically to the Falcon II diagram above for CMYK printing, which may give you headaches with cross-contamination if your pumps or wipers aren't working normally. Then to stagger the remaining heads, you're going to have to do some major surgery to that side of the head carriage; since all heads will have the same solution loaded you can plumb those lines straight through but the electronic firing order will get interesting.

Hope that helps.
 

artbot

New Member
does it ever. i feel like i'm googling mutoh with the replies i'm getting. thank you!

so falcon outdoor II's (very common. a few 87's out there currently. doable. but there will be an after noon of cursing the mutoh gods. that layout will kill the f-style manifolds. one damper per head will be impossible.).

i wish i wasn't working with an 84" table. there are so few printers that accommodate. 2.5m printers are everywhere but the offset for the z-up would be too drastic.

that said, i've found one possible chinese contender (there are a few 2.1m chinese printers all of which after research look to be okay to iffy, namely the UD2112LA's).

but there is one chinese printer by wit-color (the ultra 9000) that gets really great reviews. but it's not cheap (so to speak). it's about $11,000 for what most chinese are charging $7500. they have a 2.2m dual dx5 that prints some amazing 1 pass coverage. and even FLAAR admits that wit-color makes finely constructed printers. it would though be a shame to tear apart a brand new $11k printer. but, this thing would make a sweet solvent flatbed.

check it out.

1 pass (700 sfph 360 x 720))
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6RHt4jlRPaA&feature=player_embedded

fine text
http://video.yandex.ru/users/mfrfh/view/1/#hq
http://video.yandex.ru/users/mfrfh/view/2#hq

note that it's a big printer (like a jv5)? in the wit-color literature, they mention that these ultra9000's are built for future field upgradable speed. so as soon as the boards and demand show up for 3 and 4 head printers this chassis is designed to allow for four heads. that's pretty ambitious engineering.
 
Last edited:

artbot

New Member
... one other thing. and there's no way to get a falcon outdoor II or a xerox 8290 to be loaded with firmware that will avoid this "interwoven" color?

i think it might cause total chaos in the future if i was to change to other inksets. or at least the constant altering and plugging and unplugging would be madness. one head should mean one channel.

it's not a deal breaker but it makes things really complex.
 

henryp

New Member
... one other thing. and there's no way to get a falcon outdoor II or a xerox 8290 to be loaded with firmware that will avoid this "interwoven" color?

i think it might cause total chaos in the future if i was to change to other inksets. or at least the constant altering and plugging and unplugging would be madness. one head should mean one channel.

it's not a deal breaker but it makes things really complex.



The Rockhopper IIK+ has the same ink color for both ink channels on each head.
 
Top