need real world feedback of the HP W800

[JohnvdH]

Hi John, We gave up on heavyweight wallpapers as could never get them to print well on our 800w. We’ve got non woven dialed in now and we’re running in a sweet spot where all our WPs are perfect in length. With heavyweight substrates we always had length issues and the media appeared to buckle and distort too.

We’ve got non woven dialed > Brand?

 

[JohnvdH]

Well you have a ****ton of output tension. Is that material really so rigid it needs that much?
Btw to keep the balance between input and output, you should have a little more input tension. I would put at least 15.

We're running new test, now it gives us more headaches because the first panel is good, the second panel has a difference in length, between 0.3-0.5 or more, and the third panel is good. It's a miracle.... Please help with this issue, because we can't sell any wallpaper like this.

 

[balstestrat]

We're running new test, now it gives us more headaches because the first panel is good, the second panel has a difference in length, between 0.3-0.5 or more, and the third panel is good. It's a miracle.... Please help with this issue, because we can't sell any wallpaper like this.

I just don't think it's going to happen that you get them to 0.0. You have to buy a Colorado for that kind of work.
I think that 0.5mm per panel is acceptable. On the old machines it was worse, might have been 5.0mm difference which is not great.

 

[Mike Perth]

Thanks Mike, we'll consider this as we still have the same issues and it's even getting worse. The technician can't solve it. So we now go to higher level. Calling HP. But I think when they know the solution they already did an upgrade, so I am not so hopeful...

John, we’ve been there with HP, good luck with a solution. If you do find one please let us know.

 

[JohnvdH]

I just don't think it's going to happen that you get them to 0.0. You have to buy a Colorado for that kind of work.
I think that 0.5mm per panel is acceptable. On the old machines it was worse, might have been 5.0mm difference which is not great.

Sorry but I don't agree with you 0.5 acceptable? What about patterns? It's impossible to tell this to our customers.

 

[balstestrat]

Sorry but I don't agree with you 0.5 acceptable? What about patterns? It's impossible to tell this to our customers.

Really? It's half a millimeter, how do you even see it from a wallpaper that's being watched from meters away?

 

[JohnvdH]

See for yourselve this is acceptable?? Every day it's a lottery what the difference will be. Now we have between 5 and 10 mm! difference in panels. Technicians came over and saw it, but didn't have any clue or solutions. Still waiting for a satisfying answer from HP.

 

[Simon Peach]

I'm looking for some advice regarding grainy prints. - Ours has completely fallen off a cliff.

I have attached an image from site of a re-printed drop. + a sample image for our MD5 profile as well as the generic vinyl profile.

We've had success with both profiles in the past. - The substrate is MD5.

Printheads are all fine. - Any suggestions?

 

[balstestrat]

I'm looking for some advice regarding grainy prints. - Ours has completely fallen off a cliff.

I have attached an image from site of a re-printed drop. + a sample image for our MD5 profile as well as the generic vinyl profile.

We've had success with both profiles in the past. - The substrate is MD5.

Printheads are all fine. - Any suggestions?

Biggest factors:
- Bad printhead alignment
- Substrate advance incorrect
- Printhead problems (wear, tear, blocked nozzle etc.)

I would first do a printhead alingment and 2nd is to check that the substrate moves properly.
Also clean or replace the OMAS lense. Manual advance calibration if nothing else helps.

 

[Simon Peach]

Biggest factors:
- Bad printhead alignment
- Substrate advance incorrect
- Printhead problems (wear, tear, blocked nozzle etc.)

I would first do a printhead alingment and 2nd is to check that the substrate moves properly.
Also clean or replace the OMAS lense. Manual advance calibration if nothing else helps.

Will give those a go. - Thank you!

Re. substrates Advance, This would be in each profile, right?

 

[balstestrat]

Will give those a go. - Thank you!

Re. substrates Advance, This would be in each profile, right?

In this case it mostly means that the substrate really physically advances correctly.
- Roll is setup right way
- Take-up is setup right way
- OMAS works correctly
- No other problems on the way
etc. It's a wide topic.

 

[Simon Peach]

Appreciate your help. - Thank you.

Will get chipping away at the basics.

 

[Simon Peach]

So have run printhead alignment.
OMAS was replaced by an engineer within the past 4 weeks.
Print tests are showing the nozzles ok.

Below are two images from the head alignments.

The 4th image is from ramping the ink up to 140% - It's a significant improvement but will soon work its way through our ink.

 

[balstestrat]

So have run printhead alignment.
OMAS was replaced by an engineer within the past 4 weeks.
Print tests are showing the nozzles ok.

Below are two images from the head alignments.

The 4th image is from ramping the ink up to 140% - It's a significant improvement but will soon work its way through our ink.

It can be clearly seen you have some issues there. Those boxes should be pretty sharp on the edges but you got a lot of spray there.
Go to "optimize quality" -> "..." upper right -> Print printhead status plot.
Take a picture of every printhead and post it. Recommended standard SAV.

 

[P Wagner]

So have run printhead alignment.
OMAS was replaced by an engineer within the past 4 weeks.
Print tests are showing the nozzles ok.

Below are two images from the head alignments.

The 4th image is from ramping the ink up to 140% - It's a significant improvement but will soon work its way through our ink.

The images you posted were not printhead alignment plot. They are from the Ink Density and ICC Profile chart sets.

With current firmware, I would recommend using the manual printhead alignment (versus the automatic alignment), to achieve optimal PH align results.

 

[Simon Peach]

Thanks for the advice guys, attached are the actual tests on a generic SAV profile.

 

[balstestrat]

I think it looks like your alignment is off tiny bit. Maybe you should try that manual alignment next.

Just to be sure, no one has turned optimizer to 0 in the profile for some reason?

 

[Simon Peach]

Thanks will give the manual align a go.

I don’t think we can make any alterations to the generic profiles. - We have had issues in the past with optimiser, it was my first thought, the engineer seemed to be happy it was firing.

I might see if there’s a way to do a test draw on optimiser to be 100%

 

[Simon Peach]

wibble

 

[Simon Peach]

So run some manual head alignment. - OP was miles out, and replaced the 3 week old head. - This is the results. - Look ok?

I'm not 100% what to look for when it comes to the OP