Yahoo Groups archive

Digital BW, The Print

Index last updated: 2026-04-28 22:56 UTC

Thread

Hypothetical Cart-Less CIS?

Hypothetical Cart-Less CIS?

2007-11-15 by brigsby707

Hello all,

It's been quite some time since I posted, but after learning about the
current situation with the ITC ruling, I had an idea I thought I might
posit to the forum.

This may be a naive idea but here goes. Since the patents in question
pertain to the structure of the cartridges, what if one were to remove
them altogether from the equation?

From what I understand, the purpose of the cartridges is to provide a
supply of ink that does not readily flow unless there is enough
suction to draw air into the cart to replace the used ink. And as a
means of holding the cartridge's chip in place so as to make contact
with the printhead so it is recognized by the printer.

So, what if a CIS were designed to be attached to the printhead
directly via tubes/clamps of some sort and the dampening effect, to
control the flow of ink, were reproduced by some structure external to
the printer? And as for the chip, surely some adjustable structure
could be utilized to bring the chips (not patented) in contact with
the printhead.

Aside from the obvious benefit of completely avoiding Epson's patents
this system would also have the benefit of being universal to all
printers with the same number of ink channels.

Anyway, it's just an idea but maybe some of the more technical types
out there could take this and run with it.

Regards,

Eric Ashworth

Re:Hypothetical Cart-Less CIS?

2007-11-15 by Rick Colson

Eric Ashworth wrote:

"... the purpose of the cartridges is to provide a supply of ink that does
not readily flow unless there is enough suction to draw air into the cart to
replace the used ink. And as a means of holding the cartridge's chip in
place so as to make contact with the print head so it is recognized by the
printer."

Eric - First of all, I am NOT an expert but I did stay in a Holiday Inn
Express last night. I have been thinking about this myself but I have some
critical questions and observations mostly pertaining to small format like
the 2200/2400/1800 printers.

1) It seems that one obvious point is the need for a firm seal between the
tubes and the "nipples" in the head. A lot of complaints about CIS systems
now seem to result from the cart fitting loosely and not making a good
enough seal. Air getting into the cart from the head-end is not a good
thing. Venting is. With the right size tube and a small zip tie or clamp the
tubing could be secured but it would be a "bitch" getting it done in such a
confined space. I have had good luck inserting tubes over these "nipples" or
"needles" for the purpose of injecting cleaner through the heads (NOT
recommended except as a last resort). However, the tube will eventually come
loose if it's not more securely clamped.

2) There appears to be the need for some kind of "damper" such as the ones
used on the large format printers to suppress larger particulates. Perhaps
the large format dampers could be used in lieu of the carts?? What other
role does the damper play?

3) Some large format carts are pressurized, some not. Is it suction at work
or pressure? Which is it in the small format printers... Appears to be
suction. However, I can say that most CIS systems are HIGHLY sensitive to
gravity and placing the bottles even a little too high will result in a mess
of ink dripping through the head. Bottles too low will result in starvation
and may even draw ink back from the head causing air bubbles or air in the
lines. In fact, some people have reported that it's not enough to get the
bottles at the right height but that the level of the ink in the bottles
should be level with the head at al times. The bottles need to be raised as
the ink is used for best results (hearsay).

Part of what has kept me from moving forward has to do with unanswered
questions about the role of gravity vs. suction vs. pressure in these
printers and an inadequate understanding on my part of just how the ink is
regulated. Pumps pull ink through for cleaning but what causes the ink to
flow while printing? Are these things known or are we just taking a shot in
the dark.

It also seems obvious that building a good CIS is more complicated than it
seems. There are a lot of problems reported. Heck, there are people getting
clogs with OEM carts too. Why some and not others? Printer tolerances?
Climatic conditions? Humidity? Atmospheric pressure? Black magic? Carts that
aren't sitting tight enough? Who does know? Any engineers out there or ex
Epson folks who really understand this stuff?

Hmmm.. Lots of food for thought but too little time to digest...

Rick Colson

RE: [Digital BW] Re:Hypothetical Cart-Less CIS?

2007-11-16 by Paul Roark

>1) It seems that one obvious point is the need for a firm seal
> between the tubes and the "nipples" in the head...
> I have had good luck inserting tubes over these "nipples" ...

Yes, the standard tubing I use for the vacuum loading fits nicely over the
inlet posts.

>However, the tube will eventually come loose if it's not more 
>securely clamped.

They might.  I'm sure this is easily solved.


>2) There appears to be the need for some kind of "damper" such as 
>the ones used on the large format printers ...

Yes, and MIS carries some.  I've played with my 7500 dampers, and it appears
a different tubing size is needed, but I think the basic idea is sound.

>3) Some large format carts are pressurized, some not... 

The fact that CISs work indicates suction is sufficient on the desktop
units.

>... most CIS systems are HIGHLY sensitive to
> gravity and placing the bottles even a little too high will 
> result in a mess of ink dripping through the head. Bottles 
> too low will result in starvation and may even draw ink back 
> from the head causing air bubbles or air in the lines.

But lots of people use these devices regularly without much worry about ink
level.  It think some work here might make the units work better than they
do already, however.

I think there is a workable system here. 


Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

[Digital BW] Re:Hypothetical Cart-Less CIS?

2007-11-16 by dlruckus

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark"
<paul.roark@...> wrote:

> But lots of people use these devices regularly without much worry
about ink
> level.  It think some work here might make the units work better
than >they do already, however.
>  
> Paul
>
 That was the reason for suggesting IV bags. However, one can simply
use rinsed out 3000/7000/9000 carts reloaded with whatever ink you
choose. The tubing then has a damper on one end and a needle for the
cart on the other. Solves all of the air and ink height problems. Set
the carts beside the machine with tape or a big rubber band around
them and you're in business.
 Why work hard to invent something different when the system the wide
formats use works just fine and can be duplicated easily.
 Also, no one can sue you for using Epson parts you own in any way you
see fit privately. They can't patent tubing,needles and glue or go
after the sale of chip reset devices either.
 Another method could use the filters you talked about some time ago
inline with the tubing and add a 'T' stub to the tubing near the head
inlet to give an empty chamber for damping. That would do away with
expensive dampers as well.

Regards
Duane

RE: [Digital BW] Re:Hypothetical Cart-Less CIS?

2007-11-16 by Paul Roark

The dampers have filters in them, so that issue is also taken care of.

 

I think we're close to a solution here.

 

Paul

 

  _____  
Show quoted textHide quoted text
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of dlruckus
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 9:00 PM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Digital BW] Re:Hypothetical Cart-Less CIS?

 

--- In DigitalBlackandWhit
<mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com>
eThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark"
<paul.roark@...> wrote:

> But lots of people use these devices regularly without much worry
about ink
> level. It think some work here might make the units work better
than >they do already, however.
> 
> Paul
>
That was the reason for suggesting IV bags. However, one can simply
use rinsed out 3000/7000/9000 carts reloaded with whatever ink you
choose. The tubing then has a damper on one end and a needle for the
cart on the other. Solves all of the air and ink height problems. Set
the carts beside the machine with tape or a big rubber band around
them and you're in business.
Why work hard to invent something different when the system the wide
formats use works just fine and can be duplicated easily.
Also, no one can sue you for using Epson parts you own in any way you
see fit privately. They can't patent tubing,needles and glue or go
after the sale of chip reset devices either.
Another method could use the filters you talked about some time ago
inline with the tubing and add a 'T' stub to the tubing near the head
inlet to give an empty chamber for damping. That would do away with
expensive dampers as well.

Regards
Duane

 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [Digital BW] Re:Hypothetical Cart-Less CIS?

2007-11-16 by Kip Babington

I'm a lawyer, but not a patent lawyer and not an engineer, who for the 
last 3 years or so has used a CIS from MIS on my C84/88 printers with EZ 
inks.  So far it shows no sign of dying, but I am concerned about the 
longer haul.

It seems to me that it should be possible to design and fabricate an 
open frame that would have the outer dimensions of one of the Epson 
cartridges including its locking tabs and place for a chip.  (Imagine 
cutting the sides off an Epson cartridge but leaving the edges intact, 
probably with some internal or corner bracing to insure rigidity.)  This 
frame would snap into the same position as a cartridge, but would not 
itself hold any ink.  It would just provide a 
holder/valve/filter/connector/whatever between ink lines from outside 
reservoirs and the ink input to the heads themselves.  Using the 
existing cartridge dimensions and locking tab locations would insure 
solid connections for the ink path and the chip. 

It would take some factory to set up a new mold, and the big question 
would be whether the Epson patents would cover this kind of device.  But 
if it was outside the patent coverage, it would provide an "industrial 
strength" alternative to home-made/duct-tape devices at probably very 
little cost once the molds were amortized.  Somebody amortized the cost 
of manufacturing the third-party Epson-size cartridges, so doing the 
same thing with an Epson-size frame shouldn't be any tougher, once the 
size/location of any "internal" filter or valve was established.

Just an idea from a shoulda-been engineer.

Cheers,
Kip

Paul Roark wrote:
>
>
> >1) It seems that one obvious point is the need for a firm seal
> > between the tubes and the "nipples" in the head...
> > I have had good luck inserting tubes over these "nipples" ...
>
> Yes, the standard tubing I use for the vacuum loading fits nicely over the
> inlet posts.
>
> >However, the tube will eventually come loose if it's not more
> >securely clamped.
>
> They might. I'm sure this is easily solved.
>
> >2) There appears to be the need for some kind of "damper" such as
> >the ones used on the large format printers ...
>
> Yes, and MIS carries some. I've played with my 7500 dampers, and it 
> appears
> a different tubing size is needed, but I think the basic idea is sound.
>
> >3) Some large format carts are pressurized, some not...
>
> The fact that CISs work indicates suction is sufficient on the desktop
> units.
>
> >... most CIS systems are HIGHLY sensitive to
> > gravity and placing the bottles even a little too high will
> > result in a mess of ink dripping through the head. Bottles
> > too low will result in starvation and may even draw ink back
> > from the head causing air bubbles or air in the lines.
>
> But lots of people use these devices regularly without much worry 
> about ink
> level. It think some work here might make the units work better than they
> do already, however.
>
> I think there is a workable system here.
>
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
>
>  
>
> __,___ 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Digital BW] Re:Hypothetical Cart-Less CIS?

2007-11-20 by brigsby707

Hi Duane,

I didn't realize you had already suggested the idea of a Cart-Less CIS
and after reading your previous post, apparently all I did was
reinvent your wheel with a couple slight differences, (have the
dampers outside the printer and the adjustable structure to hold the
chips). I guess great minds think alike ;P

Anyway, I was wondering if you have any idea as to what size tubing
would be needed to pull this off. And, if different sizes are needed,
how would I go about splicing the tubes. I have an old bulk ink system
for the 1280 that I've never used and that I'd like to play with,
either with the 1280 or an R200 I have. But, I've never worked with
any of the large format dampers and don't have any experience with
using tubing on the printhead inlets. Any tips/suggestions/knowledge
would be greatly appreciated.

Best Regards,

Eric Ashworth



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "dlruckus"
<dlruckus@...> wrote:
Show quoted textHide quoted text
>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark"
> <paul.roark@> wrote:
> 
> > But lots of people use these devices regularly without much worry
> about ink
> > level.  It think some work here might make the units work better
> than >they do already, however.
> >  
> > Paul
> >
>  That was the reason for suggesting IV bags. However, one can simply
> use rinsed out 3000/7000/9000 carts reloaded with whatever ink you
> choose. The tubing then has a damper on one end and a needle for the
> cart on the other. Solves all of the air and ink height problems. Set
> the carts beside the machine with tape or a big rubber band around
> them and you're in business.
>  Why work hard to invent something different when the system the wide
> formats use works just fine and can be duplicated easily.
>  Also, no one can sue you for using Epson parts you own in any way you
> see fit privately. They can't patent tubing,needles and glue or go
> after the sale of chip reset devices either.
>  Another method could use the filters you talked about some time ago
> inline with the tubing and add a 'T' stub to the tubing near the head
> inlet to give an empty chamber for damping. That would do away with
> expensive dampers as well.
> 
> Regards
> Duane
>

Re: [Digital BW] Re:Hypothetical Cart-Less CIS?

2007-11-20 by Ernst Dinkla

brigsby707 wrote:
> Hi Duane,
> 
> I didn't realize you had already suggested the idea of a Cart-Less CIS
> and after reading your previous post, apparently all I did was
> reinvent your wheel with a couple slight differences, (have the
> dampers outside the printer and the adjustable structure to hold the
> chips). I guess great minds think alike ;P
> 
> Anyway, I was wondering if you have any idea as to what size tubing
> would be needed to pull this off. And, if different sizes are needed,
> how would I go about splicing the tubes. I have an old bulk ink system
> for the 1280 that I've never used and that I'd like to play with,
> either with the 1280 or an R200 I have. But, I've never worked with
> any of the large format dampers and don't have any experience with
> using tubing on the printhead inlets. Any tips/suggestions/knowledge
> would be greatly appreciated.
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> Eric Ashworth
> 
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "dlruckus"
> <dlruckus@...> wrote:
>> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark"
>> <paul.roark@> wrote:
>>
>>> But lots of people use these devices regularly without much worry
>> about ink
>>> level.  It think some work here might make the units work better
>> than >they do already, however.
>>>  
>>> Paul
>>>
>>  That was the reason for suggesting IV bags. However, one can simply
>> use rinsed out 3000/7000/9000 carts reloaded with whatever ink you
>> choose. The tubing then has a damper on one end and a needle for the
>> cart on the other. Solves all of the air and ink height problems. Set
>> the carts beside the machine with tape or a big rubber band around
>> them and you're in business.
>>  Why work hard to invent something different when the system the wide
>> formats use works just fine and can be duplicated easily.
>>  Also, no one can sue you for using Epson parts you own in any way you
>> see fit privately. They can't patent tubing,needles and glue or go
>> after the sale of chip reset devices either.
>>  Another method could use the filters you talked about some time ago
>> inline with the tubing and add a 'T' stub to the tubing near the head
>> inlet to give an empty chamber for damping. That would do away with
>> expensive dampers as well.
>>
>> Regards
>> Duane

The dampers have 3 functions:
the sieve to filter any filth or pigment agglomeration from 
the ink stream,
the membrane keeps the ink pressure at the air pressure,
as an ink buffer to reply on sudden demand.

The cart design functions in similar ways to keep a 
corresponding ink pressure:
the bag has the same air pressure around it,
the vertical bag in the cart folds horizontally so the ink 
level remains more or less the same and the seal is halfway 
the bag content.

Replacing the dampers isn't a good idea given the 
fundamentals of the unpressurised wide format ink supply
systems.

It is possible that some design aspects of the heads or 
(desktop) carts have to do with the left right acceleration 
of the head carriage and the influence of that on the ink 
supply. If I recall it correctly the old Crystaljet wide 
format (Calcomp, Summigraph ?) available more or less before 
Epson entered the market with the 9000 got a patent claim 
case against it on that head design aspect. Two buffers + 
two ink channels, one left, one right to solve that dynamic 
ink pressure issue. Wonder if there's something like that in 
the head or in the desktop cart. In the last case it has to 
be addressed too.

For any 3 MK 3 PK system a distribution system on the head 
carriage to serve the 6 heads with only two dampers and two 
ink lines from the big carts will make the load on the head 
carriage lower.


-- 
Met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst


|  Dinkla Grafische Techniek  |
|     www.pigment-print.com    |
|             ( unvollendet )            |

[Digital BW] Re:Hypothetical Cart-Less CIS?

2007-11-21 by brigsby707

Hi Ernst,

Thank you for the information. However I'm a little confused. You said
there are 3 functions the dampers fulfill. But, from what you wrote I
only caught the bit about filtration and pressure regulation. What is
the third?

As I mentioned in the first post, I am interested in using an
adjustable device to hold the chips in place and use some sort of
dampening in the CIS lines external to the printer (specifically small
format). From Duane's post I gather that I might have some luck using
large format dampers but might have to deal with differing tube sizes.

But just to get the ball rolling I think I will be ordering some Epson
3000 dampers and have some fun tinkering.

Your comment regarding the load on the carriage has me wondering, if
the dampers aren't in the printer's carriage and just connected via
tubing whether the printhead would be too light. But I don't think it
would be a problem as the printer operates fine with carts whether
they are full or nearly empty. I guess there's no way to know other
than to try it out.

Any additional ideas would be appreciated.


Best Regards,

Eric Ashworth



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Ernst Dinkla
<E.Dinkla@...> wrote:
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> 
> The dampers have 3 functions:
> the sieve to filter any filth or pigment agglomeration from 
> the ink stream,
> the membrane keeps the ink pressure at the air pressure,
> as an ink buffer to reply on sudden demand.
> 
> The cart design functions in similar ways to keep a 
> corresponding ink pressure:
> the bag has the same air pressure around it,
> the vertical bag in the cart folds horizontally so the ink 
> level remains more or less the same and the seal is halfway 
> the bag content.
> 
> Replacing the dampers isn't a good idea given the 
> fundamentals of the unpressurised wide format ink supply
> systems.
> 
> It is possible that some design aspects of the heads or 
> (desktop) carts have to do with the left right acceleration 
> of the head carriage and the influence of that on the ink 
> supply. If I recall it correctly the old Crystaljet wide 
> format (Calcomp, Summigraph ?) available more or less before 
> Epson entered the market with the 9000 got a patent claim 
> case against it on that head design aspect. Two buffers + 
> two ink channels, one left, one right to solve that dynamic 
> ink pressure issue. Wonder if there's something like that in 
> the head or in the desktop cart. In the last case it has to 
> be addressed too.
> 
> For any 3 MK 3 PK system a distribution system on the head 
> carriage to serve the 6 heads with only two dampers and two 
> ink lines from the big carts will make the load on the head 
> carriage lower.
> 
> 
> -- 
> Met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst
> 
> 
> |  Dinkla Grafische Techniek  |
> |     www.pigment-print.com    |
> |             ( unvollendet )            |
>

Re: [Digital BW] Re:Hypothetical Cart-Less CIS?

2007-11-21 by Ernst Dinkla

brigsby707 wrote:
> Hi Ernst,
> 
> Thank you for the information. However I'm a little confused. You said
> there are 3 functions the dampers fulfill. But, from what you wrote I
> only caught the bit about filtration and pressure regulation. What is
> the third?

The ink buffer to bridge sudden high ink demand that can not 
be pulled through the ink tubes that fast. It could well be 
that the membrane also dampens the effect of the ink 
pressure fluctuations due to the head carriage movements.

> Your comment regarding the load on the carriage has me wondering, if
> the dampers aren't in the printer's carriage and just connected via
> tubing whether the printhead would be too light. But I don't think it
> would be a problem as the printer operates fine with carts whether
> they are full or nearly empty. I guess there's no way to know other
> than to try it out.

There's a difference between loading the carriage with the 
dead weight of the carts or having it pull tubing around. 
That's an exaggeration but you have to be careful that the 
tubes are unrolling correctly etc. I has worked for other 
CIS systems so just check how it is done there.


-- 
Met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst


|  Dinkla Grafische Techniek  |
|     www.pigment-print.com    |
|             ( unvollendet )            |

[Digital BW] Re:Hypothetical Cart-Less CIS?

2007-11-21 by Steven Karafyllakis

Eric, allow me to put in a comment or two here-one function is to 
provide an exit from the ink stream for air trapped in the lines. The 
air floats to the top, ink exits out the bottom as in a cartrdge. But 
it exits from the same orifice as a cartridge, and frankly I think 
you're going to find it very difficult to mount the dampers 
externally, and connect the exit port to the intake port on the head 
without leaks. And you would still need enough tubing to allow the 
carriage full movement, which might affect the pressure control 
function.

Some of the recently available CIS units (Chinese, but what isn't 
nowdays?) have half-size carts that are essentialy a damper with an 
auto reset chip in a shape that clicks into place like a cartridge. 
This is a much more practical solution, even if you cut the tubes and 
put large bottles (the tanks hold 220ml) or IV bags or whatever on 
the other end. And the price is reasonable- the entire unit costs 
less than a set of auto-reste chips from MIS or Mediastreet. I've had 
2 going for several months, no problems so far. Check this link-its 
worth a look.

http://stores.ebay.com/SuperJetUSA-
Store_W0QQcolZ4QQdirZ1QQfsubZ0QQftidZ2QQpZ3QQtZkm


Steven Karafyllakis




 ---- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "brigsby707" 
<brigsby707@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Ernst,
> 
> Thank you for the information. However I'm a little confused. You 
said
> there are 3 functions the dampers fulfill. But, from what you wrote 
I
> only caught the bit about filtration and pressure regulation. What 
is
> the third?
> 
> As I mentioned in the first post, I am interested in using an
> adjustable device to hold the chips in place and use some sort of
> dampening in the CIS lines external to the printer (specifically 
small
> format). From Duane's post I gather that I might have some luck 
using
> large format dampers but might have to deal with differing tube 
sizes.
> 
> But just to get the ball rolling I think I will be ordering some 
Epson
> 3000 dampers and have some fun tinkering.
> 
> Your comment regarding the load on the carriage has me wondering, if
> the dampers aren't in the printer's carriage and just connected via
> tubing whether the printhead would be too light. But I don't think 
it
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> would be a problem as the printer operates fine with carts whether
> they are full or nearly empty. I guess there's no way to know other
> than to try it out.
> 
> Any additional ideas would be appreciated.
> 
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> Eric Ashworth
> 
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Ernst Dinkla
> <E.Dinkla@> wrote:
> > 
> > The dampers have 3 functions:
> > the sieve to filter any filth or pigment agglomeration from 
> > the ink stream,
> > the membrane keeps the ink pressure at the air pressure,
> > as an ink buffer to reply on sudden demand.
> > 
> > The cart design functions in similar ways to keep a 
> > corresponding ink pressure:
> > the bag has the same air pressure around it,
> > the vertical bag in the cart folds horizontally so the ink 
> > level remains more or less the same and the seal is halfway 
> > the bag content.
> > 
> > Replacing the dampers isn't a good idea given the 
> > fundamentals of the unpressurised wide format ink supply
> > systems.
> > 
> > It is possible that some design aspects of the heads or 
> > (desktop) carts have to do with the left right acceleration 
> > of the head carriage and the influence of that on the ink 
> > supply. If I recall it correctly the old Crystaljet wide 
> > format (Calcomp, Summigraph ?) available more or less before 
> > Epson entered the market with the 9000 got a patent claim 
> > case against it on that head design aspect. Two buffers + 
> > two ink channels, one left, one right to solve that dynamic 
> > ink pressure issue. Wonder if there's something like that in 
> > the head or in the desktop cart. In the last case it has to 
> > be addressed too.
> > 
> > For any 3 MK 3 PK system a distribution system on the head 
> > carriage to serve the 6 heads with only two dampers and two 
> > ink lines from the big carts will make the load on the head 
> > carriage lower.
> > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > Met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst
> > 
> > 
> > |  Dinkla Grafische Techniek  |
> > |     www.pigment-print.com    |
> > |             ( unvollendet )            |
> >
>

[Digital BW] Re:Hypothetical Cart-Less CIS?

2007-11-21 by Greg

Ernst,

One thing about the left right pressure fluctuations. As I'm sure you 
have seen, as the head in the large format machines moves left to 
right, there is a fairly large change in volume that can be seen at the 
bottle end of the tubes, especially when ink coverage in low. It can 
actually pump the ink up into the vent area of my bottles if I'm not 
carefull in making sure that the vent area is empty before starting. 
I'm guessing but maybe around 1 cc volume change between park and 
extreme left on my 9500.

Move to quarantaine

This moves the raw source file on disk only. The archive index is not changed automatically, so you still need to run a manual refresh afterward.