Miscellaneous desk
< March 21	<< Feb \| March \| Apr >>	March 23 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

March 22

Two questions about the US restaurant industry

This is a sequel to a question I asked here five years ago. This time I have two questions:

1. What is the largest US restaurant chain not to have an international presence? Largest in terms of revenue, and largest in terms of number of outlets.

2. What large US restaurant chains that lack an international presence never had one in their history? It surprised me to learn that some US-only chains such as White Castle and Chick-fil-A did have an international presence at some point but have since closed them down. What large chains have never expanded internationally ever? Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 00:16, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the list of the top 100 U.S. Restaurant Chains as of 2012. Near as I can tell, Sonic Drive-In, #12 on that list, only has outlets in the U.S., and does not look like they ever had an outlet outside of the U.S. --Jayron 32 01:49, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, yester evening I happened to see an advertisement for Sonic, of which I was previously unaware. Holy Baader-Meinhof effect, Batman! —Tamfang (talk) 07:26, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Swam on wood

got a problem with water going under my in roof and damage my wood. I have cut it out and find the next stuff on the wood. I am living in a rural town in the Karoo in South Africa. Can somebody identify this and explain this.

Caption1
Caption2

It looks like you've tried to upload some photos to illustrate your question. Unfortunately it hasn't worked and you can't just upload any old photo to Wikipedia anyway. Upload them to an image hosting site such as imgur and link them from there. --Viennese Waltz 08:07, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The swam may be wet rot (coniophora).--Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:58, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What does "swam" mean here? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:06, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Swam" is Afrikaans for fungus (from Dutch 'zwam'). - Lindert (talk) 21:28, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Is that definition given anywhere in the English Wikipedia? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:29, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

AFAIK it's not an English word, and Wikipedia is not a foreign dictionary, though fungus is linked to af:swam. - Lindert (talk) 21:39, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

inkjet printer ink and fountain pen ink

Are inkjet printer ink and fountain pen ink significantly different from each other? Would inkjet printer ink work in a fountain pen?

Reviewing Inkjet printing and Fountain pen ink, they seem to be of sufficiently different composition. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:05, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In the early days of inkjet printers, I used to use fountain pen ink successfully to refill ink cartridges, though the quality of print was slightly inferior. This might not work with modern printers. For the other way round, just try it and see, but don't blame me if it clogs your fountain pen. Dbfirs 21:43, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I expect this to be an issue of viscosity. Inkjet ink has a very low viscosity because it has to squirt out a very tiny hole at incredibly high speed. Google shows inkjet viscosity <5 mPas. I cannot find viscosity for fountain pen ink. If it is higher, it would likely clog an inkjet printer. Next issue would be how vital the higher viscosity relates to the fountain pen. Is it necessary to make the pen work? I believe so. Low viscosity ink should drip off the pen too easily. 209.149.113.5 (talk) 14:32, 23 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Update: References I've found for fountain pen ink are measured in dynes/cm2. One dyne/cm2 is 100 mPas. The inks go from around 15 to 45 dynes/cm2. So, they are 1500 to 4500 mPas, which is considerably more than 5 mPas max for inkjet ink. 209.149.113.5 (talk) 14:40, 23 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm surprised that the difference is so great. They seem to drip in very similar fashion. Olive oil has a viscosity of 81 mPas, and thick motor oil 319 mPas. What are you using in your fountain pen? I think you mis-read the patent which was for a gel ink. Most bottled inks have a viscosity of 5 mPas or lower, just the same as printer inks. Many fountain pens have a rubber reservoir. I don't know how the chemicals in a printer ink would affect this. Dbfirs 18:13, 23 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am also concerned. I only found one site giving specific values for viscosity and it clearly marked them as dynes/cm2. My gut tells me that they are actually mPas. So, I searched for contradictory information, but haven't found any. 209.149.113.5 (talk) 19:48, 23 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Searching again on dinner break and found a great site [1] that I believe explains the confusion. The surface tension is measured in dynes/cm - which is in the range 42-48 for that manufacturer. The viscosity on that page is measured in cPas with a range of 1*1.25, which is 10-12.5 mPas. So, that fountain pen ink is at least twice as viscous as inkjet ink. It still supports my two fears. First, I worry that fountain pen ink will clog the inkjet printer. Second, I worry that inkjet ink will drip off the fountain pen too easily. 209.149.113.5 (talk) 19:54, 23 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, that seems to be particularly viscous ink, probably designed for calligraphy, and I agree that it would probably clog the jets in a printer cartridge. I can't find evidence yet, but I instinctively feel that the Quink ink, mentioned by Aspro below, and exactly the brand that I and others used for refilling cartridges, is less viscous than that, and less viscous than most printer ink. I agree that surface tension will also affect performance. Dbfirs 21:34, 23 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As inkjet ink costs a lot more than the very best French Champagne, can't see why the OP would consider using it in a fountain pen. My printers are more often idle than my favorite fountain pen, yet don't seem to clog up unless left idle for a very long time, so wouldn't think the OP would notice any difference when using this ink in his fountain pen. Like Dbfirs, I refill my cartridges with pen ink (brand name Quink) which is a ruddy site cheaper! It works, regardless of the mPas ! Quality wise – I can read it clearly and easily! Whether I would use it to print out my résumé to a prospective employer is a different matter. But me-being-me, I think I would; because if my prospective employer wants to know about me, what's better than demonstrating to him how I work and live... Look: this is my experience and if you don't like the presentation of my résumé, I'll go off and work somewhere else !!!. As you know, some, many, most companies retail ink-jet printers a low prices so that they can recuperate vast profits at selling very expensive ink. Of course this approach of refilling would probably not work for my four colour printers use for printing photographs, as the inks of the right hues and tints don't appear available by other brands.--Aspro (talk) 19:15, 23 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Lest people believe that Aspro's anecdote regarding printer ink, the very best French Champagne (a redundancy since all Champagne originates in France) - Dom Pérignon Rose Gold '96 - actually costs about $49,000, and inkjet ink - though pricey in its own right - does not cost anywhere near that much.--WaltCip (talk) 19:56, 23 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Does your odd exceptions prove the rule? Tell me where you buy or steal your catriages from please! Printer ink seven times more expensive than Dom Perignon Unless of course... your in the habit of buying very rare 1947 vintage printer ink at exorbitant prices in which case I suppose Champagne might seem cheaper..--Aspro (talk) 20:38, 23 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We're getting off topic, but Consumer Reports[2] puts the price of printer ink between $13 and $75 per fluid ounce, depending on brand. A wine bottle full of the stuff would therefore cost between $330 and $1900. I did some quick estimates (independent of the CR numbers) with a cartridge I happened to have handy, and I think the wine-bottle price would be about $705. So that checks out.

So, sure "Very best" is a sky's the limit sort of thing with Champagne, but ink jet ink is sure pricier than your average bottle of perfectly nice champagne. ApLundell (talk) 13:33, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That's a clever rhetorical trick. A vial of cheap vanilla extract is $4.50 but if you filled a wine bottle with it, it would be $124.50 and up, which costs more than most bottles of high-tier wine and bubbly. But in any case, you're more likely to get two or three months use out of a cartridge of printer ink. Unless you are being absolutely penurious, you can't make a champagne bottle last for two or three months after opening it. --WaltCip (talk) 13:49, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You can get a pint of vanilla for about $20 bucks, though. (Or about $30/wine bottle) Most people understand that with that small vial you're mostly paying for the bottle and the handling.

I think the reason the comparison resonates so well with ink cartridges is that you're required to buy it in tiny containers quantities that run out often. We all know that it'd be massively cheaper if we could just buy the ink in a bottle, but for consumer-level printers, you can't.

So how about Fountain Pens? If you have a cartridge pen, you pay about $5 for a pack of 12 cartridges of 1.4ml each. That's about $220 per wine bottle. On the other hand, if you bought a small 30ml ink bottle[3] for about $15, you'd pay $375 per wine bottle, So maybe fountain pen ink isn't so much cheaper than printer ink after all. ApLundell (talk) 14:16, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Check the prices on well printer ink. The whole point is you save money on ink because the printer stores large quantities of ink. 209.149.113.5 (talk) 14:44, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Large quantities of ink? In a printer cartridge? Those big cartridges are full of sponge. That sponge takes up most of the volumetric space. Open one up and see for yourself. The actual ink inside those big cartage is very small. Try refilling one and you'll find the spong becomes saturated and full before you have even thought you started. That'll demonstrate how little ink is contained within.--Aspro (talk) 17:03, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well inkjet printers don't use cartridges. They have a well that you pour the ink into. Example: The Epson Ecotank printers. 209.149.113.5 (talk) 13:36, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

They're very similar and they will interwork, in some cases. However each type also includes a large variation range within that type. Not all fountain pen inks are usable in all pens. Far from all inkjet inks can be used in all inkjets.

They both work at a small scale, so bulk viscosity is less important than surface effects, and their attraction to other materials. But yes, modern inkjets are very low viscosity and need to be. More importantly, some inkjets work by mechanically spraying the ink, some by heating it and causing vapourisation, thus gas pressure. Those are very fussy, as their thermal behaviour is important. One needs to boil easily, one mustn't (even the physically propelled ink gets heated in the process).

Some also have unusual chemistry. H-P had a patented ink for later cartridges on the original DeskJet that reacted with acidic papers to become moderately waterproof. One of the few inkjets that could print envelopes that didn't wash clean in the rain - at least until the office stationery was upgraded to a better grade of white paper! Andy Dingley (talk) 14:33, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Inkjet ink is very specialized ink, as you've noted. These are the properties that I know of:

Must be able to be heated to vaporization and cooled to room temperature without changing the physical characteristics of the ink (Most inkjet printers heat the ink).
Must be able to go from a pool of liquid to a stream of microscopic droplets instantly.
Must be able to accelerate almost instantly to 300mph (approximate speed of inkjet sprayers).
Must be able to go through nozzles thinner than a human hair without sticking to the walls of the nozzle.
Must not splatter when going from 300mph to a dead stop on a sheet of paper.
Must not bleed into nearby ink.
Must dry almost instantly.

The comparison of inket ink to fine champagne above is rather accurate. Inkjet ink is not your average Bic quality ink. Many years of research (that is still going) has been used to perfect this very special blend of ink. 209.149.113.5 (talk) 14:42, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]