TSB
screen printing => Equipment => Topic started by: TCT on November 11, 2014, 06:31:48 PM
-
Yes another LED thread!!!
I am going back and forth with the Saati guys getting info on their single point exposure LED "Bulb". Anyone here heard anything on it?
I'll try to link or post the PDF...
-
I knew this was coming from them and others are working on it as well. But that's one of the worst sales pdf's I've ever witnessed. I guess if there isn't much to show or say then that's what you get but damn that's some 1970's stuff right there.
-
It is like $1200, seems REAL hard to pass that up!
-
I knew this was coming from them and others are working on it as well. But that's one of the worst sales pdf's I've ever witnessed. I guess if there isn't much to show or say then that's what you get but damn that's some 1970's stuff right there.
No sh!t!! LOL
-
Ok see if this works so everyone doesn't have to download it. ;D
-
I've got a brand new one sitting in the box here. I'm planning to test with it Thursday so I'll let you know my thoughts.
-
I've got a brand new one sitting in the box here. I'm planning to test with it Thursday so I'll let you know my thoughts.
Seriously!? set that SOB up now! ;D I no more than 4 hrs. before I started talking to the Saati guy emailed over a PO for a LED exposure unit! >:( Gonna see if I can politely retract that for now and see what I can find out about the Saati one.
-
I would think that crinkle finish reflector would create a lot of light scatter.
Would be nice if it would just drop in as a retrofit for a MH unit.
-
I would think that crinkle finish reflector would create a lot of light scatter.
Would be nice if it would just drop in as a retrofit for a MH unit.
Make one.
-
I don't think that reflector really matters since the LED is directional unlike a traditional bulb.
-
I wonder if the blue guy will say this is a bad idea, as his had 31% more better LEDs than the red guys lol Sorry had to do it.
I would think anyone with the traditional unit could convert their units in an afternoon.
-
Dammit, when did this happen? I'm sure we'll be very happy with our starlight but this would have been a very easy drop in for us at a seventh of the price. Anyone know how far away from the glass it shoots? different reflector options?
Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
-
I would think that crinkle finish reflector would create a lot of light scatter.
Would be nice if it would just drop in as a retrofit for a MH unit.
Yeah, this wouldn't be hard to drop in place if you ask me! I'm very interested in your findings as well. Maybe I can trade them out a redesign of their PDF for one. ;)
-
Dammit, when did this happen? I'm sure we'll be very happy with our starlight but this would have been a very easy drop in for us at a seventh of the price. Anyone know how far away from the glass it shoots? different reflector options?
Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
Sounds like Danny will have the most educated review, but the engineer from Saati is calling me in the am and I can try to give the Tim Taylor/Wilsion(anyone) explanation of what I'm told. ;D
I wonder if the blue guy will say this is a bad idea, as his had 31% more better LEDs than the red guys lol Sorry had to do it.
I would think anyone with the traditional unit could convert their units in an afternoon.
I would actually really enjoy to hear Rich's thoughts. Blue, red, green, black, purple aside I still find Rich's thoughts and insight informative. Also would love to hear from Alan from Murakami!
-
Honestly, if this is faster than a 1k MH unit and uses a 120v and has no warmup and can hold the same relative detail, I will buy one ASAP...as soon as others have a chance to thoroughly test it who I trust :D
-
Lets also not lose sight of the reason things expose so fast is because of how close the LEDs are... So going single point does give you a long lasting cooler bulb but probably won't reduce exposure times like the multi led systems will.
-
If it would keep my 3140 from getting to 110+ degrees when shooting multiple dual cure screens.... I am all over it.
-
But why not just go straight to the standard led unit and get best of both worlds?
-
I wonder if you have to pull the ballast or make other internal electrical changes, or if it's truly 'drop-in'
-
Can't be truly drop in as let's are DC powered. Single point led in the 300w range will probably need a 72v DC power supply. Still if it shoots quick, geat potential here.
-
I think this one is more of a replacement for a freestanding unit to be used with a vacume frame of hanging screens on a wall when using DTS.
Like mentioned no heat and not having to replace a bulb are tremendous benifits.
-
Can't be truly drop in as let's are DC powered. Single point led in the 300w range will probably need a 72v DC power supply. Still if it shoots quick, geat potential here.
Most have drivers that accept standard AC, sometimes between 87 and 240 volts.
-
I could attach this to the top of mine 40-1K.
Keep the controls on the existing unit just for the vacuum and use this and the timer for the exposing.
And that is of course if my unit goes dead.
In the meantime, I never understood the pricing on these stand alone LED units. WTF they are so expensive??
I understand the R&D, but I just bought an LED light string, 3 meters and 300 LED lights in it. With a power converter it was $15.
Lets say, little LED light in the exposure unit are more expensive to make by 10 times (I doubt it), that would put the cost at $150 for 300 lights.
That means that wires, box, timer, vacuum and a glass is about $7-$8K
Sorry, just thinking out loud.
-
because they can be...
prices often times are more about what the market can bear more so than a figure based on cost...this can work both ways...this is why places clearance stuff too.
-
Offset the cost of R&D, it is built into the cost of most goods.
-
Yea the LED units will come down an absolute ton in a few years when every manufacturer is producing them.
-
I don't think they will come down in prices... At least not from the "big boys".
As Brad said, "because they can." We will pay $7k because of "perceived value".
When I was in (actively) the video production business we lost a bid once because my business partner didn't get this. Someone wanted a comercial and everyone else was bidding $50k-$75k and he thought "that's crazy, even if we rented the same camera as they have and brought in a grip truck. we could still do it for under $20k and make out like bandits." So that's what he did. It was even a friend of his taking the bids, we didn't get the bid and he was so confused why they would CHOOSE to spend 3 times the money for the same product.
Perceived value... The organization just couldn't image that we would be able to give them the same quality product for such a lower price.
It's basically unspoken price fixing. They all know it doesn't serve any of their interest to cut the others throat by THAT much... They want to make that big margin as well. Even if Anatol, workhorse and vastex all came down to half of what M&R is charging, M&R would probably still out sell them because of perceived value, lots of ppl FEEL like they are getting that much more for their money.
-
huge part of what you paying for is the support. Don't forget M&R offers 24/7 phones and techs all over the place. Add the R&D, better quality LED's (yes there is a difference, and the better stuff is made in smaller batches so it is significantly more expensive and your 10x example is not that much off) and the price goes up. If you want something that will work for the most part, build it yourself. If you want something that is guaranteed to work, by a unit from one of the big manufacturers.
pierre
-
Lets also not lose sight of the reason things expose so fast is because of how close the LEDs are... So going single point does give you a long lasting cooler bulb but probably won't reduce exposure times like the multi led systems will.
In total efforts to prove my ignorance, is that really how it works? Because the LED units are so close?
-
This is also why fluorescent units expose pretty quickly... the bulbs are right on the glass (practically).
Inverse Square Law is what applies here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse-square_law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse-square_law)
-
Yea the LED units will come down an absolute ton in a few years when every manufacturer is producing them.
Queue Ryonet...What will his be called?? The Cosmic Ray Avenger LED BLASTER!!!
-
Can't be truly drop in as let's are DC powered. Single point led in the 300w range will probably need a 72v DC power supply. Still if it shoots quick, geat potential here.
Most have drivers that accept standard AC, sometimes between 87 and 240 volts.
Yeah but I think they were hoping they could pop out their MH bulb, and literally drop in an LED, hit the switch and all would work.
Drivers/power supplies for the higher voltage LED's are a little pricier than 12V, but to the point. It's not just an LED drop in, but a "box" with other components inside that convert AC to DC to power the LED.
Very interested to see what Danny's results are...
-
I don't doubt M&R and a few others will still sell the units at a premium, but I also have no doubt that companies like Ryonet will lower the cost substantially on "comparable" units. Obviously they won't be backed by the M&R support and will likely be made with shittier components, but the cost will be much less than what we see now and other companies will follow.
I just want to know if this unit will be faster than a 1k MH. If it is at all faster and holds the same detail it would be worth it to not have to wait for bulb warmup or worry about heat. The added electrical savings and consistent exposure over the life of the bulb would just be added benefits.
-
Someone already did... and we almost rode their a$$ right out of town.
The Vastex unit was originally the Baby Joe for $2,200 and no one would buy it. He got nothing but harassing on how it couldn't be all that good and that he was full of sh!t. He had to send a unit to Pierre to test on his dime to even get the public here to accept that he had created what he created.
So if someone comes out with a cheaper version, it will be just like that all over again.
If I came out with a product and sold it for $1k who would be the first to step up and buy it (untested by an independent?) Clearly we already kind of see how that is working out right now with this $1,200 single point unit. "I'll wait to see what Danny finds out first!" is the thinking by everyone here. If Danny wouldn't be signed up already I doubt many of you would be diving on that grenade. ;)
-
I'll admit, I was right there beating him up over it as well.
http://www.theshirtboard.com/index.php/topic,5639.0.html (http://www.theshirtboard.com/index.php/topic,5639.0.html)
-
I've said this from the time I saw an LED unit why not build a drop in for an existing unit, here is a good selling point if the led drop does work and does the same thing as an MH, what you get is not heat build up, no waiting for the light to heat up, longer bulb life, and a little cheaper on the wallet in the long haul, no weak light/changing bulbs. I would go for that, because once I'm dial in I'm good for years maybe.
darryl
-
here's the thing...LED's are only about 11% efficient. OLED's are better, but not really in much mass production outside of TVs and smartphones. Theoretically they can achieve up to 40% efficiency.
I would imagine that as these progress and the better LEDs become mid-range the prices will drop, by how much I don't know.
it's funny how much we tout LED's as being so efficient. They are only efficient in comparison to filament bulbs and other style lighting.
-
As long as you have a clue of what you are doing, you could just drop it in. Take the lines that feed the ballast and feed the driver.
-
So apparently the LED that Saati sent me is different then the led that Alex was talking about here....... So the disclaimer here is I'm pretty confident the led they sent me is not designed to fully expose a screen, rather it's to post expose. I did retrofit the light into my 3140 and did some testing with it and results are junk. The light does not have near enough power to expose my dual cure emulsion. I think the reason the led works so well on our i image ste is due to the fact of how many leds there are and how close they are to the screen....... Unless the light saati is talking about is way more powerful then the one they sent me I would say the single point led is a waste of time but just my opinion there....... Like I said the light your talking about looks to be different then the one they sent me so it's not fair for me to say if it will/won't work but as of right now I would be sticking to a ste or a starlight...... I dont think you can beat the starlight imo
Saati is suppose to be in my shop tomorrow so I'll talk more about it then and let you guys know but as of right now I'm pretty sure the led they sent me is not designed to actually expose.
-
So made about a dozen screens with the led light sitting in my 3140 unit...... My high mesh stuff I'm getting really nice screens with it around 1.5 minutes.....Which is pretty slow but like I said the light saati sent me is different then the 3000..... As far as undercutting and detail on the screen I'm not seeing anything that looks bad... The screens look really nice, it's just a bit slow. But so far if this light was more powerful it would probably work as a drop in unit....
-
What emulsion Danny? And is there any power rating/consumption info on the unit you have? 90 seconds isn't too bad for some emulsions
-
The unit linked by TCT (not Danny's apparently) is reported to be the equivalent of a 5k MH.(they actually say "traditional" lamp)
It was on display at SGIA, and got a brief mention in the Ink Kitchen blog (http://theinkkitchen.com/2014/10/sgia-2014-a-biased-tour-part-1/).
-
I have to agree with Pierre's comments and really everyone's on perceived value. Our Starlight arrives pretty soon. The Anatol unit had a better layout for us, for our shop's needs shooting 2up would in fact have a benefit, and the Anatol, the Vastex model as well as Lightspeed cost significantly less. I bought peace of mind with the Starlight, not necessarily a huge increase in performance over the other brands although I trust that will be a real benefit as well.
Models like the Saati unit would not exactly "drop in" to where your MH bulb was in your current lamphead but would replace the entire lamp head and ballast I believe. There would be no reason to continue using the 5kw ballast of an MH unit for a 300w LED array.
Yes, inverse square law (I think?) kicks in no matter the light source and for us to continue to shoot as we are, appx 63" from glass would still result in similar expo times with this LED lamp head. This is why I was asking about reflector options, if they had a "super wide" option to bring the lamp in closer it could mean a reduction in expo times. This means R&D spent on getting the angles correct and eliminating cross over and scatter though which would mean a higher price. For a shop that had to shoot larger areas, switching to this Saati unit would still be a probable no brainer as the unit costs around what 3 high quality Olec lamps run. That's a 1 yr ROI for a shop with moderate screen throughput and much faster for shops with their bulb on all day long.
So this would be buying your way out of MH bulb replacement v. changing the way you shoot altogether with an array setup. I think we'll still be much happier with an LED array system since it solves a number of other problems for us aside from exposure time- space, light scatter, power consumption -all those are just as beneficial to us right now as decreasing expo time.
-
Ok, so I just got off the phone with 2 Saati guys....
Danny, is yours more of a circular unit vs. rectangular? They were thinking you may have the "100" unit, which is more of a circle and they said has been used for post exposing with CTS units.
The "300" unit @ 44" from the glass they said was equivalent to a OLIX(sp?) 3000 watt unit.
Exposure times vary depending on placement from the glass, mesh, emulsion, yada, yada, yada... But they said a safe or common range they were seeing was 17-27 seconds.
The 300 unit is made up of 3 actual lights focused, the 100 is 1 light and they are working on a 500 unit but are having hurdles keeping it cool enough.
They were actually in the airport on their way to a company that makes exposure units to work out a deal. Sounds like they would IDEALLY down the line like to have a whole unit with vacuum blanket timer and all for under $3K in the future.
They are getting me a handful of contact info for current US users that I can talk to and see what they think....
-
OK, light energy in the correct wavelengths is what exposes emulsion. How many watts? At what distance? 300w compared to a 5,000 watt Metal Halide? Proximity to the screen is what helps the Starlight and other LED's to expose emulsion, and most have limited multi spectral capability that dual cures love. I'd love to hear tests. Here is the acid test: Coat a 110 1:2 with your emulsion. Expose it for the same time at the same distance as you are using now. I doubt the emulsion will stay on the screen without a far longer exposure using a 300w LED than the 1k and 5k units. Even the difference between an Olec 8k and 5k is quite a lot as far as emulsion durability. Weak light = weak screens. Maybe Ok for plastisol and small runs, but a long discharge run, or worse a long High Solids Acrylic ink run? no way. LED's conjure up all sorts of savings in electricity and lamps, but image quality and reject rates, especially on discharge could be painful.
We have experimented with a variety of LED's from a major LED manufacturer. We have tested some so strong they burnt holes in the mesh due to being so close. The best times we came up with in a scanning LED had times equal to the 5k metal halide in the lab, but did not pass a simple ink test with Matsui 301 whereas a multi spectral MH 5k bulb exposure showed no breakdown of the emulsion. We have seen good results with the Starlight in our tests and it is due to how close the lights are to the screen. You will see emulsion manufacturers coming out with LED emulsions. Trouble is they need to be tuned to the wavelength of the sensitizer. Diazo likes 360 nanometers, SBQ likes 380, 420. So if the lamp has only a single spike wavelength in the histogram it may not fully expose a dual cure. It may appear to be fully exposed, even without slime on the inside, but the cross linking going on in the emulsion will be partial and not as complete as a 5k-8k fresh Metal Halide. Call the emulsion what you will, diazo is the magic ingredient that helps with water resistance and it likes 360nm so how will a 405nm light expose that completely?
LED is in it's infancy. It's only going to get better. Anyone with results on any LED lamps using Discharge would be appreciated. If the screen can hold up to a long discharge run and hold good tonals then the LED light has benefits. Printers make money when the presses run, if the light source doesn't shoot durable screens the profits suffer. Short runs, probably won't matter, for the long runs? I have seen disasters and major headaches at shops running longer discharge and HSA ink print runs suffering screen failure and with plastisol showing major pinhole issues.
Al
-
Ok, so I just got off the phone with 2 Saati guys....
Danny, is yours more of a circular unit vs. rectangular? They were thinking you may have the "100" unit, which is more of a circle and they said has been used for post exposing with CTS units.
The "300" unit @ 44" from the glass they said was equivalent to a OLIX(sp?) 3000 watt unit.
Exposure times vary depending on placement from the glass, mesh, emulsion, yada, yada, yada... But they said a safe or common range they were seeing was 17-27 seconds.
The 300 unit is made up of 3 actual lights focused, the 100 is 1 light and they are working on a 500 unit but are having hurdles keeping it cool enough.
They were actually in the airport on their way to a company that makes exposure units to work out a deal. Sounds like they would IDEALLY down the line like to have a whole unit with vacuum blanket timer and all for under $3K in the future.
They are getting me a handful of contact info for current US users that I can talk to and see what they think....
Alex, yes I have the small circular led.... Pic attached of it sitting in my 3140 unit....... So as you know it's really only meant for post exposing on dts made screens so it's not an ideal application at all.....I would say if the other more powerful designated led was in here it would work great. Do I think it will be better then a starlight, no but it would produce some nice stencils for sure. I would be confident to say though that 100% you can make something like this work...
-
Man, something new almost every day it seems... 3 LED's keeping up with 5K MH would be pretty cool if it works...
Steve
-
OK, light energy in the correct wavelengths is what exposes emulsion. How many watts? At what distance? 300w compared to a 5,000 watt Metal Halide? Proximity to the screen is what helps the Starlight and other LED's to expose emulsion, and most have limited multi spectral capability that dual cures love. I'd love to hear tests. Here is the acid test: Coat a 110 1:2 with your emulsion. Expose it for the same time at the same distance as you are using now. I doubt the emulsion will stay on the screen without a far longer exposure using a 300w LED than the 1k and 5k units. Even the difference between an Olec 8k and 5k is quite a lot as far as emulsion durability. Weak light = weak screens. Maybe Ok for plastisol and small runs, but a long discharge run, or worse a long High Solids Acrylic ink run? no way. LED's conjure up all sorts of savings in electricity and lamps, but image quality and reject rates, especially on discharge could be painful.
We have experimented with a variety of LED's from a major LED manufacturer. We have tested some so strong they burnt holes in the mesh due to being so close. The best times we came up with in a scanning LED had times equal to the 5k metal halide in the lab, but did not pass a simple ink test with Matsui 301 whereas a multi spectral MH 5k bulb exposure showed no breakdown of the emulsion. We have seen good results with the Starlight in our tests and it is due to how close the lights are to the screen. You will see emulsion manufacturers coming out with LED emulsions. Trouble is they need to be tuned to the wavelength of the sensitizer. Diazo likes 360 nanometers, SBQ likes 380, 420. So if the lamp has only a single spike wavelength in the histogram it may not fully expose a dual cure. It may appear to be fully exposed, even without slime on the inside, but the cross linking going on in the emulsion will be partial and not as complete as a 5k-8k fresh Metal Halide. Call the emulsion what you will, diazo is the magic ingredient that helps with water resistance and it likes 360nm so how will a 405nm light expose that completely?
LED is in it's infancy. It's only going to get better. Anyone with results on any LED lamps using Discharge would be appreciated. If the screen can hold up to a long discharge run and hold good tonals then the LED light has benefits. Printers make money when the presses run, if the light source doesn't shoot durable screens the profits suffer. Short runs, probably won't matter, for the long runs? I have seen disasters and major headaches at shops running longer discharge and HSA ink print runs suffering screen failure and with plastisol showing major pinhole issues.
Al
Thanks for the insight Alan, I don't think there has ever been a single post of yours I didn't learn something from!
Would I be right in assuming that in your opinion a 300 watt single point LED light source at say 30"(for sake of argument) wouldn't have much of a advantage over a 1000 watt MH unit at 30"? Aside from power consumption.
The nature of our printing is heavily on the DC/WB side of things with HSA's gaining. We have used HVP for years but in the last year probably, switched over to the SP-1400 because we were having breakdown issues with the HVP. I know some people can go thousands of imprints with it and be fine, but we would be lucky to hit 500. The switch to SP-1400 probably only "band-aided" our problem. We were burning the HVP@ like 50sec. and now the 1400 is @ 4:20. I have the same Workhorse 1K watt unit I bought 9 years ago when I started, the shutter system has finally just bit the dust. That coupled with a 4:20 exposure time and the pot smoking jokes that go along with it paints a clear picture we need to upgrade. I have 2 perfectly good exposure units(minus the shutter box) with 3 vacuums, 3 blankets and 3 sets of glass, so buying a total new unit is a waste of money. We were going with the Vastex retro fit kit, but the "ease" of this single point one was really appealing. It could be used in the Workhorse unit we have or set up with the Olec unit that I have had sitting since I got it.
-
Had a demo of the single unit last week and for the money looks like great results in our CTS shop.
I think we will be going forward with the triple soon, although the concept of no integrator is a bit counter to my upbringing.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Had a demo of the single unit last week and for the money looks like great results in our CTS shop.
I think we will be going forward with the triple soon, although the concept of no integrator is a bit counter to my upbringing.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
But, of course, you were brought up with bulbs which weakened over time, necessitating a way to compensate. The question would be, do LED's truly give out the same "shine" throughout their whole life? If so, I'll refer you to the recent thread here about cameras, which along with all of the other advances and changes you've experienced in this business, make this new adjustment pale in comparison. Good times ahead!
-
Had a demo of the single unit last week and for the money looks like great results in our CTS shop.
I think we will be going forward with the triple soon, although the concept of no integrator is a bit counter to my upbringing.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Almost everything we do is different from the way I learned, but I like it. I'd rather work in Photoshop than a darkroom anytime, and the creation of the flash was boon to mankind (OK, printerkind). Our staple gun is for putting up pictures, canvas stretching pliers, well they're a conversation piece...
Steve
-
contrary to popular belief, LED's do deteriorate with time, but significantly slower than the MH bulbs. It is possible that there would be no difference after a year, but I would imagine 5 years would be a different story. This is just a guess on my end based on what I've heard.
also, heat is significant factor in the life and output of the LEDs. So there will be variations from shop to shop.
pierre
-
contrary to popular belief, LED's do deteriorate with time, but significantly slower than the MH bulbs. It is possible that there would be no difference after a year, but I would imagine 5 years would be a different story. This is just a guess on my end based on what I've heard.
also, heat is significant factor in the life and output of the LEDs. So there will be variations from shop to shop.
pierre
This was my thinking on deterioration. So a unit like the Starlight contains no integrator? I guess I should've asked! That seems like a no-no to me.
I'm not nearly as old as some of you ancients on here talking about stat cameras but I'm in the camp, it really goes against my basic understanding of exposure to not have an integrator. I suppose one could be added and wired into the controls....seems like that should be included with the units for the price. Clearly nobody has done a 5yr test on any of these yet.
-
I was surprised at this-
mk162-here's the thing...LED's are only about 11% efficient.
Why so much waste?
-
I was surprised at this-
mk162-here's the thing...LED's are only about 11% efficient.
Why so much waste?
OK, so I did some digging. The numbers are different between the manufacturers and there is quite a big difference in quality of the LEDs.
Good stuff if driven (proper voltage and amperage) will lose 5% at around 10,000 hours. So at 40 hours per week, that's 5 years! So check your exposure once a year and you are good to go!
As far as the efficiency, I was surprised to find out the 15% is correct (up to 20% for high end). The funny part is, this is pretty much the same as the MH!!! go figure. . .
as previously mentioned, temperature has high impact too.
pierre
-
Well I think we can all stomach a 5% drop over 5 years (less if not exposing a full 8 hrs a day).
I would just watch out for shooting ultra fast times on an LED as the minute and a half exposure isn't going to be effected too much by a 1-5% drop but that 5s time might be. According to Mr. Greaves a very fast PP exposure is not ideal anyhow.
-
contrary to popular belief, LED's do deteriorate with time, but significantly slower than the MH bulbs. It is possible that there would be no difference after a year, but I would imagine 5 years would be a different story. This is just a guess on my end based on what I've heard.
also, heat is significant factor in the life and output of the LEDs. So there will be variations from shop to shop.
pierre
This was my thinking on deterioration. So a unit like the Starlight contains no integrator? I guess I should've asked! That seems like a no-no to me.
I'm not nearly as old as some of you ancients on here talking about stat cameras but I'm in the camp, it really goes against my basic understanding of exposure to not have an integrator. I suppose one could be added and wired into the controls....seems like that should be included with the units for the price. Clearly nobody has done a 5yr test on any of these yet.
I know I should catch some crap for this, but we've never used the integrator, which be because they weren't invented when I started with an Arc Lamp. However, we could always tell when the bulb was fading in our MH, they just looked "different", very scientific, I know... We usually need a new bulb around every 9 months or so. We do want to upgrade, but since this is still evolving, we're moving slowly...
Steve
-
I'll be catching crap with ya! Never had one on our exposure unit either and when I bought ours it was light years ahead of the one I learned on at the shop I worked at in high school. Like Sbrem I just knew we had to change the bulb every year or so.
-
Creating light is not an efficient process in general, that is why there is so much waste.
Conversion of energy is a hell of a process.
-
it is terribly inefficient...but I thought the numbers would at least be out of the teens...
but even if you hit 100% efficient, will it save you THAT much money? I mean a 60w equiv. LED uses about 6-7w...even doubling the efficiency would put it at 3...3 watt savings...hardly worth rushing out to the store for that.
Compared to MH bulbs though, they are better, and they are much cooler(the heat is from the power converters)...on busy days it should make non-conditioned screen rooms more comfortable.
-
Had a demo of the single unit last week and for the money looks like great results in our CTS shop.
I think we will be going forward with the triple soon, although the concept of no integrator is a bit counter to my upbringing.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Greg, are you guys planning on using the 300 unit for exposing your "wall of screens" once they are imaged?
-
That's the initial plan, we were exposing to 9 on the 21 step scale at 30 inches and 30 seconds with the single.
Will do more eval with the triple as we move forward
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Hello TCT and all the members.
Regarding water base, discharge and HSA screen exposure. I get to see a lot of printers using these new HSA inks with long print runs and typically those that have high wattage units tend be able to avoid break down more than low wattage units or direct light to screen exposure units. The other key area is the right emulsion for the ink. In terms of the ink's ability to break down the emulsion I look at them like this:
Plastisol - not aggressive at all.
Water base (totally transparent no opacity inks) - Aggressive rating 2 on a 1-5 scale
Discharge - Aggressive rating 4
HSA - Agressive rating 5 - but this can vary from different manufacturers
My thought is we need to look at an individual light ray from the various units and how much strength it has left when it hits the squeegee side of the emulsion. This is the breakdown area usually not the print side. So if you have a 1000 watt vs a 5,000 watt the 1,000 watt will be quite weak after going through the emulsion and mesh compared to the 5,000 watt which will have more punch after the mesh and emulsion it needs to travel through. Give me the strongest light ray possible for Discharge and HSA inks. The more aggressive the ink, the more light energy I want to expose with. Emulsion is not underexposed only, or over exposed only. There is a linear ramp in between and some light sources give decent images and partial exposure. For these inks I want both the best resolution and the best exposure, where Metal Halides are proven to do so.
LED's overcome this with proximity and have strength due to the inverse square law. I did some math on another post here that shows that doubling the distance, multiplying the wattage by 4 at each doubling yields comparable wattage at the 40-48" distance for metal halides.
so Starlight wattage proximity is 3/4"x2=1.5" multiply by 4 for comparable wattage needed to equal the 3/4" distance exposure, 1.5x2=3" multiply previous wattage by 4, 3x2 = 6" multiply previous wattage equivalent, 6x2=12" multiply previous wattage, 12x2=24 multiply previous wattage, 24x2=48 multiply previous wattage. This is the equivalent wattage needed to match the Starlight wattage at 3/4"
So if the 300 watt is at 30" x2 = 60" 300 watts times 4 for the equivalent wattage needed at 60" which is 1200 watts. So replacing in a 1000 watt MH would work, but then also the histogram of the light spikes typically in an LED at one wavelength while the MH 1000 may have a multi spectral bulb that emulsions prefer. Especially dual cures that have diazo (likes 360nm) and SBQ (likes 400-420). So a single spectral bulb even with equivalent exposure may not yield as strong a screen for wb, discharge and especially HSA that a multi spectral with equivalent wattage might yield. It's the quality of the cross linked molecules and what we call handshakes. The stronger the handshake brought about by the sensitizers and what percentage of emulsion molecules have complete handshakes will determine the emulsion strength. Stronger light equals molecule handshakes that forms a stronger exposed screen.
My tests on the starlight were very strong. The scattered light doesn't seem to matter much, but could be noticeable on 65-85 lpi tonals with inkjet imagery, wax, no problems.
I am old school. I like Metal Halides and probably I am little biased. But nothing has ever come close to exposing as well as my 8k Olec (Douthitt now markets them) for long discharge runs. We printed for Disney back in the day and had one set of screens with Aquasol TS and A&B hardened last to 250,000 pcs on an 8 color discharge and foil print. Once your exposure unit does that for you and you see the results in non stop production, there is no reason to go a different direction. For shorter runs and especially plastisol the new LED's are so much cheaper to operate that it is obviously a benefit. SBQ can be post exposed to gain more strength as well as hardening screens, but these are band aids that can't equal the initial exposure with strong light at the longest time possible without over exposing.
-
Hello TCT and all the members.
Regarding water base, discharge and HSA screen exposure. I get to see a lot of printers using these new HSA inks with long print runs and typically those that have high wattage units tend be able to avoid break down more than low wattage units or direct light to screen exposure units. The other key area is the right emulsion for the ink. In terms of the ink's ability to break down the emulsion I look at them like this:
Plastisol - not aggressive at all.
Water base (totally transparent no opacity inks) - Aggressive rating 2 on a 1-5 scale
Discharge - Aggressive rating 4
HSA - Agressive rating 5 - but this can vary from different manufacturers
My thought is we need to look at an individual light ray from the various units and how much strength it has left when it hits the squeegee side of the emulsion. This is the breakdown area usually not the print side. So if you have a 1000 watt vs a 5,000 watt the 1,000 watt will be quite weak after going through the emulsion and mesh compared to the 5,000 watt which will have more punch after the mesh and emulsion it needs to travel through. Give me the strongest light ray possible for Discharge and HSA inks. The more aggressive the ink, the more light energy I want to expose with. Emulsion is not underexposed only, or over exposed only. There is a linear ramp in between and some light sources give decent images and partial exposure. For these inks I want both the best resolution and the best exposure, where Metal Halides are proven to do so.
LED's overcome this with proximity and have strength due to the inverse square law. I did some math on another post here that shows that doubling the distance, multiplying the wattage by 4 at each doubling yields comparable wattage at the 40-48" distance for metal halides.
so Starlight wattage proximity is 3/4"x2=1.5" multiply by 4 for comparable wattage needed to equal the 3/4" distance exposure, 1.5x2=3" multiply previous wattage by 4, 3x2 = 6" multiply previous wattage equivalent, 6x2=12" multiply previous wattage, 12x2=24 multiply previous wattage, 24x2=48 multiply previous wattage. This is the equivalent wattage needed to match the Starlight wattage at 3/4"
So if the 300 watt is at 30" x2 = 60" 300 watts times 4 for the equivalent wattage needed at 60" which is 1200 watts. So replacing in a 1000 watt MH would work, but then also the histogram of the light spikes typically in an LED at one wavelength while the MH 1000 may have a multi spectral bulb that emulsions prefer. Especially dual cures that have diazo (likes 360nm) and SBQ (likes 400-420). So a single spectral bulb even with equivalent exposure may not yield as strong a screen for wb, discharge and especially HSA that a multi spectral with equivalent wattage might yield. It's the quality of the cross linked molecules and what we call handshakes. The stronger the handshake brought about by the sensitizers and what percentage of emulsion molecules have complete handshakes will determine the emulsion strength. Stronger light equals molecule handshakes that forms a stronger exposed screen.
My tests on the starlight were very strong. The scattered light doesn't seem to matter much, but could be noticeable on 65-85 lpi tonals with inkjet imagery, wax, no problems.
I am old school. I like Metal Halides and probably I am little biased. But nothing has ever come close to exposing as well as my 8k Olec (Douthitt now markets them) for long discharge runs. We printed for Disney back in the day and had one set of screens with Aquasol TS and A&B hardened last to 250,000 pcs on an 8 color discharge and foil print. Once your exposure unit does that for you and you see the results in non stop production, there is no reason to go a different direction. For shorter runs and especially plastisol the new LED's are so much cheaper to operate that it is obviously a benefit. SBQ can be post exposed to gain more strength as well as hardening screens, but these are band aids that can't equal the initial exposure with strong light at the longest time possible without over exposing.
-
I'm really liking this thread, a lot like a roller coaster; good solid information that can be used to make a decision depending on the size of your shop and length of runs. I've always had 3k to 5k MH, except for the arc lamp, but really like the idea of lower electricity costs of LED; the proximity seems to solve the depth of the initial exposure, at least for those of us printing 1K to 5K, not 250K. I'm sure orders that large take care of electricity costs better. We're about to see a 30% to 35% increase in electricity here in Massachusetts, OUCH
Steve
-
So if the 300 watt is at 30" x2 = 60" 300 watts times 4 for the equivalent wattage needed at 60" which is 1200 watts. So replacing in a 1000 watt MH would work, but then also the histogram of the light spikes typically in an LED at one wavelength while the MH 1000 may have a multi spectral bulb that emulsions prefer. Especially dual cures that have diazo (likes 360nm) and SBQ (likes 400-420).
isn't this the other way around? I thought diazo was around 400 and SBQ is at 360. . . not that it makes any difference in the argument.
pierre
-
^^I recall 370, but either way, pretty sure Diazo is lower than SBQ in wavelength.
edit: Pretty sure I recalled wrong, that's what I get for never using SBQ.
Alan: Great read.
A single point LED could be the future, but from what I see of the industry (LED, that is,) it will likely be prohibitively expensive for a long time.
Would likely have a pretty esoteric heat sinking setup, unless there's some huge advance in LED tech.
I'm not selling my MH units anytime soon... ;)
-
A single point LED could be the future, but from what I see of the industry (LED, that is,) it will likely be prohibitively expensive for a long time.
With these single point units it doesn't seem that way.... The "list" prices were about $500 for the 100 watt unit and $1200 for the 300 watt unit. So take what you pay for a MH replacement bulb and the ROI on a single point unit(as long as it exposes as good or better) isn't that horrible...
I talked to 3 shops that have the units last week. It kind of sucks because they were shops/numbers that Saati gave me to call so that screws up the "honest review" aspect of things, but they all really liked the units. 2 of the shops had the 100 unit and 1 shop had the 300 unit. All were CTS and 2 of them were exposing multiple screens on a wall. All the shops were also using Saati emulsion.
It still leaves a lot up in the air for me here as I am still using films and have no intention switching from Murakami emulsion(Saati is sending over a sample gallon so we will see I guess). For me 11 second exposure times are not something I would pay more for right now. If I could get them to ~45 sec. or less that would be huge. Even at that rate screens would be done exposing before the first one was washed out... It would remove the bottleneck we currently have at the exposure unit.
-
If there is an LED system that actually competes, single point, no undercutting, with a 5K or 8K MH unit I'd be interested in checking it out. I'm assuming a sales person would have already bothered me if that were claimed, much less happening in reality.
The other thing about the market the way it is, you can get a MH for 500-1000, or even free, depending on the situation. If you do any type of volume, it's easy to justify 300 bucks a year on a new bulb, when you never have to re-shoot a screen or lose a dot because of it.
As has been mentioned, it would likely have to be a VERY high wattage LED array, considering efficiencies are similar.
Don't take me as being too retro-grouchy, I think it's cool.
To me, it's not cutting edge, it's bleeding edge. ;)
-
If there is an LED system that actually competes, single point, no undercutting, with a 5K or 8K MH unit I'd be interested in checking it out. I'm assuming a sales person would have already bothered me if that were claimed, much less happening in reality.
The other thing about the market the way it is, you can get a MH for 500-1000, or even free, depending on the situation. If you do any type of volume, it's easy to justify 300 bucks a year on a new bulb, when you never have to re-shoot a screen or lose a dot because of it.
As has been mentioned, it would likely have to be a VERY high wattage LED array, considering efficiencies are similar.
Don't take me as being too retro-grouchy, I think it's cool.
To me, it's not cutting edge, it's bleeding edge. ;)
the StarLight would very well against any exposure unit you put up against it. Regardless of whatever wattage you would like to compare it to.
-
Sorry gents....I haven't read this thread end-to-end, so this post may be a rehash of previous comments:
Here goes:
-- I've got an old Atlas exposure unit that started life as a 'beamed blacklight" fluorescent.
-- A couple years ago, I converted it to MH to get a more through exposure with thicker stencils.
-- I became intrigued with the LED concept and decided to attempt another conversion
-- I bought 25 meters of 5050 SMD strip lighting (that's 1500 individual LEDs) and a pair of 12 volt LED drivers
-- I attached the strips to a piece of plexi and mounted it 4" below the glass of the exposure unit.
-- I've always been a dual cure guy... but this light is pretty wavelength specific (about 395-405), so I have switched to a pure-photo emulsion (Chromablue). Chromaline has a new LED specific emulsion "ChromaLIME", I'd like to try that.
-- I haven't burned enough screens to really fully dial it in, but a 137S mesh (coated 1x2) is about a 40 second exposure.
-- The real attraction for me is getting rid of the warm-up time required by the MH
-- I've got about $200 into materials and the jury is still out... I may go back to MH and dual cure, if the halftone dots aren't what I'm used to.
-- mine is definitely a crude DIY project, but I can envision a savvy manufacturer selling a drop in conversion.
-
North I've been saying that from the start, some company will make a drop in version of LED, sorry Rich, but whatever bulbs you are using someone else might get the same ones and do the drop in. some people will still rather buy a new unit while some others might use there old box and convert it's, just a matter of time before some smart cookie does this, it just seems to simple not to do this I could be very wrong on the simple, but time will tell.
-
Vastex already has retro kits
-
North I've been saying that from the start, some company will make a drop in version of LED, sorry Rich, but whatever bulbs you are using someone else might get the same ones and do the drop in.
If someone were to use the same LED's that Rich uses, a drop in board, all wired up with power supply and operating on at least 100% markup would have to sell for over $2k. Starlight LED's ain't cheap!
North, I pretty much did the same thing with similar results here:
http://www.theshirtboard.com/index.php/topic,12120.msg114469.html#msg114469 (http://www.theshirtboard.com/index.php/topic,12120.msg114469.html#msg114469)
I am in the process of trying out some different LED's that are non-waterproof. Along with powering EACH ROW individually to avoid power loss through the tiny traces on these strips. Hopefully will get better results this go around. If I can't get times under my 5k Olec, then it's just not worth anything more than a backup in case the MH lamp goes out unexpectedly.
-
I am sure you are correct about that, Rich--I am looking forward to seeing one in service, I would guess you guys have put some work into the geometry of the light that is so critical to a good exposure. I would make the uneducated guess that a Starlight and your equivalent MH unit go for similar prices for good reason. (And that is a guess, I have no idea what your NuArc stuff is going for these days)
But your products not withstanding, really I was just mentioning it seems like a poor decision TO ME to pay more (or possibly a lot more) for a single point 300W LED than you can buy a used 5K MH unit for, 300 dollar bulbs or not.
Perhaps it does make sense, for someone else.
-
The three main areas in evaluating exposure light:
The histogram: What is the nanometer wavelength(s) of the light and what is the amplitude of these wavelengths? (Olec/Douthitt puts the histogram on the box that shows these outputs, many cheap replacement lamps don't. Question any metal halide, fluorescent, that doesn't). This is the issue with DIY lamps. Urban myth is just that, sometimes it works, sometimes it becomes a never ending tech call to explain this to new printers and often I use the sun as an example. Walk outside in noon sun in the summer with an unexposed screen for 15-30 seconds. Compare emulsion hardeness to your exposure unit that is homemade at your best time, it should be as a hard an exposure or you are short changing the exposure. Not an emulsion fault if it isn't working, its' a light quality fault. Multi spectral lamps do create longer lasting screens. Single wavelength lights typical of LED energize a portion of the sensitizer, but due to proximity they are working OK. SP1400 shot on a Starlight was equal to a 5kw metal halide in strength with a pressure washer test, but has yet to be proven on 90,000 discharge prints I find in Central America. My feeling is it will work given that a 30 second exposure equaled a 90 second exposure on the metal halide when hit with a pressure washer test. Try holding your pressure washer (600-1500 psi not a 5,000 psi Hydro blaster) with fan spray at 2-3 inches to see if it will blow the emulsion off during development. The Starlight is the only one we have tested, and it worked very well with this test. (May also give you some reason to switch emulsions as well when you see how weak some are!).
Light strength (amplitude.): This can be a 5kw at 42 inches or a starlight at 3/4". The milliwatt rating of the LED can be backward engineered to compare to a MH at 42-48". (See post, thanks TCT for the mind blowing graphic, if only my band would listen to me as well).
Resolution: Our tests with the starlight shows decent resolution. Is there some undercutting? Yes, but minimal and not enough to warrant a lower exposure time. MH lamps and reflectors also play a huge part of the point light source resolution quality.
Note: There are specific MH lamps for diazo, SBQ and multi spectral for dual cures. A diazo lamp doesn't expose an SBQ emulsion as well as a diazo lamp or a dual cure multi spectral. We recommend multispetcral for this reason. Reflectors is a science. Without good reflectors a light intensity meter may give different millijoule values (light energy) over the face of the screen. I have had some units be 1/2 the strength of a dead center reading when two screens are loaded in a 2 screen system. Disaster for WB, discahrge and HSA. If you see breakdown on one side of a screen this is the issue. Try shooting it dead center one at a time for MH lamps for these inks to avoid breakdown.
-
After really mulling this over I went a head and put the order in for the "300" unit. Should be in on Monday. Figured worst case scenario I return the thing. I anticipate using it horizontally with a flip vacuum frame holder I have so I can burn 2 up. I'll update you guys with progress, exposure times, pics and overall impression. I'm not DTS/CTS yet, so it will be a hands on review for us less fortunate! ;)
-
Keep us poor people informed!
-
After really mulling this over I went a head and put the order in for the "300" unit. Should be in on Monday. Figured worst case scenario I return the thing. I anticipate using it horizontally with a flip vacuum frame holder I have so I can burn 2 up. I'll update you guys with progress, exposure times, pics and overall impression. I'm not DTS/CTS yet, so it will be a hands on review for us less fortunate! ;)
Cool! Do some testing at different EOM levels so you can determine if the LED's are powerful enough to penetrate through thicker stencils.
-
...here's a quick video of my DIY LED project, which is very similar to IntegrityShirts.
My strips are mounted on 1/8" plexi and that sits on a wood platform (for elevation).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQTXNp4U6pE&feature=youtu.be (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQTXNp4U6pE&feature=youtu.be)
-
Nice.
Any reason for your 3" off?
If you halved that distance you would increase the intensity by 4 fold according to Inverse Square Law. As long as your light throw is still even and uniform at that distance, that is a huge gain.
-
...here's a quick video of my DIY LED project, which is very similar to IntegrityShirts.
My strips are mounted on 1/8" plexi and that sits on a wood platform (for elevation).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQTXNp4U6pE&feature=youtu.be (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQTXNp4U6pE&feature=youtu.be)
Cool! I just ordered an adjustable power supply and plan to overdrive mine up to 13v or so to see if I can get times down and penetration up for thicker stencils.
The traces are so small on these cheapo leds that voltage drop is a problem even on short runs.
-
I would highly advise you research what over-voltage conditions do to LED junctions.
You are likely to increase output by a very small margin, but only for a short time before you destroy your LED's.
(Not trying to be a jerk, just hate to see a bunch of soldering go to waste ;))
I think Gilly is on the right track, if you want fast exposure, lots of junctions for coverage, as little distance to stencil as possible.
-
I would highly advise you research what over-voltage conditions do to LED junctions.
You are likely to increase output by a very small margin, but only for a short time before you destroy your LED's.
(Not trying to be a jerk, just hate to see a bunch of soldering go to waste ;))
I think Gilly is on the right track, if you want fast exposure, lots of junctions for coverage, as little distance to stencil as possible.
The resistors along the strip limit the current to the actual LED to a certain extent. What I'm trying to do is overcome the loss due to the length of the run for the copper strip in each row of LED's
13.8V at the power supply, 13.5V measured at the ends of each strip, and 3.5V measured at each LED. 3.5V is within spec for these LED's so I think I'm ok.
-
I think what he's saying is that if it gets hotter (and it will) then you run the risk of shortening the life span.
I picked up some white strips for replacing some florescents as an experiment and I cranked the voltage to 13.5 and I'd say it was at LEAST 10% brighter (calculated by my highly sophisticated eyehole-o-mometer. I put it back to 12v for now. They are not installed yet.
-
^^Yup. And if you go over voltage, you will run the risk of shortening the lifespan to seconds or milliseconds.
Sounds like you're on the right track how you're measuring.
If you are measuring the traces just outside the junctions themselves you have a good voltage to reference.
If you have or can get a datasheet, check it for Vmax, IIRC it's often listed as 3.6 or 3.7
If there is an individual resistor on each you are measuring, you may be safe up to or even over 4V.
Of course, if you don't have, and can't get a datasheet, you can always destroy one to find out. ;)
-
Definitely need to feed from both sides.
I measured 9.37v on the back end of a 5 meter spool while supplying 12v to the front end.
I was disappointed by the "white" from my leds that I installed in the ceiling so I buttoned it up and went home. When I rip them out I'll measure it and see... I may even pierce the water proofing to read what the voltage is at the halfway point.
-
Since we are going off course here in the single point LED thread, we should keep talking over in the DIY project thread here:
http://www.theshirtboard.com/index.php/topic,12120.15.html (http://www.theshirtboard.com/index.php/topic,12120.15.html)