TSB
screen printing => Equipment => Topic started by: blue moon on February 21, 2013, 01:45:23 PM
-
Lou came in today and we are testing the Baby Joe 2k.
I have to admit being skeptical about the 5 second exposure times so despite what he insisted, we ran a test from 5 sec to 35 seconds. Low and behold, the 5 second had the best exposure!!!
We tested it on 305 and 330S mesh and at 4-5 seconds it is holding at least 5-90%. The first film that went to 35 seconds was definitely overexposed, so believe it or not, it really is that fast. We ran a 110 with 50% EOM at 10 seconds and it probably would have been better at 9.
this was with SBQ/photopolymer Aquasolv HV emulsion. 20% EOM on 305/330 mesh.
We are about to test the dual cure as soon as the screens dry.
stay tuned . . .
pierre
-
Nice to see you testing this thing. Have you looked at the edge definition of the stencil? Is it undercutting? I think that is peoples number one question on a non point light source exposure unit.
-
Hey Pierre, ask him, using a CTS, not needing glass, and no drawdown/flim ect. how does he think it will do on diazo emulsed screens.
Thanks man
Mike
-
pretty curious, keep it coming... (I've never used anything but a point source myself, so undercutting would be the big question)
Steve
-
so from what I am seeing now, looks like it would be significantly better than the fluorescents and pretty close to a point light source. Lou is a genuine "article". He has an engineering background and care and thought have gone into making a product that's easy to use, reliable and performs as required. I think it is a good product as it is and very little would take to make it a GREATproduct.
For those asking about undercutting, there is a little bit, but it seemed very minimal and could probably be addresses in the RIP curve to deliver results very close to an MH unit. 97%+ of the shops would not even be able to measure/see/understand/appreciate the difference. It just happens that we have spent a significant amount of time and money on improving the finest of the detail so we know where and what to look for (and have the measuring equipment to help us out!). On the bottom end, a 5% dot reads 2-3% and the 50% is around 45%. My guess is the difference is at the most a thousandth of an inch. I just can't see too many ppl missing such a small amount!!! I think an MH does produce a better stencil, but I can't honestly say that it would make any difference even at our level.
we did not get into the dual cure too much, we underestimated the time needed to expose (since the SBQ was so fast) and with only two screens to test it was over before it started. We don't use dual cure and I purchased some just for this test so I am not the guy to ask about it. It does look like a 50% EOM on a 155 would take four or five minutes to expose. We tried a 230 at 15-20 (I can't remember exactly) and it was not enough. My guess it would be somewhere between 30sec and a minute. Same thing on our exposure unit would probably be at least 6 min.
If I was shopping for another unit, he would be the first call I make. This does not mean a guarantied sale, but it would be his sale to lose. I think with the few changes it could be on par with an MH and then it becomes a no brainer. There are few convenience features I'd like to see, but the science and performance are for real. 5 second exposure for a 5%-90% 55 lpi dot on 330 mesh!
pierre
-
Thats really cool. LEDs for exposure. I love it. What was the price again?
-
Thats really cool. LEDs for exposure. I love it. What was the price again?
I think it's $2200. . .
pierre
-
and that includes our cut, right? ;)
-
Thats really cool. LEDs for exposure. I love it. What was the price again?
I think it's $2200. . .
pierre
I think with crating and shipping it is much closer if not over $3k. I am just sitting here thinking of how many minutes are wasted waiting on screens to burn... It seems like this should pay off in time alone.
-
Thats really cool. LEDs for exposure. I love it. What was the price again?
I think it's $2200. . .
pierre
I think with crating and shipping it is much closer if not over $3k. I am just sitting here thinking of how many minutes are wasted waiting on screens to burn... It seems like this should pay off in time alone.
wedid not talk about pricing very much, but I think he said $2400 delivered. Again, these are questions to ask him. He should still be driving home, but I am sure he will chime in when he gets a chance.
pierre
-
Interesting... just watched his video, looks like a nice unit...the latches look a bit cumbersome.... the speed of the exposure is amazing but I wonder how fast you could wash them out after exposing... how much power saving is there compared to a 1kw metal halide???...very cool how small the unit is, I will be keeping an eye on this unit for sure.
Thanks for the info Pierre
-
Does someone have a link to this video? I'd like to see it. I keep a reef tank at home and use LED lighting over it - they are formulated for high output in a UV range (which corals need) so it would make sense this could be done. Probably wouldn't work for us, but still interesting to look at and think about.
-
Here you are my friend. http://www.ldtronix.com/baby-joe-2000.html (http://www.ldtronix.com/baby-joe-2000.html)
-
This is what the website has for price. (if you click on the PayPal link)
Item total $2,200.00
Tax $178.75
Shipping and handling: $500.00
Total $2,878.75 USD
-
FYI....I have the Unit for the past few months, works fine. Screen Exposure is quick and the wash out is not a problem.
What I like most about the unit is its simplicity. has no part to break or bulbs burn out.
Especially when I just went for $900.00 in bulb and parts for my Nuarc exposure unit.
-
Thanks for the info Pierre--Doesn't sound too bad if it holds up well.
It's too bad you didn't get a chance to try 125-200 mesh count screens for all the athletic printers out there, I'd think that would be the sticking point for most start-ups if it takes forever, or just won't cure the whole film.
-
Thank you Pierre for taking the time to provide us with some info on the product!
I'm all ears!
I'm close to getting one myself!
Aloha!
-
Thanks for the info Pierre--Doesn't sound too bad if it holds up well.
It's too bad you didn't get a chance to try 125-200 mesh count screens for all the athletic printers out there, I'd think that would be the sticking point for most start-ups if it takes forever, or just won't cure the whole film.
we did test it on a 110, it took only 10 seconds to expose. No problems there. So if it can do 110's and 330's I am sure ti will do fine with anything in between.
pierre
-
Real test will be screens for waterbase. If it exposes those in 30 sec thats a game changer.
-
Real test will be screens for waterbase. If it exposes those in 30 sec thats a game changer.
we tested with Aquasolv HV which is pretty popular with waterbased printing. I think with the right emulsion you could get 230 mesh to expose at 30 seconds with a dual cure.
pierre
-
Thanks for the info Pierre--Doesn't sound too bad if it holds up well.
It's too bad you didn't get a chance to try 125-200 mesh count screens for all the athletic printers out there, I'd think that would be the sticking point for most start-ups if it takes forever, or just won't cure the whole film.
we did test it on a 110, it took only 10 seconds to expose. No problems there. So if it can do 110's and 330's I am sure ti will do fine with anything in between.
pierre
It seems surprising a 110 would be that fast. I'm guessing white mesh coated 1/1? Was 230 the lowest mesh attempted with a diazo or dual cure?
Interesting stuff.
-
Thanks for the info Pierre--Doesn't sound too bad if it holds up well.
It's too bad you didn't get a chance to try 125-200 mesh count screens for all the athletic printers out there, I'd think that would be the sticking point for most start-ups if it takes forever, or just won't cure the whole film.
we did test it on a 110, it took only 10 seconds to expose. No problems there. So if it can do 110's and 330's I am sure ti will do fine with anything in between.
pierre
It seems surprising a 110 would be that fast. I'm guessing white mesh coated 1/1? Was 230 the lowest mesh attempted with a diazo or dual cure?
Interesting stuff.
that's the cool part! It was a 2+1 with 50% EOM and I think 10 seconds was too long!!! We were looking at it and thinking 9 would be about right.
the low mesh count with dual cure is looking like several minutes (with similar EOM), but remember, I have not a clue 1 when it comes to dual cure. I think we were coating it too thick, I can't really tell if the stencil is fully exposed just by looking at it and so on. This might be a good question for somebody who is using it with dual cure already.
pierre
-
Thanks for the info Pierre--Doesn't sound too bad if it holds up well.
It's too bad you didn't get a chance to try 125-200 mesh count screens for all the athletic printers out there, I'd think that would be the sticking point for most start-ups if it takes forever, or just won't cure the whole film.
we did test it on a 110, it took only 10 seconds to expose. No problems there. So if it can do 110's and 330's I am sure ti will do fine with anything in between.
pierre
It seems surprising a 110 would be that fast. I'm guessing white mesh coated 1/1? Was 230 the lowest mesh attempted with a diazo or dual cure?
Interesting stuff.
that's the cool part! It was a 2+1 with 50% EOM and I think 10 seconds was too long!!! We were looking at it and thinking 9 would be about right.
the low mesh count with dual cure is looking like several minutes (with similar EOM), but remember, I have not a clue 1 when it comes to dual cure. I think we were coating it too thick, I can't really tell if the stencil is fully exposed just by looking at it and so on. This might be a good question for somebody who is using it with dual cure already.
pierre
A 110 with 50% EOM is crazy thick. If it does that in 10 seconds then there is nothing faster then that exposure unit on the market. The one thing about LEDs is they are instant on. Many of us are comparing this to a Metal Hydride. Unless you have a Metal Hydride with a shutter like my Workhorse Photosharp you are exposing screens with a bulb that is heating up for the first 20 to 30 seconds. (that is if it ever gets to full power before the exposure time is done)
-
Thanks for the info Pierre--Doesn't sound too bad if it holds up well.
It's too bad you didn't get a chance to try 125-200 mesh count screens for all the athletic printers out there, I'd think that would be the sticking point for most start-ups if it takes forever, or just won't cure the whole film.
we did test it on a 110, it took only 10 seconds to expose. No problems there. So if it can do 110's and 330's I am sure ti will do fine with anything in between.
pierre
It seems surprising a 110 would be that fast. I'm guessing white mesh coated 1/1? Was 230 the lowest mesh attempted with a diazo or dual cure?
Interesting stuff.
that's the cool part! It was a 2+1 with 50% EOM and I think 10 seconds was too long!!! We were looking at it and thinking 9 would be about right.
the low mesh count with dual cure is looking like several minutes (with similar EOM), but remember, I have not a clue 1 when it comes to dual cure. I think we were coating it too thick, I can't really tell if the stencil is fully exposed just by looking at it and so on. This might be a good question for somebody who is using it with dual cure already.
pierre
A 110 with 50% EOM is crazy thick. If it does that in 10 seconds then there is nothing faster then that exposure unit on the market. The one thing about LEDs is they are instant on. Many of us are comparing this to a Metal Hydride. Unless you have a Metal Hydride with a shutter like my Workhorse Photosharp you are exposing screens with a bulb that is heating up for the first 20 to 30 seconds. (that is if it ever gets to full power before the exposure time is done)
I know! I did not believe him when he said 5 seconds for a 305. I thought he was full of it!
pierre
-
5 seconds seems too short to me. It leaves very little room for adjusting exposure time. I know sometimes if I am running low on screens and I am putting something on a 280 that should be on a 305 I may under expose slightly to make washout of the finer detail easier and then hit with a post expose. Can you set the time on this to 4.72 seconds if you want to do this?
-
Hi everyone
I would 1st like to thank Pierre for taking the time out of his busy schedule to test the BJ2K, and confirm the unit’s performance for the people of this forum.
Pierre had so many tools for checking the quality of screen printing, that at one point I felt like he might be the Batman of screen printing. “Where does he get all those wonderful toys?”
I now understand why he is so highly regarded! The quality control of his product says it all!
You’re a great screen printer, but a better person. Thanks again Pierre, it was an honor to meet you.
Lou
www.LDTronix.com (http://www.LDTronix.com)
-
5 seconds seems too short to me. It leaves very little room for adjusting exposure time. I know sometimes if I am running low on screens and I am putting something on a 280 that should be on a 305 I may under expose slightly to make washout of the finer detail easier and then hit with a post expose. Can you set the time on this to 4.72 seconds if you want to do this?
Agreed! The latitude at such small numbers needs to be infractions of a second!
this was one of the things Lou and I discussed and will be implemented in the future. I have a feeling it is not a big deal and can be available right now, but he will have to confirm.
pierre
-
Thanks for the info Pierre--Doesn't sound too bad if it holds up well.
It's too bad you didn't get a chance to try 125-200 mesh count screens for all the athletic printers out there, I'd think that would be the sticking point for most start-ups if it takes forever, or just won't cure the whole film.
we did test it on a 110, it took only 10 seconds to expose. No problems there. So if it can do 110's and 330's I am sure ti will do fine with anything in between.
pierre
It seems surprising a 110 would be that fast. I'm guessing white mesh coated 1/1? Was 230 the lowest mesh attempted with a diazo or dual cure?
Interesting stuff.
that's the cool part! It was a 2+1 with 50% EOM and I think 10 seconds was too long!!! We were looking at it and thinking 9 would be about right.
the low mesh count with dual cure is looking like several minutes (with similar EOM), but remember, I have not a clue 1 when it comes to dual cure. I think we were coating it too thick, I can't really tell if the stencil is fully exposed just by looking at it and so on. This might be a good question for somebody who is using it with dual cure already.
pierre
A 110 with 50% EOM is crazy thick. If it does that in 10 seconds then there is nothing faster then that exposure unit on the market. The one thing about LEDs is they are instant on. Many of us are comparing this to a Metal Hydride. Unless you have a Metal Hydride with a shutter like my Workhorse Photosharp you are exposing screens with a bulb that is heating up for the first 20 to 30 seconds. (that is if it ever gets to full power before the exposure time is done)
[/quot
Thats why there is an integrator.
-
5 seconds seems too short to me. It leaves very little room for adjusting exposure time. I know sometimes if I am running low on screens and I am putting something on a 280 that should be on a 305 I may under expose slightly to make washout of the finer detail easier and then hit with a post expose. Can you set the time on this to 4.72 seconds if you want to do this?
Agreed! The latitude at such small numbers needs to be infractions of a second!
this was one of the things Lou and I discussed and will be implemented in the future. I have a feeling it is not a big deal and can be available right now, but he will have to confirm.
pierre
I was thinking with exposure times so short, and the typically small window of ideal time for some of the "fast" emulsions on the market, might an integrator of sorts that could be programmed to reduce the light output to allow for more fine tuning on an as-needed basis? I know it seems counterproductive, but with times like 5 seconds, going up to ten, or striking an ideal time somewhere in between might actually be more desirable. Can emulsion physically react positively to times in tenths and hundredths of a second if a timer capable of accurately cutting the light to those degrees were incorporated?
-
5 seconds seems too short to me. It leaves very little room for adjusting exposure time. I know sometimes if I am running low on screens and I am putting something on a 280 that should be on a 305 I may under expose slightly to make washout of the finer detail easier and then hit with a post expose. Can you set the time on this to 4.72 seconds if you want to do this?
Agreed! The latitude at such small numbers needs to be infractions of a second!
this was one of the things Lou and I discussed and will be implemented in the future. I have a feeling it is not a big deal and can be available right now, but he will have to confirm.
pierre
There are timers that will work in tenths of a second...
Steve
-
Hi everyone
I would 1st like to thank Pierre for taking the time out of his busy schedule to test the BJ2K, and confirm the unit’s performance for the people of this forum.
Pierre had so many tools for checking the quality of screen printing, that at one point I felt like he might be the Batman of screen printing. “Where does he get all those wonderful toys?”
I now understand why he is so highly regarded! The quality control of his product says it all!
You’re a great screen printer, but a better person. Thanks again Pierre, it was an honor to meet you.
Lou
[url=http://www.LDTronix.com]www.LDTronix.com[/url] ([url]http://www.LDTronix.com[/url])
Lou,
Nice work on that unit. I am glad to see it worked out with Pierre. So what your you going to do with all the money you get from the BJ2K??? Wait a min...BJ2K Now thats an expensive BJ :o :o :o
Jon
-
5 seconds seems too short to me. It leaves very little room for adjusting exposure time. I know sometimes if I am running low on screens and I am putting something on a 280 that should be on a 305 I may under expose slightly to make washout of the finer detail easier and then hit with a post expose. Can you set the time on this to 4.72 seconds if you want to do this?
Agreed! The latitude at such small numbers needs to be infractions of a second!
this was one of the things Lou and I discussed and will be implemented in the future. I have a feeling it is not a big deal and can be available right now, but he will have to confirm.
pierre
I was thinking with exposure times so short, and the typically small window of ideal time for some of the "fast" emulsions on the market, might an integrator of sorts that could be programmed to reduce the light output to allow for more fine tuning on an as-needed basis? I know it seems counterproductive, but with times like 5 seconds, going up to ten, or striking an ideal time somewhere in between might actually be more desirable. Can emulsion physically react positively to times in tenths and hundredths of a second if a timer capable of accurately cutting the light to those degrees were incorporated?
interesting point, I had to think about it for a second. . .
Yes, Lou and I talked about making changes to the timing and it is an option (it is already in the unit), but in the end my thinking was that it would be better to introduce fractions of a second than to prolong the times. It accomplishes the same without slowing down the process.
interesting part is, there is no need for an integrator. From what I understand, LED's don't dim with time so the amount of UV light you get in 5 seconds now should be exactly the same 20 years from now. The main purpose of the integrator is to compensate for the lower light output and since it is not happening here, it is not needed!
pierre
-
I can just see it now, us retrofitting this technology to go right on our CTS unit. There's certainly room for the led light tubes to fit under the screen on our unit. It would be as simple as image the screen with the cts printer, flip the screen around, hit a button and 5 seconds later you would have a fully exposed screen. On the 3 head cts units like lawson and m&r that can do a full size image in around 30 seconds, plus 5 sec expose time that would be a super fast combination. If you could image and expose 1 screen in 45 sec that would means in theory we could do 80 screens in 60 minutes.....Oh no, I didn't just go there did I? ;D ;D ;D
-
Guys guys you're going about this all the wrong way. There's an easy solution. We all come together and order the same dts/cts unit - that way it's in bulk with a major discount - and they have to have the LEDs installed on the machine. Maybe they'll even splurge and get frog's machine painted green. What say you rich? :-)
-
is it possible to remove the glass and expose CTS imaged screens on this?
-
anything is possible.
Also, here is a concern...how are the bulb strips assembled, can a single bulb be replaced? Or do you have to replace the entire strip? What does a replacement strip run?
I know, bulbs are rated for 50,000 to 100,000 hours, but have you ever seen an LED traffic signal with every bulb working?
-
anything is possible.
Also, here is a concern...how are the bulb strips assembled, can a single bulb be replaced? Or do you have to replace the entire strip? What does a replacement strip run?
I know, bulbs are rated for 50,000 to 100,000 hours, but have you ever seen an LED traffic signal with every bulb working?
In the unlikely case of failure you would call me.
I will overnight the failed part to you..
The M.L.B. strips are modular, and can be simply replaced.
Note: Technically the unit will still function, until the strip gets to you.
-
is it possible to remove the glass and expose CTS imaged screens on this?
I have to do a little testing, but I think CTS screens will not be a problem. Just an option.
Stay tuned
-
Lou,
Nice work on that unit. I am glad to see it worked out with Pierre. So what your you going to do with all the money you get from the BJ2K??? Wait a min...BJ2K Now thats an expensive BJ :o :o :o
Jon
[/quote]
This is just the Baby j2k, I have allot of ideas in other areas of this field.
I can see a really large family of really hard to imagine products in the near future.
-
Ok, how about uv ink curing units? Nazdar has developed an ink system or systems that are tailor made for LED curing, but are sort of hush hush about it. When I talked to the Nazdar rep about it, he said something about only selling to companies that have the R&D to make the curing unit. So far as I have been able to find, no one has come out with a commercial solution yet and it seems like it would be no more difficult to do than what you did with this BJ machine. Well, I guess a radiometer might be necessary.
-
UV ink sounds like a great idea to me!
-
Ok, how about uv ink curing units? Nazdar has developed an ink system or systems that are tailor made for LED curing, but are sort of hush hush about it. When I talked to the Nazdar rep about it, he said something about only selling to companies that have the R&D to make the curing unit. So far as I have been able to find, no one has come out with a commercial solution yet and it seems like it would be no more difficult to do than what you did with this BJ machine. Well, I guess a radiometer might be necessary.
Stu: Thanks for sharing the news on Nazdars LED UV curable inks. Nazdar has been manufacturing inks that cure with LED UV energy for the past couple of years and selling these products to a limited number of customers who are printing small format graphics such as roll-to-roll labels, container decorating and some industrial applications. The major hang up against these inks being more widely adopted for general graphics applications has been the lack of availability and the prohibitively high cost for large format UV LED curing units. EFI VUTEk is another company that is taking a leadership position with using UV LED cuing on their large format digital inkjet printers. The advantage that a digital press has is that the curing unit scans over the entire image with the print head carriage so they only need a small format curing array.
I do want to dispel one rumor about Nazdar keeping these products hush-hush by reminding everyone that we partnered with M&R to demonstrate our LED UV curable inks on a modified M&R inline press at the last SGIA show in Las Vegas, and even participated in a television interview at one of our customers in the upper Midwest, so you can be assured that the inks are not a secret. http://youtu.be/rrnD63LAp6g (http://youtu.be/rrnD63LAp6g) The bottom line is that Nazdar is ready and waiting with a range of LED UV curable inks just as soon as the rest of the industry to include the equipment manufacturers, screen and digital inkjet printers are ready to go in this new direction.
-
That's great to hear! I was mainly going off of the frustration of seeing the inks advertised on the Nazdar site, even though they weren't available through sourceone or anywhere else so far as I could tell. I did some research into the machinery and it looks like the basic parts are available, such as preassembled banks of high uv producing LEDs. I understand wanting to wait until there is a widely available solution to release these into the wild. Thanks for the update I am really interested ink where this goes!