Author Topic: Metal Halide vs led  (Read 13171 times)

Offline ABuffington

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 545
Re: Metal Halide vs led
« Reply #45 on: January 06, 2016, 12:43:35 PM »
Thanks for the great info Dan
Alan Buffington
Murakami Screen USA  - Technical Support and Sales
www.murakamiscreen.com


Offline LuckyFlyinROUSH

  • !!!
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 334
Re: Metal Halide vs led
« Reply #46 on: January 06, 2016, 02:46:50 PM »
Compare this to what your doing now. Then use ROI calculator. Ours has already paid for itself...and we've almost had it a year.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UifJ3t6ziKs
I spend too much money on equipment...

Offline screenprintguy

  • !!!
  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1677
  • Constantly thanking the Lord!
Re: Metal Halide vs led
« Reply #47 on: January 06, 2016, 02:53:51 PM »
Compare this to what your doing now. Then use ROI calculator. Ours has already paid for itself...and we've almost had it a year.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UifJ3t6ziKs

Cool video.

244, what do you think about an operator having the uv blast hit them like that throughout the day? think it's bad for the skin, or not enough time to bother the human body? Just curious. Looks like wearing shorts standing next to that thing for several exposures could give that guy a tan left calf  ;D but serious about the possibility of uv damage on the skin?
Evolutionary Screen Printing & Embroidery
3521 Waterfield Parkway Lakeland, Fl. 33803 www.evolutionaryscreenprinting.com

Offline LuckyFlyinROUSH

  • !!!
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 334
Re: Metal Halide vs led
« Reply #48 on: January 06, 2016, 03:01:16 PM »
No sun-tan I am afraid...cus I am still white as all can be. Different type of light ;)

The UV light actually isn't very effective past where the screen is. We could hold one out at about 1 foot from the light and get it to exposeish...but not that great.
I spend too much money on equipment...

Offline screenprintguy

  • !!!
  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1677
  • Constantly thanking the Lord!
Re: Metal Halide vs led
« Reply #49 on: January 06, 2016, 03:07:08 PM »
No sun-tan I am afraid...cus I am still white as all can be. Different type of light ;)

The UV light actually isn't very effective past where the screen is. We could hold one out at about 1 foot from the light and get it to exposeish...but not that great.

That's good to know!! I saw that one screen near it while one was still burning and figured it must not bother it being a little bit away. I guess if that's you in the vid burning the screens, you'd know if you were getting a sun burn or not lol. I know you can feel the heat from my tri light if you get any direct light. I have our's rigged like a pizza over to put 2 frames in at a time no glass, but this year want to add an led unit and save some space in the room. Those 1-5 second exposure blow my mind, that's awesome.  Do you do any longer exposures for emulsion use with discharge? What's your time looking like on such an exposure?

Thanks man

Mike
Evolutionary Screen Printing & Embroidery
3521 Waterfield Parkway Lakeland, Fl. 33803 www.evolutionaryscreenprinting.com

Offline jvanick

  • !!!
  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2477
Re: Metal Halide vs led
« Reply #50 on: January 06, 2016, 03:08:13 PM »
No sun-tan I am afraid...cus I am still white as all can be. Different type of light ;)

The UV light actually isn't very effective past where the screen is. We could hold one out at about 1 foot from the light and get it to exposeish...but not that great.

inverse square law.

for every doubling of distance from the light source, the 'energy' is half.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse-square_law

Offline jvanick

  • !!!
  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2477
Re: Metal Halide vs led
« Reply #51 on: January 06, 2016, 03:12:13 PM »
Those 1-5 second exposure blow my mind, that's awesome.  Do you do any longer exposures for emulsion use with discharge? What's your time looking like on such an exposure?

we had to change to a slower emulsion here because Saati PHU was WAY too fast on our starlight (3 seconds for a 160 mesh screen) and we didn't have the latitude to adjust (2 seconds was too short, 4 seconds was too long)... changed to PHU-2 (12 seconds for a 160, 9 seconds for a 230)

Diazo emulsions are definitely slower on the Starlight tho... (around 50 seconds or so for a white 160 mesh).

Offline shirtshack

  • Verified/Junior
  • **
  • Posts: 34
Re: Metal Halide vs led
« Reply #52 on: January 06, 2016, 03:37:10 PM »
I suppose things just got a lot more interesting now Exile is about to release a CTS unit for under £10k.. I have an MHM X type plus with the Pru and I am still blown away that I can load 2,3 and 4 colour jobs multiple times all day and not have to touch the micros.. I have even blown a screen on a multicolor job and been able to burn a new screen and have it register instantly.

 I would not see a dramatic benefit using CTS because the MHM is so good so could not justify £30k but at £10k I'm thinking about it,not to mention it will look nice next to my new starlight :).

Offline LuckyFlyinROUSH

  • !!!
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 334
Re: Metal Halide vs led
« Reply #53 on: January 06, 2016, 04:15:13 PM »
No sun-tan I am afraid...cus I am still white as all can be. Different type of light ;)

The UV light actually isn't very effective past where the screen is. We could hold one out at about 1 foot from the light and get it to exposeish...but not that great.

That's good to know!! I saw that one screen near it while one was still burning and figured it must not bother it being a little bit away. I guess if that's you in the vid burning the screens, you'd know if you were getting a sun burn or not lol. I know you can feel the heat from my tri light if you get any direct light. I have our's rigged like a pizza over to put 2 frames in at a time no glass, but this year want to add an led unit and save some space in the room. Those 1-5 second exposure blow my mind, that's awesome.  Do you do any longer exposures for emulsion use with discharge? What's your time looking like on such an exposure?

Thanks man

Mike

I wished it worked like a tanning bed. Could open it up for the public while we aren't using it lol. Flipping it on its side is the way to go, the space savings and the ease of use (especially with heavier rollers). However M&Rs new unit that is already vertical may peak your interest instead of my JimmyRig ways...

Yea, virtually no heat is a nice addition in the summer time. We've tried a couple DCs and we were around 30 seconds. Hadn't dialed them in. We'll do more testing with WR-14 this winter and report back.

Use chromablue right now and are hovering around the 3.5 second mark. Seems to do alright for the majority of the work we do. On orders over 1,000 pcs we always come back and throw a couple screens on there and Post-expose for another 30 seconds. They've lasted through 15,000-20,000 impressions.
I spend too much money on equipment...

Offline Sbrem

  • Ludicrous Speed Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 6054
Re: Metal Halide vs led
« Reply #54 on: January 06, 2016, 05:08:41 PM »
Compare this to what your doing now. Then use ROI calculator. Ours has already paid for itself...and we've almost had it a year.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UifJ3t6ziKs

Cool video.

244, what do you think about an operator having the uv blast hit them like that throughout the day? think it's bad for the skin, or not enough time to bother the human body? Just curious. Looks like wearing shorts standing next to that thing for several exposures could give that guy a tan left calf  ;D but serious about the possibility of uv damage on the skin?

I tanned the back of my legs years ago while cleaning the huge vacuum frame; the Violux 3000S we used at the time had a broken shutter, and remained open when it powered down after the exposure; even on low power, I burned my legs in about 10 minutes (just slightly, no pain). The distance I see here should pose no problems, as the inverse square law dictates. I do like the speed I see here a lot.

Steve
« Last Edit: January 06, 2016, 05:15:42 PM by Sbrem »
I made a mistake once; I thought I was wrong about something; I wasn't

Offline ABuffington

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 545
Re: Metal Halide vs led
« Reply #55 on: January 06, 2016, 06:43:45 PM »
When I received my first 8k Olec and shot 100 screens I was stoked to watch the diazo emulsion change color so quickly.
At the end of the day I had 1/2 sun burnt face and 1/2 not. Yes it was an improvement and led to many bar conversations that week.
 At least I knew the UV was good and strong.  Seriously though UV light is nasty stuff at any wavelength and any milliwatt exposure.
Your eyes may not notice the damage now, but when those cataracts start forming 10-20 years down the line it isn't fun or cheap.
Alan Buffington
Murakami Screen USA  - Technical Support and Sales
www.murakamiscreen.com

Offline Sbrem

  • Ludicrous Speed Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 6054
Re: Metal Halide vs led
« Reply #56 on: January 07, 2016, 09:54:00 AM »
When I received my first 8k Olec and shot 100 screens I was stoked to watch the diazo emulsion change color so quickly.
At the end of the day I had 1/2 sun burnt face and 1/2 not. Yes it was an improvement and led to many bar conversations that week.
 At least I knew the UV was good and strong.  Seriously though UV light is nasty stuff at any wavelength and any milliwatt exposure.
Your eyes may not notice the damage now, but when those cataracts start forming 10-20 years down the line it isn't fun or cheap.

Agreed, the eyes are a different story. I would like to think that no one would stare at the light anymore than they would stare at the sun, but...

Steve
I made a mistake once; I thought I was wrong about something; I wasn't