Author Topic: Screen mesh panels - the myths, the facts, and the future  (Read 17751 times)

Offline Printficient

  • !!!
  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1222
Re: Screen mesh panels - the myths, the facts, and the future
« Reply #30 on: June 03, 2011, 09:15:09 AM »
Not going to get involved in this mess. I know I can use both in a profitable and efficient manner. Just want to let you know about a new product from Nazdar called Panel frame Quick Frames. Rigid frames that use a tensioning tool and I believe no glue. Now I have no idea what tension levels can be achieved that would certainly depend on mesh and other variables but I am intrigued so I am having one sent and will report back.
cheers tp
Sounds cool.  I think that I have a customer using them.  Also, if it is what I am thinking of, then they provide a kit that makes standard static frames into panel frames.  I'll find out and update.
Shop-Doc "I make house calls"
Procedure Video Training
Press Inspections
Tips and Tricks Training
404-895-1796 Sonny McDonald


Offline alan802

  • !!!
  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3535
  • I like to screen print
Re: Screen mesh panels - the myths, the facts, and the future
« Reply #31 on: June 03, 2011, 10:16:50 AM »
I have been involved in the old debate over statics versus retens for a few years now, but I'll argue it as a high tension versus low tension because that's what it really is.  If static alums were capable of holding even 30 newtons for an extended amount of time then we probably wouldn't have this debate brought up near as often.  Here's the story from someone who has used both extensively for years at a time.  We started out with statics.  Every single day it was something different coming up on press that was a problem, you know, like every single issue that could arise from using low tensioned screens.  At that time, I had no idea there were discussion forums dedicated to screen printing, and didn't know that there was so much literature out there that we could take advantage of so we pulled our hair out every day for an entire year. 

Once I discovered the ton of screen printing information we began to implement literally ever single different technique I came across to see if it worked better than what we were doing.  After dozens and dozens of changes were made, we finally got around to using some of our newman roller frames that we had the whole time but never used.  Then I bought a used tension meter and measured our statics.  At that time I knew what kind of tension levels were ideal and I was floored when I saw that literally 150 static alums were from 12-20 newtons, even the brand new ones.

I won't go into anymore detail on the back story, but we might go months before encountering any type of issue throughout the entire process from art to teardown, and a huge reason for that is using high tension screens.  So therefore, I couldn't disagree with Sonny more, which isn't the first time.

I'm not arguing that you can't get a decent print using static alums, I've done it, seen it done many times, but it's not going to be as good as it would have been through a higher tensioned frame system, and that includes benefits throughout the entire print process (ink deposit, consumption, pressure, speed, setup times, etc.).  You'll never learn how to REALLY properly print through 16 newton screens because you're going to be using probably 40-100% more pressure, probably multiple strokes, double the ink consumption, high off contact, slow strokes, I could go on and on.

To argue against the benefits of using high tension screens only tells me that the one doing the arguing doesn't print every day :).  And I mean that respectfully of course.  I don't care how tight things got around here, we'd never spend another dime on a static alum.  I don't have anything against those who use statics or even wood or even those who argue that they are fine for what we do, but I'd be willing to bet a good chunk of change that if those shops switched to retens or even the shurloc ez's for an entire year, 90%+ would not go back to stretch and glue frames.

I'm assuming that most of us have used at least 2 different types of screens, so how many of you that have used retens for an extended period of time would consider going back to static or wood frames? 

Oh yeah, and Sonny, the reason there are so many used newmans out there isn't because statics are that good, it's because Don screwed up and made a product that will literally last forever.  And unfortunately, just because you use retens, it won't assure that your business is a success and that you won't be selling off all of your equipment 3 years after you started.  The percentage of used roller frames on the market that people are selling because they are moving to stretch and glue is probably extremely small.

We have newman rollers from the first batch ever made, hell, there is a decent chance we have one of the first newmans rollers ever sold.  We bought up half of the inventory from a shop that was one of the first to invest in the technology.  I was told at one time that the shop was THE FIRST to buy them but I would have to talk to Don to know for sure.
I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it -T.J.
Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigues of supporting it -T.P.

Offline tonypep

  • Ludicrous Speed Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 5683
Re: Screen mesh panels - the myths, the facts, and the future
« Reply #32 on: June 03, 2011, 10:26:02 AM »
Thats right Alan the discussion is about tension. The frame itslef is a means to that end and one primarily of personal preference. True we can all skew the dollar#s in our defense of choice but the bottom line is a good tight screen will perform better than a poorly tensioned one. I was just about to pull the trigger on building my screen stretcher but I'm waiting on that "Rigid Re-ten" first. And yes I use roller frames as well.
best tp

Offline ZooCity

  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4914
Re: Screen mesh panels - the myths, the facts, and the future
« Reply #33 on: June 03, 2011, 11:49:30 AM »
Man, this conversation had gone all over the board, lots of ways to look at it for sure.

Doug, I think you might've mis-read a few things from me:

You are assuming there is some “debate” on this issue, you would assume I would worry about being wrong, or that I and others are not getting some value from the exchange of views.

Ok, well I'm not actually sure what you meant by this.  I think we're all getting something out of most conversations like this, it gets the gears turning if nothing else.  And yeah, I do believe there is some "debate" on the issue, this thread being a fine case in point as well as others.  You seem to be the type of man who would live more by an Emerson-esque mantra than one of being worried about being wrong in the exploration of things. 

I looked up 230 with the same mesh I know is the default and the numbers I got are not near that, but that is just fine even taking inexpensive mesh as a comparison and a huge increase in the price I continue to support the idea and product.

What I posted are my exact prices- mesh by the yard from my supplier and panels at 25+ from shur-loc.  It could be my odd frame size of 25x30 costs a bit more to produce.  Those are just hard numbers- the panels are significantly more expensive in up-front cost. 

Your ability to seat and tension mesh is not comparable to a newbie or even a new customer and the panels have benefits, we don’t have to even use a product in a particular shop to understand the possible value in the correct place.

Well, I think these panels have a correct place in my shop.   Or at least I better if I just dropped that kind of $$  on them.  And yes, it took quite some time to get good with loading mesh but I learned a lot about how the mesh and frame interact at tension in the process.  That was more valuable than the mesh loading skill probably.

I agree wholeheartedly with most of the points you've made but still think, in caveman terms:

  • Panels expensive, mesh cheap
  • Panels convenient, mesh less convenient

Offline Socalfmf

  • !!!
  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1238
  • Lead, Follow or Get Out of the Way!
Re: Screen mesh panels - the myths, the facts, and the future
« Reply #34 on: June 03, 2011, 12:52:21 PM »
Alan

it is about high vs low tension, but it is also about maintaining that tension...just like my screen door at home...it is nice and tight and even with slight pressure ( read my kids heads looking out the door) you do not notice the stretching the first week or even month but by fall when we put in the storm window panel we have to have the screen re-installed....that is what happens with statics...so in the long run it cost more and more for those statics...

sam

Offline DouglasGrigar

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 166
  • Can you test, repeat, and measure it? fact or not?
Re: Screen mesh panels - the myths, the facts, and the future
« Reply #35 on: June 03, 2011, 04:23:08 PM »
I'm not arguing that you can't get a decent print using static alums, I've done it, seen it done many times, but it's not going to be as good as it would have been through a higher tensioned frame system, and that includes benefits throughout the entire print process (ink deposit, consumption, pressure, speed, setup times, etc.).  You'll never learn how to REALLY properly print through 16 newton screens because you're going to be using probably 40-100% more pressure, probably multiple strokes, double the ink consumption, high off contact, slow strokes, I could go on and on.

To argue against the benefits of using high tension screens only tells me that the one doing the arguing doesn't print every day

I am not so sure there is any real indication that anyone is arguing that the facts of higher tension exist and that the benefits range from essential to miniscule. (edited for a big typo - my mistake)

I predict this is going to reappear again and again it will focus on specific application.

Quote
I don't care how tight things got around here, we'd never spend another dime on a static alum.

A reasoned targeted choice I would support 100% (so do you consider the EZ frame a static, retensionable, or hybrid?)

Quote
I don't have anything against those who use statics or even wood or even those who argue that they are fine for what we do, but I'd be willing to bet a good chunk of change that if those shops switched to retens or even the shurloc ez's for an entire year, 90%+ would not go back to stretch and glue frames.

This depends on the frustration level - EZ only one user I have found stopped using them over frustration (long story) roller retensionable is another story and at percentages you would be shocked over.

Quote
I'm assuming that most of us have used at least 2 different types of screens, so how many of you that have used retens for an extended period of time would consider going back to static or wood frames?

I have one wood frame in my personal collection as a sample, and a handful to a dozen static aluminum the other approximately 150 screens are a mix of roller, 4 square bar, and hybrid (most roller).

Quote
the reason there are so many used newmans out there isn't because statics are that good, it's because Don screwed up and made a product that will literally last forever.  And unfortunately, just because you use retens, it won't assure that your business is a success and that you won't be selling off all of your equipment 3 years after you started.  The percentage of used roller frames on the market that people are selling because they are moving to stretch and glue is probably extremely small.

They will not last forever in some shops - you should see some of the abuse I see out there.

Don’t count on that last part - you are forgetting frustration as a factor, panels, and stretch tables lesson that frustration greatly, the numbers of reverted shops would drop to much lower percentages (and would have) with panels and tables.

Of course none of this negates your underlying expression of the facts and your experience.
« Last Edit: June 04, 2011, 01:38:13 PM by DouglasGrigar »
When there are no standards, you must make them!

Offline DouglasGrigar

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 166
  • Can you test, repeat, and measure it? fact or not?
Re: Screen mesh panels - the myths, the facts, and the future
« Reply #36 on: June 03, 2011, 04:31:48 PM »
I agree wholeheartedly with most of the points you've made but still think, in caveman terms:

  • Panels expensive, mesh cheap
  • Panels convenient, mesh less convenient

And there is nothing wrong with that because it puts a point on the choice of this product.

So:

Mongo very sad with much work, not go home and see willowy long hair good smelling cave mate in long time...

Mongo must try and make things go faster, find way to not do slow stinky work and stay on Pushy-pushy make many heap big pretty shells...

Mongo have new shiny thing that take many shells to have, must figure if shiny thing make more shells with more pushy-pushy than cost...

Mongo wish make time for fuzzy foamy rotten seed water in heap big drink horn...


 ;)
When there are no standards, you must make them!

Offline DouglasGrigar

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 166
  • Can you test, repeat, and measure it? fact or not?
Re: Screen mesh panels - the myths, the facts, and the future
« Reply #37 on: June 03, 2011, 04:49:57 PM »
Doug, I think you might've mis-read a few things from me:

You are assuming there is some “debate” on this issue, you would assume I would worry about being wrong, or that I and others are not getting some value from the exchange of views.

Ok, well I'm not actually sure what you meant by this.  I think we're all getting something out of most conversations like this, it gets the gears turning if nothing else.  And yeah, I do believe there is some "debate" on the issue, this thread being a fine case in point as well as others.  You seem to be the type of man who would live more by an Emerson-esque mantra than one of being worried about being wrong in the exploration of things.

I’m wrong all the time, if I hold an idea of how something works and it is wrong, I have no problem whatsoever in changing that view to one that better reflects the facts. I think I drive some people crazy with questions, testing, and the like but I don’t want to present things that are “wrong” I want the facts. I love stories, myths, BS sessions and just useless conversation over dinner but I don’t want any of that to be placed into the “facts” section unless it deserves to be there.

In a case like this subject we come against variables that change the application of particular items - there are facts and there are reasonable, logical, and dare I say it profitable applications that can change due to the variables this is the part that makes presenting a position difficult.

Quote
What I posted are my exact prices- mesh by the yard from my supplier and panels at 25+ from shur-loc.  It could be my odd frame size of 25x30 costs a bit more to produce.  Those are just hard numbers- the panels are significantly more expensive in up-front cost.

As presented this is true, nitpicking the details is not going to help, the final decision needs to be rational, well researched, and logical - this you will see again and again - there is no wrong choice if made with rational, logical, informed procedures. Of course that choice will not fit every application.

The sad part is how many decisions we (me included) make on emotion, reaction, and ignorance.
When there are no standards, you must make them!

Offline Evo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 955
  • Anything is possible.
Re: Screen mesh panels - the myths, the facts, and the future
« Reply #38 on: June 03, 2011, 05:36:13 PM »
They will not last forever in some shops - you should see some of the abuse I see out there.

The majority of screens I have in the shop are used Newman M3's I picked up from a large shop that closed down. Many are dented, they were put through a screen washing machine that had chemicals strong enough to strip the powder coating off, they were over/under torqued, banged up, and worked daily on a mis-adjusted Roller Master table that had a broken regulator.

All of these frames are still in use and with very little fuss, stay flat and hold high tension. I picked them up for about $15 each.

Add bolt mesh, (average is about $9-$10 a screen) and you have a very, VERY desirable screen inventory for the cost of most static frames. Once the mesh is stabilized and the corners are properly taped off, I can expect that screen to be in service for tens if not hundreds of stencils.

Thing is, when the static frames loose tension or pop, (I have about 8-10 here) I need to send them out to have them re-stretched. This, along with shipping, costs at least $12 a screen. And they don't reclaim anywhere near as well as the rollers do. The low tension mesh hangs on to emulsion, stains and ghosting where the rollers for the most part are clean and clear.

Panel frame "hybrids", to me, have no benefits over glued static frames. No way to work harden and max out the tension? No thanks.

Panels on roller frames? Once my business grows to the point where I hire someone to stretch screens, I will give them a long look. Until then the bolt mesh works wonders in my hands.
« Last Edit: June 03, 2011, 05:38:35 PM by Evo »
There is scarcely anything in the world that some man cannot make a little worse, and sell a little more cheaply. The person who buys on price alone is this man's lawful prey.
John Ruskin (1819 - 1900)

Offline squeegee

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 379
Re: Screen mesh panels - the myths, the facts, and the future
« Reply #39 on: June 03, 2011, 10:13:02 PM »
I've made multiple comments about EZ frames or hybrids or whatever you want to call them, so my opinion is probably nothing most haven't heard already, but I love a good discussion.
EZ frames are NOT static frames, truly they aren't, why? Because the panels are designed to take the mesh to manu's spec for optimal performance and that's just what they do. I can spot check 5 or 10 frames with the same mesh and find the tension within a few newtons, and the tension does stabablize, which is something maybe others don't realize about EZ frames.  Even tension arcoss our frames is now better now than I could ever honestly say about my rollers or statics. I know many here will tell that their rollers are spot on all the time, and I say more power to them.
For us though, from frame to frame we are very consistent in EOM, tension, exposure and printing "behavior". That's been huge. And the EZ frame offers simplicity and freedom from monotonous tasks like multiple tensionings, removing chemical resistant tape, frame flatness. They are also fast to restretch, nearly no frames without mesh, ever. We have a fast paced work environment, we turn a lot of jobs pretty much all the time, so this is where the EZ frame shines for us, they've been one of the best products I've ever used.
And to statics, well they are fine for some things, but c'mon, if you want to have some kind of control and understanding of why, where, how and so on, statics are not going to help, more like confuse you because they are inconsistent.
My opinion and my personal results, I honestly think EZ frames have out performed our rollers in most every way. Maybe it would be different if I could have kept one fully trained employee on the roller frames all the time, but reality has been far different and more difficult. I do not enjoy the burden of retraining or the investment in time to teach someone to stretch rollers (or the continual endless cost of the maintainence), and very few employees in my experience have had the patience to really do the job right. Most haven't wanted to keep rollers at optimal tension because they don't want to pop screens, so they just settle below what it should be to "get by". Sure I could micromanage the process, but who wants their boss up their butt about something they perceive as not so important? Is trying to preach tension as gospel worth my time or shoud I be concentrating on or improving other things?  I know my time is better spent elsewhere, so the EZ frame is more than a happy medium for us. Just my opinion though.

Offline DouglasGrigar

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 166
  • Can you test, repeat, and measure it? fact or not?
Re: Screen mesh panels - the myths, the facts, and the future
« Reply #40 on: June 04, 2011, 12:25:14 AM »
Panel frame "hybrids", to me, have no benefits over glued static frames. No way to work harden and max out the tension? No thanks.

Someone has given you some misinformation about how this frame works and the adjustments available.

What more tension do you want than level 3 (EHT) any next step is mesh failure? (Based on the terms Standard Tension - ST level 1, Advanced Tension - AT level 2, and Expert/High Tension - EHT level 3).

Post adjustment does allow secondary tensioning with the EZ frame back up to EHT/L3.

Quote
Panels on roller frames? Once my business grows to the point where I hire someone to stretch screens, I will give them a long look. Until then the bolt mesh works wonders in my hands.

And you would consider yourself a skilled technician not a newbie - is this correct? And how does this relate to the frustration factor we have to deal with in connection to retensionable frames?
When there are no standards, you must make them!

Offline blue moon

  • Administrator
  • Ludicrous Speed Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6366
Re: Screen mesh panels - the myths, the facts, and the future
« Reply #41 on: June 04, 2011, 10:27:01 AM »
this is a great read that I had to set aside as we are buried with work. . . So sorry for taking so long  to post, as I think my perspective here is the one missing. Why do I think that?  We are a startup shop where money is tight and a learning curve is extremely steep. I also don't think many would question our ability to produce some pretty impressive work. So we are short on money, had to learn to print (started about two and a half years ago) and are trying hard to do all the right things (proper techniques, right equipment and so on . . . ).

The reality:

Limited budget, never held a squeegee. Let's start a screenprinting shop! Huh? With no experience???
I had to learn every single aspect of screenprinting in a very short time. The amount of frustration is absolutely mind boggling. Trying to read the articles, and comprehend somehow all the industry terms and trying to make sense out of them, requires insane amounts of patience and dedication. It was not long ago that I spent 4 hours trying to figure out where to place the print (first paying order).  First film took hours to print, first half tone positive took 12 hours!!! Squeegee angles, push pull, underbase, flash times, over cooking, undercuring . . . the list goes on. Imagine what Alan went through, but having ZERO screenprinting experience and having to solve those issues!

We still use statics for most of our work! We have EZ Frames and the high end stuff gets printed with them. Every single advantage mentioned before stands. They are an all around better product than statics. Anybody arguing that is insane. But the reality is, for a shop starting up, there is no money to buy the expensive screens. The argument of buying used does not  hold water here as somebody just learning will not know if the problem is with the equipment or the user. We bought new statics from Hirsch and they sold us good quality screens. Now try to imagine somebody who never printed before trying to learn the trade, manage the shop and find customers. How much time do you think I had to learn how to stretch, reten and maintain the Newmans? Add to that the aggravation that comes with learning how to do it, and statics are a clear winner. An important point here though is that we had good screens all put in play at the same time and using the same mesh. Doing this with tired and mismatched screens would have been crazy.

Fast forward a year . . .
Knowing that statics are not an answer and trying to improve the print quality, we purchased some EZ frames. We ordered the "S" mesh wanting to go and do the right thing from the start. Well, that was a mistake, a costly one at that for somebody still in the startup mode. After popping all the mesh within about a month (12 screens) I realized that we are not ready for something like it. I was still learning how to print and the frustration of mesh breaking for no apparent reason was infuriating! In one case, I was holding a screen in may hand and talking to somebody. Two min into the conversation, the mesh popped, right in my hand. There was no pressure on the screen at all and I was standing still when it happened. Shortly afterwards, EZ Frames were retired to be revisited down the line. The only reason they were not sold is that I knew they were the right way to do things and that we would have to make changes to accommodate the best practices. Most other shops would have sold them. So as Douglas keeps repeating, we were back to statics due to aggravation . . .

About a year later we bought more frames and more panels and managed to pop most of them rather quickly, but we have a small number in rotation that is holding up to slow but continuous use. It is time to order new screens and I will order some panels and try to reintroduce them into rotation. I think we have slowly learned how to handle them and we should have much better success this time around.

So to recap, good statics will still produce a good print (anybody wanting prof PM me and I'll send you some samples). But they have to be good statics. Not everybody would benefit from starting with newmans. With the only option being used retens and new statics, retens would have put us out of business. There just wasn't enough time and patience to tackle such a task. Statics were also cheaper for a startup shop. So there is a time and place for the statics, but in the end, as we progress, retens become more and more necessary.

Yes, we've won our share of awards, and yes, I've tested stuff and read the scientific papers, but ultimately take everything I say with more than just a grain of salt! So if you are looking for trouble, just do as I say or even better, do something I said years ago!

Offline blue moon

  • Administrator
  • Ludicrous Speed Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6366
Re: Screen mesh panels - the myths, the facts, and the future
« Reply #42 on: June 04, 2011, 10:33:33 AM »
I am not so sure there is any real indication that the facts of higher tension exist and that the benefits range from essential to miniscule. I predict this is going to reappear again and again it will focus on specific application.


Am I reading this right? Big opening with lower (but proper) tension is possibly more important than high tension? SHould we start another topic?
Yes, we've won our share of awards, and yes, I've tested stuff and read the scientific papers, but ultimately take everything I say with more than just a grain of salt! So if you are looking for trouble, just do as I say or even better, do something I said years ago!

Online Northland

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 622
Re: Screen mesh panels - the myths, the facts, and the future
« Reply #43 on: June 04, 2011, 12:11:19 PM »
I am not so sure there is any real indication that the facts of higher tension exist and that the benefits range from essential to miniscule. I predict this is going to reappear again and again it will focus on specific application.


Am I reading this right? Big opening with lower (but proper) tension is possibly more important than high tension? SHould we start another topic?
I'm hoping to find that out for myself real soon.... I just received 2 yards of 110,160,230 "S" mesh to use on some 20 x 28 newmans that I'm putting together.

I've got about 20 PanelFrames in rotation.... every time I put a tensionmeter on them I think "these are too low"... yet they print fine. I don't know what Sefar thread is in them, but the ink clears better than most statics I've used. So, maybe the mesh opening (thread size) is as critical as the tension ??

Offline jsheridan

  • !!!
  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2130
Re: Screen mesh panels - the myths, the facts, and the future
« Reply #44 on: June 04, 2011, 12:28:05 PM »
I am not so sure there is any real indication that the facts of higher tension exist and that the benefits range from essential to miniscule. I predict this is going to reappear again and again it will focus on specific application.



Am I reading this right? Big opening with lower (but proper) tension is possibly more important than high tension? SHould we start another topic?


Yes you read that right. The thinner threads allows more ink to pass through at a lower tension than a thick thread high tension thread.

Check out the tech sheet and look at the numbers yourself:

http://www.murakamiscreen.com/documents/MeshGuidefromCatalogweb.pdf

Blacktop Graphics Screenprinting and Consulting Services