pre-registration system

[ZooCity]

I took a good look at the Pin Lock system recently and, out of them all, it looks like the best fit for us.  But my final verdict was that our chameleon can't keep itself aligned well enough to reap the benefits from the system.  x-y micros will walk out of reg and the off-contact adjustments like to walk around a little too.  For us to get an advantage from a pre-reg system, especially one with a $4k ticket, it would need to eliminate the use of the micros on our press outright.  That would absolutely be worth it- messing with those poorly designed micros takes up more setup time than anything else.  If they just moved in a logical manner and stayed put when you locked them I would have those crazy short setup times that the reg systems claim just eyeballing the registration. 

I'm wondering how many presses out there can?  If you had a press with very tight tolerances (and you keep it calibrated) the pin lock system looks like an obvious choice.

I had a post awhile back that touched on some of this but I appears it was lost in the migration.  Briefly, the way I see it, there is pre-alignment systems and pre-registration systems.  If yer going for the latter you need to make a systemic commitment.  The former is just something that every single shop necessarily has to do in some way or another or your films will be too far off from each other for the screen adjustments on your press to get the job into registration.

I actually like the idea of carrier sheets, but on the top of the film only, not extending down behind the film adding another layer of light scattering material, that just seems ass backwards to me.   In fact, printing longer film and punching it, as mentioned would probably be preferable.   What I like about the punch holes is that you can library a jobs films rather than it's screens.  This is extremely appealing to a guy who doesn't have space for more screens but needs to whip out 10k worth of re-stock orders for a pre-print line every month in addition to the usual workload of a custom print shop. It'd be nice to coat fresh screens and line up the holes, tape and go.  In this case you align films once and keep your parameters tight so the rest is on auto pilot.  Just a fer instance.  I'm sure there are other benefits. Downside is that you need to really get a post-exposure routine down if your going to use carriers and long-runs of aggressive inks would be extra tricky. 

I hate, however, the notion of putting some semi-permanent fixture on my expo glass.  Yay, now we need two expo units!  One for the regular screens and one for the big ones... No thanks.   If I could get around that somehow the tri-loc would do us fine.   It looks like an otherwise nice system at a fair price. 

And DTS?  Absofuckinglutely.  All you'd need then is a jig, anything repeatable, to align your screens on press.  Whose going to make one affordable for the small to middlin shops though?

 

[alan802]

Why do I start drooling whenever someone mentions DTS?  That technology with the identical pallet jig for the press and I think that combination could be tops in setup times.  I think 95% of our issues when a job doesn't line up would be eliminated with a DTS.  Could you imaging setting up every single 5 color job without having to micro the press or spend 20 minutes at the film positioning unit taping up the 5 screens precisely? 

I know most of the DTS machines are triloc compatible, but since the triloc uses 3 flat metal pieces instead of round stops, it should be easier to duplicate those points on the triloc even if the DTS is made by a different company right?  Reason I ask is because the problems we had with the vastex was the 3 stop points on the pallet jig didn't perfectly match the 3 point on the FPU, but 3 flat plates work differently than 3 posts that have to contact the screens in the exact same place, therefore more easily duplicated?  What happens if you use something besides newman rollers and a weld knot on an aluminum screen contacts one of the posts or plates of the FPU, but doesn't contact the post or plates of the pallet jig?  One screen way out of registration and several minutes of micro work and likely multiple test prints most likely.

[ftembroidery]

I had the Vastex VRS system and Mark Vastex worked with Doug Greiger to make the pallet registration system specific for my platens (Antec Legend 14" x 14" square with no neck).  I loved it.  Something I found was that if I had a job that was more than 2 colors and just kept stacking the carrier sheets and positives on the board, there were registration issues after the 2nd color.  What I did was to place one carrier sheet and the positive on the board and leave it there until I had done all the other carrier sheets/positives ONE AT A TIME.  In other words, I made the 2nd carrier and removed it from the board, then I placed the 3rd carrier/positive and aligned it to the reg. marks of the 1st carrier and removed the 3rd carrier and then made the 4th, etc., etc.  When I tried to align too many reg. marks (read: more than one set), the registration began to suffer because I was looking thru too many sheets and seeing too many reg. marks.

[mk162]

If I had a DTS I would totally forgo a pallet jig and use an identical head jig for placement.  That would save immense time over lining screens individually and it would be done as soon as the screen was placed into the holder...like the MHM.

The best part is if the jig was off on each head, it could be adjusted out with the micros and each head would then be tuned to each other.  Then no switching platens or tabling up for alignment.

[ZooCity]

The best part is if the jig was off on each head, it could be adjusted out with the micros and each head would then be tuned to each other.  Then no switching platens or tabling up for alignment.

That would be most excellent. 

Does anyone make an "entry level" DTG that does 25" wide screens?

[ebscreen]

Punch through your reggie marks.

On the films or through the mesh?

 

Think outside the frame.

[alan802]

If I had a DTS I would totally forgo a pallet jig and use an identical head jig for placement.  That would save immense time over lining screens individually and it would be done as soon as the screen was placed into the holder...like the MHM.

The best part is if the jig was off on each head, it could be adjusted out with the micros and each head would then be tuned to each other.  Then no switching platens or tabling up for alignment.

For MHM users, how difficult is it to "zero" out your micros?  I understand the mhm system but when I think about it I only can envision it as if it were installed on our press and then things start to get muddy on the whole printhead zeroing the micros.  I know most autos have the grid and a marker to show you how and where you've moved the micros, but truly zeroing them out seems like it might be difficult due to several factors.  I know they can manufacturer each printhead to be fairly identical but it seems like during the initial installation of the press, the zero for each printhead would have to be figured out and marked.  I can zero out our printhead micros to be close to the same but our press is different and I don't know how accurate it would be if we had a printhead jig of sorts.  I do think the MHM system is probably the best, but I see potential issues with it but only comparing it to if something similar would be installed on our press. 

This discussion has really motivated me to move forward with the newman pin lock system so that first, I can compare it's ability to the DIY I made, then work on getting my guys to buy into using it if it works better than our current one.  There was someone on the M&R board that said he had fabricated a regi system and was working on the patent but that was months ago and haven't heard anything about it since.  I'd be real interested to see how and if someone was able to reinvent the wheel so to speak and was real suspicious of whether it was really something new.  I'm certainly not someone who can invent anything, I'm the kind of guy that can use and analyze something and figure out how to make it better, like most of us can do.  I am envious of those who can create something out of the blue and invent something new.  I've spent many hours trying to figure out a better regi system but it almost seems like everything that can be done has been done as far as that topic goes.  But I'm also not as smart as the people who came up with the popular systems so that could be the main reason why I haven't come up with anything.

[ZooCity]

I've read their sheets on the MHM auto-reg presses and it sounds like it overcomes the zeroing out issue handily.  These are equipped with something like precision motors that can reset themselves.  I think you place a positive on a platen, adjust that head's micros to align and then the other heads move exactly that far in each direction.

[prozyan]

Something I found was that if I had a job that was more than 2 colors and just kept stacking the carrier sheets and positives on the board, there were registration issues after the 2nd color.  What I did was to place one carrier sheet and the positive on the board and leave it there until I had done all the other carrier sheets/positives ONE AT A TIME.

Color me dumb, I never considered that.  And it describes the problem I have perfectly.  I'll have to give it a try.

[Shanarchy]

Alan,  I have a Newman pin system. All but the pallet. How are the arms mounted to the pallet? Could one possibly buy the arms and mount them themselves? I have been hesitant to invest in this until I know it will work spot on. Having to but pinlocks for every frame will add up. A worthy investment if it will make your micros obsolete, but not if it only gets you "very close".

I also have a VRS. However, mine is made to be used with the matching exposure unit. Otherwise I would need to swap out my FPU for one with the bump stops. I think transferring the film via 2 sided tape leaves too much margin for the film to move slightly. I have considered ashering the pins and bump stops to the glass of my msp3140. Again, not worth making it tougher to expose larger frames if you can not achieve dead on registration.

I think the films should all be registered no more than 2 at a time. As mentioned you put your first film down. Register the second. Move it to the screen. Then repeat for all other films.

I am also thinking if using carrier sheets and an exposure unit with pins on the glass, small cut pieces of the carrier sheet would work better. So the carrier sheets would only be maybe 4" long. The film taped on the top to it. Would this leave room for the film to easily shift if not mounted/taped in all four corners? I am thinking no. Thoughts?

Bump stops, would round or flat edge be more preferred?

I think if the screens can all be burned in dead on register, the biggest problem is overcome.

What if a square could be fabricated that would lay/not adhere to the glass (so you can remove it for bigger screens) which had the carrier sheet pins at the top. and frame mounts at the bottom. Then said frame could mount to a master pallet....

I also believe that the MHM will zero itself. I am sure Pierre can confirm that.

[Evo]

  Something I found was that if I had a job that was more than 2 colors and just kept stacking the carrier sheets and positives on the board, there were registration issues after the 2nd color.  What I did was to place one carrier sheet and the positive on the board and leave it there until I had done all the other carrier sheets/positives ONE AT A TIME.

Same thing with the Tri-Loc. I put the "keyline" film down on the first carrier sheet on the light table, then do one color at a time on it. I use a loupe to register the reg marks dot-for-dot. Works perfectly.

That said, it helps to slow down just a bit at this step. 10-15 extra seconds on each film makes a world of difference. Line up, put the first piece of tape down, double check all the reg marks, then more tape, etc.

[alan802]

Alan,  I have a Newman pin system. All but the pallet. How are the arms mounted to the pallet? Could one possibly buy the arms and mount them themselves? I have been hesitant to invest in this until I know it will work spot on. Having to but pinlocks for every frame will add up. A worthy investment if it will make your micros obsolete, but not if it only gets you "very close".

I was going to mount the arms to pallet number one myself, using contact cement, but I don't know if that will hold up over time.  I'm not worried about getting the arms in the correct location, that seems fairly easy to do but will the contact cement be enough to hold those arms in place and rigid enough to not every flex or move at all.  I'm not really sure how Newman attaches the arms to the pallets and how they assure everything is correctly place in relation to the press pallets, but I'll try to do it myself before I contact them to do it for me.  I did put the arms on one of our old centurian pallets a few years ago but took them off when I abandoned the idea of using the pin lock system.  I know that Newman recommends that you send a pallet in and they attach the arms there but there is no telling how much that costs, as nothing of theirs is cheap. 

As far as round bump stops or square, I have no idea which is better.  I've only used the round stops and haven't really sat down and tried to figure out which method would work best.  Something tells me the square or flat stop might work better but that's just because I haven't used it and always think the grass is greener on the other side. 

[Evo]

As far as I know you can send a pallet into Stretch Devices and they will correctly mount the pin-reg arms for you.

[Shanarchy]

I know that Newman recommends that you send a pallet in and they attach the arms there but there is no telling how much that costs, as nothing of theirs is cheap. 
[/quote]

Memory tells me it was $1000 (possibly a hair more, but I'm pretty sure it wasn't less).

As far as centering the arms I think it would be as easy as putting a vertical line on the center of the screen to lay over a center line drawn on the pallet the pin locks on the screen would put the outstretched pin arms where they belong. As long as you have it 98% straight and centered I don't see it making a difference in the final product (shirt print). All the screens will be registered on the same pallet so they would all be in register to each other. Of course, I am thinking this with out seeing the actual pallet arms.

Would JB Weld work? How were the affixed to the pallet of your centurian?

[Evo]

I took a good look at the Pin Lock system recently and, out of them all, it looks like the best fit for us.  But my final verdict was that our chameleon can't keep itself aligned well enough to reap the benefits from the system.  x-y micros will walk out of reg and the off-contact adjustments like to walk around a little too. 

Wow, this sounds like your press needs a serious tune & lube. Mine holds registration rock solid. Seriously, I've ran into a screen with a tall screen cart and it didn't knock the reg out.


The Tri-Loc works perfectly with it.


A few things are critical for the Chameleon to work right with pre-registration (or for any job setup really):

Off contact - the level pad buckeye (the bolt/pad on the station arm) needs to be perfectly the same height from station to station. This is somewhat of an involved adjustment time wise, but it's a "one time" deal. Once they are all set right (or if they are already set right) you shouldn't touch them. The procedure is simple - find head #1 and tape the off contact adjustment knob in place. Lock a screen in the head. Don't touch any more adjustments on the head. Measure the distance from the bottom of the screen frame in the back to the top of the pallet arm. (or from a fixed point on the bottom of the head) A caliper is good for this. Now spin the next station to this head and measure. Adjust (if needed) the buckye bolt so this head is the same height from the top of each pallet arm. Lock em all down firmly and measure them all twice. All the same? Good, un-tape the off contact on that head and your all set. Threaten all staff with public torture if they touch the buckeyes with a wrench. This should be a once every five years adjustment, if ever again.

Micro locks - these need to be pulled apart every once in awhile, the lock studs need to be snugged up from underneath the head, (two acorn nuts are under there, snug em up) and the whole shebang put back together with some lithium grease. Then the top anti-droop locknut should be adjusted to *just* let the micro move. Then the top plate goes back on and the locking handles (grease all mated surfaces and threads). If the studs come loose from the bottom or the top locknut is out of adjustment, then the micros will not work smoothly and may not lock down all the way.
Check every 6 months or whenever micros feel weird or don't lock.

Pallets need to be dead parallel. Check monthly or every time some ass rests something heavy on one.

Tilt adjusters shouldn't be really easy to move. Tighten them so there is no play in the tilt, but you should still be able to turn the knob with *some* resistance. Check yearly.