Author Topic: squeegee flood vs flood bar  (Read 6877 times)

Offline Shanarchy

  • !!!
  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1421
squeegee flood vs flood bar
« on: January 28, 2013, 08:17:23 PM »
Anyone ever use a squeegee in place of their flood bar? I've been peaking at the Joe Clarke Squeegee and Dr J flood bar. Pretty interesting.

But I'm figuring there must be an advantage to a conventional metal flood bar, or manufacturers would just put a squeegee in both places. I know the DR J is a little more engineered than a conventional squeegee, but thoughts?

The first think I come up with is you won't have the advantage to a winged flood bar. But I'm sure someone must have messed with this. So before I have play time at the shop, what do you have for me?



Offline bimmridder

  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1886
Re: squeegee flood vs flood bar
« Reply #1 on: January 28, 2013, 09:02:15 PM »
Maybe someone will come up with the squeege-flood with wings?
Barth Gimble

Printing  (not well) for 35 years. Strong in licensed sports apparel. Plastisol printer. Located in Cedar Rapids, IA

Offline ZooCity

  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4914
Re: squeegee flood vs flood bar
« Reply #2 on: January 28, 2013, 09:39:41 PM »
Maybe someone will come up with the squeege-flood with wings?

Yes!

Maybe you could use those M&R ink traps + squeegee blade? I've never seen those traps in person so maybe not., but if they hook up on the holder it could work, or at least help.

Printing manually the way we do in our shop and also using an auto for flatstock and a metal fill bar there, I say advantage squeegee as flood for plastisol for the best possible hard fill without distorting the image but winged metal floods are just fine for wb.

I think Joe Clarke's Dr.J is based around a concept I've seen him write on that the metal fill bar should not contact the mesh.  Image distortion is my best guess but it's still confusing since the squeegee distorts as well, maybe friction issues?  My fill bars are always set just a little past the mesh, a little more than I thought would be required in fact, you can feel the bar depressing the mesh underneath.

Offline alan802

  • !!!
  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3535
  • I like to screen print
Re: squeegee flood vs flood bar
« Reply #3 on: January 28, 2013, 10:26:24 PM »
I've been using the Dr J for a while now. I use them all the time for our one hits on darks.  The squeegee as a flood bar fills the stencil better and you can see a difference in ink deposit between a metal flood bar and squeegee.  The other day when I was asking what would be the best substrate to print on to test ink deposit thickness was to measrure those differences between different flood bars, squeegees and also mesh counts.  Hopefully I'll get a chance to test and measure soon.
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 ZooCity

  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4914
Re: squeegee flood vs flood bar
« Reply #4 on: January 29, 2013, 12:21:41 AM »
Alan, ever used a constant force flood?

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk 2


Offline alan802

  • !!!
  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3535
  • I like to screen print
Re: squeegee flood vs flood bar
« Reply #5 on: January 29, 2013, 08:23:00 AM »
I've got some manual ones that I've tried a few times but I don't really like them.  I can't say I honestly gave them much of a chance cause I don't print manually very often.
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 Gilligan

  • !!!
  • Ludicrous Speed Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 6853
Re: squeegee flood vs flood bar
« Reply #6 on: January 29, 2013, 09:07:06 AM »
I've got some manual ones that I've tried a few times but I don't really like them.  I can't say I honestly gave them much of a chance cause I don't print manually very often.

My guy actually LOVES those squeegees now... so next time you send me a box of something, send it back. :p

Or send it to Mooseman, I offered to let him try it out.

Offline ZooCity

  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4914
Re: squeegee flood vs flood bar
« Reply #7 on: January 29, 2013, 09:24:01 AM »
The auto ones, I mean.

Also do not care for the manual ones but appreciate the concept.  The manual ones are actually incredible on ultra high tension and a paralleled press.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk 2


Offline ScreenFoo

  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1296
  • Semper Fidelis Tyrannosaurus
Re: squeegee flood vs flood bar
« Reply #8 on: January 29, 2013, 10:55:10 AM »
I thought they worked OK with both CF and conventional squeegees.

The Hydra is sweet for high tension screens and really loads the stencil, but you lose several inches of inkwell. 
The Vector seems to keep more ink warmed up, but both are still pretty bad about running out of ink in the middle if you don't keep a massive amount of ink in the screen.
Seems like they'd be great for process if I actually had 4-6 of them, but I don't see that happening anytime soon.


 

Offline ZooCity

  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4914
Re: squeegee flood vs flood bar
« Reply #9 on: January 29, 2013, 12:46:59 PM »
I thought that the newman floods were notably missing wings.  With all that rolling the ink around it probably flows out to the sides a lot quicker. 

Offline Shanarchy

  • !!!
  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1421
Re: squeegee flood vs flood bar
« Reply #10 on: January 29, 2013, 12:53:56 PM »
I've been using the Dr J for a while now. I use them all the time for our one hits on darks.  The squeegee as a flood bar fills the stencil better and you can see a difference in ink deposit between a metal flood bar and squeegee.  The other day when I was asking what would be the best substrate to print on to test ink deposit thickness was to measrure those differences between different flood bars, squeegees and also mesh counts.  Hopefully I'll get a chance to test and measure soon.

A couple of questions....

Do you think putting a normal squeegee in place off my flood bar would give me any advantages? Or would it be a poor trial to see if the Dr J's would be worth it?

If someone was to take a 16" Dr J or Smilin Jack and trim either a half inch or an inch off both sides, do you think it would alter the performance being that it would change the profile of the smile cut?

Do you think the advantage to a squeegee base/Dr J flood bar is only worth it for white and high opacity inks? Or do you think you would get a noticeable benefit even using them on wow and general purpose inks?


Offline JBLUE

  • !!!
  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2036
Re: squeegee flood vs flood bar
« Reply #11 on: January 29, 2013, 01:18:08 PM »
My question is why do you need to flood that much ink? Using a squeegee is going to have dot gain galore if you are using it to make contact with the screen.
www.inkwerksspd.com

We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid...... Ben Franklin

Offline Screened Gear

  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2580
Re: squeegee flood vs flood bar
« Reply #12 on: January 29, 2013, 02:22:22 PM »
My question is why do you need to flood that much ink? Using a squeegee is going to have dot gain galore if you are using it to make contact with the screen.

I agree. If you have to do something like this your messed up somewhere else in the process. I haven't used the smile or the doctor so I am not trashing them but I understand the physics of the design. The cut makes a bending point. Depending on speed and pressure you create your print angle. This is why they go in at zero angle and they want you to run them fast. Since the bending point is lower on the blade then a standard blade (bending at the squeegee holder). This makes you get a sharper print angle with ink compression before the print. The ink compression is similar to printing with a push stroke. Depending on speed and pressure maybe a high print angle then possible with a normal set up. The blade only needs to bend a slight amount to get the angle. Now they say its an 80 duro or something like that. Well the 80 duro has a cut in it making it bend at that point more like a 40 duro since it is only bending half the mass of the blade. The 80 duro material can't clean the screen as well as a soft duro. I have a few blades that do something similar and they do work great. I am sure if you cut a 80 duro on a table saw you could get the same performance as one of these blades. I like the thinking but like everything in screen printing most of these special items are because people have something else not set right or need to compensate for something. Alan I am not talking about you. I know you use these type things to do what some say are impossible. If I saw this last year I would have bought one. I was having issues with ink lay down (not enough ink). It took me a while but I fixed that issue with finding the areas I was not adjusted properly.

Offline Shanarchy

  • !!!
  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1421
Re: squeegee flood vs flood bar
« Reply #13 on: January 29, 2013, 03:17:57 PM »
My question is why do you need to flood that much ink? Using a squeegee is going to have dot gain galore if you are using it to make contact with the screen.

I agree. If you have to do something like this your messed up somewhere else in the process. I haven't used the smile or the doctor so I am not trashing them but I understand the physics of the design. The cut makes a bending point. Depending on speed and pressure you create your print angle. This is why they go in at zero angle and they want you to run them fast. Since the bending point is lower on the blade then a standard blade (bending at the squeegee holder). This makes you get a sharper print angle with ink compression before the print. The ink compression is similar to printing with a push stroke. Depending on speed and pressure maybe a high print angle then possible with a normal set up. The blade only needs to bend a slight amount to get the angle. Now they say its an 80 duro or something like that. Well the 80 duro has a cut in it making it bend at that point more like a 40 duro since it is only bending half the mass of the blade. The 80 duro material can't clean the screen as well as a soft duro. I have a few blades that do something similar and they do work great. I am sure if you cut a 80 duro on a table saw you could get the same performance as one of these blades. I like the thinking but like everything in screen printing most of these special items are because people have something else not set right or need to compensate for something. Alan I am not talking about you. I know you use these type things to do what some say are impossible. If I saw this last year I would have bought one. I was having issues with ink lay down (not enough ink). It took me a while but I fixed that issue with finding the areas I was not adjusted properly.

Jon,

The image you posted is the main reason I am interested in the Dr J. 0 degree angle. I have a mini horizon. Great press, but it is a smaller print stroke. I'm looking into testing these and double bevel squeegees to see if I can get an extra inch or two out of my print stroke.

But I am also very interested in items that could possibly improve quality/production.

Offline Screened Gear

  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2580
Re: squeegee flood vs flood bar
« Reply #14 on: January 29, 2013, 03:35:08 PM »
I'm not sure it would help much with print stroke length. You still have to flood the image so your flood bar is going to determine your print stroke length. If you switch to a squeegee for flooding it will take away even more of your printable area. Many flood bars are bent so the flood is closer to the squeegee. This may not be true on all presses. If I use a squeegee to flood it will take away almost an inch or more. The winged flood bars from Action are not as bent as the original floods on my press so they also take away from my print stroke. (Sorry to hear your lacking on stroke length. I have plenty of length  ;D)