Author Topic: Automated v. Semi-Automated v. Manual Reclaim  (Read 5258 times)

Offline ZooCity

  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4914
Automated v. Semi-Automated v. Manual Reclaim
« on: March 19, 2016, 07:08:46 PM »
We're revamping reclaim here and I want to either fully automate it or semi-automate it.  I'm open to the argument that manual is best as well but my goal is to minimize labor time in this area.

Is full automated reclaim a reality for under 100k?  It seems far-fetched that these units will be effective, fast enough and reliable.  Do these units actually work in the field?

I've attached a concept for semi-automated reclaim.   It utilizes a pair of these http://www.nwgraphic.com/family.php?id=SYS-19010 which are air powered recirculation/filtering units.  These units could also be another type that utilizes electric press washers, open to whatever, but the air units struck me as simple and reliable by nature.

One unit would be for de-inking and they come with a gong brush and pump.  The de-ink unit would be lifted for better ergonomics and this would be the only point that a human would scrub the screen- once on the ink side.  I believe de-inking is the only place that mechanical brushing is required in this process.  (aside from dehazing, if needed)

The second unit would simply be there to rinse ink remover before dunking in emulsion stripper tank and then again to blast emulsion off after soaking in tank.    Hopefully that makes sense in the layout.   It's a hop back to the clean water rinse after the emulsion dunk tank. 

The degrease dip to the right of the inspection booth would be for a literal dunk, in and out, to neutralize the ph and get surfactant into the crevices of the roller frames to loosen up any errant chem trapped in there, and then a top down rinse with an overhead spray a la restaurant dish pit before going to dry.  The rinse could also be done in a third semi-automated unit. 

Conveyorized drying sounds good to me. Minimize wet screen time and thus contamination.  Feed the screen room a steady supply of screens ready to coat.  Reduce a racking and transportation step.  Not a necessity though, rinsed screens could simply be racked and go to a drying area.

In this model, the reclaim worker is putting inks away, cleaning tooling, etc. with any down time as screens move through the semi auto units and tanks. 

The semi-auto model attached takes up about as much room as a fully auto solution.  Cost is about half of full auto.   I'm not really concerned about cost here so much as having the most effective and reliable system. 

The semi-auto is attractive because it still only takes one employee, is very simple and modular and allows the "full" reclaim process to happen using dedicated chems for each step.   

Auto is attractive because your one employee operating it needs very little hustle to maintain throughput but is unattractive by it's more complicated machinery and therefore less reliable nature.  I also don't like the idea of mixing chems within the auto systems. 

Thoughts?



Offline pwalsh

  • !!!
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 473
Re: Automated v. Semi-Automated v. Manual Reclaim
« Reply #1 on: March 19, 2016, 10:13:24 PM »
We're revamping reclaim here and I want to either fully automate it or semi-automate it.  I'm open to the argument that manual is best as well but my goal is to minimize labor time in this area.

Is full automated reclaim a reality for under 100k?  It seems far-fetched that these units will be effective, fast enough and reliable.  Do these units actually work in the field?

I've attached a concept for semi-automated reclaim.   It utilizes a pair of these http://www.nwgraphic.com/family.php?id=SYS-19010 which are air powered recirculation/filtering units.  These units could also be another type that utilizes electric press washers, open to whatever, but the air units struck me as simple and reliable by nature.

One unit would be for de-inking and they come with a gong brush and pump.  The de-ink unit would be lifted for better ergonomics and this would be the only point that a human would scrub the screen- once on the ink side.  I believe de-inking is the only place that mechanical brushing is required in this process.  (aside from dehazing, if needed)

The second unit would simply be there to rinse ink remover before dunking in emulsion stripper tank and then again to blast emulsion off after soaking in tank.    Hopefully that makes sense in the layout.   It's a hop back to the clean water rinse after the emulsion dunk tank. 

The degrease dip to the right of the inspection booth would be for a literal dunk, in and out, to neutralize the ph and get surfactant into the crevices of the roller frames to loosen up any errant chem trapped in there, and then a top down rinse with an overhead spray a la restaurant dish pit before going to dry.  The rinse could also be done in a third semi-automated unit. 

Conveyorized drying sounds good to me. Minimize wet screen time and thus contamination.  Feed the screen room a steady supply of screens ready to coat.  Reduce a racking and transportation step.  Not a necessity though, rinsed screens could simply be racked and go to a drying area.

In this model, the reclaim worker is putting inks away, cleaning tooling, etc. with any down time as screens move through the semi auto units and tanks. 

The semi-auto model attached takes up about as much room as a fully auto solution.  Cost is about half of full auto.   I'm not really concerned about cost here so much as having the most effective and reliable system. 

The semi-auto is attractive because it still only takes one employee, is very simple and modular and allows the "full" reclaim process to happen using dedicated chems for each step.   

Auto is attractive because your one employee operating it needs very little hustle to maintain throughput but is unattractive by it's more complicated machinery and therefore less reliable nature.  I also don't like the idea of mixing chems within the auto systems. 

Thoughts?


Chris; Automating screen reclamation and screen preparation will provide your business with a great opportunity to improve print quality, reduce the volume of your waste water discharge, and lower your overall screen production costs.  You are asking good questions regarding reliability and efficiency of the different systems that are on the market.  We have a number of customers who have been running the Grunig and CCI fully automated screen cleaning and reclamation systems with good results. With the Grunig units you will pay a premium for performance as they tend to be on the higher end of the price range, while the CCI FA systems are generally more price competitive, albeit in a more basic unit.   

Nazdar SourceOne has a number of high volume printers who have acquired the M&R Eco-Tex Screen Cleaning and Reclamation systems during the past year who have been getting good results.  With regard to the price of the M&R Gear you can have a Single Chamber Eco-Tex System, and an Eco Rinse System to enhance your screen stencil processing operations  installed and operational on your shop floor for under $100K.  These two units will process around 160 screens per 8 hour shift, with higher production throughput available by selecting the Eco-Tex "double chamber" option.

If you're committed to going the semi-automated approach then I'd recommend you look at the Saati Flat SS Reclaim system.  https://youtu.be/KLx19HD7I6g It's really more of an optimized manual system, versus semi-automated but the people running these systems who I've spoken to are very happy with them.

Peter G. Walsh - Executive Vice President
The M&R Companies - Roselle, IL USA
Email:  peter.walsh@mrprint.com
Office 847-410-3445 / Cell 913-579-6662

Online Maxie

  • !!!
  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1311
Re: Automated v. Semi-Automated v. Manual Reclaim
« Reply #2 on: March 20, 2016, 01:14:26 AM »
I have just set up the Saati I system and it works really well.
Much easier and faster than what we were doing but we don't do anything like 160 screens a day.
If you have someone apply the chemicals but automated the washing it would be fast and efficient.
That way one person would get to 160 a day.
Greg Kitson has some info on Utube that's worth watching.
Maxie Garb.
T Max Designs.
Silk Screen Printers
www.tmax.co.il

Offline BorisB

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 377
Re: Automated v. Semi-Automated v. Manual Reclaim
« Reply #3 on: March 21, 2016, 01:33:10 PM »
Just some numbers of yearly usage from my Shop:

First year (2009) is dip tank reclaim. From 2010 we went automatic. 

2009, year before buying Grunig G-112 unit for reclaim and developing:
460 lit of emulsion, 85 lit of stripper

2011, one year into using Grunig G-112:
650 lit of emulsion, 270 lit of stripper

2015, five years using Grunig G-112:
820 lit of emulsion, 375 lit of Stripper.

Same products all years: RLX and Autostrip 1:20 from Autotype

I should probably get rid of it. 

Any help from Grunig in setting optimal programs and optimal products? No, they don't want to favour any of suppliers.


Perhaps we are too stupid to be able to setup machine properly in 5 years.






Offline ZooCity

  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4914
Re: Automated v. Semi-Automated v. Manual Reclaim
« Reply #4 on: March 21, 2016, 04:31:52 PM »
The Saati table/booth is nice looking, thanks Peter, I'll consider it.  Would prefer a backlit one though. 

Boris, those chem usage figures look high but has it been worth it for the reduction in labor?  It sounds like your unit has never really performed to your satisfaction?  Also, do you think it's related to not using Grunig's recommended chemistry?

Offline hoogie

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 113
  • feel free to email hoogies@bnin.net
Re: Automated v. Semi-Automated v. Manual Reclaim
« Reply #5 on: March 21, 2016, 04:52:24 PM »
Greg, from Mindseye should chime in on this one, I spent the better part of the morning watching his system. Man its fast...I'd talk to him before heading to automated...just my two cents worth.
Hoogie...

Offline ZooCity

  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4914
Re: Automated v. Semi-Automated v. Manual Reclaim
« Reply #6 on: March 21, 2016, 04:55:02 PM »
Greg, from Mindseye should chime in on this one, I spent the better part of the morning watching his system. Man its fast...I'd talk to him before heading to automated...just my two cents worth.

I found his video and I like everything about it save for degreasing in the same booth.  I think a take on Greg's method utilizing automated pressure washing could yield you near what a full auto could. 

The problem with all manual or semi-auto systems though is worker motivation.  If the person in there isn't ready to work and throw down on the screens it just drags and the work piles up. 

Offline GKitson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 720
  • Just another t-shirt guy
Re: Automated v. Semi-Automated v. Manual Reclaim
« Reply #7 on: March 21, 2016, 05:05:33 PM »
WARNING: Shameless self promotion

If anybody wants to check out our screen loop the perfect time is one of the coming Workshops at Mind's Eye.

www.mindseyeg.com for info on our PROScreen event on April 8-9, 2016.  Greaves on Garments May 6-7, 2016.  For those of you we live more than a tank of gas away we might even send Steph to pick you up at the Fort Wayne airport. 

If nothing else come for the food and the networking.
Greg Kitson
Mind's Eye Graphics Inc.
260-724-2050

Offline BorisB

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 377
Re: Automated v. Semi-Automated v. Manual Reclaim
« Reply #8 on: March 21, 2016, 05:37:45 PM »



Boris, those chem usage figures look high but has it been worth it for the reduction in labor?  It sounds like your unit has never really performed to your satisfaction?  Also, do you think it's related to not using Grunig's recommended chemistry?
Grunig would not reccomend any chemistry. They refused to give any advice. They want to be neutral, just like Switzerland. Not taking any sides, just your money.

You have close to zero labour with reclaim, and mostly screens are really nicely reclaimed. Just for 110 mesh it takes 12 minutes for one cyle. We print most of our transfers using large 110 mesh screens. G112 is causing bottleneck in our production.
If I knew, what I know now... I wouldn't buy it again. Systems like Greg's or what Saati offers are more economical. But temps like those that Bimridder is having can reclaim screens with our machine.
I often wanted to get cutting edge by heavy investment in fancy machines and reducing the role of operater. Well often I have been wrong. You need good people to run high end  machines for succesful business.

Offline ZooCity

  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4914
Re: Automated v. Semi-Automated v. Manual Reclaim
« Reply #9 on: March 21, 2016, 06:46:11 PM »
Thanks for the honest feedback Boris. That boggles the mind that the manufacturer would not recommend chemistry, seems like that goes hand in hand. 

I can see high eom stencils taking longer.  I bet it's hard for a machine using spray on emulsion remover to soften thicker stencils quickly enough, that just takes time even in the dip tank. 

I agree with you, high tech is no good if you put "low tech" workers on it.  I'm hoping we can modernize and have less workers as we grow but of higher quality overall.  With enough automation you could be looking at 1, maybe 2 good people supporting 2 autos with screen throughput from teardown to fresh, imaged screens and with very little drudgery to the work.   Additionally, I'm looking at renting or FMV leasing an automated unit so if it can't hack it the investment risk is minimal. 

Online Maxie

  • !!!
  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1311
Re: Automated v. Semi-Automated v. Manual Reclaim
« Reply #10 on: March 21, 2016, 08:46:59 PM »
Greg, how many screens can you process in a hour?
Ink removal, stencil removal and degrease.
Maxie Garb.
T Max Designs.
Silk Screen Printers
www.tmax.co.il

Offline GKitson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 720
  • Just another t-shirt guy
Re: Automated v. Semi-Automated v. Manual Reclaim
« Reply #11 on: March 22, 2016, 07:20:50 AM »
Greg, how many screens can you process in a hour?
Ink removal, stencil removal and degrease.

Using SATTI IR-26 and Er-2 in the dip tank starting with screens that have all excess useable ink & masking tape removed, 1 operator can easily maintain 20-22 screens per hour into a drying rack to be recoated.  Adding a second person exclusively removing ink on the table top and shuttling screens into the dip tank increased the throughput to 35-40.  The second person requires about 75% attention to ink removal and is also responsible for shuttling ranks of screens into coating area, bringing additional screens to reclaim and removing tape etc.  Added efficiency is achieved by having the reclaim techs switch positions throughout the course of the day.

This is a shift long average with normal breaks and a single operator can easily do 140-160 per shift with 2 people achieving 300 per shift on a regular basis.

In order to maintain these numbers with our system as demonstrated in the you tube video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRYLxEz3fd4 we re-charge  tank with 1 oz. ER-2 about every 100 screens and out tank is heated to maintain 85 degrees F.
Greg Kitson
Mind's Eye Graphics Inc.
260-724-2050

Offline jsheridan

  • !!!
  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2130
Re: Automated v. Semi-Automated v. Manual Reclaim
« Reply #12 on: March 23, 2016, 04:14:38 PM »
I see automation as a benefit for the reason that the manual labor associated with screen processing is an ergonomic and PPE nightmare.

I like button pushers who don't have to lift, twist, flip heavy things nor get soaking wet in their daily lives. I can't remember how many gloves and other PPE items I've had to use wear over the years just to clean a screen. Total mess.. we don't have to do that anymore.

Blacktop Graphics Screenprinting and Consulting Services

Online ebscreen

  • !!!
  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4215
Re: Automated v. Semi-Automated v. Manual Reclaim
« Reply #13 on: March 23, 2016, 05:09:57 PM »
I see automation as a benefit for the reason that the manual labor associated with screen processing is an ergonomic and PPE nightmare.


This is so very true and the main driving factor for why we would automate.

So far we've got one "meh" for a Grunig machine and several other "hell yeahs" for table style manual cleaning.

Can anyone else add to the list with their experiences? Personally I'd be interested to hear about the CCI and M&R machines
in the wild.