TSB

screen printing => Equipment => DIY - From master engineered marvels to cobbled together jury-rigged or Jerry-built junk! => Topic started by: mimosatexas on April 07, 2014, 10:11:24 PM

Title: Most UV bang for your buck?
Post by: mimosatexas on April 07, 2014, 10:11:24 PM
Stripping it down to just the bare essentials of a bulb outputting UV in the proper spectrum, what is the best bang for your buck?

Essentially, I'm looking for whatever weird chinese knockoff unbranded metal halide bulb would be the best "deal".

I don't care about an integrator, or shutter vs instant on, etc.  All I am looking for is the absolute most powerful light source for the lowest cost that can produce a consistent amount of UV in a specific time (unlike the sun).  Any ideas?
Title: Re: Most UV bang for your buck?
Post by: sben763 on April 07, 2014, 11:40:04 PM
http://www.bulbamerica.com/ushio-mhl-1000-1-blacklight-metal-halide-bulb.html. (http://www.bulbamerica.com/ushio-mhl-1000-1-blacklight-metal-halide-bulb.html.) This is what I am using. Has the correct spectrum for photopolymer. I took a old national exposure unit built a manual metal  shutter and a fan for the bulb.
Title: Re: Most UV bang for your buck?
Post by: mimosatexas on April 08, 2014, 12:58:44 AM
Thanks for the link. Finding 1k units for dirt cheap is pretty easy. I was hoping someone might have a source for 3k or 5k bulbs and ballasts.
Title: Re: Most UV bang for your buck?
Post by: sben763 on April 08, 2014, 08:35:27 AM
I can find 3K and 5k bulbs.  Ushio has plenty but no one seems to have the ballast.  I have called several light supply companies.  I was wondering if they could be hooked in parallel. 

The biggest I have found is 1500w and 2000w. I would be interested if anyone has a source for a 3000w or 5000w ballast.

http://www.bulbamerica.com/ushio-mhl-261l-5000w-250v-photo-polymer-uv-curing-metal-halide-lamp.html (http://www.bulbamerica.com/ushio-mhl-261l-5000w-250v-photo-polymer-uv-curing-metal-halide-lamp.html)

Here is a 5000w.
Title: Re: Most UV bang for your buck?
Post by: IntegrityShirts on April 08, 2014, 10:14:18 AM
I can find 3K and 5k bulbs.  Ushio has plenty but no one seems to have the ballast.  I have called several light supply companies.  I was wondering if they could be hooked in parallel. 

The biggest I have found is 1500w and 2000w. I would be interested if anyone has a source for a 3000w or 5000w ballast.

[url]http://www.bulbamerica.com/ushio-mhl-261l-5000w-250v-photo-polymer-uv-curing-metal-halide-lamp.html[/url] ([url]http://www.bulbamerica.com/ushio-mhl-261l-5000w-250v-photo-polymer-uv-curing-metal-halide-lamp.html[/url])

Here is a 5000w.


Olec is a good source of power for 5k bulbs
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Olec-Olite-AL-53-UV-light-Hood-power-Supply-/281295563060?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item417e85a934 (http://www.ebay.com/itm/Olec-Olite-AL-53-UV-light-Hood-power-Supply-/281295563060?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item417e85a934)
Title: Re: Most UV bang for your buck?
Post by: mimosatexas on April 08, 2014, 10:32:00 AM
that bulb looks perfect.  I have been googling for ballasts without luck all morning.
Title: Re: Most UV bang for your buck?
Post by: StuJohnston on April 08, 2014, 10:37:53 AM
Out of curiosity, I checked the local electrical supplier for ballasts and the  highest they have is 1000W. I am pretty sure that ballasts over a kW like what we use are pretty specialized. I also took a look at Alibaba http://www.alibaba.com/trade/search?fsb=y&IndexArea=product_en&CatId=&SearchText=5kw+lamp+ballast (http://www.alibaba.com/trade/search?fsb=y&IndexArea=product_en&CatId=&SearchText=5kw+lamp+ballast)
Title: Re: Most UV bang for your buck?
Post by: IntegrityShirts on April 08, 2014, 10:40:02 AM
that bulb looks perfect.  I have been googling for ballasts without luck all morning.

Olec al-53 is the power supply for that bulb,  with I think the 1260/1262 lamp headt.  You can find them used all over the place for under $500. They weigh about 150-200lbs though so shipping hurts.
Title: Re: Most UV bang for your buck?
Post by: mimosatexas on April 08, 2014, 10:44:37 AM
The problem I see with buying an AL53 is it is branded and sold as a screen printing exposure system, and is priced at a premium as a result.  New they run $4K and include a bunch of extras.  Replacement bulbs from Douthitt cost twice what comparable bulbs cost from other sources, though obviously the build quality may be different.

The used one you linked is being sold "as is" and has not been tested.  The cheapest one that is being sold as tested and functional is $700.  I guess I just can't understand why a new ballast and power supply for a 1000W can be had for under $100, but a 5000w is 40 times as expensive new or 7 times as expensive used.
Title: Re: Most UV bang for your buck?
Post by: IntegrityShirts on April 08, 2014, 11:27:06 AM
I think I bought my AL53 for about $400 shipped. The motorized shutter didn't work on it, hour or so of tracing with a multimeter on the main board found a little ice cub relay was dead. Easy fix.

I'm just suggesting that these 5kw olec units are plentiful in the used market, coupled with a used light integrator and you have a full on professional 5kw exposure/timer control for under $600-800.  Add a diy vacuum blanket/glass/frame and you're done.  Even if you find the 5kw ballast you'll have to manually operate a shutter and start a stopwatch or something with each exposure. That's exactly what I did with a 1000w grow lamp prior to upgrading to the olec. It was a pain in the butt haha. Now I have possibly the most ugly exposure unit in existence, but it works well.
Title: Re: Most UV bang for your buck?
Post by: ScreenFoo on April 08, 2014, 02:01:04 PM
IMHO, an AL-53 in good shape is worth at least ten times what a 1k warehouse light is worth, not only are you looking at the integrator and cell interface as well as the shutter, but they are very efficient in the spectrum you need.

FWIW, if a thousand sounds like a lot, they retail for five...

Title: Re: Most UV bang for your buck?
Post by: Inkworks on April 08, 2014, 02:20:47 PM
Thanks for the link. Finding 1k units for dirt cheap is pretty easy. I was hoping someone might have a source for 3k or 5k bulbs and ballasts.


Nuarc Flip-top plate makers, come with 3000 or 6000 watt instant start MH. with built in integrator, I've seen 3K go for a couple of hundred, and 6K go for under $500.

3K
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Nuarc-FT26V3UP-KM-Ultra-Plus-Flip-Top-Platemaker-/171283159511?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item27e14599d7 (http://www.ebay.com/itm/Nuarc-FT26V3UP-KM-Ultra-Plus-Flip-Top-Platemaker-/171283159511?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item27e14599d7)

6K
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Nuarc-FT-40V6UP-2-sided-Platemaker-Burner-/271447341545?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3f3385b9e9 (http://www.ebay.com/itm/Nuarc-FT-40V6UP-2-sided-Platemaker-Burner-/271447341545?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3f3385b9e9)

Of course if you buy the 6K, you're better off just modifying the vacuum frame to accept a screen, It should fit a 23 x 31 without any trouble. I have a full write-up on here already.
Title: Re: Most UV bang for your buck?
Post by: Inkworks on April 08, 2014, 02:24:04 PM
ps: I've been using my 3K unit for 12 years with the same bulb, and the bulb was used when we got it, it still smokes my 8K Olec for exposure times due to the light being so close to the screens.

In fact it's exposure times were in line with the fastest times posted for the LED units, and I'm using Diazo emulsion with a med exposure time. (Autotype 8000)
Title: Re: Most UV bang for your buck?
Post by: mimosatexas on April 08, 2014, 02:39:05 PM
Nice finds!  I wish I was in Virginia :D

Nothing similar within Texas though based on my searching.

I am looking for just the light as I plan on using it for exposing huge frames for all over printing and sign printing among other things.  Some of the art is a good 4 feet across, so the light will be 6 feet away, and a 1k bulb takes a hell of a long time at that distance, plus the glass will be thicker than my other unit.

My 1k diy MH unit with vacuum top is working like a champ already (at least compared to the tube unit I built before) and I actually had to lower the light almost to the ground to make the exposure slow enough that I can comfortably washout a screen, squeegee it, check it for issues, set it on the dry rack, and walk back to the unit in time to pop the shutter.  It was exposing a little too fast at 1.5x the diagonal of my art.  I also removed the reflector to see if it cut down on undercutting due to spreading the light, replacing it with matte black instead.  So far it does seem to have helped.  I can hold every single dot on a 45 lpi film from my 1400, but I still feel like I am losing too much when I try 55 lpi.  Not sure what to do about that exactly.  Glass is 1/4", film is standard wp inkjet, 1400 is printing without a rip, but I have played with all the settings and it is basically putting down as much ink as the film will accept without it starting to blur and oversaturate.  full exposure to a hard 7 at 31" from the glass on a 2/1 coated 160 is just shy of 2 minutes.

Out of curiosity, what exactly makes a bulb instant on vs requiring a warmup time?  Is it the ballast, power supply, or the bulb itself or the combination?
Title: Re: Most UV bang for your buck?
Post by: Inkworks on April 08, 2014, 02:54:39 PM
Basically it doesn't have a shutter, it still has a short warm-up time, maybe taking 20 seconds to hit full brightness from dead-cold, subsequent exposures with a warm bulb means even less warm-up.

My 8K Olec is 4.5' away from the surface of the screens. going to 6' would probably double exposure times.

I'm not sure what the electronics or bulb differences are.

I buy used stuff from all over N.A. I'm in BC Canada, so I know shipping expenses all too well. You should be able to get that shipped for ~$300, maybe less, I have a great US freight broker if you need it. A 6K bulb, reflector, ballast, integrator, and vacuum pump for ~$500 landed is a heck of a deal i.m.o. My 8K light source was over $2000 used. My vacuum frame was a good deal though , traded $200 worth of printing for a 4' x 6' wall mount unit in good shape.
Title: Re: Most UV bang for your buck?
Post by: ABuffington on April 08, 2014, 03:09:52 PM
The Histogram of a bulb says it all.  If you don't know the histogram for any bulb you are accepting a salesman's pitch, if he doesn't have a histogram of the lamp he either doesn't know what works, or he is hiding the following.  There is no cheap way to make a metal halide bulb.  The Original Equipment will have a far better histogram showing the UV output spectrum and the amplitude in between.  Cheap metal halides skimp on the expensive precious metals used in the lamp.  These precious metals are what makes the UV spectrum.  The cheaper the bulb, the less precious metals are used, or sometimes not as many are used to get the price down.  Bulb life is generally shorter. Wattage is important, so is the histogram of the bulb you are buying.  An  8k Olec with an L-1282 bulb has one of the best histograms going.  This bulb will expose both diazo and pure photopolymers completely since they like different wavelength spikes to expose well.  There is much more than meets the eye in exposure lamp construction than just ballasts and any old UV lamp, even if they are high wattage.  I personally would use OEM bulbs for longer life with stronger histograms of UV output. 
Title: Re: Most UV bang for your buck?
Post by: mimosatexas on April 08, 2014, 03:25:11 PM
I agree with the concept of getting the best equipment when you are trying to optimize your processes. 

I honestly don't care about that for this particular application.  I don't do a ton of oversized stuff, but enough to make getting a more powerful lamp worth it if the cost is $500 or so.  I know literally nothing about the 1k MH I use everyday, except that I got it from Homer and he said it worked and was extremely generous about it.  That said, it works fine and I haven't seen a need to optimize that part of my process again...yet.

It looks like finding a fliptop platemaker is the way to go, and if it has broken components that aren't related to the lightsource itself, all the better deal-wise.  I still find it hard to believe you can't source just a ballast/powersupply by itself from some random cheapo manufacturer.
Title: Re: Most UV bang for your buck?
Post by: IntegrityShirts on April 09, 2014, 10:12:06 AM
Along the same lines of most bang for the buck UV. Has anyone seriously thought about a DIY LED exposure unit? You can get LEDs in the 365-395nm range pretty darn cheaply in lower wattages. Higher power ones are more expensive but still not too bad. Won't really help you mimosa for large format exposure, but could be a cool test/retrofit for people with tube units.
Title: Re: Most UV bang for your buck?
Post by: tonypep on April 09, 2014, 10:21:47 AM
BTW I believe the term is Jerry-Rigged although so many use Jury Rigged by now they are synonomous.
Filed under who cares.
Title: Re: Most UV bang for your buck?
Post by: Frog on April 09, 2014, 10:42:23 AM
BTW I believe the term is Jerry-Rigged although so many use Jury Rigged by now they are synonomous.
Filed under who cares.

You sir, are obviously not a 250 year old sailor!
Most word freaks have found that "jerry-rigged", though popular, is actually the bastard child of "jury-rigged" (dating back to sailors making makeshift repairs in the late 1700's) and   "jerry-built", commonly understood to mean to be made cheaply or shoddy, and only traced to 1868. Interestingly, "jerry-rigged" according to some, can only be traced back to 1959.

For our purposes here, we welcome both meanings, and the board name has been modified to reflect this.
Title: Re: Most UV bang for your buck?
Post by: sben763 on April 09, 2014, 11:16:22 AM
Along the same lines of most bang for the buck UV. Has anyone seriously thought about a DIY LED exposure unit? You can get LEDs in the 365-395nm range pretty darn cheaply in lower wattages. Higher power ones are more expensive but still not too bad. Won't really help you mimosa for large format exposure, but could be a cool test/retrofit for people with tube units.

Not only thought about I have done it. It requires a bunch of LEDs. You can get 1-3watt LEDs in the correct spectrum from many places but I choose to buy directly from china. I didn't use enough LEDs so my results were very similar to a florescent blacklight exposure unit.  I gave the entire setup to another guy who is still currently using them.   

I have a supplier suppose to call me back about 3000-5000 watt ballast.

Title: Re: Most UV bang for your buck?
Post by: IntegrityShirts on April 17, 2014, 01:21:16 PM
Along the same lines of most bang for the buck UV. Has anyone seriously thought about a DIY LED exposure unit? You can get LEDs in the 365-395nm range pretty darn cheaply in lower wattages. Higher power ones are more expensive but still not too bad. Won't really help you mimosa for large format exposure, but could be a cool test/retrofit for people with tube units.

Not only thought about I have done it. It requires a bunch of LEDs. You can get 1-3watt LEDs in the correct spectrum from many places but I choose to buy directly from china. I didn't use enough LEDs so my results were very similar to a florescent blacklight exposure unit.  I gave the entire setup to another guy who is still currently using them.   

I have a supplier suppose to call me back about 3000-5000 watt ballast.

Cool! How many was not enough, exactly? I might just tackle this as a project.  Would you suggest covering the whole under glass area with leds? What about distance from LED to glass? Maybe I should start a new thread.  8)
Title: Re: Most UV bang for your buck?
Post by: ZooCity on April 17, 2014, 03:16:15 PM
A used AL-53 setup is probably the most bang for the buck.  There are still units out there that were originally in service as plate makers (all computer to plate now) and for photography.  We have two complete units and, including parts/repairs, total cost is probably barely $1k over the 6 years or so we've ran them.  Integrators can be tougher to find sometimes but you'll see 'em on ebay if patient.

Alan is on the money with bulb quality for halides.  However, don't make the mistake I did last year and scoop up an OEM Olec bulb on ebay for cheap, they appear to have a shelf life and that "deal" I got on an Olec lamp was a waste of a hundred fifty bucks or whatever I paid.  Our knockoff from Caprock, though probably inferior in the heavy metals, was fresh and performed much better than the stale Olec from ebay.  The Caprock bulbs have actually done well for us.  At the same time, you're looking at maybe 1-3 bulbs/year for a shop, depending of course so that's not much more to invest for the spectral quality of an Olec bulb over the course of a year.
Title: Re: Most UV bang for your buck?
Post by: ABuffington on April 17, 2014, 04:39:31 PM
While LED is becoming more and more popular I think we need to step back and look at the physics involved here.  The Histogram, or the amplitude of specific wavelengths, (notice wavelengths is plural here) is what creates the exposure.  Specifically from 350/380 nanometers to 420 as well as the area in between these spikes and to the left and right of the spikes.  A histogram is the only way of knowing if your lamp will expose a screen well.  I can image with a 60 watt incandescent bulb if I leave it on the screen overnight, but did I expose the emulsion or just image the emulsion?  Exposure and image are two very different things.  Just shooting for an image does not mean it will be durable on press, especially with water base and discharge and HSA inks.  The key is to cross link as much of the sensitizer with the emulsion components using as much light as possible with the strongest multi-spectral light.  It takes energy, lots of it, in specific wavelengths to really expose the emulsion.  Look at it like gas engines.  A lawn mower is a gas engine, as is a 4/cylinder engine, as is an 8 cylinder engine.  Don't expect a lawn mower engine to do the work of a V8.  If you have an automatic and print either water base, discharge, or HSA and your run lengths are decent, you will get non stop production from a strong high wattage lamp with a fresh multi-sprectral bulb.  Yes you can use images on plastisol, but pinholes, loss of halftones and wear through can all be fixed with strong multi spectral light.  LED's are uni spectral mostly, with some multi-spectral units out there.  Note the lamps have chaotic light (undercuts fine details, especially ink jet films with low d-max) and they are the equivalent by inverse square law about the strength of a 1000 watt at 42 inches with a weak histogram of mostly one spike in one wavelength. There is a place for them in short run plastisol and with hardening short run wb or discharge.  But if I was running a multi auto shop I want bullet proof screens, non stop production, cause I know that's the only way I can compete price wise with the competition.  Drop 50-60 units per hour due to stencil breakdown fix its and the profit margin really takes a hit.  After all if you are an owner of the shop, you only get paid on what's left over and to maximize that profit I have found strong screens yield a better paycheck.  For DIY its all about not emptying the bank for something you can make yourself.   We used the sun when we had 4 autos before getting an 8k olec, the sun is not a consistent light source, and only good for 4-5 hours a day, but talk about a cheap exposure unit!  Last time I had the guts to put my light meter out there it was at 23,000 watts at noon and I had to pull the meter out of the sun for fear of damaging the sensor.  If you are in the north, get a good exposure unit, in the south the sun is super strong in summer.