TSB
screen printing => General Screen Printing => Topic started by: Stinkhorn Press on March 16, 2017, 10:41:22 AM
-
We struggle to get a good opaque-enough UB white. What should we try? (none of us here have ever worked at any other shop so our biggest struggle is not knowing what we don't know – speak slowly and don't assume too much of what we ought to know...)
This is especially evident when printing athletic- white and top colors on darks. The bad solution is to revolve and print the UB white twice.
Ink – white is synergy poly, orange is wilflex epic (and epic super, but without a good UB the high opacity stuff makes no difference with orange).
Mesh – murakami S 150 UB, 225 top.
Printing on roughly 60% Jerzees 29M blend, 20% G2000, 20% fleece.
A semi-acceptable solution would be 2 white screens and 2 flashes on the press both before the top color, only going around once but still not a good solution.
-
We stir/mix Poly White on our Turnabout before any poly run. [Wilflex Top Score]
-
not clear - by athletic I mean chunky solid color artwork, not that it's on poly garments... we do print with poly ink, but poly ink from synergy works as a regular white ink as well...
-
Have you tried experimenting with a smoothing screen after the flash?
-
Whats your trap?
Squeegee selection?
pressure?
flash time?
Mesh tension?
etc...
I see lots of fibers coming through the print. That will kill opacity and make the print rough.
Also, when dealing with transparent color shades - and some orange inks/pms colors are much more transparent than we want - you will need to bite the bullet and do whats needed for a brighter under base...
-
Put an extra layer of emulsion on the ink side of the frame. Made a huge difference for us....
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
-
We've moved from 150S to 135S for spot color underbases and have seen a noticeable difference. I'm going to be ordering a few lower counts from Shurloc on our next order to try some testing as well.
I'd also second the roller/smoothing screen if you're not currently using one. And for certain top colors (like the ones in your photo), we often run either a PFP base or PFP 225S top (the latter offering a thinner final print) if that's what it takes to get the print to our standard.
-
We print a lot of 50/50 and poly. Our go to for a while was Versamax white from Onestroke. Rarely had any bleeding issues, but it didn't lay as flat as I'd like it to. My 2 standard whites are now Wilflex Epic Lava LB for the majority of what I print, and then for bad poly bleeders I use Epic Polywhite. Both work great. Depending on the artwork I try to use the 135-S. It gives you great coverage.
I've been a manual shop up until recently so everything we did was generally a pfpf. I'll probably do the same on the auto, but all the jobs on it so far have been 1 color on cotton so we'll see.
-
I'd like to know some of the questions Colin asked, most importantly what mesh counts are you running for everything, especially the UB. Squeegee blades are important in that they need to be sharp and a fairly soft duro, then work on printing the base as fast as possible. That will increase your opacity more than any other factor if the other parts of the system are solid. If you're using standard mesh counts then do yourself a favor and throw them away, for this type of printing it's especially important to print fast and thin thread allows you to do that. Standard mesh counts don't have the open area and restrict shearing speed to a joke.
-
recap of suggested tweaks:
Do more to pre-mix ink, get it flowing. (can do, really need to get equip to do this well)
Add smoothing screen post-flash. (I'm not totally clear on what that does?)
Add emulsion to squeegee side. (our screens are face and back coated for emulsion surface smoothness - and most of our prints have big fat UB print areas so more EOM will only make the edges slightly thicker)
Lower from 150 S down to 135 S (or lower). (working on this, not seeing much difference at 135, might try a thin thread 100...)
Try different white ink. (duh - as in we should have thought of this...)
print as fast as possible with the 'right' squeegee. (working on speed, working on squeegee knowledge - duro, bevel, edge...)
-
Whats your trap?
Squeegee selection?
pressure?
flash time?
Mesh tension?
etc...
I see lots of fibers coming through the print. That will kill opacity and make the print rough.
I'd like to know some of the questions Colin asked, most importantly what mesh counts are you running for everything, especially the UB. Squeegee blades are important in that they need to be sharp and a fairly soft duro, then work on printing the base as fast as possible. That will increase your opacity more than any other factor if the other parts of the system are solid. If you're using standard mesh counts then do yourself a favor and throw them away, for this type of printing it's especially important to print fast and thin thread allows you to do that. Standard mesh counts don't have the open area and restrict shearing speed to a joke.
trap - .75 point (from center, so half that)
squeegee on UB is usually Joe Clarke's single bevel (bevel edge print) hinged hard squeegee (should be double bevel, but we need to order a new one in)
squeegee on top is usually single duro basic blade unknown duro (green, hardish, came with press) that have maintained sharp edge
ub screen mesh is 135/150 thin thread
top screen mesh is 200/225 thin thread
pressure is RPM reported (which may not be applicable to other makes) UB white roughly 30, top color minimal 25 or lower (as much as it takes to clear and no more)
speed UB white 12-24 inch per second (adjusted upwards as the print progresses – possibly stirring beforehand would reduce this)
top color 20-25 inch per second
tension lowish, static screens with thin thread, not much recorded but probably 20-24 N
flash time 2.5 seconds if single stroking all colors, 1.5 seconds twice if double stroking any colors (thanks ALAN! We were waaaaay long on flashes – alan helped us figure out some stuff, but I probably never got back – the solution was new style bulbs, and chopping the legs in half (RPM flash sits in the screen holder))
-
Also, when dealing with transparent color shades - and some orange inks/pms colors are much more transparent than we want - you will need to bite the bullet and do whats needed for a brighter under base...
I'd also second the roller/smoothing screen if you're not currently using one. And for certain top colors (like the ones in your photo), we often run either a PFP base or PFP 225S top (the latter offering a thinner final print) if that's what it takes to get the print to our standard.
I've been a manual shop up until recently so everything we did was generally a pfpf. I'll probably do the same on the auto, but all the jobs on it so far have been 1 color on cotton so we'll see.
That's three votes for “certain colors” it's damn hard to do.
Anyone out there want to pipe up to claim that they consistently print:
large open area UB that is
opaque enough
once around the press to properly support
harder top colors (gold/yellow/orange)?
Our main local school's colors are Black/Orange/White so this is something that would pay dividends to learn how to do repeatably.
-
That's three votes for “certain colors” it's damn hard to do.
Anyone out there want to pipe up to claim that they consistently print:
large open area UB that is
opaque enough
once around the press to properly support
harder top colors (gold/yellow/orange)?
Our main local school's colors are Black/Orange/White so this is something that would pay dividends to learn how to do repeatably.
I think if you ran Union Maxopake as the top color on a 180S you'd probably get the coverage you're looking for. The print will be a bit heavier, but likely not noticeable by most customers.
-
Maxo's are good inks - BUT - It still depends on the tonal shade your customer is happy with.
Where we are at, our customers are fairly picky (living in the shadow of Nike - literally). So even with our C3 system and working on making a color as opaque as possible, while still maintaining the color space our customer wants..... we will occasionally need to print/flash/print either the base or the top color.
Tis' the world we live in here. Some printers only have to visit ;)
SMOOTHING SCREEN:
It is designed to smooth out your print by pressing down on hot ink with either a squeegee (lubricated by any ink/curable reducer/etc) or a roller squeegee. This happens - Right after - the flash. The ink still needs to be hot enough to be pliable for this to work. Your surface area will be MUCH smoother when done properly.
-
Ill say that with the G3 we have double stroked the base more the last month than we had the last 8 years combined but because I'm trying to print at 40"/sec and the G3 will still run at 750+/hr even double stroking. If I wasn't trying to push the limits with print speed we'd never double stroke or PFP a base unless the top color was a neon or flouro with opacity issues.
I've said it numerous times over the years that there seems to be this notion that the lower mesh counts are bad and put down too much ink yet the same shops will double stroke a 156 standard mesh and put down more ink than a single stroked 90/71.
-
... then work on printing the base as fast as possible. That will increase your opacity more than any other factor if the other parts of the system are solid. If you're using standard mesh counts then do yourself a favor and throw them away, for this type of printing it's especially important to print fast and thin thread allows you to do that. ...
(with everything setup right) faster print speed = more opacity
If I wasn't trying to push the limits with print speed we'd never double stroke or PFP a base unless the top color was a neon or flouro with opacity issues.
so why is your extra-super-fast resulting in a need for you to double stroke the UB?
Not trying to be an ass, but just not clear. I agree (more in theory for us) that (with everything setup right) faster print speed = more opacity.
I'm heartened to hear that there are shops that wouldn't stoop to PFP unless it's a very specific set of conditions.
It's also nice to know that most shops our speed are also stooping to PFP until we can improve our game. (it's more ok being poor if all your acquaintances are also poor heh)
-
... then work on printing the base as fast as possible. That will increase your opacity more than any other factor if the other parts of the system are solid. If you're using standard mesh counts then do yourself a favor and throw them away, for this type of printing it's especially important to print fast and thin thread allows you to do that. ...
(with everything setup right) faster print speed = more opacity
If I wasn't trying to push the limits with print speed we'd never double stroke or PFP a base unless the top color was a neon or flouro with opacity issues.
so why is your extra-super-fast resulting in a need for you to double stroke the UB?
Not trying to be an ass, but just not clear. I agree (more in theory for us) that (with everything setup right) faster print speed = more opacity.
I'm heartened to hear that there are shops that wouldn't stoop to PFP unless it's a very specific set of conditions.
It's also nice to know that most shops our speed are also stooping to PFP until we can improve our game. (it's more ok being poor if all your acquaintances are also poor heh)
Essentially I'm just doing what I always do and experimenting, documenting the results, comparing techniques. What I'm doing now is maxing the print stroke speed which seems to be around 40-45"/sec but rarely have I been able to get the ink to shear fully with a single stroke at that speed. The ink will fully shear/clear the stencil on the second stroke. Even though it's technically a double stroke, I've measured the ink deposit and in most instances it is virtually the same as a single stroke at slower speeds. The opacity is greater however, since more ink is on top of the garment. I'm able to lower the pressure a little bit and speed the print up a lot and both of those factors increase opacity. If I were on a press that couldn't run as fast then I'd never be messing around with this technique. At the end of the day we need to be efficient/fast and our results with single stroking were fantastic, but when I have an opportunity to increase print quality and maintain efficiency, I will at least explore the methods.
Whenever I get on these new techniques I implement them for weeks at a time, at the very least. I don't think you can fully understand or get enough info on whether something works just trying it once or twice (unless it's just a disaster of an idea/technique). A few weeks from now I may come to the conclusion that even double stroking at 40"/sec isn't doing as well for us as a single stroke at 30"/sec, or 20"/sec, that's what I'm trying to figure out and I don't mind sharing that with my buddies. It might make me look bad in some instances if I share an idea that is a total failure, but I don't mind. For every 10 bad ideas or techniques I try a few of them turn out great and boost our efficiency.
Double stroking here and there, running revolver mode once or twice a week probably won't negatively affect most shops, but I know if we had to do those things regularly then it would hurt us badly. I've shared some of our numbers in the past and I always hate doing it because it looks like bragging, but I don't know how else to share how the things we talk about here impact a shop's performance, so flame away behind the scenes if it pleases you. We do embroidery for other screen printing shops and I speak with those shops frequently and they like to come over and look around occasionally, so I get to know what our local competitors are struggling with because they'll ask me what or how we do something. I know a shop that has very similar shop setup to ours but they were struggling to do 15 setups a day on both presses combined, and they have 7-8 production employees. They've since gone CTS and should at least double that 15 and be doing 15 per press soon. But guess what? They are one of the most successful shops in the area because they print for some REALLY well known people and he ain't shy about charging for his work. They do roughly 25% more volume than we do, but we're still a film shop, with virtually identical presses and only 3 production employees (myself included in that "3"). We do things way differently across the entire spectrum and an example of that would be that only recently have they ditched canned spray tack. They were using several cases of spray tack per month and it took him 4 to 5 tries over 5 years to get his production staff to use the waterbased pallet tack. They do things the old school way for the most part. Thin thread mesh? No way. Fancy squeegee blades? Nope. But they end up doing some really good work, lots of spot process stuff. I think they are one of the most respected shops in the area but production efficiency isn't in the same ballpark as ours. I only say these things to try and compare/contrast two shops with identical equipment, almost identical customers, in the same region, but vastly different production efficiency. I think now that they are CTS, they should take a giant leap forward and should see the types of setups per day as we have, but they still have dozens of things they could improve on.
-
thanks alan. peering into your mind is always an adventure.
what are you doing with your flood? is a hard fill a goal/approachable/worth it in your opinion?
or have you left the flood to mostly just scooting the ink to the front of the print?
-
thanks alan. peering into your mind is always an adventure.
what are you doing with your flood? is a hard fill a goal/approachable/worth it in your opinion?
or have you left the flood to mostly just scooting the ink to the front of the print?
HARD flood, essentially a fill stroke where I'm attempting to fill the "tunnels" with ink so that shearing becomes easier (less pressure, faster print speeds). I had to stop using a fill stroke on the RPM on a bunch of heads a year or so ago due to the flood chopper coming down crooked and busting screens, and we definitely had to increase the print pressure and slow things down on those heads that had the biggest issues. If I had to put a number on it I'd say we use 20-25% more pressure with a light flood stroke and our print speeds are slower by 30-40%, depending on the mesh count.
You've got the perfect press to experiment with some of these techniques and I beg you to get a fairly open design with a good bit of ink deposit, then adjust your settings so that you print white at 4"/sec with light pressure, then do a half-dozen test prints. Then bump up the print speed to 20"/sec while adding enough pressure (you might go from 20psi at 4"/sec to 35psi at 20"/sec, but don't worry about it) and do another set of test prints, then put the prints side by side. I've done this numerous times over the last few years to show new employees and workshop attendees how important speed was, and the differences are VERY noticeable. If someone can't see the opacity changes then they didn't do it right, because it's very drastic.
-
Is it true that the dia of the mesh threads matter. Less thread dis more in desposited. If possible put a stand alone flash, and if yourt press is programable to start printing on the last head and load and un load on the next to laast head, you could speed up the amt per hr. Most arms can be simplly removed, it depends on how many pcs to print.
also, a penny or paint stick munder the first screen for a little more off contact might help with the fuzzies.