Hi john,
That would be a good test, but it won't show me much with the crude
tests I am doing. It really needs to be tested on an actual
printer. The thickness of the ink is a critcal part in this and I
can't apply an even film with what I have to work with. So, with an
uneven film of ink, the results at best will be "uneven" ;-)
Chris
--- In
Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, John Popelish <jpopelish@...>
wrote:
>
> lcdpublishing wrote:
> > Well, it looks to me like someone with an epson printer that has
> > durabrite ink has to give this a go.
> >
> > The ink is resisting the ferric chloride for a while. Then, it
> > starts to breakdown and the etchant starts to eat away at the
> > copper. So, it does appear to work for a while.
> >
> > I certainly can read my name from the previous etch test.
However,
> > I also drew a box and some lines around my name with a sharpie.
> > When I run my finger over the board, I can easily tell the
> > difference in thickness of the copper. The areas that were
masked
> > with the sharpie are much thicker copper than with the ink.
> >
> > The problem with my tests is that I have no way to consistantly
> > control the application thickness (Film thickness) of the ink.
So,
> > in areas where the ink is thick, it protects good - I suspect.
This
> > also appears to be the case where I tried another "Flood fill"
> > area. Some areas resisted well, others etched through like
there
> > was nothing there.
> >
> > So, I really think the next step is for someone to try it on an
ink
> > jet printer. that will provide consistant thickness of ink and
of
> > course, something accurate to see after the etching.
> >
> > that's all I got folks.
>
> Might you try baking the Durabrite in a warm oven or under a lamp
for
> a while? It might take a while for the ink to cure into a tough
solid.
>