| previous by date | index | next by date |
| previous in topic | topic list | next in topic |
Hi Epa,
I'm a beginner to this but recently made my first perfect PCB using the UV method. Tried the toner transfer several times and I want nothing to do with it. I don't like hit and miss success methods. I think a few have repeatable success but I don't want all the headaches of getting there.
My UV box is a girls nail curer which I got for $22. Lamps are 365nm, perfect. I bought a second nail curer and I'll be pulling all the guts out making a better box.
Transparency is INKJET sticky label sheet (thick because it's also got the backing), but there are much better alternatives from screen printing suppliers, and somewhere on the forum there's various mentions of purpose made inkjet transparencies for photo positives. Forgot the names of them.
There are high opaqueness inkjet inks also available from screenprinting suppliers. If you can dedicate an inkjet printer to PCB making you could fill all cartridges with this ink.
You have to get to know your inkjet printer and which driver settings pump out the most ink. If using the printers standard ink them some say pigment ink blocks UV better than dye ink (I don't know) so the model of printer may or may not use pigment ink.
From what I've studied, forget laser printers for an opaque photo positive.
If your tracks, etc are not too fine you can easily get away with stacking more than one transparency on top of the other to get the opacity. I did this on my last board and still got nice sharp results.
My inkjet is an Epson TX810FW and does not print particularly dense, but with two transparenies stacked, I increased the UV exposure time from the max recommended of 90 sec to 120 sec and did not get any overexposure.
I extended the developing time to "test" if the photoresist would dissolve but it held firm indicating no UV exposure where the printed part of the photo positive was.
Etched in 5 mins with very old ammonium persulphate and perfect crisp results.
Despite great success, there are improvements I can make:
Buy the proper high opacity ink and dedicate a printer to PCBs. Fill all cartridges with this ink.
Rip software (if the printer is supported) to increase ink density. $500 for that so I'll probably never do it.
Best quality inkjet photo positive transparencies designed specifically for the purpose.
The above should allow me to use just one transparency instead of two stacked and get better edge resolution on tracks.
UV light source further away and directly overhead so light hits the board more perpendicular, once again helping increase track edge sharpness.
Vacuum system to pull the transparency hard against the board at every point ensuring no UV gets under side of ink prints. Youtube has various ideas for creating a vacuum using old fridge compressors, car tyre compressors, etc.
---In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, <palciatore@...> wrote:A recent thread that was a thinly disguised ad has brought back to my mind the basic reason why I joined this group and several others. I have been mostly lurking on all of these boards trying to pick up the answers that I need.
I have made PCBs at home decades before the present and the process was relatively painless and inexpensive. These were the days before PCs, Gerber files, and the internet. I took a sheet of drafting media and pasted on pads and tape to form the layout. I took that manual drawing to a place with a copy camera and got a high contrast negative made from it. Then that negative was used with a sensitized board to make a board. Today this process is no longer possible. Places with copy cameras are no longer in every or even any city. The drafting aids are hard to impossible to find. Etc. so be it. Life moves on.
So I am looking for a new way to make prototype boards, preferably in quantities of one. And that is why I am here. But it seems to me that every present day alternative has it's own problems and pitfalls. And when I move from prototype to a production run, most or all of the effort I put out for the prototype board is not applicable for a larger order because I must use another supplier.
There are on-line places who specialize in small orders and who supply software for your use, but they are not mutually compatible and they do not have good pricing for orders of one to three boards as well as for larger orders like 50 or more boards. One place may be good for three prototype boards but then they charge too much for larger orders. Another may have nice prices for larger orders but they will soak you if you need two or more prototype orders to develop the design. And if you have to use two or more services you will have to do all the work of laying out the board over for each one. It seems like you are going to pay many hundreds of dollars to develop a working design.
If you use home methods to make the prototype boards you are up against another set of problems. From the conversations here and on other boards, there are problems with almost every present-day, home process. You can not just directly print a negative or positive because the density of most printers is not sufficient to guarantee no holes or light spots in it. If you use toner transfer that also has problems. Modify a printer to print directly on the copper? Well, it is not supposed to work, but some say that it does. Etc., etc., etc.
I am presently working on two projects and need to make or have made some prototype boards. One can use perf-board and point-to-point wiring but the other uses small surface mount parts and needs a foil heat sync and two layers so it will probably require a real PCB for even the first prototype. It may need three or more revisions before it is complete. I am really puzzling over that one. I am up to several hundred dollars if I have the prototype boards made by others. But I would still need several hundred dollars of printer and other supplies if I do it at home.
Back to the other thread. That company was heavily criticized for posting a "free" ad here. So, they are trying to advertise an inexpensive way to get a few boards made and the general thought is that this is a bad thing. From their point of view, the alternative is to use PAID ads. And who pays for those ads? They do. Or is it, "They do?" Actually, ad costs are factored in to the price of the goods or services so it is the customer who pays. I know this because I am constantly looking for ways to advertise my own creations without making them too expensive for anybody to buy. As a customer of these services, I do NOT object to an OCCASIONAL free ad if it helps to keep their prices down. Frankly, I think boards like this one should allow occasional free ads that are RELATED to the main topic of conversation. By "occasional" I do not mean daily or even weekly, slick messages that are obviously created by a professional creator. I mean monthly or less and just a message with one or two sentences describing the services available. Am I out of line here? I think that would be a valuable service to all the members here. I mean, am I the only one who spends as much time reading the ads in magazines as in reading the articles. Heck, some printed magazines that you pay $5 to $10 a copy for have degenerated to publishing articles that are thinly disguised advertisements for a product.