Stefan Trethan wrote:
>>that was clinging to the paper, but was still in it's unmelted, powdery
>>form, and hadn't been fused yet. I immediately ironed it to a board, and
>>with very little pressure it seemed to work very well. I'm wondering,
>>why not try to trick a laser printer into thinking its fuser is present
>>and up to temp when it's really been removed? That would give us toner
>>that perhaps wasn't as hard to transfer. I'm still experimenting...
> You really want a new office laser do you?
> i mean sending plastic through it ;-) .
>
> a) you still fuse the toner to the surface you print on with your iron,
> so it still has to release it easy.
>
> b) it may be hard to keep the toner from moving while placing it on the
> board.
>
> I'm not very sure that it is easier, but please keep experimenting..
> I would like to read about more results.
>
Yes you still have to get the toner up above the melt point, so
really shouldn't be much difference.
What really would make a difference is to have no sheet in between at
all. As in a direct laser print to the board. I have looked at the
idea, an insulation layer over the copper is all that's really needed,
so it'll hold the electrostatic image. Something that can be etched,
but that won't etch out too fast under the toner, or that the toner will
melt through some in fusing with pressure but won't just melt off onto
the fuser where there isn't toner. Plus it takes a straight through
printer and mods for the board thickness, but that's minor enough. Also
you have to be sure your edges and surface is smooth with no scratches
or you'll scratch the drum. Quite a bit of trouble to get it going when
the results from just ironing on are so good..
Alan