Homebrew PCBs

I would suspect that you would be better off finding/using a UV 
cured Ink.  My large HP Printer (24" wide) uses UV cured ink but 
being a big and expensive printer, I have not yet had the courage to 
try and run a PCB through it.

With that system, if I understand it correctly, the print head puts 
the ink on the paper, and next to the print head is a UV light 
source that cures it instantly.  

Some day I would like get the guts up to run a PCB through it, but 
that won't happen anytime soon I am afraid.

Just some thoughts.

Chris



--- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, David Cureton <yahoo@...> 
wrote:
>
> Hi Myc Holmes,
>     Based on your research chemist background, maybe we can 
utilize your 
> experience in that regard.
> I have been racking my brain tryng to think of chemicals that may 
be 
> suitable as an ink replacement for printing PCB etch resist.
> 
> I am thinking that a two part ink similar to an epoxy  would be 
the 
> best.  My C88 printer  has 120 black jets and 179 jets for the 
colours.
> 
> Therefore if we can work out a two part ink then the black jets 
could 
> lay down PART A with the remaining colour jets laying down the 
PART B to 
> set
> it.
> 
> Naturally these substances would need to have a similar 
> physical/chemical properties as the inks which the printer is 
supposed 
> to use and most likely need to have a fairly neutral pH.
> 
> Any ideas?
> 
> Cheers,
> David
> 
> 
> Myc Holmes wrote:
> 
> >Hi Voltan,
> >
> >First of all, I congratulate you on a great idea and the work  
cleverness
> >that have made it work for you.. I agree, a 99% reliability rate 
is not
> >needed, just somewhat equal to Toner Transfer.
> >
> >As part of my research chemist background, I find it is important 
to
> >identify and document all the details for repeatable results.  
The key is in
> >the details.
> >
> >I've been following your work and am trying to repeat it. It is 
frustrating
> >when it fails and  appears that the process has been duplicated. 
Until just
> >recently, the use of Brake Fluid to reduce surface tension and 
now the fact
> >3 sets of nozzles / cartridges are being used to correct coverage 
problems
> >has been published. It is very normal that some details the you 
just  take
> >for granted are especially important and need to be mentioned.
> >
> >These are the missed details that slow down the progress by 
others. After
> >all, it has been 4 months since your original post and no one yet 
has
> >successfully duplicated your results.
> >
> >It could be similar to Toner Transfer, where apparently minor 
variations
> >have a major impact.
> >
> >Again, I apologize if it appears that I am disparaging you 
efforts, but I am
> >trying to get a grasp on all the details to be able to repeat 
them.
> >
> >Myc
> >
> >On 7/24/06, Volkan Sahin <vsahin@...> wrote:
> >  
> >
> >>   I didn't understand you reliability question, if possible 
please
> >>explain a little bit more, what are your reliability criteria? 
Do you mean
> >>successful repeatability or reliable as TT :)? Please don't ask 
me to have
> >>99% success rate.
> >>
> >>I could be able print on pcb without any failure, it may be 
because of the
> >>printer that I am using. The main thing is, board needs to be 
clean, free of
> >>finger print, dust, and grease like required in TT process and 
you need to
> >>use as many colors as possible to decrease the effects of 
clogged nozzle. I
> >>am always using 3 colors. I didn't do 100 pcbs with this 
technique but I can
> >>say that, at least for me, success rate is much higher than TT. 
If someone
> >>plans to do double layer PCB with CNC drill or applying solder 
resist then
> >>there is no chance to do it with TT, either he needs to use 
photo-resist
> >>/dry-film or direct inkjet.
> >>The curing process is the key for direct printing, you need to 
cure it
> >>until seeing some smoke on pcb, ink color becomes much darker 
and copper
> >>will be oxidized. I think after a few trials you will understand 
what I
> >>mean.
> >>Good luck,
> >>Volkan
> >>
> >>....successfully and reliably repeated. We have only heard from 
Voltan
> >>that it is do-able, but nothing about the
> >>
> >>reliability. From Stefan's posts, his trials show a 
repeatability problem.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >
> >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> >Be sure to visit the group home and check for new Links, Files, 
and Photos:
> >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Homebrew_PCBs
> >
> >If Files or Photos are running short of space, post them here:
> >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Homebrew_PCBs_Archives/ 
> >Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> > 
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 
> > ** ACCEPT: CRM114 PASS Markovian Matcher ** 
> >CLASSIFY succeeds; success probability: 1.0000  pR: 43.8618
> >Best match to file #0 (nonspam.css) prob: 1.0000  pR: 43.8618  
> >Total features in input file: 6086
> >#0 (nonspam.css): features: 1603168, hits: 161233, prob: 
1.00e+00, pR:  43.86 
> >#1 (spam.css): features: 797120, hits: 122054, prob: 1.37e-44, 
pR: -43.86 
> > 
> >-=-Extra Stuff-=-
> >
> >  From sentto-4505361-15314-1153763115-yahoo=dcureton.com@... Tue 
Jul 25 03:45:23 2006
> >Return-path: <sentto-4505361-15314-1153763115-
yahoo=dcureton.com@...>
> >Envelope-to: yahoo@...
> >Delivery-date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 03:45:23 +1000
> >Received: from n24c.bullet.sc5.yahoo.com ([66.163.187.215])
> >	by whitetail with smtp (Exim 4.62)
> >	(envelope-from <sentto-4505361-15314-1153763115-
yahoo=dcureton.com@...>)
> >	id 1G54Ud-0007hS-7T
> >	for yahoo@...; Tue, 25 Jul 2006 03:45:23 +1000
> >Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys
> >DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=lima; 
d=yahoogroups.com;
> >
	b=Pt1k+BGHxukS6bww+cmX5khJ1DSOUOXg9NhKvQpCkAMCeo3QyDWhGVA8uc8
1jn1G1N8SotZxEFAqzfzhAv7WYJLWeUVDFVl2mbFXIDPwEZBf4Y0uM+0nRO9Y9br8THkK
;
> >Received: from [66.163.187.123] by n24.bullet.sc5.yahoo.com with 
NNFMP; 24 Jul 2006 17:45:15 -0000
> >Received: from [66.218.69.3] by t4.bullet.sc5.yahoo.com with 
NNFMP; 24 Jul 2006 17:45:15 -0000
> >Received: from [66.218.67.96] by t3.bullet.scd.yahoo.com with 
NNFMP; 24 Jul 2006 17:45:15 -0000
> >X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: groups-email
> >X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 4505361-m15314
> >X-Sender: mycroft2152y@...
> >X-Apparently-To: Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com
> >Received: (qmail 69678 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2006 
17:44:21 -0000
> >Received: from unknown (66.218.67.33)
> >  by m39.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 24 Jul 2006 17:44:21 -0000
> >Received: from unknown (HELO nf-out-0910.google.com) 
(64.233.182.190)
> >  by mta7.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 24 Jul 2006 17:44:20 -0000
> >Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id k27so1035398nfc
> >        for <Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com>; Mon, 24 Jul 2006 
10:44:19 -0700 (PDT)
> >Received: by 10.78.170.17 with SMTP id s17mr1721353hue;
> >        Mon, 24 Jul 2006 10:44:19 -0700 (PDT)
> >Received: by 10.78.193.14 with HTTP; Mon, 24 Jul 2006 10:44:19 -
0700 (PDT)
> >Message-ID: <bd2a1fcc0607241044j5848744ci65256c80440472e2@...>
> >To: Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com
> >In-Reply-To: <20060724171238.85729.qmail@...>
> >References: <bd2a1fcc0607240722l3211afd6gf0923c99c64ace07@...>
> >	 <20060724171238.85729.qmail@...>
> >> >X-eGroups-Msg-Info: 1:0:0:0
> > From: "Myc Holmes" <mycroft2152y@...>
> >X-Yahoo-Profile: mycroft2152
> >Sender: Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com
> >MIME-Version: 1.0
> >Mailing-List: list Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com; contact 
Homebrew_PCBs-owner@yahoogroups.com
> >Delivered-To: mailing list Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com
> >List-Id: <Homebrew_PCBs.yahoogroups.com>
> >Precedence: bulk
> >List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:Homebrew_PCBs-
unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com>
> >Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2006 13:44:19 -0400
> >Subject: Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: Epson R220 PCB printing Report #1
> >Reply-To: Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com
> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
> >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> >
> >Hi Voltan,
> >
> >First of all, I congratulate you on a great idea and the work  
cleverness
> >that have made it work for you.. I agree, a 99% reliability rate 
is not
> >needed, just somewhat equal to Toner Transfer.
> >
> >As part of my research chemist background, I find it is important 
to
> >identify and document all the details for repeatable results.  
The key is in
> >the details.
> >
> >I've been following your work and am trying to repeat it. It is 
frustrating
> >when it fails and  appears that the process has been duplicated. 
Until just
> >recently, the use of Brake Fluid to reduce surface tension and 
now the fact
> >3 sets of nozzles / cartridges are being used to correct coverage 
problems
> >has been published. It is very normal that some details the you 
just  take
> >for granted are especially important and need to be mentioned.
> >
> >These are the missed details that slow down the progress by 
others. After
> >all, it has been 4 months since your original post and no one yet 
has
> >successfully duplicated your results.
> >
> >It could be similar to Toner Transfer, where apparently minor 
variations
> >have a major impact.
> >
> >Again, I apologize if it appears that I am disparaging you 
efforts, but I am
> >trying to get a grasp on all the detai 
> >  
> >  
> > -0-0-0- 
> >  
> >
>