Homebrew PCBs

I just want it known that i disagree with many points of this post.
I don't have the time right now to go into details though, just treat it  
as not unanimously accepted.

ST

On Sun, 17 Dec 2006 22:38:29 +0100, mikezcnc <eemikez@...> wrote:

> Hi,
> Yes, Steve said that a thin PCB 20 mils can pass without
> modification and Steve is correct- that works fine. I will answer
> and comment about the method:
> 1. Thank you Steve for letting us know about the C84 and mispro ink.
> I followed your advice and while I had a hard time to follow it, it
> was a very good info.
> 2. I duplicated all Steves experiments and I can tell you that teh
> PCBs generated in that manner resemble near photo quality. The
> method is fast (I can have a PCB in 20 minutes etched) and it seems
> to be a bit better in quality than TT. Regrefully there are many
> variables and Zoran actually had a point in this case but than again
> I disagree with Zoran on photochemical being simple-- yes it is
> simple if you buy sensitized PCBs ($$) but if you make them.. I can
> write a dissertation if there is a demand)
> 3. What is wrong with printing on copper? The method is really cool.
> You stick a PCB and off you have the pattern that can be heated up
> and etched. Well, the printer C84 is $itty.I got one and learned on
> it. Freeing up the heads is not for everyone. In fact not knowing
> hte reader I can tell it is not for you... BS on the net about
> cleaning is just that-BS. Having that C84 I then decided to use it
> for learning about sheet metal. I reade and reread Steves directions
> about nibbling on it and the results was I finally took a
> reciprocating saw and cut above the slot.  Now what? You have to
> mount it so that it is true in three planes and true for CNC means
> different trueness than for making wood cabinets. Bottom line is:
> you won't be able to mount that cut off front rail so it holds its
> position today and tomorrow. No way. If you have so much metal
> talent I suggest sticking that head on a  cnc machine that Dave will
> have in January and now you've got something going!
> 4. So the good news is: you do not have to touch the sheet metal and
> can remove few plastic parts and start sliding PCBs of 20mils or
> thinner, right? Sort of. Like I said the printer is $itty.
> 5. But there is a light in a tunnel. People like morons keep buying
> those poor quality printers C84 on ebay for big $$$s. They don't
> know that they can have a brand new printer C88+ from CompUSA for
> $80 and actually with some discounts for much less. Brand new. It is
> the same printer jus brand new. As a reminder C86 also is the same
> printer but also $itty quality.
> 5. So now you have a brand new C88+ and are ready to buy the inks.
> You bought the inks, you isntalled the chips with the gooball and
> are ready to print. Surprise! My c88+ printed crooked! I took it
> apart and what happened? The pad looked like a used cotex, but with
> black ink. I swear, those people at Epson sell rufubished printers!
> I saw ink all over inside, I saw plastic parts labelled 'resprayed'.
> Maybe collection of early engineering prototypes? Times are tough
> for everyone, I guess. I used that printer for experiments:  I warn
> you, stay away from cutting metal. I was printing all right, but
> getting anything resembling  a pattern was impossible.
> 5. Another C88+ another day. I printed mispro ink. Frankly, IMO
> misproinks might be a solution for some but the quality of colors is
> unacceptable. Those people at mispro are color blind that they don't
> see that they don't resemble epson colors. Stay away from mispro if
> you want to have quality colors.
> 6. But all we care is that secret ingredient in yellow in magenta,
> so who cares. I finally got C88+ printing, made the famous cut in
> side (thank you Steve, that helped, great job you did!) and was very
> happy. Heating it is no problem but takes some experimenting, no
> biggie. The PCBs are etch resistant, except for the very thin traces
> have tendency to underetch. Now: let'sention one thing: what I like
> in a PCB is not what you like in a PCB> I am talking about
> complelxity on the level of a PCB in desktop PC, ok? And that type
> is achieveable with ease with, I would say 99% accuracy. Almost
> photo quality.
> 7. So what seems to be the prblem? Well, few days later I revisited
> teh experiment and the print head was clogged- ina brand new
> printer. Cleaning, etc.. came out better but still for a brand new
> printer it is surprising that Epson engineers don't have it in grip.
> I am disappointed with the drying out ink when printer is not in use
> and that pretty much disqualifies teh method unless you know youa re
> printing daily and I hope it is often enough.
> I don't have that problem with a laminator.
> It amazes me that I read discussions on Make of people excited about
> it, without understanding that even a brand new printer is not a
> solutionn for printing PCBs. Was fun to try it but it is not a good
> solution. It is probably the same problem liek with the plotter pens
> that always dried out except here you cannot run the cartriges dry-
> that mispro misfit is expensive. I feel sorry for peole who try to
> make a living pinting on inkjet printers large size prints- there's
> got to be a better way.
> So who is going to present the next innovation?
> Mike