Wow! That was quite a thing! 73, Todd ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ K7TFC / Medford, Oregon, USA / CN82ni / UTC-8 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ QRP (CW & SSB) / EmComm / SOTA / Homebrew / Design On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 2:14 AM, Boman33 <boman33@...> wrote: > ** > > > Todd, > > The panda is real. I had an opportunity to play with and feed seven of them > in China. > > Bertho > > From: Todd F. Carney / K7TFC Sent: Sunday, April 07, 2013 04:54 > > > On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 11:53 PM, Boman33 <boman33@... > <mailto:boman33%40vinland.com> > wrote: > > > > As I wrote, I know it works but the question is why. > > Mine is not to reason why, mine is but to do or . . . hey, wait a minute! > > Actually, I suspect the viscosity and surface tension of the emulsion has > something to do with how the spin-coating method works. It may also be that > it does end up thinner the farther it gets from the center, but that it > doesn't matter given the use and the pretty-course image resolution > required. Back then, I found myself more concerned about the thickness of > the copper than of the emulsion. > > The engineers I worked for had always used 2oz copper clad, and that's what > they wanted me to use. I wanted to use 1oz copper because a) I could get > more yield from the etchant, b) it etched faster, and c) because it etched > faster I could preserve fine lines much easier than with the thick 2oz > stuff. If etching takes too long, it begins to undercut the traces and then > the resist flakes off on the edges of the traces for that reason. Thin > traces, such as dogbones or "sneak-throughs," would just get torn up. But > it didn't matter how much data or how many calculations of current vs. temp > rise of traces of thinner clad, they insisted on 2oz. Neither did it matter > that industry standard by that time (1984) was 1oz except for special > applications. Even Coombs the Revered (author of the standard text on pcb > design) could not move them. > > I was able to ramrod the abandonment of the spinner/liquid emulsion hassle > and we started using laminated dry film. In that small industrial setting, > spun-and-flung liquid emulsion was a real bother, but for the hobbyist I > think it's not a bad idea, as long as you can put a spinner together for > next-to-nothing. At some point, the cost of the apparatus (along with the > minor hassle) and the emulsion chemistry makes presensitized pcbs a much > better value (and much easier, too!). > > Just curious: is that a real panda in your avatar picture? > > 73, > > Todd > ---------------------------------------------------------- > K7TFC / Medford, Oregon, USA / CN82ni / UTC-8 > ---------------------------------------------------------- > QRP (CW & SSB) / EmComm / SOTA / Homebrew / Design > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Message
Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: Seno 100 photo resist applicator
2013-04-07 by Todd F. Carney / K7TFC
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.