Yahoo Groups archive

Homebrew PCBs

Index last updated: 2026-04-05 19:38 UTC

Thread

Photo-resist etching questions....

Photo-resist etching questions....

2007-05-20 by lcdpublishing

Hi guys,

I have almost given up on direct ink-jet resist and on "plotting" 
with Staedtler pens using the CNC machine, and I am about to abandon 
toner transfer.  Only problem with toner transfer is the "scaling" 
issues either through the printer or from the paper not being stable 
which causes problem with CNC drilling.

Anyway, I ordered up some negative type resist chemical, the 
developer, a lamp, and an exposure frame.  I am not expecting this 
to go "perfectly" either, but am hoping to have a bit less 
frustration in other areas.

I am thinking the best accuracy I can get when printing is to use an 
ink jet printer (I have Epson R220 and Epson CX6600).  I have a PDF 
editor program that allows me to edit trace colors and back ground 
colors so that I can make negatives so that shouldn't be a problem.

The first "problem" I suspect I will run into is getting enough 
density on the transparency to make sure the "black" areas are dense 
enough to block out the UV exposure lamp where needed.  Has anyone  
run into this issue and how do you deal with it?

Any other pointers would be greatly appreciated as well as this is 
my first time for "photo-processing".

Thanks

Chris

Re: Photo-resist etching questions....

2007-05-20 by docstein99

> toner transfer.  Only problem with toner transfer is the "scaling" 
> issues either through the printer or from the paper not being 
stable 
> which causes problem with CNC drilling.

If you bave scaling issues - they will exist with a laser or inkjet 
printer.  My inkjet printouts (using corel draw) are so precise, I 
can actually print grids and squares to calibrate my cnc machine.  I 
have printed rulers and checked them with my digital calipers, and 
they are by far - very accurate.  I dont know what software your 
using to create the images, there are a billion options. Simply in 
corel draw, I can create tiny lines and examine them against a 
precision ruler using a 10x magifying lens - matching dead on.

If it is out of scale for toner transfer, then that same image you 
will use for photo-resisting, will also be out of scale.

> The first "problem" I suspect I will run into is getting enough 
> density on the transparency to make sure the "black" areas are 
dense 
> enough to block out the UV exposure lamp where needed.  Has anyone  
> run into this issue and how do you deal with it?

When I attended the seminar on homemade pcb making, there was a large 
variety of people that have had very good success for YEARS doing 
photo-resist etching.  They say it takes about 15 minutes to expose a 
very exact board with SMT leads.  A standard laser printer provides 
enough coverage on a transparency to expose the image.  I was told 
they order the "GC" type boards from DIGIKEY.

Hope this helps a little.

Re: Photo-resist etching questions....

2007-05-20 by pcb.easy

Snip
> The first "problem" I suspect I will run into is getting enough 
> density on the transparency to make sure the "black" areas are dense 
> enough to block out the UV exposure lamp where needed.  Has anyone  
> run into this issue and how do you deal with it?

Chris,

I use the Positive Photo method. In the begining I was using over head 
transparencies and was having trouble obtaining a dark enough photo 
mask, even to the point of using two copies laid on top of one another. 

I switched to Vellum or tracing paper. I use 20# 8.5" * 11" paper and 
run it through the laser printer. Don't use light weight paper, it will 
crinkle in the laser. This paper is extremly translucent to UV light. 
As an example, using a single F15T8BL at 3.5 inches the Over head 
transparency took 10 minutes, the Vellum took 8 minutes to expose. Also 
Vellum is very inexpensive.

I'm able to run a trace between two pads on an IC chip using the vellum.

Ron

Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: Photo-resist etching questions....

2007-05-20 by Leslie Newell

It isn't actually a scaling issue. The problem is that the paper expands
and contracts as it goes through a laser printer. This results in rather
unpredictable distortion of the image. Inkjets don't have this problem
because they don't heat the paper.

Les

docstein99 wrote:
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> If you bave scaling issues - they will exist with a laser or inkjet 
> printer.  My inkjet printouts (using corel draw) are so precise, I 
> can actually print grids and squares to calibrate my cnc machine.  I 
> have printed rulers and checked them with my digital calipers, and 
> they are by far - very accurate.  I dont know what software your 
> using to create the images, there are a billion options. Simply in 
> corel draw, I can create tiny lines and examine them against a 
> precision ruler using a 10x magifying lens - matching dead on.
>
> If it is out of scale for toner transfer, then that same image you 
> will use for photo-resisting, will also be out of scale.
>
>

Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Photo-resist etching questions....

2007-05-20 by John P. Anhalt

Hi Chris,

I guess one question to ask is why you decided to go negative resist  instead of positive resist?  I have been using positive resist with pre-coated boards for several years and only once had a failure.  That one failure was due either to too short an exposure or too weak a developer.  I increased the concentration of potassium hydroxide in my developer, and got a decent, but not great board.  I hang out on this list just in case someone has a discovery that works better.  The only problem with pre-coated boards, besides cost, is the limited choice in copper thickness and board thickness that is available.

My printer is an HP970Cse inkjet.  It's now getting old, but works well, and I have not had any problem with UV leakage where I don't want it.  I use maximum resolution and either regular or heavy on the ink flow, which is determined at the time of use by simply printing at each density and seeing which one looks better on the transparency.  It does not waste any of the pre-coated boards.

One detail that may be important:  I use a "premium" OHP transparency film made by Pictorico.  The film is available at my local PC store.  It has an extremely fine ceramic coating to aid  retention of the ink.  One can barely tell the coated (print) side from the non-coated side.  The print side is slightly duller in reflected light.  There are probably other films out there that work just as well, and I have not done any side-by-side comparisons -- just reporting what works for me.  As for the image density, I can say it is fairly dense.  There are no clear pinholes, but one can see some light through the black areas.  The ink tends to form a darker ridge (maybe just an artifact of refraction) right at the interface between clear and black areas, which may help to give the sharp edges one gets with the process. 

John
Show quoted textHide quoted text
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: lcdpublishing 
  To: Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2007 8:31 AM
  Subject: [Homebrew_PCBs] Photo-resist etching questions....


  Hi guys,

  I have almost given up on direct ink-jet resist and on "plotting" 
  with Staedtler pens using the CNC machine, and I am about to abandon 
  toner transfer. Only problem with toner transfer is the "scaling" 
  issues either through the printer or from the paper not being stable 
  which causes problem with CNC drilling.

  Anyway, I ordered up some negative type resist chemical, the 
  developer, a lamp, and an exposure frame. I am not expecting this 
  to go "perfectly" either, but am hoping to have a bit less 
  frustration in other areas.

  I am thinking the best accuracy I can get when printing is to use an 
  ink jet printer (I have Epson R220 and Epson CX6600). I have a PDF 
  editor program that allows me to edit trace colors and back ground 
  colors so that I can make negatives so that shouldn't be a problem.

  The first "problem" I suspect I will run into is getting enough 
  density on the transparency to make sure the "black" areas are dense 
  enough to block out the UV exposure lamp where needed. Has anyone 
  run into this issue and how do you deal with it?

  Any other pointers would be greatly appreciated as well as this is 
  my first time for "photo-processing".

  Thanks

  Chris



   

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: Photo-resist etching questions....

2007-05-20 by Roland F. Harriston

I think that the best way to get really good
negative or positive artwork is to use
lithographic film. Using litho film entails
more process steps i.e. camera and photo darkroom
work, but the quality of the boards that
can be produced via this method are
superior to all others.

Roland F. Harriston
*******************

pcb.easy wrote:
Show quoted textHide quoted text
>
> Snip
> > The first "problem" I suspect I will run into is getting enough
> > density on the transparency to make sure the "black" areas are dense
> > enough to block out the UV exposure lamp where needed. Has anyone
> > run into this issue and how do you deal with it?
>
> Chris,
>
> I use the Positive Photo method. In the begining I was using over head
> transparencies and was having trouble obtaining a dark enough photo
> mask, even to the point of using two copies laid on top of one another.
>
> I switched to Vellum or tracing paper. I use 20# 8.5" * 11" paper and
> run it through the laser printer. Don't use light weight paper, it will
> crinkle in the laser. This paper is extremly translucent to UV light.
> As an example, using a single F15T8BL at 3.5 inches the Over head
> transparency took 10 minutes, the Vellum took 8 minutes to expose. Also
> Vellum is very inexpensive.
>
> I'm able to run a trace between two pads on an IC chip using the vellum.
>
> Ron
>
>

Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Photo-resist etching questions....

2007-05-20 by Leon

----- Original Message ----- 
Show quoted textHide quoted text
From: "lcdpublishing" <lcdpublishing@...>
To: <Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2007 1:31 PM
Subject: [Homebrew_PCBs] Photo-resist etching questions....


> Hi guys,
>
> I have almost given up on direct ink-jet resist and on "plotting"
> with Staedtler pens using the CNC machine, and I am about to abandon
> toner transfer.  Only problem with toner transfer is the "scaling"
> issues either through the printer or from the paper not being stable
> which causes problem with CNC drilling.
>
> Anyway, I ordered up some negative type resist chemical, the
> developer, a lamp, and an exposure frame.  I am not expecting this
> to go "perfectly" either, but am hoping to have a bit less
> frustration in other areas.
>
> I am thinking the best accuracy I can get when printing is to use an
> ink jet printer (I have Epson R220 and Epson CX6600).  I have a PDF
> editor program that allows me to edit trace colors and back ground
> colors so that I can make negatives so that shouldn't be a problem.
>
> The first "problem" I suspect I will run into is getting enough
> density on the transparency to make sure the "black" areas are dense
> enough to block out the UV exposure lamp where needed.  Has anyone
> run into this issue and how do you deal with it?
>
> Any other pointers would be greatly appreciated as well as this is
> my first time for "photo-processing".

It depends on the printer and transparency material. I get very good results 
with an HP 5940 (quite cheap) and JetStar Premium film from Mega 
Electronics. That's the only film I've tried that works properly with that 
printer, it's specially made for PCB work. You will probably find that a 
positive process is easier.

Leon

Re: Photo-resist etching questions....

2007-05-20 by twb8899

I use photo plotted film negatives with negative acting dry film photo
resist. Expose with 1 kW mercury vapor bulb for 17 seconds. Etching is
with ferric chloride at 110 degrees F in a small spray etcher. I use
negative acting resist because it's lower cost and exposes much faster
than positive types. Almost never have any rejects using this method.
My production is 10 to 50 boards per lot with nearly 100% yield every
time. 

Find a supplier in your area with a photo plotter to make your films.
If that's not available plot the design at 2:1 scale with black ink on
white paper and have a printing shop shoot a negative film at 50%
reduction on their camera. You will have a high accuracy master film
that will last for years.

Do some research on D-min and D-max concerning photo films. It's the
measure of density in the clear and black areas of the film. The
biggest problem with laser and ink jet printing is not enough D-max or
very dense black areas. Shine a lamp through the black areas of your
film and look at it with a maginfier. This is what your photoresist is
seeing and it's usually not dense enough for a proper exposure.

Tom

--- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, "lcdpublishing"
<lcdpublishing@...> wrote:
Show quoted textHide quoted text
>
> Hi guys,
> 
> I have almost given up on direct ink-jet resist and on "plotting" 
> with Staedtler pens using the CNC machine, and I am about to abandon 
> toner transfer.  Only problem with toner transfer is the "scaling" 
> issues either through the printer or from the paper not being stable 
> which causes problem with CNC drilling.
> 
> Anyway, I ordered up some negative type resist chemical, the 
> developer, a lamp, and an exposure frame.  I am not expecting this 
> to go "perfectly" either, but am hoping to have a bit less 
> frustration in other areas.
> 
> I am thinking the best accuracy I can get when printing is to use an 
> ink jet printer (I have Epson R220 and Epson CX6600).  I have a PDF 
> editor program that allows me to edit trace colors and back ground 
> colors so that I can make negatives so that shouldn't be a problem.
> 
> The first "problem" I suspect I will run into is getting enough 
> density on the transparency to make sure the "black" areas are dense 
> enough to block out the UV exposure lamp where needed.  Has anyone  
> run into this issue and how do you deal with it?
> 
> Any other pointers would be greatly appreciated as well as this is 
> my first time for "photo-processing".
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Chris
>

Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: Photo-resist etching questions....

2007-05-20 by Roland F. Harriston

twb8899:

Your technique is probably the most "professional"
that I've read about on this forum.

Negative acting resist may have an edge over
the positive stuff, and may produce better products.

I don't know if "Resiston" or any of the laminated resist
materials are still being made, but this stuff worked really good.
But one needs to have a dry film laminating setup to use it.

I recall the excellent results that Kodak KPR resists
could produce, but alas, the Feds said it was too
nasty and Kodak moved away from it, although I
think some version of KPR is still being made for
the microcircuit fab industry, but not generally
available to the public.

A lot of microstripline work used to be done using
the photo plotter methods you described, but I've been divorced
from that area for so long, I don't know what they
are using now. It might be interesting to set up a
plotter using an LED "pen" in a dark box to plot
on sheets of litho film and then develop the film
in AB litho developer.  I think such a setup could
produce some really high contrast PC artwork.

Having done "tape-up" artwork as large as 10X,
and having it reduced to Actual on a big copy
camera, I have a feeling for the accuracy one can
obtain from the methods you described.

Good Show!

Roland F. Harriston






twb8899 wrote:
Show quoted textHide quoted text
>
>
> I use photo plotted film negatives with negative acting dry film photo
> resist. Expose with 1 kW mercury vapor bulb for 17 seconds. Etching is
> with ferric chloride at 110 degrees F in a small spray etcher. I use
> negative acting resist because it's lower cost and exposes much faster
> than positive types. Almost never have any rejects using this method.
> My production is 10 to 50 boards per lot with nearly 100% yield every
> time.
>
> Find a supplier in your area with a photo plotter to make your films.
> If that's not available plot the design at 2:1 scale with black ink on
> white paper and have a printing shop shoot a negative film at 50%
> reduction on their camera. You will have a high accuracy master film
> that will last for years.
>
> Do some research on D-min and D-max concerning photo films. It's the
> measure of density in the clear and black areas of the film. The
> biggest problem with laser and ink jet printing is not enough D-max or
> very dense black areas. Shine a lamp through the black areas of your
> film and look at it with a maginfier. This is what your photoresist is
> seeing and it's usually not dense enough for a proper exposure.
>
> Tom
>
> --- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com 
> <mailto:Homebrew_PCBs%40yahoogroups.com>, "lcdpublishing"
> <lcdpublishing@...> wrote:
> >
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > I have almost given up on direct ink-jet resist and on "plotting"
> > with Staedtler pens using the CNC machine, and I am about to abandon
> > toner transfer. Only problem with toner transfer is the "scaling"
> > issues either through the printer or from the paper not being stable
> > which causes problem with CNC drilling.
> >
> > Anyway, I ordered up some negative type resist chemical, the
> > developer, a lamp, and an exposure frame. I am not expecting this
> > to go "perfectly" either, but am hoping to have a bit less
> > frustration in other areas.
> >
> > I am thinking the best accuracy I can get when printing is to use an
> > ink jet printer (I have Epson R220 and Epson CX6600). I have a PDF
> > editor program that allows me to edit trace colors and back ground
> > colors so that I can make negatives so that shouldn't be a problem.
> >
> > The first "problem" I suspect I will run into is getting enough
> > density on the transparency to make sure the "black" areas are dense
> > enough to block out the UV exposure lamp where needed. Has anyone
> > run into this issue and how do you deal with it?
> >
> > Any other pointers would be greatly appreciated as well as this is
> > my first time for "photo-processing".
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Chris
> >
>
>

Re: Photo-resist etching questions....

2007-05-20 by lcdpublishing

The reason for the negative photoresist is cost. I can buy the 
photoresist in a spray-on bottle MUCH cheaper than I can find the 
positive resist.  I can also buy clad boards cheap on E-Bay.  So, 
using the negative resist is the cheapest way for me to go.   I make 
a lot of mistakes on layout and such (and of course learning) so I 
end up making some boards many times before getting it right.

If the pre-treated boards were cheap enough, I would go that route 
right away, but I am just trying to save a few bucks.

As for the scaling issues with the laser printer,  it has to do with 
scaling in one axis versus the other.  I forget which way it is, but 
for example the 11" side needs to be scaled and not the 8 1/2" 
side.  So, rather than fight that, I would prefer to go with the ink 
jet for the same reason others have stated - very high accuracy.

Thanks for all the help and suggestions guys!

Chris

Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Photo-resist etching questions....

2007-05-20 by lists

In article <f2pf25+oulj@...>,
   lcdpublishing <lcdpublishing@...> wrote:
> Anyway, I ordered up some negative type resist chemical

If you're talking about spray on type stuff forget it. It's well nigh
impossible to get an even coating of consistant thickness without
pin-holes and other flaws.

Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Photo-resist etching questions....

2007-05-20 by Leon

----- Original Message ----- 
Show quoted textHide quoted text
From: "lists" <stuart.winsor.lists@...>
To: <Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2007 9:02 PM
Subject: Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Photo-resist etching questions....


> In article <f2pf25+oulj@...>,
>   lcdpublishing <lcdpublishing@...> wrote:
>> Anyway, I ordered up some negative type resist chemical
>
> If you're talking about spray on type stuff forget it. It's well nigh
> impossible to get an even coating of consistant thickness without
> pin-holes and other flaws.

Spin-coating is supposed to work well with liquid resist. It can be messy, 
though.

Leon

Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Photo-resist etching questions....

2007-05-20 by Roland F. Harriston

One method that is worth trying when using
spray-on resist is to use something like an
old 78RPM photo turntable. You attach the
PCB to the turntable with 2-sided tape and
spin it while spraying on the resist.

In the microcircuit industry, they use a
similar method. The substrate is placed on
a small turntable, and a drop of photo resist is
placed in the middle of the substrate, then
the turntable is spun at a high speed and the
resist spreads out over the substrate surface
in a very evenly distributed coating.

At one time, it was possible to purchase
photo resist in an aerosol spray can, and
it was possible to get a fairly even coat.
But the Feds said that the aerosol was
nasty, so it went away.

Some prototypers have used those little
artists spray guns (air brush) to apply liquid photo resist.

Some of the Kepro systems used the dip-coat
method with a motorized hanger that pulled the
PCB out of the dip tank at a controlled rate, thus
providing a fairly even coat of liquid resist.
There would be a slight "wedge" at the bottom of
the PCB, but it was not a problem.....just make the
PCB slightly longer than the intended circuit board.

Roland F. Harriston
******************



lists wrote:
Show quoted textHide quoted text
>
> In article <f2pf25+oulj@... <mailto:f2pf25%2Boulj%40eGroups.com>>,
> lcdpublishing <lcdpublishing@... 
> <mailto:lcdpublishing%40yahoo.com>> wrote:
> > Anyway, I ordered up some negative type resist chemical
>
> If you're talking about spray on type stuff forget it. It's well nigh
> impossible to get an even coating of consistant thickness without
> pin-holes and other flaws.
>
>

Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Photo-resist etching questions....

2007-05-20 by Roland F. Harriston

You are so right Leon!

One trick is to purchase one of those great big
aluminum stew pots like the professional chefs
use. You mount your turntable or spinning device
in the bottom of the stew pot and the walls will
prevent the resist from spewing out all over
everything when the spinner gets wound up.

I've seen some of these pots that are about 16 inches
in diameter and 12 to 18 to 24 inches deep. They only cost
a few bucks in those "Dollar-Rama" "Penny Saver" type stores
and they make good (cheap) spray chambers as above.

Roland F. Harriston
*******************



Leon wrote:
Show quoted textHide quoted text
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "lists" <stuart.winsor.lists@... 
> <mailto:stuart.winsor.lists%40dsl.pipex.com>>
> To: <Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com 
> <mailto:Homebrew_PCBs%40yahoogroups.com>>
> Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2007 9:02 PM
> Subject: Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Photo-resist etching questions....
>
> > In article <f2pf25+oulj@... 
> <mailto:f2pf25%2Boulj%40eGroups.com>>,
> > lcdpublishing <lcdpublishing@... 
> <mailto:lcdpublishing%40yahoo.com>> wrote:
> >> Anyway, I ordered up some negative type resist chemical
> >
> > If you're talking about spray on type stuff forget it. It's well nigh
> > impossible to get an even coating of consistant thickness without
> > pin-holes and other flaws.
>
> Spin-coating is supposed to work well with liquid resist. It can be 
> messy,
> though.
>
> Leon
>
>

Re: Photo-resist etching questions....

2007-05-21 by twb8899

Roland,

You're correct about using the methods I mentioned earlier for micro
wave strip lines. I used to have a commercial shop and used much of
the same equipment I now have to make strip line and other RF
circuits. These were for McDonnell F/A-18 parts and equipment. I
closed that plant several years ago but kept most of the smaller
equipment for my home based shop. 

I built my spray developer and spray etcher from scratch and use them
all the time. They are a simple design and kind of based on the Kepro
stuff. When Kepro shut down I bought quite a bit of the manufacturing
 equipment they used to make their products. I'm now thinking about
making the etchers myself and offering them for sale. Biggest problem
is getting the cost down. The Kepro units were way too expensive and
could probably be offered for a more attractive price with some
engineering changes.

This new spray etcher is in the works but it's still to early to say
much about it except that the prototype works great. If we can get the
cost just right it will be available later this summer. If anyone is
interested in a product like this contact me by email and I'll forward
photographs and more information when we are ready to go. 

Tom

--- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, "Roland F. Harriston"
<rolohar@...> wrote:
Show quoted textHide quoted text
>
> twb8899:
> 
> Your technique is probably the most "professional"
> that I've read about on this forum.
> 
> Negative acting resist may have an edge over
> the positive stuff, and may produce better products.
> 
> I don't know if "Resiston" or any of the laminated resist
> materials are still being made, but this stuff worked really good.
> But one needs to have a dry film laminating setup to use it.
> 
> I recall the excellent results that Kodak KPR resists
> could produce, but alas, the Feds said it was too
> nasty and Kodak moved away from it, although I
> think some version of KPR is still being made for
> the microcircuit fab industry, but not generally
> available to the public.
> 
> A lot of microstripline work used to be done using
> the photo plotter methods you described, but I've been divorced
> from that area for so long, I don't know what they
> are using now. It might be interesting to set up a
> plotter using an LED "pen" in a dark box to plot
> on sheets of litho film and then develop the film
> in AB litho developer.  I think such a setup could
> produce some really high contrast PC artwork.
> 
> Having done "tape-up" artwork as large as 10X,
> and having it reduced to Actual on a big copy
> camera, I have a feeling for the accuracy one can
> obtain from the methods you described.
> 
> Good Show!
> 
> Roland F. Harriston
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> twb8899 wrote:
> >
> >
> > I use photo plotted film negatives with negative acting dry film photo
> > resist. Expose with 1 kW mercury vapor bulb for 17 seconds. Etching is
> > with ferric chloride at 110 degrees F in a small spray etcher. I use
> > negative acting resist because it's lower cost and exposes much faster
> > than positive types. Almost never have any rejects using this method.
> > My production is 10 to 50 boards per lot with nearly 100% yield every
> > time.
> >
> > Find a supplier in your area with a photo plotter to make your films.
> > If that's not available plot the design at 2:1 scale with black ink on
> > white paper and have a printing shop shoot a negative film at 50%
> > reduction on their camera. You will have a high accuracy master film
> > that will last for years.
> >
> > Do some research on D-min and D-max concerning photo films. It's the
> > measure of density in the clear and black areas of the film. The
> > biggest problem with laser and ink jet printing is not enough D-max or
> > very dense black areas. Shine a lamp through the black areas of your
> > film and look at it with a maginfier. This is what your photoresist is
> > seeing and it's usually not dense enough for a proper exposure.
> >
> > Tom
> >
> > --- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com 
> > <mailto:Homebrew_PCBs%40yahoogroups.com>, "lcdpublishing"
> > <lcdpublishing@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi guys,
> > >
> > > I have almost given up on direct ink-jet resist and on "plotting"
> > > with Staedtler pens using the CNC machine, and I am about to abandon
> > > toner transfer. Only problem with toner transfer is the "scaling"
> > > issues either through the printer or from the paper not being stable
> > > which causes problem with CNC drilling.
> > >
> > > Anyway, I ordered up some negative type resist chemical, the
> > > developer, a lamp, and an exposure frame. I am not expecting this
> > > to go "perfectly" either, but am hoping to have a bit less
> > > frustration in other areas.
> > >
> > > I am thinking the best accuracy I can get when printing is to use an
> > > ink jet printer (I have Epson R220 and Epson CX6600). I have a PDF
> > > editor program that allows me to edit trace colors and back ground
> > > colors so that I can make negatives so that shouldn't be a problem.
> > >
> > > The first "problem" I suspect I will run into is getting enough
> > > density on the transparency to make sure the "black" areas are dense
> > > enough to block out the UV exposure lamp where needed. Has anyone
> > > run into this issue and how do you deal with it?
> > >
> > > Any other pointers would be greatly appreciated as well as this is
> > > my first time for "photo-processing".
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > >
> > > Chris
> > >
> >
> >
>

Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: Photo-resist etching questions....

2007-05-21 by Roland F. Harriston

twb8899:

I also remember cutting "Rubylith",
but I guess that sort of stuff is gone
forever.

"Coordinatograph"  pops  up in my
memory.

Roland F. Harriston
*****************
twb8899 wrote:
Show quoted textHide quoted text
>
> Roland,
>
> You're correct about using the methods I mentioned earlier for micro
> wave strip lines. I used to have a commercial shop and used much of
> the same equipment I now have to make strip line and other RF
> circuits. These were for McDonnell F/A-18 parts and equipment. I
> closed that plant several years ago but kept most of the smaller
> equipment for my home based shop.
>
> I built my spray developer and spray etcher from scratch and use them
> all the time. They are a simple design and kind of based on the Kepro
> stuff. When Kepro shut down I bought quite a bit of the manufacturing
> equipment they used to make their products. I'm now thinking about
> making the etchers myself and offering them for sale. Biggest problem
> is getting the cost down. The Kepro units were way too expensive and
> could probably be offered for a more attractive price with some
> engineering changes.
>
> This new spray etcher is in the works but it's still to early to say
> much about it except that the prototype works great. If we can get the
> cost just right it will be available later this summer. If anyone is
> interested in a product like this contact me by email and I'll forward
> photographs and more information when we are ready to go.
>
> Tom
>
> --- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com 
> <mailto:Homebrew_PCBs%40yahoogroups.com>, "Roland F. Harriston"
> <rolohar@...> wrote:
> >
> > twb8899:
> >
> > Your technique is probably the most "professional"
> > that I've read about on this forum.
> >
> > Negative acting resist may have an edge over
> > the positive stuff, and may produce better products.
> >
> > I don't know if "Resiston" or any of the laminated resist
> > materials are still being made, but this stuff worked really good.
> > But one needs to have a dry film laminating setup to use it.
> >
> > I recall the excellent results that Kodak KPR resists
> > could produce, but alas, the Feds said it was too
> > nasty and Kodak moved away from it, although I
> > think some version of KPR is still being made for
> > the microcircuit fab industry, but not generally
> > available to the public.
> >
> > A lot of microstripline work used to be done using
> > the photo plotter methods you described, but I've been divorced
> > from that area for so long, I don't know what they
> > are using now. It might be interesting to set up a
> > plotter using an LED "pen" in a dark box to plot
> > on sheets of litho film and then develop the film
> > in AB litho developer. I think such a setup could
> > produce some really high contrast PC artwork.
> >
> > Having done "tape-up" artwork as large as 10X,
> > and having it reduced to Actual on a big copy
> > camera, I have a feeling for the accuracy one can
> > obtain from the methods you described.
> >
> > Good Show!
> >
> > Roland F. Harriston
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > twb8899 wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > I use photo plotted film negatives with negative acting dry film photo
> > > resist. Expose with 1 kW mercury vapor bulb for 17 seconds. Etching is
> > > with ferric chloride at 110 degrees F in a small spray etcher. I use
> > > negative acting resist because it's lower cost and exposes much faster
> > > than positive types. Almost never have any rejects using this method.
> > > My production is 10 to 50 boards per lot with nearly 100% yield every
> > > time.
> > >
> > > Find a supplier in your area with a photo plotter to make your films.
> > > If that's not available plot the design at 2:1 scale with black ink on
> > > white paper and have a printing shop shoot a negative film at 50%
> > > reduction on their camera. You will have a high accuracy master film
> > > that will last for years.
> > >
> > > Do some research on D-min and D-max concerning photo films. It's the
> > > measure of density in the clear and black areas of the film. The
> > > biggest problem with laser and ink jet printing is not enough D-max or
> > > very dense black areas. Shine a lamp through the black areas of your
> > > film and look at it with a maginfier. This is what your photoresist is
> > > seeing and it's usually not dense enough for a proper exposure.
> > >
> > > Tom
> > >
> > > --- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com 
> <mailto:Homebrew_PCBs%40yahoogroups.com>
> > > <mailto:Homebrew_PCBs%40yahoogroups.com>, "lcdpublishing"
> > > <lcdpublishing@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi guys,
> > > >
> > > > I have almost given up on direct ink-jet resist and on "plotting"
> > > > with Staedtler pens using the CNC machine, and I am about to abandon
> > > > toner transfer. Only problem with toner transfer is the "scaling"
> > > > issues either through the printer or from the paper not being stable
> > > > which causes problem with CNC drilling.
> > > >
> > > > Anyway, I ordered up some negative type resist chemical, the
> > > > developer, a lamp, and an exposure frame. I am not expecting this
> > > > to go "perfectly" either, but am hoping to have a bit less
> > > > frustration in other areas.
> > > >
> > > > I am thinking the best accuracy I can get when printing is to use an
> > > > ink jet printer (I have Epson R220 and Epson CX6600). I have a PDF
> > > > editor program that allows me to edit trace colors and back ground
> > > > colors so that I can make negatives so that shouldn't be a problem.
> > > >
> > > > The first "problem" I suspect I will run into is getting enough
> > > > density on the transparency to make sure the "black" areas are dense
> > > > enough to block out the UV exposure lamp where needed. Has anyone
> > > > run into this issue and how do you deal with it?
> > > >
> > > > Any other pointers would be greatly appreciated as well as this is
> > > > my first time for "photo-processing".
> > > >
> > > > Thanks
> > > >
> > > > Chris
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>

Re: Photo-resist etching questions....

2007-05-21 by twb8899

Roland,

Sounds like we both go back a bit in the industry. We used to do
red-blue separations and pad masters. Everything was shot on a Brown
3000 horizontal camera. I bought my first photoplotter in 1987 and
sold the Brown camera. Kept a smaller Eskofot vertical camera that I
still have and use on occasion. Most of the time I use a table top
Lavenir photoplotter. Also have a Gerber Crescent 30 photoplotter in
storage but haven't used it in several years. I bought the Lavenir
plotter in 1989 and it's never failed yet. That machine just keeps on
running. It may become obsolete along with the cameras when rapid
access film is no longer available. I still have some rubylith film
and use it once in a while!

Tom


--- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, "Roland F. Harriston"
<rolohar@...> wrote:
Show quoted textHide quoted text
>
> twb8899:
> 
> I also remember cutting "Rubylith",
> but I guess that sort of stuff is gone
> forever.
> 
> "Coordinatograph"  pops  up in my
> memory.
> 
> Roland F. Harriston
> *****************

Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: Photo-resist etching questions....

2007-05-21 by Roland F. Harriston

I threw away my last sheets of Rubylith about
five years ago.

Time goes by.

Roland F. Harriston
*******************

twb8899 wrote:
Show quoted textHide quoted text
>
> Roland,
>
> Sounds like we both go back a bit in the industry. We used to do
> red-blue separations and pad masters. Everything was shot on a Brown
> 3000 horizontal camera. I bought my first photoplotter in 1987 and
> sold the Brown camera. Kept a smaller Eskofot vertical camera that I
> still have and use on occasion. Most of the time I use a table top
> Lavenir photoplotter. Also have a Gerber Crescent 30 photoplotter in
> storage but haven't used it in several years. I bought the Lavenir
> plotter in 1989 and it's never failed yet. That machine just keeps on
> running. It may become obsolete along with the cameras when rapid
> access film is no longer available. I still have some rubylith film
> and use it once in a while!
>
> Tom
>
> --- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com 
> <mailto:Homebrew_PCBs%40yahoogroups.com>, "Roland F. Harriston"
> <rolohar@...> wrote:
> >
> > twb8899:
> >
> > I also remember cutting "Rubylith",
> > but I guess that sort of stuff is gone
> > forever.
> >
> > "Coordinatograph" pops up in my
> > memory.
> >
> > Roland F. Harriston
> > *****************
>
>

Re: Photo-resist etching questions....

2007-05-21 by Richard

Chris,


Laser-printer scaling problem:

Edit the PDF file.  The PDF is just a big text-file, and the
scaling
parameters are right there at the beginning.  You can adjust each
axis
to suit.  There's tons of info on the web about PDF language and
how to go about doing things like this.


Exposure and Density:

If it's taking 15 minutes to expose your board, then your
light-source
is MUCH too weak.  The longer the exposure, the fuzzier the
image;
because the UV also moves -sideways- through the resist; not just

straight into it.  Not only do your traces get fuzzy, but a
pinhole that
might make an easily etched micro-dot turns into a 'spot' that
doesn't
want to etch away.

Also, the molecules being exposed/crosslinked by the UV always
affect
a few molecules nearby....so the longer the exposure, the more
nearby
molecules that get randomly added to the crosslink as well.  This
too
spreads out your lines.


Bottom-line:  the faster your exposure, the junkier the artwork
that
you can get away with using (i.e. poor density etc.).


As far as printer-density goes, laser-printouts have always been
marginal,
in my experience.  I use them; for non-critical, undemanding
work; but
if it's anything important, or fine-line, I will send Gerber
files to the
local film-house.

Photoplot films are usually only 5 or 10 bucks a layer; for 8x10"
size.
15 bucks is worth it for an important project....and they're
ready the
next day.



Dry-Film Resist:

I ran Riston dry-film for years.  Even with a shop-made exposure
unit, I never burned longer than 2 minutes.

This unit was a simple wood enclosure, with the bottom lined with

aluminum foil, then eight 20w germicidal-UV lamps (these are the
clear glass ones); and a piece of 1/4" plate glass on top; about
an
inch above the bulbs.  Not at all a collimated source; but with
10
bulbs mounted right next to each other all the way up the box; it

faked 'collimated' quite well...lol.

Note:  it is WELL worth the trouble to find and buy the
germicidal
lamps.  They burn an image far faster than 'black light' bulbs.


I used a piece of 1" thick aluminum tooling-plate about 12x16" as

a "pressure-shoe" on top of the board.  This flattened out warp
in
the board and kept the film up tight to the board over the whole
board area.

That is important, by the way.  Many times, a poor result is
caused
more by poor contact between artwork and board; than by poor
artwork.

This unit was built to expose 8x10" images evenly.  Average
exposure
for good density in Riston 4700 was around 90 seconds, as I
recall.

Note:  most common types of glass eat UV...i.e absorb it,
attenuate it.
So don't use any thicker glass than what you feel you need for
strength.


Laminating Dry-Film Resist:

You don't need a "dry film laminator" to use Riston.  I used an
antique
GBC graphics-art laminator that I pulled from the trash
somewhere.

In a pinch, I've also 'laminated' it onto 2" square items using
nothing
but a plain old clothes-iron.

Another "laminating" method that works fine on small boards is to
heat
the board in the oven (to roughly 200-250F), lay a pre-cut piece
of
dry-film on the board, and then simply use a medium-durometer
rubber
roller to 'laminate' it.


Riston comes up on ePay all the time...usually pretty cheap too.

Although it is claimed to only have 6-12 months shelf-life; that
is
wildly conservative.   It lasts FAR longer than that.

Good storage conditions help a lot (i.e. cool and dry and dark,
and
keep it sealed in thick-poly bags).

I am still using the last of a case of 2 rolls which I bought 15
years
ago; and they were old/surplus -then- !  ...lol.


Liquid Resists:

If you're not the type that knee-jerks a freak-out about
chemicals,
then there are many excellent liquid resists you could use.  I've
never
had any problem ordering a quart of whatever I needed.

Some of these are aqueous-alkaline-developing like most
dry-films;
although many of them strip via a solvent.  Some use a solvent
for
both strip and develop; as KPR did.


Expect to pay $40-90/quart.  However, note that your processing
(i.e., your etch-bath etc) is likely far more benign than what
the
resist is capable of handling at 'normal' coating thickness; so
you
may not need 'normal' thickness.

Most of these resists were designed to withstand Piranha
etch...and
Oxygen Plasma etch...etc..

So in a bath that's relatively mild by comparison; a much thinner

layer might work just fine for you.  If so, you may be able to
'cut'
the resist 2:1 or 3:1 with solvent; and get far more boards out
of a
quart.  But even when run 'straight', a quart does a LOT of
boards.

I used a lot of KPR in the past, and quite a bit of Shipley stuff
as
well; and I never bothered with spin-coating or spray coating.

I found that simple dip-coating gave excellent results; so why
make
things more complex than they need to be?

For dipping, I made up a very thin tank by TIG-welding some .062"

316 stainless from the scrap-bin.  This tank was only about 1/2"
thick, so that it only needed a bare-minimum of resist to fill
it.

I also fabbed a stainless lid for it; into which I fitted a thin
rubber strip
as a gasket.  I cut a hole in the counter-top and mounted the
tank in the
counter.  With the lid on, the resist never lost any solvent.

I didn't bother with a motorized puller either....I simply pulled
the board
out slowly by hand; and hung it right above the tank to drain and
set.

The trick for getting good results via simple dipping like this,
is to
prevent the coating from drying too -fast-.  You want it to stay
non-viscous long enough to fully drain off.  That will give you a
nice
even-thickness coating over the whole board.

The way to make it dry slowly (especially with solvent-based
resists
like KPR), is to make the air around the board stagnant.  I did
this
by putting a cardboard box upside-down on the counter, over the
board where it was hanging above the tank  This box was no larger

than necessary; i.e. holding the minimum amount of air.

This produced a solvent-rich environment in the box; which caused

the coating to dry at a slower rate.

The whole process was dirt-simple and worked like a champ.  We
routinely held razor-sharp 2-mil lines and spaces in chem-milling

nickel foil; and likely could have done much finer.

Note:  for success with resists, you must CLEAN the board first.

After the preliminary scrub with dish-soap and a 3M sponge-back;
I use an alkaline-cleaner soak for 5 mins; then rinse; then into
a
microetch bath of dilute sulfuric/peroxide (about 5% of normal
strength).  30-60 seconds in that, and I'm looking at brand new
copper.  Then rinse, blow off liquid with filtered shop-air; and
laminate soon....don't let it sit around for days and oxidize, or

collect new dirt.

Note:  I don't like the HCL/peroxide.  It fumes more, and it's
harder
to regenerate.  The sulfuric-peroxide etch is very fast, produces

fewer fumes; and can be regenerated simply by chilling it.  The
copper falls out as copper-sulfate crystals; which can be easily
dip-netted out.


But back to resists...  In general, liquid resists are great....I
really
like 'em.  Dry film only has the advantage in high-volume
production
work, imo.

Best of luck with your efforts,

Richard

--
============================
Please do NOT attach pictures without contacting me FIRST.
DSL isn't available here.  Do not add address to any lists.
============================

Re: Photo-resist etching questions....

2007-05-21 by Steve

--- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, lists <stuart.winsor.lists@...>
wrote:
>
> In article <f2pf25+oulj@...>,
>    lcdpublishing <lcdpublishing@...> wrote:
> > Anyway, I ordered up some negative type resist chemical
> 
> If you're talking about spray on type stuff forget it. It's well nigh
> impossible to get an even coating of consistant thickness without
> pin-holes and other flaws.

It's been many years since I've made boards that way, but I didn't
have any particular problems with spray on negative resist.

BTW- black inkjet ink is not the most UV opaque. It has been posted
here several times in the past, I learned it from someone using an
inkjet printer to make photo films for Tshirt screens.

The basic idea: the ink that is most sensitive to UV fading are the
photo magenta and photo cyan. So OEM inks that have improved fade
resistant must have UV blockers. I even saw a website where someone
tested this, and he found that printing a light green resulted in the
most opaque (to UV) patterns.

Also, look at what pro Tshirt screeners use: vellum. They tend not to
use transparencies.

Check out http://boards.screenprinters.net forum.

Steve Greenfield

GE or BL[B] bulbs ? - was - Re: Photo-resist etching questions....

2007-05-21 by Andrew

> Richard wrote:
>
> <SNIP>
> This unit was a simple wood enclosure,
> with the bottom lined with aluminum
> foil, then eight 20w germicidal-UV
> lamps (these are the clear glass ones);
> and a piece of 1/4" plate glass on top;
> about an inch above the bulbs.  Not at
> all a collimated source; but with 10
> bulbs mounted right next to each other
> all the way up the box; it faked
> 'collimated' quite well...lol.
> 
> Note:  it is WELL worth the trouble to
> find and buy the germicidal lamps.
> They burn an image far faster than
> 'black light' bulbs.
> <SNIP>

Data sheets for most of the positive
resist I have seen would indicate that
black light (long wave UV) bulbs are
faster at exposing than germicidal bulbs
(short wavelength).

Is the negative resist different to the
positive stuff ?

I know that _some_ gemicidal lamps have
much higher wattage ratings per unit
length that common black light ones (10's
of watts 100mmm as opposed to 18W in
600mm).

GE or BL[B] bulbs ? - was - Re: Photo-resist etching questions....

2007-05-24 by pgdion1

I've always used the black light bulbs (fluorescent, not the
incandescent ones) and thought I was cheaping by but I read the same
thing. The wavelength of these is just about perfect. Either the black
light or the 'bug zapper' bulbs are supposed to work equally well (one
just filters more of the visible light than the other but both emit
good UV).

btw - for collimation, my box is all white inside instead of aluminum
foil. I think this works well to even things out.

Phil
KA0HBG
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> 
> Data sheets for most of the positive
> resist I have seen would indicate that
> black light (long wave UV) bulbs are
> faster at exposing than germicidal bulbs
> (short wavelength).
> 
> Is the negative resist different to the
> positive stuff ?
> 
> I know that _some_ gemicidal lamps have
> much higher wattage ratings per unit
> length that common black light ones (10's
> of watts 100mmm as opposed to 18W in
> 600mm).
>

GE or BL[B] bulbs ? - was - Re: Photo-resist etching questions....

2007-05-24 by jpanhalt

--- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew" <andrewm1973@...> 
wrote:
> 
> Data sheets for most of the positive
> resist I have seen would indicate that
> black light (long wave UV) bulbs are
> faster at exposing than germicidal bulbs
> (short wavelength).
> 
> Is the negative resist different to the
> positive stuff ?
> 
> I know that _some_ gemicidal lamps have
> much higher wattage ratings per unit
> length that common black light ones (10's
> of watts 100mmm as opposed to 18W in
> 600mm).
>
Do the datasheets really show 600nm is the best wavelength?

What in the datasheet for the positive resist shows that longer 
wavelength UV will be more effective, i.e., faster, given the same 
intensity of light at each wavelength one compares?  I would assume 
that germicidal lamps (i.e., low-pressure mercury lamps) produce 
predominately the mercury line at 254nm.  I forget the exact number, 
but as I recall, it is on the order of 90 to 99% of the light. The 
tube itself, which acts as a filter, and various coatings can change 
that maximum to give most of the light at longer wavelengths, such as 
366nm or more.

With reference to a previous posting about the efficacy of germicidal 
lamps, one thing to consider is that regular glass blocks virtually 
all of the light at 254nm.  Thus, if one uses common glass over the 
PCB, a germicidal lamp may seem to be less effective.  That is not 
because the wavelength of light per se is less effective, but because 
the light is blocked by the common glass (or even the transparency).

I suspect that lamps designed to produce wavelengths in the near UV, 
say around 366 nm to 450nm(?), should be used, just because that 
simplifies the rest of the system.  

Can you give a link to the data sheet for the positive resists?

Thanks. John

new spray etcher

2007-05-24 by Adam Seychell

twb8899 wrote:
> 
> 
> Roland,
> 
> You're correct about using the methods I mentioned earlier for micro
> wave strip lines. I used to have a commercial shop and used much of
> the same equipment I now have to make strip line and other RF
> circuits. These were for McDonnell F/A-18 parts and equipment. I
> closed that plant several years ago but kept most of the smaller
> equipment for my home based shop.
> 
> I built my spray developer and spray etcher from scratch and use them
> all the time. They are a simple design and kind of based on the Kepro
> stuff. When Kepro shut down I bought quite a bit of the manufacturing
> equipment they used to make their products. I'm now thinking about
> making the etchers myself and offering them for sale. Biggest problem
> is getting the cost down. The Kepro units were way too expensive and
> could probably be offered for a more attractive price with some
> engineering changes.
> 
> This new spray etcher is in the works but it's still to early to say
> much about it except that the prototype works great. If we can get the
> cost just right it will be available later this summer. If anyone is
> interested in a product like this contact me by email and I'll forward
> photographs and more information when we are ready to go.
> 
> Tom

Hi Tom, I'll be curious to know the concept of your new spray etcher. I 
too built a machine from scratch for a hobby project. You can see a 
short description of it at my home page.
http://members.optusnet.com.au/~eseychell/PCB/SprayEtcher/index.html

I posted the above link on Homebrew_PCB a couple of times but got zero 
response. I would be interested in hearing any comments you may have. My 
design is probably too complex to manufacture as a 'very low cost' spray 
etcher, as the prices a hobbyist expects to pay isn't much. The 
important thing to me is that this machine works very well, though it is 
on about the 3rd major revision. You can see performance tests by 
looking at etching uniformity shown at the bottom of the web page.

Adam

GE or BL[B] bulbs ? - was - Re: Photo-resist etching questions....

2007-05-24 by Andrew

> > andrewm wrote:
> > 
> > Data sheets for most of the positive
> > resist I have seen would indicate that
> > black light (long wave UV) bulbs are
> > faster at exposing than germicidal bulbs
> > (short wavelength).
> > <SNIP>

> jpanhalt wrote:
>
> Do the datasheets really show 600nm is the
> best wavelength?

They show just below 400 as the best.  This
is closer to BL[B] bulbs (350 - 370nm) than
GE/GT bulbs which put out UV-C at 250nm

> 
> What in the datasheet for the positive
> resist shows that longer wavelength UV
> will be more effective, i.e., faster,
> given the same intensity of light at each
> wavelength one compares?

If you look on duponts website for Riston
9000 - it states in textual format that the
peak sensitivity is 350-380 nanometers.

This is actually different from the
datasheet I remeber being given for another
brand that showed a graph of sensitivity
and the peak being a bit lower than 400
and rapidly dying off below 300.

> <SNIP>

> Can you give a link to the data sheet for
> the positive resists?
> 
> Thanks. John

Can't find the one with the graphs though
if you google for 

"Riston 9000 datasheet"

The PDF for it comes up as hit number 1.

Page 4 of this data sheet is where it
says "peak sensitivity of 350 to 380nm".

I have both BLB and GE bulbs at my house
if you think it is worth doing some side
by side tests.  I am happy using the
safer BL[B] bulbs myself though.

Re: GE or BL[B] bulbs ? - was - Re: Photo-resist etching questions....

2007-05-25 by Len Warner

At 08:27 07/05/25, Digest Number 2194 wrote:
>     Posted by: "pgdion1" pgdion1@... pgdion1
>     Date: Thu May 24, 2007 7:37 am ((PDT))
>
>I've always used the black light bulbs [snip]
>
>btw - for collimation, my box is all white inside instead of
>aluminum foil. I think this works well to even things out.

Evenness of illumination is not the same as collimation and
yours is diffuse illumination, more or less its opposite.


Regards, LenW
-- 
   From Yahoo! Groups Help: ... trim all the irrelevant quoted text
   out of your message (as a courtesy to the other members of
   the group to make the digest easier to read).

GE or BL[B] bulbs ? - was - Re: Photo-resist etching questions....

2007-05-28 by Ben

> >I've always used the black light bulbs [snip]
> >
> >btw - for collimation, my box is all white inside instead of
> >aluminum foil. I think this works well to even things out.
> 
> Evenness of illumination is not the same as collimation and
> yours is diffuse illumination, more or less its opposite.

Collimation is light just coming from the direction of the source.


I use MG Chemical's 600 series boards Positive type resist.  They list 
wavelength to be 375nm  I use the BL Blacklight lamps.



Ben

Re: GE or BL[B] bulbs ? - was - Re: Photo-resist etching questions....

2007-05-28 by Len Warner

At  9:08 pm ((PDT)) Sun May 27, 2007, bhleavi wrote:
>[attribution lost]
> > >btw - for collimation, my box is all white inside instead of
> > >aluminum foil. I think this works well to even things out.
> >
> > Evenness of illumination is not the same as collimation and
> > yours is diffuse illumination, more or less its opposite.
>
>Collimation is light just coming from the direction of the source.

Only if the light source is sufficiently far away that the rays may be
considered parallel within the accuracy required by the application.

[ http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=dictionary%3A+collimation

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/collimation
1. To make parallel; line up.
2. To adjust the line of sight of (an optical device). ]

For some purposes the Sun is such but if you need something
more portable, less energy-consuming and 24/7/365 it is usual
to use a compact light source and a collimating device.

This might be as simple as a long tube but that is inefficient
so it is common to use a focusing device such as a lens or
curved mirror.

A collimating lens gives a highly parallel beam but the edge
illumination falls off and target area is limited by the aperture.

A parabolic mirror is easier to make for large apertures but the
edge illumination falls off even further and direct illumination
from the source may need attention.

On the other hand, the illumination inside a hollow black-body
radiator is extremely uniform but totally un-collimated.

A lamp in a white box is somewhere between these extremes.

A commercial PCB exposure device I saw on the web had an
row of parallel discharge tubes covering the same area as the
stage but spaced well above it and behind a baffle grid so that
there was no squint illumination of the stage. Thus the
exposure was effectively an array of overlapping beams from
discrete light sources each far enough distant to approximate
a parallel beam. A rear reflector could have been used, I don't
know, but lighting efficiency isn't a big issue here.

Move to quarantaine

This moves the raw source file on disk only. The archive index is not changed automatically, so you still need to run a manual refresh afterward.