----- Original Message ----- From: "Adam Seychell" <adam_seychell@...> To: <Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Monday, June 30, 2003 4:17 AM Subject: Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: Inkjet Transparencies > > > Ted Inoue wrote: > > I would think the most productive thing would be to keep a record of > > all the printers and media that work or don't work. In this way, a > > newcomer can simply refer to a chart and have an easy time learning > > from the combined experience of those in the group. > > > > That would be a extremely useful reference to use. I was planning > on making a web page dedicated to this very topic, but hadn't had > the time. Ideally some form of measurements would need to be > taken so all the different printing tests can be accurately > characterized. Some measurements that come to mind are; overall > relative light transmittance and line edge jaggedness (or maximum > deviation of ink droplets from an ideal line). I have a > microscope that can take pictures of line edge jaggedness. > The latter is responsible for the minimum PCB line widths that > can be achieved. Many years ago I worked on subjective copy quality for Xerox Research (UK), correlating it with physical measurements. IIRC the main physical parameters used were 'edge gradient' and 'line darkness', measured automatically with a very expensive piece of equipment. Line darkness is basically your relative light transmittance and edge gradient probably isn;t relevant with ink jet technology using transparency material. I think you would need a statistical measure of the 'jaggedness'. Leon -- Leon Heller, G1HSM leon_heller@... http://www.geocities.com/leon_heller
Message
Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: Inkjet Transparencies
2003-06-30 by Leon Heller
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.