by clicking the arrows at the side of the page, or by using the toolbar.
by clicking anywhere on the page.
by dragging the page around when zoomed in.
by clicking anywhere on the page when zoomed in.
web sites or send emails by clicking on hyperlinks.
Email this page to a friend
Search this issue
Index - jump to page or section
Archive - view past issues
FLEXO Magazine : December 2012
Technologies & Techniques TAKING A PULSE • Determine any variation in measurements from a single operator and instrument measuring the same roll • With each instrument, effort was made to determine the variation between different operators measuring the same engraving • The four most consistent systems (Anicam, 3DQC, Microfax and Liquid Volume) all report a volume lower than the nominal for the largest volume. • As for reproducibility, novice-expert influences appear on the microscope data to be very skill-dependent and the readings tend to be somewhat subjective Measuring Anilox Volume A gauge R&R study By Dan Reilly Inmeasuring anilox volume, questions inevitably arise about how repeatable and reliable instruments really are because of the sheer number of methods available. A Flexo Quality Consortium (FQC) committee was formed to explore that question. Statistics contained in this report were analyzed and compiled by Professor Tim Claypole, MBE , of Swansea University. Kern Cox, lecturer, of Clemson University, coordinated the measuring. Anilox volume measurement is critical for consistent color, repeatable print results, press productivity, ability to match proofs and, ultimately, customer satisfaction. It is important to note that this study is not designed to choose or recom- mend one method over another but, rather, is purely intended to report the results of the Gauge R & R study. Each method has its place and advantages in the pressroom and anilox manufacturing facility. Repeatability: The study aimed to determine any variation in measurements from a single operator and instrument measuring the same roll—under the same conditions. Reproducibility: With each instrument, the effort was made to determine the variation between different operators measuring the same engraving. Instruments: We selected the most commonly used instruments to test: • Microscope or Gravure Scope (Unitron) • Capatch • Liquid Volume Measurement (LVM) • Troika - Anicam • Microdynamics - 3DQC • Testex Press-O -Film tape, also referred to as Microfax INFLUENCES ON MEASUREMENT There are a number of outside variables that must be con- sidered, including the experience of the person in using the instrument and the associated effect on the measurement? To determine this, two experienced and two novice operators were tested. The novice operators were trained on the day of the measuring. Another variable considered was whether diameter or curvature influences the result? Three very different roll diam- eters were chosen to answer this question. The study also asked whether coarse engravings measure differently than fine engravings? Fine, medium and coarse Tested devices—microscope or gravure scope, capatch, liquid volume measurement (lVM), Troika – Anicam, Microdynamics - 3DqC, Testex Press-o-Film tape, also referred to as Microfax. www.flexography.org DeCeMBeR 2012 FLeXO 27 LVM Scope Capatch Impression Microdynamics Troika If failure is not an option... and growing your business is important, then you need to join FTA today. Whether you’re a narrow, mid or wide web printer/converter, a CPC, a prepress provider, or supplier/distributor, you’ll find FTA’s robust offerings are guaranteed to grow your organization and take your career to new heights. • Technical conferences, events & networking • Education, training & sustainability • Publications & media • Honors & awards • Support & expertise • Surveys & benchmarking • Visibility & brand recognition Get started today. Call Susan Demato, FTA’s Membership Manager at 631-737-6020 ext.11