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
largest volume. This suggests that the nominal volume is over estimated, or the anilox may be worn. The Capatch system shows the next largest difference to the nominal value. The other systems have a spread of less than 1 bcm between them and are all within +/- 1 bcm of the nominal. The 0.0 line on the vertical axis represents nominal. Note each system interprets volume differently. The instru- ments are not calibrated to each other. And, the question remains: what is the true nominal? STANDARD DEVIATION Consistency is critical for the use of these systems as a quality control tool. This can be compared from the standard deviation of the results of each system as shown in both the table and graph (see “Standard Deviation” graph). The microscope and Capatch system are the least consistent with the highest standard deviation. Overall the 3DQC produces the most repeatable results, followed by the Anicam and Mi- crofax and then the Liquid Volume method. Note the Microfax are measured by one of the highly consistent electronic tools. Average Small Mid Large Anicam 0.27 0.28 0.26 0.26 3DQC 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.19 Scope 1.79 2.24 1.78 1.21 Capatch 0.54 0.47 0.77 0.32 LVM 0.37 0.49 0.34 0.25 Microfax 0.24 0.34 0.22 0.15 Reproducibility: One concern when measuring reproducibility is having an operator independent of the results. Comparing the results of the novice and expert users alleviates this apprehension. In both the mean and standard deviation, it is the systems with the most variables that show the biggest difference between operators. The novice operators of the microscope have a tendency to produce a lower estimation of the volume of the anilox, whereas with the Capatch and the Liquid Volume method the difference is random. There is no trend in the standard deviation (SD) of the novice compared with the expert operators. Both novice and expert produce the same variability with the Anicam and 3DQC system. -2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 Difference to Nominal Anicam 3DQC Scope Capatch LVM Microfax www.flexography.org december 2012 FLEXO 29