|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
And indeed, that understanding is correct as far as it goes. But that's not the whole story. Endless retensionings of the mesh, in fact, do relatively little toward our stability goal until we begin printing with the mesh. We can demonstrate why by applying our fork once more to our plate of spaghetti. Notice that the individual noodles begin to reorient in the direction of the applied force. This directionalization is similar to what happens when we begin to work the mesh with the squeegee. The continuous stressing of the mesh as it deflects with each pass of the squeegee results in our third concept, workhardening. Under stress the polymers become increasingly reoriented in a more parallel fashion and, as they do, our molecule chains not only can replace broken bonds with new bonds, but actually form additional bonds. The result is a stronger mesh, because filament strength increases with the total number of bond sites. And a stronger filament better resists elongation even at much higher tensions. Workhardening, to a small degree, occurs during retensioning. But it is the stress of printing that primarily accomplishes it, in conjunction with an occasional retensioning between print runs. That's why, in practice, I recommend that after as few as one to three retensionings, the mesh should be coated, exposed and used in production. But care should be taken to avoid jobs that require extremely close-tolerance registration during the first one or two print runs, because the mesh does continue to elongate somewhat during the process of workhardening. Like fine wine In my lectures, it's often at this point that someone asks: If we keep retensioning do we get to the point where there is no change? If they mean no further elongation, the answer is no. Truth is, a "constant" represents a theoretical ideal. And, like most things in the "perfect" category, constant tension (absolutely no change) is a practical impossibility. But that's in no way a piece of bad news. For screen-printing purposes, at higher tensions the variation represented by the loss of a Newton or two rarely makes a visible difference in a printed image. So practically speaking, the answer to that question is: we're already there. Next time, I'll detail the role of elevate tension in the mesh-stabilization process, explain practical steps to attain it, and pose the ultimate high-tension question: "How high is high enough?" |
|
Making it Measurable N/cm = lbs. per lineal foot Thus, mesh mounted on a frame two feet wide and three feet long and tensioned to 56 N/cm would be subjected to 2+3 total feet X 400 lbs. per foot, for a total of 2000 ft./lbs. of force. To put what the tension meter tells us in proper perspective, one N/cm does little more than overcome gravity's attempt to make the mesh sag, but because force doubles as the number of N/cm doubles, a 50 N/cm screen easily supports the weight of a grown man. |
|||
|
PRINTWARE MAGAZINE - DECEMBER 1993 |
|||