November 5-7, 2007 Nashville, TN Processing System Optimization David Chinnis Sr. Digital Plates Specialist The Flint Group

2 Three Considerations  Method  Machine  Money

3 Method  What methods may increase productivity? Testing and Measuring Processing Performance

4 Wash Out Rate Performance  Are my processor brushes optimized and consistent?  Brushes that are not level can’t possibly create consistent floors without over processing to compensate for error!

5 How do I know?  Check Brush Level - Incremental Processors  12” long plate x maximum processor width  Expose header (2”), no back exposure required  Process, dry 20 minutes  Measure 12 areas across  Shim or adjust brushes to achieve variation <.007” Batch Processors require an entire sheet to accurately measure flatness (<.015”)

6 Wash Out Rate Performance  Is my processing time optimized for my relief depth?  Does it make a difference?

7 The Method  Four plates similar size (ex. 18” x 18”)  Masking Sheet 6” smaller than plate (15” x 15”)  Face expose ONLY

8 The Method  Process plates at four set speeds/times  Allow a brief dry down (20 MINUTES)  Measure the results  Select plate with an average overwash of 0.008” – 0.010” measured in the unexposed area Does it make a difference? You bet it does!

9 Test Design  All plate material from same batch  1 back exposure time selected to produce relief from.023” -.026” (210 seconds based on prior testing)  3 washout rates with 5% solids and 35°C  250 mm/min (4.0 min) =.010” overwash  180 mm/min (5.6 min) =.020” overwash  120 mm/min (8.3 min) =.062” overwash (Washed to support)  All plates dried for 90 65°C

10 Measurements  Gauge measured on 100% solid and 1% process areas  8 individual measurements for each area at each exposure combination  Entire study measured 448 solid and 448 screen readings at 3 washout rates, for a total of 2688 gauge readings

11 Comparison  448 gauge readings at 100% solid and 448 gauge readings at 1% measured at each washout rate and averaged

12 Gauge (in) Washout250 mm/min180 mm/min120 mm/min Solid % Range AVG Comparison

13 Results  Decreasing wash rate causes longer dwell time in solvent  250 mm/min = 4.0 min wash  180 mm/min = 5.6 min wash (40% increase over recommended)  120 mm/min = 8.3 min wash (108% increase over recommended)  Longer solvent dwell time causes more swelling, thereby extending the dry time

14 Plate Processing Summary

15 Machine - Incremental Processors

16 Solvent Wash Plates / 8 Hour Shift 20 Plates/8 hrs

17 Machine  Solids Content Measuring Pump Tank Draw

18 Machine  Controlled Brush Depth

19 Money  Optimized Wash = Optimized Dry  Optimized Solvent = Optimized Wash  Optimized Brushes = Optimized Plate  Optimized Plate = Optimized Production Time = Savings!

20 Solvent  Solvent Reclaim Costs Example: sq ft/yr ( % solid area on plate Usage = 12,931 gal - but expected recovery = gal Plate = $10.08 square foot (0.07¢ sq in) Solvent = $15.00 gallon (1293 replacement) Operating and Disposal = 0.66¢/gal reclaimed on site Estimated Annual Cost $27930 or 0.47¢/sq. ft. (.0033 ¢) Total Plate cost ¢ sq in

November 5-7, 2007 Nashville, TN THANK YOU! David Chinnis Flint Group Printing Plates