Study of Dampening solution Parameter towards Waste Paper Quantity

[Onesiforus Yabes Ronanus]

Hi all and Happy New Year 2026.

I am new here and would like to discuss on my study analysis on dampening solution impacts towards waste paper quantity.

Currently I have been experimenting and collecting data from Nov 16th 2025 till Dec 20th 2025 to find the best parameter range for conductivity, pH and temperature.

Constant Variables are:
1) Dampening are formulated new every week using our own standard.

Result from my analysis,

1) pH does not fluctuates aggresively with coefficient of variances (%) of 6.55%.

2) Temperature does fluctuates moderately with coeffiecient of variance (%) of 17%.

3) Conductivity does fluctuates aggresively with coefficient of variance (%) of 26.4%.

Hence, from this analysis I correlate with the amount of paper wastage with conductivity value when machine is running within the

As for conclusion, this study suggest to as conductivity increase more than 2.0 mS/cm, defect rate increases due to color variation, smearing and hickeys.

However, since I only collected data for 1 month, I am more likely to question the accuracy of this study whether it is reliable or not. Hence, I would like to discuss this matter further on the dampening solution parameter range based on other printer experiences.

Your reply will be much appreciated. Thanks!

 

[SteveSuffRIT]

In your dot & line graphs to the left, please remove all the connecting line. This will just make it an X/Y scatter diagram which is easier to interpret.
They are labeled as being Individuals (Xi) control charts? If so, they would never have connecting lines like shown?

Histogram shape usually has a normal bell shape. Your pH does not, conductivity and 'C do, but are skewed.

If your fountain solution is heavily "buffered" the pH should not change and be constant.
Each whole number change in pH (1.0), is a chemical change of 10X because pH is a logarithmic scale.

Normally, over time conductivity should increase as it ages from usage.

Is this data for a single tank recirculatory/filter system, where only 1 tank supplies all 4 press units (CMYK)?

I assume your fountain solution doesn't use any IPA alcohol.

The waste paper values are for waste produced during make-ready (MR) or during the production run, or both?
If you are throwing away defective sheets due to mis-registration, this has no correlation to pH, conductivity, or 'C.

The coefficient of variance (CV) is the sigma or standard deviation / mean.

 

[Erik Nikkanen]

Hi all and Happy New Year 2026.

I am new here and would like to discuss on my study analysis on dampening solution impacts towards waste paper quantity.

Currently I have been experimenting and collecting data from Nov 16th 2025 till Dec 20th 2025 to find the best parameter range for conductivity, pH and temperature.

Constant Variables are:
1) Dampening are formulated new every week using our own standard.

Result from my analysis,

1) pH does not fluctuates aggresively with coefficient of variances (%) of 6.55%.
View attachment 16673

2) Temperature does fluctuates moderately with coeffiecient of variance (%) of 17%.
View attachment 16674

3) Conductivity does fluctuates aggresively with coefficient of variance (%) of 26.4%.
View attachment 16677

Hence, from this analysis I correlate with the amount of paper wastage with conductivity value when machine is running within the

View attachment 16676

As for conclusion, this study suggest to as conductivity increase more than 2.0 mS/cm, defect rate increases due to color variation, smearing and hickeys.

However, since I only collected data for 1 month, I am more likely to question the accuracy of this study whether it is reliable or not. Hence, I would like to discuss this matter further on the dampening solution parameter range based on other printer experiences.

Your reply will be much appreciated. Thanks!

Hi Onesiforus,

It is nice to see a study presented here. I always like to see studies even though I don't quite understand the results completely and don't often agree with the conclusions. My area of interest in offset is not with the chemistry but more with the mechanical and logical thinking of how the process works. I have an interest in understanding the rules that govern the process, which is quite helpful to understand problems in the process and problems with existing research and should be helpful in developing better technology.

Just some comments about studies related to offset. One must always be aware that correlation is not necessarily causation. Also what is the purpose of a study? Is it to just collect data from observations to get a picture of what the results are in your operation or is it aimed at finding a solution to particular problems? You have done a lot of work in your study and it probably will help in defining control limits but it does not really explain why things happen.

If one wants to understand the rules that govern the process that are predictable, then just doing tests on production presses will not provide that information in many cases. Doing a scientific test, to study the process, is quite different then doing a test on a production press. A scientific test requires more control of variables. The production offset press does not control the critical variable of ink feed. This means that the whole history of research done on production presses has not been totally scientifically valid and has resulted in some questionable views on how the process works.

There are many problems with how, even the modern offset press is designed and that still causes problems. These problems interact with each other making it difficult to understand what is happening from observations and data. The most critical problem, in my opinion, is the lack of predictability and consistency of the ink feed. This is a fact. It affects the problem of ink water balance and is very much related to waste at the start of the run and during the run.

I would like to see this problem with the ink feed fixed and then the kind of research you are doing might result in very interesting results. Maybe with results you did not expect.

 

[Onesiforus Yabes Ronanus]

In your dot & line graphs to the left, please remove all the connecting line. This will just make it an X/Y scatter diagram which is easier to interpret.
They are labeled as being Individuals (Xi) control charts? If so, they would never have connecting lines like shown?

Histogram shape usually has a normal bell shape. Your pH does not, conductivity and 'C do, but are skewed.

If your fountain solution is heavily "buffered" the pH should not change and be constant.
Each whole number change in pH (1.0), is a chemical change of 10X because pH is a logarithmic scale.

Normally, over time conductivity should increase as it ages from usage.

Is this data for a single tank recirculatory/filter system, where only 1 tank supplies all 4 press units (CMYK)?

I assume your fountain solution doesn't use any IPA alcohol.

The waste paper values are for waste produced during make-ready (MR) or during the production run, or both?
If you are throwing away defective sheets due to mis-registration, this has no correlation to pH, conductivity, or 'C.

The coefficient of variance (CV) is the sigma or standard deviation / mean.

Hi SteveSuffRIT,
Thanks for the reply. I actually generated through Pyhton coding for the illustration. Might need to tweak few options to disable the connecting dots. However thanks for pin it out. (will amend when presenting later)

Correct, my pH histogram was not distributed as per bell curve. It actually made me wonder why and thanks for clarifying on the logarithmic scale and the characteristic of conductivity over time.

Just for the record, all this data are compiled from 10 machines, 6 KBA and 4 Komori machines. Only 4 out of 10 machines has automatic dosing for fountain solution and fresh water (only 1 using ). The rest were manually formulated from time to time. For the circulation, it supplies for all printing unit from 4 to 6 units running CMYK and may include Special colors.

We are actually using IPA for dampening solution formulation but only for KBA machines. Komori does not.

We are calculating waste paper from production run process only (to prevent from adding waste paper qty due to misregister or other reason). Also, we usually have the allowable provision for waste paper especially for make ready purpopes and it already counted as "production cost", so the waste paper from make ready process is neglected.

However,in this case, if they using more paper then they should have, they would request for additional paper and in the requisiton form they are required to state reason for it. From there, i collected the data and correlates with the dampening recording. This data might have integrity issue but I also have time constraint as I also cannot stay at single machine to conduct this study.

Methodology for data collection (only able to do this due to time constraint):
Sampling method for every machine, regardless of number of job run:
One sampling per day at 5.00 pm

or should I ask operator to record their dampening parameter for every single job (but this might jeopardize the data integrity where they may cheat on the data). However this might be the reliable method if i really wanted to find out the impact of dampening solution on addition of waste paper.

 

[Onesiforus Yabes Ronanus]

Hi Onesiforus,

It is nice to see a study presented here. I always like to see studies even though I don't quite understand the results completely and don't often agree with the conclusions. My area of interest in offset is not with the chemistry but more with the mechanical and logical thinking of how the process works. I have an interest in understanding the rules that govern the process, which is quite helpful to understand problems in the process and problems with existing research and should be helpful in developing better technology.

Just some comments about studies related to offset. One must always be aware that correlation is not necessarily causation. Also what is the purpose of a study? Is it to just collect data from observations to get a picture of what the results are in your operation or is it aimed at finding a solution to particular problems? You have done a lot of work in your study and it probably will help in defining control limits but it does not really explain why things happen.

If one wants to understand the rules that govern the process that are predictable, then just doing tests on production presses will not provide that information in many cases. Doing a scientific test, to study the process, is quite different then doing a test on a production press. A scientific test requires more control of variables. The production offset press does not control the critical variable of ink feed. This means that the whole history of research done on production presses has not been totally scientifically valid and has resulted in some questionable views on how the process works.

There are many problems with how, even the modern offset press is designed and that still causes problems. These problems interact with each other making it difficult to understand what is happening from observations and data. The most critical problem, in my opinion, is the lack of predictability and consistency of the ink feed. This is a fact. It affects the problem of ink water balance and is very much related to waste at the start of the run and during the run.

I would like to see this problem with the ink feed fixed and then the kind of research you are doing might result in very interesting results. Maybe with results you did not expect.

Hi Erik Nikkanen,

You are very true about "correlation is not necessarily causation". As I have started diving into printing industry 5 years ago, I can say mostly of my projects or studies has been the upgrading side which are improving the press efficiency through manpower and methods. The results are very straightforward but when i started to study the impact of waste paper from process parameter, i have seen things differently. I have learnt many new things about the epictomy of printing offset and it made realized that it requires deep understanding to actually run the press machine especially when running CMYK.


Although my study is very far from scientific study but I am aware of the fundamentals of how dampening solution parameters may affect our printed sheet quality. My data representation may not suggest a strong conclusion however, with regards of experiences such the likes of experts in this community, I hope that we can discuss in a meaningful way that may benefit others.


Anyway, thanks for the heads up on the ink feed issue. Recently I have CMYK + 1 special color that cannot be achieved as per customer sample when running in all KBA machine. Although the cycle of ink feed is already max, it won't give the desired result. Suprisingly, Komori presses were able to achieve as per customer sample. Currently, still under discussion with our maintenance team and I wish to further investigate with KBA's printer on this matter. Possibly dampening solution may not be the culprit to the waste paper after all.

As for now, I have to control the process and enforcing the SOP for recording. At least, process parameter wont be bugging me around when i am conducting waste paper study on different area such as ink feed, roller condition, machine speed. At first this study objective is just to revise our current standard whether it is still reliable or not, but after i have connected the waste paper as the responding variable, it seems like there are many areas that i should dive deeper.

Yes, I will keep on posting my study here as my superior don't really have time to zoom in or even discuss on this in more meaningful way. I am glad this study intrigues you in a good way

 

[Erik Nikkanen]

Hi Erik Nikkanen,

You are very true about "correlation is not necessarily causation". As I have started diving into printing industry 5 years ago, I can say mostly of my projects or studies has been the upgrading side which are improving the press efficiency through manpower and methods. The results are very straightforward but when i started to study the impact of waste paper from process parameter, i have seen things differently. I have learnt many new things about the epictomy of printing offset and it made realized that it requires deep understanding to actually run the press machine especially when running CMYK.


Although my study is very far from scientific study but I am aware of the fundamentals of how dampening solution parameters may affect our printed sheet quality. My data representation may not suggest a strong conclusion however, with regards of experiences such the likes of experts in this community, I hope that we can discuss in a meaningful way that may benefit others.


Anyway, thanks for the heads up on the ink feed issue. Recently I have CMYK + 1 special color that cannot be achieved as per customer sample when running in all KBA machine. Although the cycle of ink feed is already max, it won't give the desired result. Suprisingly, Komori presses were able to achieve as per customer sample. Currently, still under discussion with our maintenance team and I wish to further investigate with KBA's printer on this matter. Possibly dampening solution may not be the culprit to the waste paper after all.

As for now, I have to control the process and enforcing the SOP for recording. At least, process parameter wont be bugging me around when i am conducting waste paper study on different area such as ink feed, roller condition, machine speed. At first this study objective is just to revise our current standard whether it is still reliable or not, but after i have connected the waste paper as the responding variable, it seems like there are many areas that i should dive deeper.

Yes, I will keep on posting my study here as my superior don't really have time to zoom in or even discuss on this in more meaningful way. I am glad this study intrigues you in a good way

It is good to see that you are trying to get a good understanding of the issues both from the day to day management of the process and the hidden issues of fundamental causes. I would expect that you can get a lot of valuable and practical help for those everyday printing issues on this forum.

I have a specific area of knowledge on this subject that you would not find from any other source. Not quite so practical because its potential benefits require modifications to the process. Even so, it does give a different perspective that can help in understanding some parts of a confusing process. This can save time by not working too hard in a direction that will not be very useful.

I would like to ask you a question about you background if I may? Your profile says that you are working as a print engineer. So, are you an educated engineer, from a normal engineering school, who is now working in a printing operation or are you one who has got your education through a graphic arts technical school. The reason I ask is because it helps me to know how to comment on a specific issue with you. The thinking patterns of those two group are quite different and need different ways to communicate ideas. Also educational background can bring along with it faulty understanding of problems that is extremely hard to change.

Yes, the issues you are having are getting more interesting. One is the issue about why one press can reach a target condition but the other press can't. Also it would be nice to be more specific about the problems. The issue of waste is huge and can have numerous causes but a problem with solid print density variation is more specific and has fewer factors. While the total amount of ink printed during steady state conditions, has only one variable.

Anyhow, the manufacturing capability of the printing process is a fascinating subject but one that does have potential solutions and not just ways to try to manage it.

 

[SteveSuffRIT]

Hi SteveSuffRIT,
Thanks for the reply. I actually generated through Pyhton coding for the illustration. Might need to tweak few options to disable the connecting dots. However thanks for pin it out. (will amend when presenting later)

Correct, my pH histogram was not distributed as per bell curve. It actually made me wonder why and thanks for clarifying on the logarithmic scale and the characteristic of conductivity over time.

Just for the record, all this data are compiled from 10 machines, 6 KBA and 4 Komori machines. Only 4 out of 10 machines has automatic dosing for fountain solution and fresh water (only 1 using ). The rest were manually formulated from time to time. For the circulation, it supplies for all printing unit from 4 to 6 units running CMYK and may include Special colors.

We are actually using IPA for dampening solution formulation but only for KBA machines. Komori does not.

We are calculating waste paper from production run process only (to prevent from adding waste paper qty due to misregister or other reason). Also, we usually have the allowable provision for waste paper especially for make ready purpopes and it already counted as "production cost", so the waste paper from make ready process is neglected.

However,in this case, if they using more paper then they should have, they would request for additional paper and in the requisiton form they are required to state reason for it. From there, i collected the data and correlates with the dampening recording. This data might have integrity issue but I also have time constraint as I also cannot stay at single machine to conduct this study.

Methodology for data collection (only able to do this due to time constraint):
Sampling method for every machine, regardless of number of job run:
One sampling per day at 5.00 pm

or should I ask operator to record their dampening parameter for every single job (but this might jeopardize the data integrity where they may cheat on the data). However this might be the reliable method if i really wanted to find out the impact of dampening solution on addition of waste paper.

Hi Onesiforus,

Thanks for writing back and providing additional information, that was helpful in understanding the context.

The formula for pH = -log H+ shows the logarithmic relationship.
Optical print density is also logarithmic too, D = -log R.

Temperature has an effect on both pH (inverse) and conductivity (direct) so that should be known also or normalized with a compensation correction.

Your data is aggregate (10 presses combined as a single global population), so you may want to separate, group, or stratify it into logical groups, like auto vs. manual dose/mix or IPA vs. none. I don't think KBA vs Komori is needed. To preserve the individual identity, you can code your data with letter (A-Z), numbers (1-10), colors, and/or shapes in the graphs.

Sampling once a day by you is fine for now but your valuable/limited time is better used in the analysis of the data rather than the collection of it.

Histograms (vertical bar charts) and X/Y scatter diagrams are "static" (snap shot photo) and do not show dynamic/kinetic movement over time (video) like a run/trend/time plot or control chart does.

And as discussed previously by another, correlation is not the same as causation.

 

[Onesiforus Yabes Ronanus]

It is good to see that you are trying to get a good understanding of the issues both from the day to day management of the process and the hidden issues of fundamental causes. I would expect that you can get a lot of valuable and practical help for those everyday printing issues on this forum.

I have a specific area of knowledge on this subject that you would not find from any other source. Not quite so practical because its potential benefits require modifications to the process. Even so, it does give a different perspective that can help in understanding some parts of a confusing process. This can save time by not working too hard in a direction that will not be very useful.

I would like to ask you a question about you background if I may? Your profile says that you are working as a print engineer. So, are you an educated engineer, from a normal engineering school, who is now working in a printing operation or are you one who has got your education through a graphic arts technical school. The reason I ask is because it helps me to know how to comment on a specific issue with you. The thinking patterns of those two group are quite different and need different ways to communicate ideas. Also educational background can bring along with it faulty understanding of problems that is extremely hard to change.

Yes, the issues you are having are getting more interesting. One is the issue about why one press can reach a target condition but the other press can't. Also it would be nice to be more specific about the problems. The issue of waste is huge and can have numerous causes but a problem with solid print density variation is more specific and has fewer factors. While the total amount of ink printed during steady state conditions, has only one variable.

Anyhow, the manufacturing capability of the printing process is a fascinating subject but one that does have potential solutions and not just ways to try to manage it.

Hi Erik,

Thanks for replying back.

I was not aware of this community at all after been this "long" in the offset printing industry as I always refer the manual book from the manufacturer itself. I actually did not expect this forum is to be active and interactive. Could've saved tons of my time...(really)

Correct, I would really prefer not to do so much work for a study that has already been proven by other experts in this community especially in this area of knowledge. For that, I am thankful for your tips you have given earlier and future advise and commentary.

My education backgroud is I studied mechanical engineering for my degree and specialized in heat transfer (refrigeration), corrosion studies and factory management. I actually started as Maintenance Engineer in the first 4 years and only have been assigned to printing department last year to fill up the vacant position. Hence, I am actually still a freshie in this area of knowledge and I don't really cared much about the production process before. But I do understand when some part in the machine is faulty or worn out, what will it cause to the printed sheet. For example, if the chiller for dampening tank is not doing its job, the viscosity of the ink will be lower and hence causing over-inking or uneven distribution to the printed sheets. Most of the times, I only cared until that part not until what will happen if the in process parameter is not controlled.

I guess I will try to discuss the ink density (distribution) in another thead. It is indeed a great topic to discuss and I'll to post it soon as the KBA's printer come and fixed the issue. Just matter of time, I will post it with the corrective action that I have taken to solve it internally. Surely will wait for your commentary on that.

"Anyhow, the manufacturing capability of the printing process is a fascinating subject but one that does have potential solutions and not just ways to try to manage it." This is very true, I have seen things gone wrong and exagerated without any potential solutions. Thanks for reminding me that!

 

[Onesiforus Yabes Ronanus]

Hi Onesiforus,

Thanks for writing back and providing additional information, that was helpful in understanding the context.

The formula for pH = -log H+ shows the logarithmic relationship.
Optical print density is also logarithmic too, D = -log R.

Temperature has an effect on both pH (inverse) and conductivity (direct) so that should be known also or normalized with a compensation correction.

Your data is aggregate (10 presses combined as a single global population), so you may want to separate, group, or stratify it into logical groups, like auto vs. manual dose/mix or IPA vs. none. I don't think KBA vs Komori is needed. To preserve the individual identity, you can code your data with letter (A-Z), numbers (1-10), colors, and/or shapes in the graphs.

Sampling once a day by you is fine for now but your valuable/limited time is better used in the analysis of the data rather than the collection of it.

Histograms (vertical bar charts) and X/Y scatter diagrams are "static" (snap shot photo) and do not show dynamic/kinetic movement over time (video) like a run/trend/time plot or control chart does.

And as discussed previously by another, correlation is not the same as causation.

Hi Steve,

Thanks for your reply.

I was not aware on the inverse and direct proportional of temperature between pH and conductivity respecitvely. Thanks for mentioning it. I could make a Pearson's correlation and see whether my data is realiable. I already tried to correlated conductivity with the waste paper qty and it actually did not support whether conductivity actually impact waste paper qty. If you don't mind, could you share to me standard parameter for dampening solution that your presses are using regardless of machine types. eg. Temperature, pH and conductivty, formulation (freshwater %, fountain% and IPA%)/per litre?


Yes, that is a great idea. By stratifying it I could see the trend even more detail per logical group. Also, I agree on the static analysis using histogram, it does not say much about the dampening solution conditions over time, how the operators are taking care of their dampening and how no of colours impact the conductivity. For the record, the main reason why I use the control chart and histogram is to find a collective standard for the conductivity parameter range. Hence, I believe that as long as I can find out the actual min and max value from the average conductivity data, the new standard that I was going to implement could be used (practically) in my 10 presses. It is just that there are actually a lot more to dig in other than controlling conductivity even if I implement new "practical standard" for the conducitivty when it comes to solve the waste paper qty due to color variation,ink smearing, etc.

 

[Erik Nikkanen]

Hi Erik,

Thanks for replying back.

I was not aware of this community at all after been this "long" in the offset printing industry as I always refer the manual book from the manufacturer itself. I actually did not expect this forum is to be active and interactive. Could've saved tons of my time...(really)

Correct, I would really prefer not to do so much work for a study that has already been proven by other experts in this community especially in this area of knowledge. For that, I am thankful for your tips you have given earlier and future advise and commentary.

My education backgroud is I studied mechanical engineering for my degree and specialized in heat transfer (refrigeration), corrosion studies and factory management. I actually started as Maintenance Engineer in the first 4 years and only have been assigned to printing department last year to fill up the vacant position. Hence, I am actually still a freshie in this area of knowledge and I don't really cared much about the production process before. But I do understand when some part in the machine is faulty or worn out, what will it cause to the printed sheet. For example, if the chiller for dampening tank is not doing its job, the viscosity of the ink will be lower and hence causing over-inking or uneven distribution to the printed sheets. Most of the times, I only cared until that part not until what will happen if the in process parameter is not controlled.

I guess I will try to discuss the ink density (distribution) in another thead. It is indeed a great topic to discuss and I'll to post it soon as the KBA's printer come and fixed the issue. Just matter of time, I will post it with the corrective action that I have taken to solve it internally. Surely will wait for your commentary on that.

"Anyhow, the manufacturing capability of the printing process is a fascinating subject but one that does have potential solutions and not just ways to try to manage it." This is very true, I have seen things gone wrong and exagerated without any potential solutions. Thanks for reminding me that!

OK. I am new to this community also even though I have known about it for years. Printplanet.com is also helpful for everyday problems and it seems to have more responses to questions than here. Both can help. Linkedin can also be useful.

I want to comment on the idea of experts relative to pioneers. There are many "experts" that have a lot of experience with the process and they can be very helpful on practical issues with existing technology. This covers operators and most people in the technical community in the printing industry. Unfortunately they are not pioneers and are almost totally useless in seeing what is needed for the future and how to get there. A pioneer does not have all the answers but can see the general direction that is needed and can explain that. Knowledge is gained on the way to the future via proper analysis and experimentation. The two groups have a hard time coexisting since the experts can not see and understand what the pioneers are talking about and the pioneers don't always have the resources to demonstrate every concept and thought based on their new knowledge to convince the experts. A pretty sad situation.

I think of myself as being in the pioneer camp. And I can tell you that after almost thirty years, I seem to be the only one in that camp in the print industry. Very strange. Here is the dilemma. If you have an new idea to improve the process, never ask an expert. They will always be negative since they have never seen it before. Never ask an operator for their opinion. But operators would be great to evaluate the new concept in operation. That is what they are good at. But if you want an opinion, ask an engineer or scientist outside the industry, who can evaluate things based on first principles, and after you explain the problem properly and presenting a potential solution, then see if it makes sense. See if their view makes sense in your own mind. You have to be the final decision maker and not accept anyone's opinion as truth.

Glad to see that you are a mechanical engineer. I am assuming we talk the same language. If we get back to the press. Here is a fact that should be of interest to you. On an offset press, the ink key setting has NO direct relationship to the amount of ink fed into the roller train. Why is this so? Even if the ink key meters an accurate and predictable amount of ink onto the ink fountain roller, the transfer of ink from the ink fountain roller to the roller train is inconsistent and unpredictable. This is because the ductor, which is a technology that has been used on presses for over 170 years, is inconsistent. Many variables, such as water, temperature, press speed etc. affect the amount of ink transferred at this point. I have attached a file on a guide to build and run an ITB (Ink Transfer Blade) that corrects this problem. If you feel like experimenting, this might be something to try. I consider it a prototype but I think it is close to what would be viable in production. You have 10 presses and a little bit of knowledge can be leveraged on those presses. Might be fun to see how that works out.

The ITB or any other tech that positively controls the ink feed into the press will mean that the total amount of ink printed on the substrate will ONLY be directly related to the amount of ink fed into the press, on average. This must be true based on the conservation of mass principle. It will be independent of any changes in water settings. This has also been confirmed in testing on four different presses over the years. Basically no ink water balance problems.

Now this might be of interest to your initial studies. With the ink feed being independent of water settings, the method of water application can be simplified. One could directly inject water into the roller train without any recirculation system. This would mean that the fountain solution chem would be consistent since there is no recirculation. There would not be any need to maintaining and disposing of the spent fountain solution. Floor space would also be saved. Something to think about.

I tried to also attach my 1997 TAGA paper that covers some of the issues that need to be solved, to getting the press to go directly to proper conditions. Unfortunately the file was too big. If you give me your email address, I will send it directly to you. Also some of this conversation on what is potentially possible might better be made off forum. Frankly, I get too much abuse from the experts.

 

[SteveSuffRIT]

Onesiforus,

The basic parameters you listed for fountain solution (FS) are now complete.
Advanced printers may also measure contact angle or refractive index (Brix) for surface tension.

I wouldn't expect a high degree of correlation between FS conductivity and running paper waste.
Paper is the most expensive raw material cost in printing and tracking/monitoring waste is important.
Most printers will use an MIS software (Management Information System) which allows them to assign an operaton/reason code for waste, which can later be investigated and analyzed.

 

[Onesiforus Yabes Ronanus]

OK. I am new to this community also even though I have known about it for years. Printplanet.com is also helpful for everyday problems and it seems to have more responses to questions than here. Both can help. Linkedin can also be useful.

I want to comment on the idea of experts relative to pioneers. There are many "experts" that have a lot of experience with the process and they can be very helpful on practical issues with existing technology. This covers operators and most people in the technical community in the printing industry. Unfortunately they are not pioneers and are almost totally useless in seeing what is needed for the future and how to get there. A pioneer does not have all the answers but can see the general direction that is needed and can explain that. Knowledge is gained on the way to the future via proper analysis and experimentation. The two groups have a hard time coexisting since the experts can not see and understand what the pioneers are talking about and the pioneers don't always have the resources to demonstrate every concept and thought based on their new knowledge to convince the experts. A pretty sad situation.

I think of myself as being in the pioneer camp. And I can tell you that after almost thirty years, I seem to be the only one in that camp in the print industry. Very strange. Here is the dilemma. If you have an new idea to improve the process, never ask an expert. They will always be negative since they have never seen it before. Never ask an operator for their opinion. But operators would be great to evaluate the new concept in operation. That is what they are good at. But if you want an opinion, ask an engineer or scientist outside the industry, who can evaluate things based on first principles, and after you explain the problem properly and presenting a potential solution, then see if it makes sense. See if their view makes sense in your own mind. You have to be the final decision maker and not accept anyone's opinion as truth.

Glad to see that you are a mechanical engineer. I am assuming we talk the same language. If we get back to the press. Here is a fact that should be of interest to you. On an offset press, the ink key setting has NO direct relationship to the amount of ink fed into the roller train. Why is this so? Even if the ink key meters an accurate and predictable amount of ink onto the ink fountain roller, the transfer of ink from the ink fountain roller to the roller train is inconsistent and unpredictable. This is because the ductor, which is a technology that has been used on presses for over 170 years, is inconsistent. Many variables, such as water, temperature, press speed etc. affect the amount of ink transferred at this point. I have attached a file on a guide to build and run an ITB (Ink Transfer Blade) that corrects this problem. If you feel like experimenting, this might be something to try. I consider it a prototype but I think it is close to what would be viable in production. You have 10 presses and a little bit of knowledge can be leveraged on those presses. Might be fun to see how that works out.

The ITB or any other tech that positively controls the ink feed into the press will mean that the total amount of ink printed on the substrate will ONLY be directly related to the amount of ink fed into the press, on average. This must be true based on the conservation of mass principle. It will be independent of any changes in water settings. This has also been confirmed in testing on four different presses over the years. Basically no ink water balance problems.

Now this might be of interest to your initial studies. With the ink feed being independent of water settings, the method of water application can be simplified. One could directly inject water into the roller train without any recirculation system. This would mean that the fountain solution chem would be consistent since there is no recirculation. There would not be any need to maintaining and disposing of the spent fountain solution. Floor space would also be saved. Something to think about.

I tried to also attach my 1997 TAGA paper that covers some of the issues that need to be solved, to getting the press to go directly to proper conditions. Unfortunately the file was too big. If you give me your email address, I will send it directly to you. Also some of this conversation on what is potentially possible might better be made off forum. Frankly, I get too much abuse from the experts.

Hi Erik,

Thanks for your response.

It is funny when you mentioned about the "pioneers" term. In my production floor, engineer are called pioneers and for some reason I found it very sarcastic when being called one, but I don't really cared that much. But I do agree why both parties do not coexist nicely. Operators are being demanded for producing output while pioneers exists to record, experiment, analyze and prove why such output is achieved. It is a sad situation indeed, but the market is very competitive these days and we have to optimize our operating cost to stay relevant. Hence, operator should also know this fact and be a positive contributer to pioneers. Basically, we need each other to survive.

It is interesting to know the outcomes of your ITB's implementation in 4 of your presses. I guess I have to find out it sooner in my presses. I believe this should able to reduce quality issues and reduce wastage. You may send your paper studies at onesiforus.yabes@gmail.com and surely I will utilized it for good. We could also talk other "cool stuff" about offset, I am definitely have lots of things to ask

"Frankly, I get too much abuse from the experts", this is crazy to fathom because it is easier to learn objectively with proper studies. People are forgetting the fact that it is very simple to be a pioneer nowadays than being an inventor through splendid studies from researchgate/sciencedirect/etc... I don't really favor learning by experience (trial and error), it is very time consuming and waste of energy. It is better to stay objective rather than having big heart and clueless. Abuse is such a strong word, I guess I might be getting few of that too sooner or later

 

[Onesiforus Yabes Ronanus]

Onesiforus,

The basic parameters you listed for fountain solution (FS) are now complete.
Advanced printers may also measure contact angle or refractive index (Brix) for surface tension.

I wouldn't expect a high degree of correlation between FS conductivity and running paper waste.
Paper is the most expensive raw material cost in printing and tracking/monitoring waste is important.
Most printers will use an MIS software (Management Information System) which allows them to assign an operaton/reason code for waste, which can later be investigated and analyzed.

Hi Steve,

Thanks for replying me.

This thing about contact angle I have heard before but was it for surface tension also? I bet it has something to do with the varnish only.

Almost 50% expenses are coming from paper purchases and You are very true on this fact. I don't think many people will understand how impactful could it be by just able to reduce 1% to 3% of paper wastage and how it can benefit any printing firm.

Basically, my company also record this paper wastage however with big time manual data entry. It is so impractical and thanks for letting me know about the MIS software. I will look it up later.

 

[Erik Nikkanen]

OK. I am new to this community also even though I have known about it for years. Printplanet.com is also helpful for everyday problems and it seems to have more responses to questions than here. Both can help. Linkedin can also be useful.

I want to comment on the idea of experts relative to pioneers. There are many "experts" that have a lot of experience with the process and they can be very helpful on practical issues with existing technology. This covers operators and most people in the technical community in the printing industry. Unfortunately they are not pioneers and are almost totally useless in seeing what is needed for the future and how to get there. A pioneer does not have all the answers but can see the general direction that is needed and can explain that. Knowledge is gained on the way to the future via proper analysis and experimentation. The two groups have a hard time coexisting since the experts can not see and understand what the pioneers are talking about and the pioneers don't always have the resources to demonstrate every concept and thought based on their new knowledge to convince the experts. A pretty sad situation.

I think of myself as being in the pioneer camp. And I can tell you that after almost thirty years, I seem to be the only one in that camp in the print industry. Very strange. Here is the dilemma. If you have an new idea to improve the process, never ask an expert. They will always be negative since they have never seen it before. Never ask an operator for their opinion. But operators would be great to evaluate the new concept in operation. That is what they are good at. But if you want an opinion, ask an engineer or scientist outside the industry, who can evaluate things based on first principles, and after you explain the problem properly and presenting a potential solution, then see if it makes sense. See if their view makes sense in your own mind. You have to be the final decision maker and not accept anyone's opinion as truth.

Glad to see that you are a mechanical engineer. I am assuming we talk the same language. If we get back to the press. Here is a fact that should be of interest to you. On an offset press, the ink key setting has NO direct relationship to the amount of ink fed into the roller train. Why is this so? Even if the ink key meters an accurate and predictable amount of ink onto the ink fountain roller, the transfer of ink from the ink fountain roller to the roller train is inconsistent and unpredictable. This is because the ductor, which is a technology that has been used on presses for over 170 years, is inconsistent. Many variables, such as water, temperature, press speed etc. affect the amount of ink transferred at this point. I have attached a file on a guide to build and run an ITB (Ink Transfer Blade) that corrects this problem. If you feel like experimenting, this might be something to try. I consider it a prototype but I think it is close to what would be viable in production. You have 10 presses and a little bit of knowledge can be leveraged on those presses. Might be fun to see how that works out.

The ITB or any other tech that positively controls the ink feed into the press will mean that the total amount of ink printed on the substrate will ONLY be directly related to the amount of ink fed into the press, on average. This must be true based on the conservation of mass principle. It will be independent of any changes in water settings. This has also been confirmed in testing on four different presses over the years. Basically no ink water balance problems.

Now this might be of interest to your initial studies. With the ink feed being independent of water settings, the method of water application can be simplified. One could directly inject water into the roller train without any recirculation system. This would mean that the fountain solution chem would be consistent since there is no recirculation. There would not be any need to maintaining and disposing of the spent fountain solution. Floor space would also be saved. Something to think about.

I tried to also attach my 1997 TAGA paper that covers some of the issues that need to be solved, to getting the press to go directly to proper conditions. Unfortunately the file was too big. If you give me your email address, I will send it directly to you. Also some of this conversation on what is potentially possible might better be made off forum. Frankly, I get too much abuse from the experts.

Hi Erik,

Thanks for your response.

It is funny when you mentioned about the "pioneers" term. In my production floor, engineer are called pioneers and for some reason I found it very sarcastic when being called one, but I don't really cared that much. But I do agree why both parties do not coexist nicely. Operators are being demanded for producing output while pioneers exists to record, experiment, analyze and prove why such output is achieved. It is a sad situation indeed, but the market is very competitive these days and we have to optimize our operating cost to stay relevant. Hence, operator should also know this fact and be a positive contributer to pioneers. Basically, we need each other to survive.

It is interesting to know the outcomes of your ITB's implementation in 4 of your presses. I guess I have to find out it sooner in my presses. I believe this should able to reduce quality issues and reduce wastage. You may send your paper studies at onesiforus.yabes@gmail.com and surely I will utilized it for good. We could also talk other "cool stuff" about offset, I am definitely have lots of things to ask

"Frankly, I get too much abuse from the experts", this is crazy to fathom because it is easier to learn objectively with proper studies. People are forgetting the fact that it is very simple to be a pioneer nowadays than being an inventor through splendid studies from researchgate/sciencedirect/etc... I don't really favor learning by experience (trial and error), it is very time consuming and waste of energy. It is better to stay objective rather than having big heart and clueless. Abuse is such a strong word, I guess I might be getting few of that too sooner or later

Hi Onesiforus,

I have emailed you my file on my TAGA paper. Hope it is of interest.

Yes, there should be cooperation between the experts and those wanting to be pioneers but there are many traps that prevent that from happening. For those hoping to be pioneers who want to create real innovative solutions, these traps prevent success and tend to damage their credibility.

The traps are partially a cultural issue and partially knowledge issue. If one says that a particular problem has been solved, and confirmed with tests, the community will not believe it. They will not tend to follow the explanation. They revert to the myths and misinformation that is common. They will only accept a concept if it is being sold by a major supplier and when everyone has access to it. So there is a built in barrier to gaining a competitive advantage because no one wants to be first.

Another trap for the eager new pioneer is that if they try to base there effort on the knowledge base of the industry, they are going to be sent down dead end efforts. There is good and poor science in the knowledge base and if you already don't know the problems in depth, you will easily be wasting time and resources. I have personal experience with trying to do some things based on accepted knowledge that was actually not true and that waste years and large sums of money. After that experience, decided to never accept knowledge that could not be validated with analysis or experimentation.

Be very careful about published studies. Most of them are of little practical value and some are just wrong. What is the job of these researchers? To publish papers and not necessarily to innovate. Beware!

To get to a point where one can actually make a difference with predictable innovation requires a very holistic understanding of the problems that need to be solved and how they relate to each other. This takes time and frankly even the press manufacturers don't have that kind of knowledge. That is one reason why an offset press roller trains, even today, do not fundamentally look different then ones build almost a hundred years ago. When they do try something new, it tends to be a press design the is not very successful because it tried to address a limited set of problems. Trying to solve one problem with a new design which introduces new problems of a different kind.

So people are smart to be cautious about innovation since they don't have enough knowledge and vision to see the traps. But innovation is very much required to be competitive. It is not easy at all but it is also not as difficult as one might think if you know what is needed and are allowed to make some mistakes along the way. Management has to be OK with that and if they aren't, then trying to innovate is very dangerous for your career.

But as I have stated before, understanding the ink feed problem and solving it is the critical first step. It does two things. One big potential advantage is it solves a critical problem of consistency and predictability in production. The other big and maybe even more potential benefit is phycological. With that initial success, the experts will have to modify their assumptions and start to understand that things can be improved. Success can also be helpful to have management support more efforts. Their support is so important. Until one get some success, management will always think you are wasting their money. Ouch.

 

[Erik Nikkanen]

Onesiforus,

The basic parameters you listed for fountain solution (FS) are now complete.
Advanced printers may also measure contact angle or refractive index (Brix) for surface tension.

I wouldn't expect a high degree of correlation between FS conductivity and running paper waste.
Paper is the most expensive raw material cost in printing and tracking/monitoring waste is important.
Most printers will use an MIS software (Management Information System) which allows them to assign an operaton/reason code for waste, which can later be investigated and analyzed.

I like the comment about paper being the most expensive raw material cost. In any manufacturing operation, reducing costs is important. What is interesting and very important is that when one reduces paper waste, it is always about saving money. On the other hand, one can get a false sense of cost savings due to accounting methods such as Standard Costs.

As an example, if one normally runs a job and it takes a full shift, that would result in a calculation of a costs of labour and machine. If one was able to run faster and only need a half shift, then the calculation would show a reduction of labour and machine time cost being one half. This is not necessarily a true saving of money, because it depends on if the other half of the shift has any production to run. If there is no production in the second half of the shift, NO savings was actually gained. Sometimes the accounting methods can give a wrong picture of how much cost is reduced and what effort needs to be done to reduce costs.

I have believed for many years that if one gets control over the process, with what ever approach is used, saving paper waste is always a benefit and the other benefit is that the improved control will also improve capacity.