[Simon.Kay]

Thanks Gents.

Foamex is written in to specification and can’t be changed (already been there – our first proposal was composite panel). However, sign is only small and although is on an external wall is not in an area with any public traffic, so maybe there’s nothing to worry about.

Ideally I was looking for something off-the-shelf rather than ‘home-made’. Customer is prone to rejecting ideas that don’t have a history of use and would probably ‘inspect’ all our offerings on this basis.

Any additional thoughts most appreciated!

[Simon.Kay]

Neil,

Thanks for that, most appreciated!

Rgds,

Simon

[Simon.Kay]

Drop me a line George, I haven’t been defeated yet….

[Simon.Kay]

Thanks Mark.

We are trying to get good adhesion to a semi-rigid PVC substrate and failing miserably! Substrate is super-clean when printed and we allow plenty of time for inks to cure but each time, ink can be rubbed off without any difficulty.

Can you print onto this type of material?

We also have some issues with static, but we know why those are happening and what needs to be done about them.

Thanks!

Simon

[Simon.Kay]

Glad I could be of use.

Bear in mind of course that we were looking at some fairly specialised components and had requirements that were a bit out of the ordinary. You may not find the same things we did when you do your digging!

Best of luck anyway.

[Simon.Kay]

Thanks Peter; RIP is Poster-print.

[Simon.Kay]

We went through the pain of making the same decision although our requirement was for a heavy diet of stainless 316 with other materials thrown in from time to time.

Although we ended up with a water-jet each technique we looked at – laser, router, mill, etc. – was an entirely viable proposition….according to the sales reps and demonstrating engineers.

My summary was as follows:-

Laser – quickest, most expensive route. In some respects, least versatile as primarily best for cutting metals (can do plastics after a fashion but you have to spec to do so and deal with fumes and gases). Appears to be a non-starter with composites although I’m sure someone would have had a go if we’d have pushed. Great if you want to do a LOT of components i.e. many thousands or tens of thousand per year. Be careful if considering second-hand machines as they may have big costs waiting to spoil your fun when you finally get installed.

Mill – very versatile and extremely gutsy – should last for a looong time with comparatively low running costs. Best for working with small components as can be pretty expensive if you want a decent machine with a large bed-size. Also work-holding (i.e. how component is held during machining step) can be a challenge as big tough aggressive tools can rip thinner sheet materials to bits (as I found out during an ‘exciting’ demonstration with 1mm 316). Agree with previous post that it is probably over-engineered for majority of sign makers (we only looked at because of our stainless steel requirement).

However, due to long-life of machines there is a good second-hand market and we got the impression that we could have picked up a unit for buttons to do smaller work. Never did though.

Router – I actually thought this was the best lower-cost solution as offers large bed size and reasonable speed and excellent versatility with most materials, but when you throw cutting stainless into the equation seemed to make less sense. There were a lot of unanswered questions over ability of router to cut stainless routinely. We felt that the machine would eat cutting bits all day and cost us a fortune in tooling. Also we wanted for engraving work, but the ones we looked at were clearly not as good as a dedicated engraver.

Water-jet – a great piece of kit, very versatile, can cut practically anything unlike laser and mill. We haven’t tried to do it but I’ve seen videos of lawnmowers, computers, mobile phones, burgers being cut. Cost is less than laser (but not much) and running costs appear to be about the same.

Be aware that the water can damage some materials if you’re not careful and I would suggest that you test everything you ever want to use before making a decision. Also there are some issues over ‘piercing’ i.e. the first plunge into the material; we specced additional options to assist with this.

What we’ve also found out since we got ours up and running is they can be very messy (unless you are fastidious about cleaning). You must create a separate area for water-jet as water and abrasive (for cutting harder materials) get spread around. As the water dries, the abrasive leaves a dusty residue which is a real nuisance and gets everywhere.

Personally if you are not doing a lot of heavy work then I think a router is best. The savings you’ll make over a WJ will allow you to buy a small or second-hand mill for smaller, tougher work.

For bigger, heavier work (like stainless) then you probably will need to consider WJ. Bear in mind you can’t do any 2.5D/3D work at all with the WJ as well, which would have been a big benefit of the router.

Most of all, don’t forget to invest in staff and training as acquiring the expertise will save you big-time on errors and mistakes but more importantly help bring you production efficiencies.

[Simon.Kay]

Dave,

Thanks for help; played around with re-sampling commands in Corel Paint and certainly seems to have smoothed out the image. However, resolution is the key and I am banking on my customer actually pulling his finger out and getting me the proper files.

Thanks again!

[Simon.Kay]

Phill,

Many thanks for this.

It seems obvious to print a sample so that they can visualise the print and I can’t believe that didn’t occur to us before now – head fuzzy after a boozy weekend!

Rgds,

Simon

[Simon.Kay]

Thanks Jill; looks good but only available in 610mm, we really need 1220mm.

I see what you mean about the sluggishness of their site!

[Simon.Kay]

Thanks Ian, will do!

[Simon.Kay]

Hi Rick,

No – we really do mean PVC!

Customer doesn’t want Phenolic as the sign is going to see water and they aren’t great under those circumstances. PVC is ideal but difficult to source!

Thanks anyway,

Simon

[Simon.Kay]

Thanks all for comments.

Whilst I was busy tapping away on here a colleague of mine came across a CANON LP17 which looks the business so we have plumped for that.

Thanks anyway and I’ll let you all know how it works for us.

[Simon.Kay]

Thanks all. I had a brief look through the thread and was surprised how hot a topic it was.

Here’s my tuppen’orth:-

Costing packages, irrespective of your business, are primarily intended to take the leg-work out of quotations and in this sense are extremely useful as part of a costing methodology. They are not meant to supplant an innate understanding of your business and products and processes, nor be a substitute for good business acumen or a finely tuned ‘gut-feeling’.

However, we are new to the sign business, so until we develop that understanding it will be great to have a package that will allow us to turn quotes around quickly knowing that the basic costing arithmetic is sound. Will we still be using it in five years time? Maybe, maybe not; I don’t know how our costing methodology will develop.

One last thought; the final element of ‘the bit on top’ is a strategic decision based on a whole bunch of factors, and no-one in their right mind would trust a computer in that regard!

[Simon.Kay]

Thanks John, I was a bit rushed this morning when I posted the message!