2016 Journal by Cal Poly TAGA

CAL POLY

TAGA 2015-2016

ÂŠ 2016 by California Polytechnic State University San Luis Obispo Technical Association of Graphic Arts (TAGA) Student Chapter First published in the United States of America by Cal Poly SLO TAGA Student Chapter 1 Grand Avenue San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 USA Printed at the Graphic Communication Department at California Polytechnic State University All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form without written permission of the copyright owners. All images in this book have been reproduced with the knowledge and prior consent of the artists concerned, and no responsibility is accepted by producer, publisher, or printer for any infringement of copyright or otherwise, arising from the contents of this publication. Every effort has been made to ensure that credits accurately comply with information supplied. We apologize for any inaccuracies that may have occurred. 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Presidentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Message

Integrating Ability-Based Design in Printed Electronics

Reevaluating the Cost of Gravure

Sustainability in Packaging

Megan Fukamaki Isabella Montalvo

Kimberly Eder

Lindsay Mitchell

Kelsey Burgett

115

125

129

The Efficacy of Conventional Mercury Vapor UV Curing and LED UV Curing

2015-2016 Cal Poly Student Chapter

Production Notes

Sponsors & Supporters

Natalee Consulo Lena Haidar Mark MacManus

Dear Reader, It is our pleasure to present California Polytechnic State University Student Chapter’s 2016 Technical Journal. As with past years, we are very proud to showcase a journal that is produced entirely in-house and at the hands of students. Such an endeavor would not have been possible without the support of the Cal Poly Graphic Communication department faculty and staff, University Graphic Systems, and our faculty advisor, Professor Brian Lawler. This year, the overarching theme of our journal is “The Evolution of Print”. We aim to incorporate as many processes and machines as possible. This includes printing the covers offset on the Heidelberg CD 74, the guts digitally on the Konica Minolta, setting the type for this message on our Linotype, trimming everything to size on our Polar Cutter, and finally, perfect binding on the Mueller-Martini Amigo. TAGA aims to fully embrace Cal Poly’s “Learn by doing” motto, which has given students in our chapter the opportunities to gain hands-on experience with research, design, printing processes, finishing, digital publication, and leadership. Within the past year, our chapter has experienced huge growth, expanding from an active membership of twelve students last year to over thirty students in this year. We put our attention this year toward improving our internal structure to better utilize team members of varying skill levels. The students in our chapter come from a broad range of majors, including Graphic Communication, Art and Design, Journalism and Business. Some have years of experience with Adobe programs or printing processes, while others have limited knowledge outside of introductory courses. One of our big goals for this year was to have more active involvement, especially from first years. We wanted to immerse these new students into the Graphic Communication program and show them that print is not dead! After three years of involvement, we have helped this chapter evolve and improve in many ways. We have been able to identify areas of need and address them as a team. Perhaps the greatest asset our chapter possesses the immense amount of talent, potential and passion that has come from our newer members. We couldn’t be more proud of where we are today, and we am more enthusiastic than ever before about the future.

Megan Fukamaki & Isabella Montalvo Cal Poly TAGA Co-Presidents

INTEGRATING ABILITY-BASED DESIGN IN PRINTED ELECTRONICS Kimberly Eder

ABSTRACT The purpose of the study is to determine if a printed electronic device can be adaptable to the visually impaired, the role that accessible design has in the development of printed electronics, and to determine if integrating accessible design prohibits usability and performance. The findings will provide better understanding of how to modify a printed electronic paper device to suit a wider range of end users and the relationship of usability and accessibility in printed electronics. The analysis of the study indicated that accessible design could be integrated into a pre-existing e-paper to improve the overall usability. However, while accessible design could be beneficial to printed electronics, the integration of accessible design will not be easily integrated until printed electronics has left its infancy stage. Accessible design is not a requirement to printed electronics but as the industry grows, manufacturers are expected to create more accessible products. If designers are able to understand the requirements of end users, it can and will lead to better innovative products.

INTRODUCTION Emerging Issues of Printed Electronics Printed electronics is a growing entity in the Graphic Communication world. A copious amount of companies are working on new and exciting interactive products. With new technology comes new challenges, “Design creates culture. Culture shapes values. Values determine the future,” advises Robert Peters (personal communication, 2014). With the emergence of printed electronics, it is necessary to avoid poor design and strive for proactive inclusive thinking. Printed electronics can work on creating inclusive and equitable environments that take disabilities into consideration. The problem is that printed electronics can begin to hinder disabled individuals if the designers do not design to include them. Even today, numerous designs are not made for people using screen readers or people with limited motion. These designs reinforce negative stereotypical attitudes towards the handicapped, which can be hard for a child to handle. If accessible design is not considered in the prototyping stage, our world will remain or become even more of a hassle for the disabled. In making the shift to accessible design, designers and inventors can turn away from forcing disabled individuals to conform to inflexible products and instead start to take into account that accessible design starts at the very basic level. For example, consider a user with limited sight capabilities. He or she has three options: struggle to use the product as-is, utilize an add-on accessibility aid software, or choose to buy a specialized braille display designed for people with low or no sight. An accessible design approach would be needed to provide a better-suited product. Yet, the challenge against accessible design is not only being able to reliably determine a user’s disabilities but also being able to design future technologies that better the user’s experiences without the need for excessive adaptation. I find that accessible based design can be the key to refining future technologies to make the end user’s abilities the central focus. The goals of this research are to describe what accessible design is, put forward its principles and discuss its roles in printed electronics. This research will also articulate challenges faced by accessible design and advance the conversation of disabilities to include the emerging world of printed electronics.

The Effect of Poor Design Choices on the Disabled Plenty of designers create products that are designed to service the general population. Disabled individuals are not often considered to be in this group. Unfortunately, this can lead to problems in the future. Currently, companies have started moving many processes from analog to online environments. Processes such as hiring, benefit enrollments, and training are often conducted through the computer. As printed electronics evolve, companies may begin to adapt the technology to ensure all their employees can access the same information. Many problems that arise in implementing printed electronic products relate to unlabeled graphics, large amounts of audio with no breaks or with too many breaks, too small of interactive buttons, a lack of design consistency, overly complex language, or even strobing designs on the pages. All employers must consider what accessibility issues may arise from the new printed electronic products. While many designers or companies can convolute the meanings of accessibility, it is vital to gain an understanding of what to look for. In order to examine what issues could be presented with the increasing use of printed electronics in everyday life, research is required to explore the present barriers the disabled face and what can be done to prepare companies and disabled individuals to deal with the new emerging issues. Personal Interest in Emerging Problems As an aspiring web designer, I know that disabled individuals have a hard time with the Internet. Additionally, my stepmother is disabled and cannot use the Internet because she cannot see most of the buttons and any flashing elements distract her. I can see the direct effect of poor design. It is an atrocity to see the amount of bad accessible design on the Internet and in print media. When I began to read about printed electronics, I thought that it would be great for the disabled to be able to interact with the world around them in a new way. Now pill containers can inform the user what they contain. Doors can be equipped to open when a certain chip is by them, thus eliminating the need for a person in a wheelchair to wait for someone to open the door. Yet, thinking about the idea more, I realized that most of the individuals working with printed electronics are looking for functionality and not necessarily with a breadth of end-users in mind. As a designer, I see the need to have beautiful and functional products that work for a large number of users.

LITERATURE REVIEW Present Barriers Faced by the Disabled There is a significant lack of accessible design in today’s online marketplace, which has created a digital gap between the disabled and non-disabled person. In 2010, the U.S. Census Bureau found that almost one in five people are living with a disability. The growing number of individuals moving through the wide range of disabilities does not look to be diminishing. This is because of the constantly evolving definition of what it means to be disabled. Disability expands beyond physical restrictions to also include the interactions of the disabled with the environment. “Defining disability as an interaction means that ‘disability’ is not an attribute of a person,” explains the World Health Organization (2011). According to Vanderheidan (1997), a pioneer of universal design, impairment can be categorized into five main types: visual, hearing, physical, cognitive and seizure disorders. Severity varies greatly in each category, which will affect the different barriers presented. To understand how these impairments affect the user, looking at a website might be beneficial. Navigation elements on a website are often problematic for the visual and cognitive impaired. Additionally, a user with a physical impairment will need to be able to navigate the menu using only the keyboard. Those with a hearing impairment struggle with audible control feedback and flashing elements on a web page can trigger seizure disorders. Despite these needs being present, products are often created without a consideration for the elderly or disabled and are lacking in necessary accessible design principles. The reasons that accessibility is not embraced can range from the fear of dissatisfied customers to the extra training that designers would require information with limited formatting options. Designers could create more accessible designs with a better understanding of the end user. Because the designers often possess a limited understanding of the user, designs often lack clear menus, adaptable properties, and limited use. Additionally, the lack of documentation of accessible specifications available to a designer lends itself to sub-par products. However, since the late 1990s, accessible design began to be explored through many different types of design principles.

Prior Approaches to Accesible Design Over the years, assistive technology (AT) has become a buzzword in technology development. AT began to morph into several different definitions as technology advanced, but AT was officially defined by the 105th Congress in 1998. The Assistive Technology Act of 1998 declares “the term ‘assistive technology device’ means any item, piece of equipment, or product system, whether acquired commercially, modified, or customized, that is used to increase, maintain, or improve functional capabilities of individuals with disabilities” (Civil Impulse, 2015). This definition framed AT as being an umbrella term used to describe any software or equipment technology that was used to aid a person with a disability. Most of these devices were add-ons and were often criticized for being an after-thought to the product. In general, AT devices tend to force the user to accommodate with the product while the product remains inflexible. To counteract the polymorphic definition of disability, some organizations suggest the idea of universal design. “Incorporating UD [universal design] processes when developing E&IT [electronic and information technology] is one solution to accommodating people with disabilities that also improves the usability of the products for the rest of the population,” (National Council on Disability, 1994). This type of design attempts to design for everyone instead of a particular persona. Of course, there are pools of thought that disagree with universal design. The main argument is the idea that a product can never be equally accessible to everyone. Universal design is a set of design principles that emerged from the broad category of AT. Geared more towards architecture, these principles create a barrier-free environment using aesthetics. Despite being physically based, many of the main design principles could be applied to a variety of disciplines. Universal design principles look at equitable use, flexibility, intuitiveness, low physical effort, size and space, and a tolerance for error. According to the Center for Universal Design at NCSU, many of the principles “may be applied to evaluate existing designs, guide the design process and educate both designers and consumers about the characteristics of more usable products and environments” (Connell et al., 1997). The problem faced with universal design is that it tends to have a one size fits all ideal. This generally does not work for disabilities because of the various degrees and severity of disabilities. Generally, the idea is that universal design was meant for objects such as door handles and did not take into account prolonged activity with the item in question. 16

Going one step past universal design and applying design principles to interface design is universal usability. Ben Schneiderman (2000), the pioneer of universal usability in human-computer interactions, proclaims that universal usability is “having more than 90% of all households as successful users of information and communications services at least once a week” (p. 85). The key word in this definition is the phrase “successful use.” By not concentrating on any one group in particular, universal usability attempts to reach the widest range of population. Schneiderman (2000) argues that to achieve universal usability, designers must “bridge the gap between what users know and what they need to know” (p .86). Simon Harper (2007) recently observed the problematic nature of the question of universal usability. Instead of thinking about what everyone can do, it might be more beneficial to think about what a particular person could do. Harper (2007) argued, “in reality, every person is a unique individual and so this view [of universal usability] cannot possibly be sustainable or achievable” (p .111). Overgeneralizing the population can lead to an exclusion of many users . To maximize the effectiveness of universal usability, it is necessary to consider a transformation from design-for-all to design-for-one. For example, when a hearing impaired individual is interacting with a sound file, she may wish to view the sound on screen or print out the sheet music. Designing for this particular user can lead to a better product in the end for everyone by providing these extra services. Ability-Based Design Ability-based design could be a viable solution for achieving a design-for-one ideal. It is both a philosophy and design approach, functioning as the opposition to universal design and serving as a catalyst for shifting a designer’s central focus (Wobbrock et al., 2011). Ideally, technology should be accessible to all people in any situation at any point in time. Ability based design attempts to achieve this by striving to create technology that is aware and can adapt to specific individual’s abilities. By concentrating on the abilities, instead of the disabilities of the end user, throughout the design process, designers can have a clear focus on how those abilities are expressed and can understand the possible changes associated with the context and time. For example, a user could experience a change in his abilities as a result of boredom, disease, medication, and fatigue. Table 1 discusses the seven principles of Ability-Based Design. The principles are broken down into three categories: stance, interface, and system. 17

Seven Principles of Ability-Based Design 1. Ability

Designers will focus on ability not disability, striving to leverage all that users required can do.

2. Accountability

Designers will respond to poor performance by changing systems, not users, required leaving users as they are.

3. Adaptation

Interfaces may be self-adaptive or user-adaptable to provide the best possible recommended match to users’ abilities.

4 . Transparency

Interfaces may give users awareness of adaptations and the means to inspect, recommended override, discard, revert, store, retrieve, preview, and test those adaptations.

5 . Performance

Systems may regard users’ performance, and may monitor, measure, model, or recommended predict that performance.

6 . Context

Systems may proactively sense context and anticipate its effects on users’ abilities

7 . Commodity

Systems may comprise low-cost, inexpensive, readily available commodity hardware and software

Table 1: “Principles of Ability-Based Design” Source: http://www.eecs.harvard.edu/~kgajos/papers/2011/wobbrock11abd.pdf

Figure 2: “Dynamic Keyboard Model” Source: http://www.markinns.com/images/article_images/apple-keyboard-american.png

One type of technology that uses almost all principles of ability-based design is the Dynamic Keyboard Model (Figure 2). Invented by Trewin, it features keyboard typing for users with motor impairments (2004). The principles of ability based design used by the Dynamic Keyboard Model include: ability, accountability, adaptation, transparency, performance and commodity. According to Wobbrock et al., ability and accountability are the two required principles for an abilitybased design (2011). The Dynamic Keyboard Model achieves an ability principle because, despite experiencing motor impairments, people can use a traditional QWERTY keyboard because of the adaptive typing data. Additionally, the Dynamic Keyboard Model uses the accountability principle because the software accommodates the motor impairments during use of a QWERTY keyboard system. Trewin also created the Dynamic Keyboard Model with the principles of adaptation, transparency, performance and commodity. By creating helpful keyboard adaptations that are based on the user’s naturally occurring typing behavior, the principle of adaptation is met. The Dynamic Keyboard Model makes suggestions such as enabling features rather than changing setting out-of-sight of the user, which meets the transparency principle. Through observation of the user’s performance, the model interprets the performance principle by responding to the user’s typing behavior by interpreting key presses before they were sent to the application. Lastly, it creates commodity by being easily integrated without extra cost to unmodified keyboards. The one principle the Dynamic Keyboard Model lacked was context. This was because the environment did not necessarily change around the user, but context is an important principle. To understand the concept of context, Wobborck et al. (2011) focused on WalkType (Figure 3), an adaptive text entry system that uses accelerometer technology to accommodate someone walking. The principles of ability-based design that were incorporated into the walking user interface include ability, accountability, adaptation, performance, context, and commodity. To meet the requirements of ability-based design, WalkType focuses on ability and accountably. First, to meet accountability, the software is expected to accommodate the situational impairment of walking and push them to be more efficient. It focuses on ability because, despite experiencing a situational impairment such as walking, users were able to use the device successfully because of the adaptation of the target 19

area sizes. Next, the WalkType software concentrates on adaptation, performance, context, and commodity. By using a simple decision tree, the software adapts the keyboard behaviors as a user clicks around as he or she is walking, which meets the adaptation principle. Next, performance is met through the system responding to the user’s performance as they interact with the device based on tap location and finger travel distance during each tap. Additionally, by using pre-existing mobile devices and built-in sensors, WalkType uses the principle of commodity. Lastly, unlike the Dynamic Keyboard Model, WalkType achieves the context principle. Through the use of the mobile device’s accelerometer data, WalkType changes its interface when the user takes a step.

Figure 3: “WalkType Application” S ou rc e:h ttp ://cd n .g e e kwire.com/wp-content/ uploads/2011/10/walktypelarge.jpg

Most of these principles were adjusted based on user interactions with the products. This means during the developmental stage of the design, each principle was addressed accordingly. By focusing on the abilities, product designers could change the conversation to a positive connotation. One field that could benefit from a more ability-focused conversation is the emerging world of printed electronics. 20

Emerging Printed Electronics Even as the generations increase their immersion in the digital world, the graphic communication industry has worked to remain relevant in a digital age. A recent development in the use of print technology is printed electronics. “Printed electronics defines the printing of circuits which include various components, e.g. transistors, diodes, antennas, etc., with conductive ink on the surface of paper, cardboard or plastic, etc. Usually, the ink and surfaces to be printed can largely vary to provide tailored functions” (Coatanéa, E., et al., p . 65, 2010) . Printed electronics are created by printing conductive ink on a substrate, such as paper, using printing technology. Currently, there is an increasing amount of technologies that are relying on printed electronics advancements. For example, the Gartner Hype Cycle Curve (Figure 4) helps to understand how far along printed electronics has come since its initial creation. As the technology moves through different key phrases in the hype curve, it comes closer and closer to being integrated into everyday life through mass production.

Figure 4: Gartner Hype Cycle for Human Computer Interaction August 2014 Source: http://blog.jenskooij.nl/2015/04/rapport-de-game-industrie-in-2023/

One example of printed electronics is electronic paper, (also known as e-paper) which is made from a display technology called gyricon. A gyricon sheet is a thin piece of transparent plastic that contains millions of small beads. Each bead—half 21

white half blackâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;is contained in an oil-filled cavity and is free to rotate within its cavity. E-paper is electrically writable and erasable and can be re-used 1000s of times. When voltage is applied to the surface of the sheet, the beads rotate to display either their black sides or white sides. Images of pictures and text are created when a pattern of voltages is sent to the paper. The image will remain until the voltage pattern changes. Referring to the Gartner Hype Cycle Curve (figure 4) electronic paper has moved through the Trough of Disillusionment to the Slope of Enlightenment. Electronic paper has moved from the stage of improving products to becoming a catalyst for other technologies to build on. Within two to five years, electronic paper will reach the Plateau of Productivity and be introduced into the mainstream market. Another type of flexible printed electronic would be foldable printed circuit boards, which are created by printing semi-conductive inks onto a paper substrate. The resulting paper is responsive to human touch, or can even play a sound when an area is pressed. Essentially, sheets of paper become interactive displays. For example, a textbook can be printed with interactive pages. It can contain illustrated videos of detailed instructions, flashing side notes, embedded sound buttons and eventually even receive homework help through RFID signals sent from the teacher via email. As products, such as the interactive textbook, are developed, individuals with disabilities may be forgotten as a result of being the outliers to the ideal user. Ideal users, those that most designers design a product for, are often problematic, because they are fictional-based. By not being based on real customer data, personas can lead to an exclusion of certain groups of users. Yet, ideal users could be a benefit to the development process if used in a different light. With the number of disabled users on the rise, personas and ideal users could become a more diverse type of group than previously used. By choosing a specific group of users and focusing on common problems encountered, the idea of ability-based design can be integrated. Ability-Based Design in Developmental Stage Leads to Innovation The importance of understanding the abilities of the end user in a particular environment and time has been essential to creating innovative accessible products. Additionally, because ability-based design focuses on a few users, 22

innovative products have been created as a result. Dunne and Raby explained, “Populations can validate a design but individuals can inspire new thinking and therefore are invaluable at the beginning of a project” (Newell, 2011, p. 127). To start with accessible design, designers may benefit from looking at a different ideal user - the outlier or the extra-ordinary user. These users comprise older users with only minor disabilities as well as a few users with severe ones. It may be helpful to frame the ideal user as a disabled person who will most likely use the product daily but who may have trouble using the product under certain circumstances. Once a designer understands the variety of potential users, she could broaden the design space through parallel design (Dow, 2010). Dow (2010) suggests that through parallel design, a designer could create multiple alternatives based on certain abilities of the user to have more diverse work and self-efficacy. Essentially, integrating all the alternatives into one solution can make a better product. Conclusion Despite all the positives that seem to come with ability-based design, it is difficult to determine if ability-based design could be integrated successfully in printed electronics. In particular, it would be difficult to truly understand user abilities. To provide accurate customer data, it is necessary to have quick and easy yet highly accurate usability tests that could check on a user’s abilities, whether permanent or situational. Additionally, it would be a challenge to measure a user’s abilities outside of a testing facility. Often times, people do not want to admit when they are struggling to use a device. Printed electronics would have a much more difficult time integrating ability-based design. Designers would have to focus their energy on certain environmental factors such as light, motion, temperature, and noise levels. To be a well-designed ability-based design, the device would be able to adapt itself to the varying environmental factors. Currently, most devices tend to ignore the environmental factors that are surrounding a user and opt to require a user to adjust their environment to the device. However, this positive thinking will create a more equitable environment for all people and printed electronics are still at the stage that would benefit greatly from ability-based design. By refocusing previous methods of accessible design, ability-based design has shifted the focus from disability to ability. This research 23

provided an explanation of printed electronics and had a brief discussion on the barriers faced by the disabled. It addressed various types of accessible designs and described the benefits of ability-based design. Hopefully, this work will serve as catalyst for creating a future where all technology is accessible to everyone.

RESEARCH AND METHODOLOGY The goals of this research were to describe accessible design, put forward its principles, and discuss its role in printed electronics. Additionally, this research will also articulate usability challenges in a marketplace printed electronic and advance the conversation of disabilities to include the emerging world of printed electronics. The objectives of this study are to: 1. Determine if a printed electronic device can be adaptable to the visually impaired

2. The role that accessible design had in the development of printed electronics 3. Determine if accessible design prohibited usability and performance Data Collection Plan Printed electronic experts were interviewed to determine how they thought disabilities were considered in the development of printed electronics. Faculty members from the Graphic Communication department, Xiaoying Rong and Malcolm Keif, were interviewed. Cal Poly professors, Dr. Xiaoying Rong and Dr. Malcolm Keif were interviewed to understand their perspective on the level of accessible research conducted for printed electronics and the future of implementing it. In addition, Brandon Larson of Redbull High Performance Team, was interviewed to discuss the positive impact accessible printed electronics could have on human performance and broke down the purpose of this research as this: â&#x20AC;&#x153;Technology is another tool you can use in a series of things you do.â&#x20AC;? All individuals were asked the same questions to gain a clear understanding of how implementing accessible design can add or take away value to a productâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s design. In addition to the interview, the plan involved an experiment using a modified foldable printed electronic device. Through trial and error, it could be determined 24

what additions could be made to the device to help it become more accessible. A group of 20 students were chosen for one trial. The subjects were students from the population at California Polytechnic University San Luis Obispo and each group were given instructions before participation in the experiment. During the trial, each person was given a foldable printed electronic device to interact with. They first interacted with the device blindfolded and then experienced the device with sight in order to experiment with different levels of disability. The data was collected on a questionnaire given to them electronically at the end of the trial. Questions were asked about the components of usability, ease of use, preference for this type of device and why, and their overall comments and impression of the product. After extensive review, the Human Subjects Committee at Cal Poly (also called Institutional Review Board, or IRB) approved the questions and research protocol used. Data Analysis Plan After the experiment, responses to the questions and comments by the interviewees were noted. The data was consolidated into a grouped data sheet. This showed the different levels of accessibility and in what ways it was most effective. Data collected from the experiment showed how the printed electronic device was accessible or not accessible and the effect on a person’s preference it had. A product’s level of usability when challenged with a user’s disability can be noted. By observing the way a user’s disability hindered the completion of a task, the overall usability of a product can be measured.

RESULTS First of all, some questions were asked to experts in the printed electronics field for evaluation of the relationship between accessibility design and developing printed electronic products. The intent of these interviews was to analyze the involvement of disabilities in the developing stage of a product, the overall level of usability when accessible design is implemented, and to determine if printed electronics could benefit the disabled community in the future. Dr. Malcolm Keif and Dr. Xiaoying Rong expressed the idea of using Braille as the traditional way to accommodate a disabled individual but were careful to emphasize the fact that printed electronics can provide opportunities to 25

communication through other senses as well. “In general, there is no special assistance provided by most graphic communication printing products except Brailler. Printed electronics may help in the way of providing voice direction and light stimulation rather then flat and static printing” (Rong). Rong also noted that designing a printing product that incorporated a voice and interaction feature was a complicated process. Depending on the nature of the printed electronic, being either a “printed product with an interactive element” or an “electronic product,” the cost and functionality will be totally different. Dr. Keif expands on, “Because the application is in its infancy, I’d say little work has been put into accessibility of alternatives. Typically, accessible products come as markets gain maturity. Cost, time and availability are not there yet” (Keif). Rong agreed with Keif; she stated, “Printed electronics are costly now. And the productivity is too low to meet the possible needs for the [disabled]” (Rong). The next two questions dealt with possible legality issues and if any government funding was available for accessible products. Dr. Rong and Dr. Keif indicated they were not aware of any laws or funding; Rong claimed, “I am not aware of products specifically designed for people with impairments. Most products [are] just to add interactive functions for general population” (Rong). Dr. Keif remarked, “I know of none. I suspect things like building codes/signage would apply, whether conventional or [printed electronics,] PEs. Really would be more application based, whether or not PEs” (Keif). The next question was: Have you had any experiences where a developing product was improved when disabilities were taken into account? While Dr. Keif and Dr. Rong indicated they have had no experience, Brandon Larson noted on his experiences. “I tend to always think about the full range of usage of any product or tech I design. In this area, considerations for hand strength, eyesight, sense of touch, awkward motions and ergonomic movements are critical to bettering design. These types of considerations are a good step to take bridging the gap for impaired populations. The only times when fewer topics are taken into account and disabilities possibly overlooked are for application specific designs, such as an astronauts suit or a piece of specific sporting equipment” (Larson). A second question relating to designing ear buds that could help distinguish between the left and right one easily where small tactile modifications were

actually a big improvement to the product. Expanding on the developmental process of this product, Larson commented, “It’s along the lines of really thinking about the frustrations of a user and being very aware of those shortcomings. You then need to put yourself in that position and internalize the problems by experiencing them. I realized that looking at my ear buds was an additional step if I had already touched them . . . so touch should be the indicator. If the ear buds are seen first, something to differentiate left vs. right is needed . . . maybe one is colored differently? Designers need to experience the world of the end user in order to understand their requirements” (Larson). The next question asked was: Should disabilities be taken into account during the developmental stage or work better as an after thought after the original design is successful? According to the United States Access Board’s website, “Accessibility is easier to achieve if considered at the beginning of and throughout the design process. Manufacturers shall consider access to telecommunications by individuals with disabilities throughout product design, development, fabrication and delivery, as early and consistently as possible.” It also clarifies that manufacturers can satisfy section 255 and 47 as long as disabled individuals are recognized as potential customers and treat that population in the same manner as other groups of potential customers. (“TAAC Final Report 4 .0 Process Guidelines.”) Dr. Rong, Dr. Keif, and Larson all agreed that it depended on the purpose of the product and who the main general user was. Dr. Rong determined that it depends on what the purpose of the product is, and stated, “It depends what type of disability the product serves. I think most electronic products have accessassist functions for disabled people. For poor vision, voice access would be helpful. It also depends on what type of product it is. For text contents, such as books, magazines, voice is also helpful. I felt it is very limited what type of product can be redesigned to add disability functions” (Rong). Dr. Keif noted specifically on the technical challenges; “Certainly designing [with] accessibility considerations would be ideal. The problem during the innovation stage is that usually the technical challenges are so great that adding additional complexities (which I am guessing most accessibility features do add complexities) are generally not desirable during the invention stage” (Keif).

Additionally, Larson added, “It really depends on the application. The application, target market, audience, user group should dictate the requirements of the product. Generally products are designed to meet the needs of the center of the bell curve. For instance the design of a fork for the masses would likely be designed very differently than a fork for someone with Parkinson’s who may not be able to steady the fork during eating, prompting alternative design. The same holds true for many other applications. Additionally, cost drivers often play a larger role in design and may make design to cover all uses and user abilities very challenging” (Larson). The next question asked: If you do consider disabilities when designing a product, what disabilities do you generally concentrate on? Dr. Rong and Dr. Keif both commented on the traditional approaches of incorporating different sensory elements. Dr. Keif expanded, “If you are thinking traditional sense challenges, engaging multiple senses would be helpful. If one includes learning disabilities, then adding reinforcing alternatives could be good. Certainly sight, auditory, tactile, etc.” (Keif). The next question concentrated on product usability: Do you agree that designing products based on the end-user’s abilities can enhance human performance of that product? Why or why not? Larson agreed that a well designed product can change the way a user experiences life and explained, “Yes, the more a product is design for a well defined use case correlating to the users abilities, the more empowering the product becomes to that person. It is, however, only through very careful design looking at and fully understanding how design impacts the experience someone has with the product, that will make the product a success for that person or not. Design is not a trivial task. Proper design can change lives, regardless of it is for able or disabled users” (Larson). Dr. Keif agreed and discussed the relationship between the accessibility and learning styles. He stated, “I agree. It is the same principle as learning styles. Individuals learn and retain information in different ways. So, it would stand to reason that making products with multiple-learning approaches would aid learning. I suspect the same is true with impaired populations. It also extends the scope and accessibility of products” (Keif). 28

Dr. Rong also agreed but asked the question of the extent of the functionality. She said, “Will you make an electronics product with more functions or a printed products with limited functions to serve the disabled end-users?” (Rong). The next question sought an answer to why most products don’t seem to be accessible yet: In your opinion, why do most companies not design printed electronics for disabilities? Dr. Keif stated that it was simply the added complexity that prohibits integration. He claimed, “As noted above, the additional complexity is often avoided during the invention stage. As greater understanding of production capabilities is gained, the enhanced features are easier to add. When I say easier, I don’t mean easier to build into the design, more that it is easier to produce because the initial production challenges have typically been mastered” (Keif). Dr. Rong agreed that the limited functions of printed electronics could not be beneficial yet to the disabled community. The last question was: How can printed electronics benefit a person with disabilities? Despite the limited functions of printed electronics, Dr. Rong stated printed electronics could be used for, “Maybe for possible interaction with the products. For example, for people with poor vision to access certain text content by reading to them” (Rong). Dr. Keif added, “I am guessing by adding secondary and tertiary stimuli” (Keif). Adding her overall comments, Dr. Rong stated, “I think the product determines whether electronics, not just printed electronics is needed for disabilities. Although printed electronics can be low cost and produced on flexible substrates, however, the functions of printed electronics are limited. Some printed electronics are flexible version of silicon electronics, such as battery, solar cells, etc. If the discussion is for using flexible electronics components, it will benefit for lowering the weight, providing more flexible devices” (Rong). Incorporating Accessibility to a Pre-Existing Foldable Printed Circuit Board Next, an exploration of materials was used to understand ways to modify a pre-existing foldable printed electronic. This printed electronic (called e-paper for simplicity) is a true or false quiz that features a printed circuit and a flexible thin film battery. To use the device, the user folds the paper onto itself to line the side up to a printed line. They can press the true or false buttons and a light at the top 29

Figure 5: In order to make the printed electronic more accessible, it was necessary to test a series of materials to determine the best fit in scope of price and functionality. The first line demonstrates the glob of glue method and the second was the application of a string. Both did not work as well as the wooden ridges

will light up either green or red. Since this printed electronic relied almost entirely on visual functionality, it would be very hard for a visually impaired person to use this printed electronic. The first step was to figure out an easier tactile way to represent the lines that the paper needed to line up to. Materials considered were globs of glue, string, hooks, and wooden ridges (Figure 5). The glue did not seem to work because when blindfolded, the paper would simply slide over the glue. Next, I experimented with string. The string was beneficial because it was flexible, but faced the same problem as the glue; it was hard to find the string with visual impairment. Next, hooks attempted to be integrated in the sides of the lines. Conceptually, this seemed easy enough. Unfortunately, for someone blindfolded, it was impossible to hook the small hole into the hook in order to engage the e-paperâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s LED light system. Last, wooden ridges were glued into place. Despite causing flexibility of the e-paper, it did provide a perfectly tactile ridge that was easily identifiable while blindfolded. Subjects were able to simply slide the paper from the top of the electronic device and find the first ridge rather easily. Next, it was important to create tactile buttons. Originally, it was hoped to find buttons that would provide feedback when pushed. Unfortunately, all the models of buttons found could not initiate an acceptable connection between the bottom surface of the button and the printed circuit. To make the buttons recognizable, a round polyester plastic piece with a sticky back was incorporated to the surface of the button . This was beneficial because the clear properties of the polyester rubber were able to display the True and False text below.

Last, to constitute the device truly accessible for the visually impaired, it would be necessary to integrate a speaker system that could read the question once the paper was lined up under the ridges then confirm if the answer pushed was right or wrong. Because of the limited time and resources of this research, this functionality was not integrated into the device. Conducting the Experiment Research was conducted with students from Cal Poly to measure the relationship between usability and accessibility to understand whether designing for disabilities increased the overall usability of the product. By presenting the printed electronic that was previously modified, it can be determined if the overall functionality of the product was improved.

CONCLUDING REMARKS After the experiments were conducted with students and the experts in the field responded, the analysis of the results indicated accessible design could be a substantial benefit in printed electronics. Through the experiment, it was determined that a pre-existing e-paper device was able to be partially adapted to fit the needs of the visually impaired. To meet the requirements of ability-based design, the modifications focused on the two required principles, ability and accountably. First, to meet accountability, the printed electronic was expected to accommodate the situational impairment of being blindfolded and push them to be more efficient in using the printed electronic device. It focuses on ability because, despite experiencing a situational impairment such as being blindfolded, users were able to use the device successfully because of the adaptation of the wooden ridges and tactile buttons. Additionally, by using pre-existing printed electronics, the modifications meet the principle of commodity. More modifications would be necessary to implement other principles such as adaptation, performance, and context. By using a simple decision tree, the printed electronic could adapt the connection location and feedback audio to help guide a user to the correct location in order to achieve the adaptation principle. Next, performance could be met through a feedback system that responds to the userâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s performance as they interact with the device based on buttons that adapt to various pressures and connection locations. Lastly, context 31

could be incorporated with a speaker system that increases in volume if it detects the room’s atmosphere to be very loud. Many of the test subjects enjoyed using an e-paper device and wanted to see more of the technology integrated elsewhere. On the other hand, the time and cost it would take to develop the e-paper to have the speaker system didn’t seem plausible without a few more individuals working on it. Not only would it need to be programmed, the printed electronic would need to be reprinted to incorporate the speaker’s circuits. Furthermore, many test subjects felt that it was more important to make the button to LED light connection work first before more feedback systems should be added. The modifications made to the printed electronic such as the tactile buttons and wooden ridges improved the functionality of the device and increased the product’s usability. By understanding the abilities of the end user, successful modifications were made to the e-paper. On the other hand, the idea of integrating accessible design in the developmental stages at this point does not seem to be entirely plausible. Cost is the main prevention of the integration of accessible design in developing printed electronics. Unfortunately, if the product is seeking to make a profit, there does not seem to be any federal funding to help ease the cost of extra development time. However, by simply changing the way a designer thinks about a problem could help create a better design that is not costly. Brandon Larson indicated that an exceptional design could be found by putting yourself in the end user’s shoes to truly understand their requirements. The packaging and medical industry have demonstrated a considerable amount of interest in printed electronics development and has emphasized the importance of being able to service a wider spectrum of customers. Not only can printed electronics create a “wow” factor, it can actually provide ways for companies to reach certain accessibility expectations. For example, the United States Access Board has created certain properties that medicine labels must have for the impaired. Interactive printed electronics can bridge those challenges faced now by adding sound and interactive touch elements. To become more competitive in the future, the graphic communication industry must or should start to integrate ability-based design. Even though the public does not seem to seek accessibility-based products exclusively, it is apparent

that the public expects products to have those capabilities. Because Cal Poly is non-profit research based, it is possible to find grant funding for projects that integrate accessible design. If Cal Poly is able to determine certain design properties that can generally be used by a wide variety of individuals, once the cost of printed electronics drops, the graphic communication industry can start to easily incorporate these design principles into the updated versions of those products. The United States Access Board stated that manufactures are expected to incorporate accessible design when creating updated versions of products. Additionally, certain accessible design actually adds value to the product. Even a small modification such as tactile ear buds can increase a productâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s desirability and can all be started with a simple notion towards the disabled. As progressively more people move away from the desktop to other means of media, the typical user is now surrounded by distractions. All of these new distractions challenge the usability of the product in ways that have never been endured before. Unfortunately, computer users are still unaware of the circumstances in which they have to endure. Electronic device accessibility, whether a printed electronic or a electronic device, is no longer just a problem with people with disabilities; electronic device accessibility is for everyone. Every userâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s abilities are affected in one way or another and if a company wants to design products that matter; they must start to consider all the new circumstances. By using an ability-based design approach, designers can explore better and more intuitive solutions because they are no longer limited by a userâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s disability.

REFERENCES Civic Impulse. (2015). S. 2432 — 105th Congress: Assistive Technology Act of 1998.

Retrieved from https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/105/s2432

Coatanéa, E., Kantola, V., Kulovesi, J., Lahti, L., Lin, R., & Zavodchikova, M. (2009).

Printed Electronics, Now and Future. In Neuvo, Y., & Ylönen, S. (eds.), Bit Bang -

Rays to the Future. Helsinki University of Technology (TKK), MIDE, Helsinki

University Print, Helsinki, Finland, 63-102. ISBN 978-952-248-078-1

Connell B.R., Jones M., Mace R., Mueller, J., Mullick A., Ostroff. E., Sanford, J.,

Steinfeld E., … and Vanderheiden G. (1997). The Principles of Universal Design.

The Center for Universal Design. Version 2. Retrieved from

http://www.ncsu.edu/ncsu/design/cud/about_ud/udprinciplestext.htm Dong, H., Keates, S., & Clarkson, P. J. (2004). Inclusive Design in Industry: Barriers,

Drivers and the Business Case. UI4All 2004, 3196, 305-319. doi:10.1007/978-3-

540-30111-0_26 Dow, S., Glassco, A., Kass, J., Schwarz, M., Schwartz, D., & Klemmer, S. (2010). Parallel

prototyping leads to better design results, more divergence, and increased self-

efficacy. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 17, 1-24.

European Commission. (1998). Design for all and ICT business practice: Addressing

the barriers. Examples of best practice (EC Ref. Number 98.70.022). Telematics

Applications Programme: “Design-for-All” for an Inclusive Information Society,

Brussels. “Gartner Hype Cycle.” Hype Cycle for Imaging and Print Services. Gartner, 2014.

Retrieved from https://www.gartner.com/doc/2805617.

Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission. (2000, March). Accessibility of

Electronic Commerce and New Service and Information Technologies for Older

Australians and People with a Disability: Report of the Human Rights and Equal

Opportunity Commission on a reference from the Attorney-General. Retrieved

from http://www.independentliving.org/docs4/hreo2000.html

National Council for Disability. (2004, October). Design for Inclusion: Creating a New 34

Marketplace. Retrieved from http://www.ncd.gov/publications/2004/Oct282004.

Newell, A. (2011). Design and the digital divide insights from 40 years in computer

support for older and disabled people. San Rafael, Calif.: Morgan & Claypool.

Shneiderman, B., (2000, May) Universal Usability: Pushing Human-Computer

Interaction Research to Empower Every Citizen, in Communications of the ACM.

ACM: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. p. 85-91. Vol. 43, No. 5. Retrieved

from http://www.cs.umd.edu/~ben/p84-shneiderman-May2000CACMf.pdf

â&#x20AC;&#x153;TAAC Final Report 4.0 Process Guidelines.â&#x20AC;? United States Access Board. N.p., n.d.

Web. 07 June 2015.

Trewin, S. (2004). Automating accessibility: The Dynamic Keyboard. In Proceedings of

ASSETS 2004, 71-78. New York: ACM.

U.S. Census Bureau. (2012). Americans With Disabilities: 2010. Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/miscellaneous/cb12 134.html Vanderheiden, G. C. (1997). Design for people with functional limitations resulting

from disability, aging, and circumstance. In G. Salvendy (Ed.), Handbook of

human factors and ergonomics (2nd Ed., pp. 2010-2052). New York, NY: John

Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Wobbrock, J. O., Kane, S. K., Gajos, K.Z., Harada, S., & Froehlich, J. (2011). Ability

based design: Concept, principles, and examples. ACM Transactions on

Accessible Computing, 3, 1-27. DOI:10.1145/1952384.

World Health Organization. (2011). World Report on Disabilities. Retrieved from http://www.who.int/disabilities/world_report/2011/chapter1.pdf.

Kimberly Eder

Kimberly Eder is a designer who loves developing her visual craftsmanship by working in space between communication and interaction design. She is a recent Web and Digital Media graduate of the Graphic Communication department of Cal Poly SLO. She has a background in Interactive and Graphic Design since 2010 on print and digital products. Her experiences cover a variety of different things, although she has found herself gravitating toward research in communication design in fast-paced working environments. She has worked under titles such as a communication specialist, freelance designer and various student assistant positions. To Kimberly, designing also means living consciously and taking the time to experience the current designed (and un-designed) world. She was first introduced to printed electronics through her professors and has volunteered and demonstrated printing equipment at conferences such as IDTechEx and FlexTech. She sees future prospects in printed electronics to make the world a better place for everyone. Kimberly is a recent North Dakota transplant and was raised herding buffalo and fixing tractors on the prairies.

REEVALUATING THE COST OF GRAVURE Lindsay Mitchell

ABSTRACT The gravure printing method has been around for over a century. It has the most exceptional quality, and often sets the standard for what print should have the ability to look like among other processes. This simple two-cylinder system has the ability to print on a wide variety of substrates and maintain the quality and color reproduction it is known for. However, this exceptional process is not being used widely across the United States. Cost is a sizeable determining factor in choosing a printing method for output, and it is often the first eliminating factor regardless of the quality and intricacy being lost. Quality is not something that should be so easily written off. Year after year, flexography and lithography principles are adjusted to enhance the quality to meet the standards of gravure printing, and in the end the cost to increase the quality technology among commercial presses will measure up to the cost to print gravure initially. Although gravure printing is still a major player in European countries and Asia, the United States still has not succeeded in reducing the cylinder engraving cost to a low enough mark for customers to return to printing gravure. However, the uniqueness of the process, and the beauty and quality of the print are worth the extra cost invested. Time should not be a concern for gravure products seeing as how they are not strongly publication based, and with new technology MicroStar Engraving has gotten their cylinder engraving and shipping to a two-week turnaround. Two weeks for a cylinder that will run millions of impressions at the same standard as the first run, is worth the wait. Gravure products are worth the uniqueness they deserve. Gravure quality is worth the cost.

INTRODUCTION The History Rewind the clocks, and take a look at where the Rotogravure printing process started. Rotogravure printing (typically shortened to be called gravure printing) is a direct descendant of older intaglio printing. In the beginning, gravures primary usage was in the printing of calico patterns on cheap clothing. In 1784, British textile printer Thomas Bell patented a rotary intaglio press for use in commercial textile printing. The primary substrate for this patent was the inexpensive cotton fabric, calico. Each cylinder used was manually prepared and hand engraved. In 1879, combining Bell’s rotary intaglio press with the halftone screen process created by Fox Talbot, and carbon tissue coating developed by J.W. Swan, Karel Klietsch developed the first gravure printing press (“Gravure: Processes and Technology”). The Basic Process The fundamental printing process of gravure starts with an image, which then gets etched into the surface of the gravure cylinder as a collection of tiny cells. The cylinder is mounted on a press, rotates in a solvent-based ink, and ink collects in the cells. The excess ink is scraped from the non-image areas by an angled blade, called the doctor blade. The substrate is passed between the gravure cylinder and a rubber coated impression cylinder. This is considered a direct printing process because there is no involvement of a third cylinder. Still used exclusively in the printing of textiles in the1890’s, Klietsch made his way to England and teamed up with Samuel Fawcett, an engraver at Story Brothers and Company, a textile printing company. Story Brothers formed the Rembrandt Intaglio Printing Company and in the late 1890’s, they developed new techniques for photo engraving, and began the commercial printing of intaglio art prints (“Gravure: Process and Technology”).

Cylinder Specifications Cell Wall Before getting into details, it is important to understand the differences in engraved cells. The cell wall is defined as the space between cells on the cylinder. It is simply any part of the cylinder that is not engraved, and “serves to support 43

the doctor blade and ensure precise measuring of the ink and consistent color application to the substrate” (“Gravure: Process and Technology”). In addition, sometimes the cell wall between the top and bottom of the cells is merged to create a channel. The channel is useful for ink to flow through the cells that touch at the top and bottom, to gain the desired ink lay down, and color. Cell Shape One unique aspect that gravure printing offers is the varying cell shape and depth. Depending on the printing design, the gravure cylinder can be engraved with compressed, normal, or elongated cells. They will all engrave at about the same speed, meaning there is no additional time or price for the right cell shape. “There are as many as 90,000 cells per inch” (“Gravure: Process and Technology”).

Normal

Elongated

Compressed

Line Screens Gravure cells are also unique in the layout of cells on the cylinder. The cells are placed out in a grid pattern, and are all evenly separated. To get the correct color brightness and appearance for multiple colors, there may need to be more ink for one color than another color. To adjust for this, there are fine and coarse line screens. Coarse line screens allow for fewer, larger, and deeper cells in a wider grid, while fine line screens allow for an increased number of smaller and shallower cells to be in a grid closer together. All gravure cells are placed strategically in a grid and will always be the same distance apart whether they are compressed, normal or elongated cells. Back in the day, from the early 1940’s to the early 1970’s, most of the cylinder engraving was done by chemical etching techniques. In the more modern world, there are three main ways to engrave cells in a gravure cylinder. “First, there is conventional, where the cells are the same size, but vary in depth, which gives a long scale of reproduction used for high quality printing of photographs. Second, there is the direct transfer of variable area, which is mostly used for packaging. Lastly, there is variable area-variable depth engraving, which is used for magazine 44

and catalog printing” (“Printing and Publishing”). No matter how it is done, most all cylinders are engraved and then coated with chrome to withstand the constant pressure of the doctor blade wiping the ink from the non-image area. Engraving a cylinder and having the ability to print continuously on fabrics for commercial use was a transforming idea for this time. Roller printing made it possible to print 10,000 to 20,000 yards in one 10-hour day by a single color machine (“Gravure Printing”). However, this revolutionary idea only went so far, as the cost to produce these cylinders began to outweigh the benefits.

RESEARCH AND METHODOLOGY Negatives Using Gravure Cylinder It is no secret that all print processes try to achieve the quality and consistency of gravure. However, it is not always easy or convenient to get that high quality. In a cost comparison, a run of the mill flexo plate will cost around 35 cents per square inch, a high quality flexo plate will cost 49 cents per square inch, and the gravure cylinder costs around 51 cents per square inch (Kos). Even with new technology reducing the cost to almost matching flexo’s high quality plate costs, there is a limited amount of suppliers selling gravure presses and equipment. With such a restricted supply, there is no need for competitive pricing, making the gravure presses range in the $1 million to $3 million dollar range, where as flexo presses can be in the $100,000 range. “The 1986 ERA study concluded that for processing one four-color page in A4 size, the cost relationship between a gravure cylinder and web-offset plate was approximately 3:1” (Bjurstedt). North America product manager for Romotec, Frank Passarelli, pointed out “year after year, the flexo industry reinvests in equipment and introduces new technology to reduce changeover time and increase press automation” (Kos). He also suspects that the key to growth in gravure lies in the prepress stage of workflow. It is common knowledge that gravure cylinders are more beneficial when the runs are long, and with today’s cylinders, they can achieve up to 10 million impressions (Kos). The problem is that they aren’t being used for long run jobs like that, and therefore are making the cost outweigh the benefit. One cylinder can last for hundreds of millions of impressions, but the cylinder cost gets so high for short runs (“Printing 45

and Marketing”). “In the United States, a gravure cylinder, depending on the width of the cylinder and the repeat use, ranges in about $1,000 to $1,200. However, in Europe the cost is about $400, and in Asia it is even lower at about $200 a cylinder” (Kos). Gravure printers are not very common throughout the United States due to the costs of engraving, the presses themselves, and the need for skilled laborers. The process requires very careful preparation, but if prepared properly produces very high quality and color for very long runs (“Gravure Printing”). Impression Roller Problems Although gravure presses only use two cylinders per color, the impression roller can cause a plethora of issues while printing. These include, but are not limited to, static build up, whiskering, heat build up and covering failure. Static build up is a result of pressroom conditions generated between the web and anything it touches. “The static can build up to be as high as 25,000 volts, especially if the moisture content is low, and on non-electrostatic assist impression rollers” (“Gravure: Process and Technology”). Static can be the cause of poor image transfer and whiskering. Whiskering is usually found where a solid area is printed near a clear area. It occurs as the substrate and cylinder start to separate at the exit side of the nip. “Ink is drawn away from the cell, and is free to move under the influence of the static electricity, low humidity, high press speed and wet solvent on the paper” (“Gravure: Process and Technology”). Heat buildup is the effect of having more heat on one area of the impression roller than others. “The impression roller is made of rubber, and as rubber is a poor conductor of heat, excessive heat on one end of the cylinder may cause additional flexing of rubber. Running a press at high speeds without first warming up the impression rollers may be the cause of heat buildup” (“Gravure: Process and Technology”). Cylinder Weight The gravure cylinder utilizes a metal printing cylinder. In its basic design, “the gravure cylinder consists of a thick-walled steel tube core with flanged steel journals” (“Gravure Cylinder Making”). The cylinder then receives a copper layer added to the surface to help create the specific desired diameter of the finished gravure cylinder. Then, depending on the requirement of the design, another copper layer or Ballard shell will be plated on the cylinder to be engraved, adding both size and weight The Ballard shell allows for easy removal of the etched surface, for the cylinder to be plated, etched and used again. “The Ballard shell 46

is used in 45% of cases” (“Gravure Cylinder Making”). After all is said and done, the average gravure cylinder weighs around 900-1300 kilograms (“MicroStar Engraving Systems”). This makes shipping costs extremely high. To transport such high masses, with such tall cylinders, gravure printers have no choice but to use trains. Trains are not the ideal way to transport goods in today’s world as it can be costly, and can take multiple weeks depending on the distance needed to travel. In the world of print, time is money, and to have a press wait around for a cylinder before printing can start will cause the company to lose profit. Size Problems Although there has been a significant increase in the use of gravure over the years, the cost of hardware makes the large majority of gravure presses large web. Using a narrow web gravure press is not as practical, which means more space is required for the press, as well as more expensive large cylinders. “Only about 10-15% of the narrow web market segment uses gravure” (Sartor). A lot of narrow web applications are pretty basic; including “tag printing, food labels and automotive applications, narrow web applications really don’t require the benefits that gravure could offer” (Sartor). Although one upside of gravure is the immense size of the web in length, that is also a tremendous negative. The large size of the rollers, the webs, and the press that holds these items means there will need to be an extremely large pressroom to hold this equipment. The infrastructure cost of running a gravure press is much higher than it would be to house a smaller flexo press. In addition to needing space for the press machine itself, there will also need to be space set away for storage of large cylinders and lengthy web rolls.

RESULTS Upsides of Gravure Only needing an engraved cylinder and an impression cylinder makes this one of the fastest and easiest presses to manipulate and control. The simplicity of the press means there is no blanket cylinder needed, and no water (or fountain solution) required. Gravure presses run with a solvent based ink that is applied directly to the cylinder in the ink tray, and wiped off the non-image area by the doctor blade. 47

This solvent ink is an advantage because it dries very quickly on the substrate, and allows for multiple colors of ink to be dry trapped. Due to the simplicity, gravure presses “often require fewer operators than other competitive processes,” leading to less labor cost (“Gravure: Process and Technology”). Why Choose Gravure? The longer the run is, the cheaper the process becomes per unit. Gravure does have the highest set up cost, but with longer runs, the quality and clarity gained is worth the initial cost. “Each year, gravure printers produce in excess of $15 billion worth of printed products in the United States” (“Gravure: Process and Technology”). In a day and age where printed advertisement seems to be slowing down, quality becomes a more important factor to stay relevant. Companies want customers to know that they are valued to retain their business, or become their main supplier. When a printed piece of advertisement is so surprisingly beautiful and unique, consumers are probably more likely to hold on to that artifact because they see it as too valuable to throw away. Almost always, gravure quality can surpass the quality of any other printing method. “The inks are visibly brighter, more vibrant and have the greatest ink hold out when printed through a gravure press. The bright, bold colors and crispness of the print allow consumers to easily recognize the product on the shelf, and then easily read product information on the package” (Fontelera). Even with relatively simple mechanical features, this press produces quality that other processes aim to achieve. To respond to the challenges of the impression cylinder, electrostatic assist was invented to be sure to pull the ink out of the impression cylinder, and place it onto the substrate. The assurance that the ink would be taken out of the highlight cells with each rotation insured that the quality of gravure prints would remain better than any other process. Electrostatic assist “places an electrical charge on the impression roller and an electrostatic field is generated in the area of the nip” (“Gravure: Process and Technology”). ESA has probably done more to improve print quality than any other single invention. Not only does gravure print have the best quality, but also has the most consistent best quality. There is a “very high degree of consistency throughout the run,” which is always beneficial to the company who has contracted the printer, because they 48

will not be charged for as much make-ready waste as other processes (“Printing and Marketing”). The cylinder use is one of the main reasons for this high quality of images and graphics. Using multiple cell shapes and depths in the cylinders helps manufacture this vividness that is so unique to the gravure process. Gravure cylinders can last for millions of impressions without getting worn down or losing their quality. This is beneficial for big companies that need mass amounts of one product, like coffee holders or candy packages. The gravure printing process has the ability to produce extremely high quality images, and is the most costeffective way to print long-run jobs among the other methods of commercial printing (Clark). The gravure process may have been invented to print patterns on calico, but its ability to print on a variety of substrates and retain its quality is one of the main selling points it offers today. Gravure has the capability to print on foil, paper, cartons, and plastic. Not to mention it has the most believable gradations, and it is the best process to print metallic inks with. The stock that gets printed on is an important consideration for the designer as well as a determining factor of which process to use. “A smooth, flat printing surface is best for the gravure process because it makes the best contact with the cylinder. Coated papers and board, foils and extruded polymer films work exceedingly well with gravure” (“Printing and Publishing”). However, although the substrate must be smooth, it does not need to be strong or stiff. Because there is no water used on the press, there is no risk in weakening the web through moisture or an excessive ink laydown. “Gravure has the ability to print on low basis weight papers, and even on tissue papers” (“Printing and Publishing”). Decreasing the paperweight allows for larger margins of error because gravure presses have better print quality with lighter basis weight stocks (Wuerl). Excellent quality, tremendous cylinder lifespan, and the variety of substrate capabilities combined with the continuous image that only gravure printing offers makes this the ideal process for a unique number of prints. There is more product variety when choosing gravure, because there is no designated start and stop of the print. Without the need to stop, or skip over sections of print or substrate, the continuous rotation of the cylinder along with the continuous rotation of the web allows for very high printing speeds. Higher printing speeds means the job will be completed swiftly, and with a continuous image, the final product length is adjustable to fit the finishing needs. For example, giftwrap can come in variable 49

lengths depending on the need of the consumer. Gravure presses can meet all needs, “ranging from widths under 12 inches to jumbo presses as wide as 12 feet” (“Gravure: Process and Technology”). Products and Packages Gravure products offer higher quality images and graphics, with more vibrant and lively color reproduction. “Some common gravure printed products include wood laminates, printed flooring, wrapping paper, wallpaper, and high quality publications such as National Geographic” (Clark). Products tend to jump off the shelf and are generally more appealing to consumers. In addition to continuous image products, gravure can also print the best shrink sleeves and flow wrap packages. Shrink Sleeves Using shrink sleeves allow the designer to utilize the whole surface area of the container to market a product. Benefits of using gravure printed shrink sleeves are numerous. Due to the wide range of substrates, areas can be left unprinted, allowing the consumer to see the product they are purchasing to get a better idea of their familiarity with the product, and to advertise that the company is honest about what is inside each of its packages”. Regardless of the shape of the container, the gravure printed sleeve fits its contours. The artwork can be distorted to compensate the shape of the package to maintain the visual impact of the design and all of the vibrant colors” (“Gravure Products”). The plastic can then be heat sealed to minimize the effect of spinning labels. Shrink sleeves allow for a dual purpose: to decorate the container fully, and to offer a tamper-proof system of keeping the contents away from harm. Flow Wraps Gravure flow wraps and laminates offer both decoration and protection similar to shrink sleeves. “There are many materials that can be laminated to form a structure for dry goods, powders, liquids or gels, such as OPP, foil, paper and PET” (“Gravure Products”). This process is typically used for dried goods like confectionary, snack bars, biscuits and potato chips as it protects the contents of the package from oxygen, moisture and light.

Growth There is fast and promising growth in the gravure industry. With the unique cylinder engraving, the depth of color, and variety of substrates, there is only room to grow and expand this process. Recently, there have been advancements in using gravure for printed electronics, which uses conductive inks to produce a more sensory engaging print. Clearly seeing the cost benefit analysis value in using gravure to print up and coming technology, printed electronics may turn out to be the new platform for gravure.

CONCLUDING REMARKS Although gravure printing is an older process originally designed to make the production of calico prints, the applications that use it today are far from limited. With such consistent quality and color reproduction, gravure sets the standard for other printing processes. Due to the stigma that the cost is unreasonable and not worth the investment, the gravure industry is making a strong advancement to only publication printing in the United States. However, that should not be happening. Companies realize the benefits of printing gravure are vast, and leave a lasting impression on their consumers. In a day and age when things happen in the blink of an eye, the blink that happens in a grocery store shelf, or a magazine stand in the city needs to be one that sticks in the mind of the consumer. The best way to do that is to print with the process that makes the most vivid and astounding color reproduction. Though the costs to print in the United States are higher than the rest of the world, the quality products create value in the minds of the consumer. With longer run jobs and continued use of a cylinder, the costs to engrave and print are quickly diminished. Initial set up costs may be slightly more than processes such as web offset, but the longer the job gets, the less expensive it becomes.

REFERENCES Clark, Donna A. “Major Trends in Gravure Printed Electronics.” N.p.,June 2010. Web. 30 Jan. 2015. Fontelera, Jorina. “Gravure Printers Go for Gold.” Converting Magazine 25.7 (2007): 2. ProQuest. Web. 4 Feb. 2015. “Gravure.” PrintWiki. The Free Encyclopedia of Print, n.d. Web. 01 Feb. 2015. “Gravure Cylinder Making.” Gravure Cylinder Making. Printpedia. n.d. Web. 01 Mar. 2015. “Gravure Printing.” Gravure Printing. Printaccess.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 04 Feb. 2015. Gravure: Process and Technology. Rochester, NY: Gravure Education Foundation, 2003. Print. “Gravure Products.” Gravure Packaging Limited. Gravurepackaging.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 04 Feb. 2015. Kos, Sayre. “Gravure: The Other Cost-Effective Process.” Flexpackmag.com. N.p., 1 May 2009. Web. 12 Feb. 2015 “MicroStar Engraving Systems.” MicroStar Engraving (2012):n. pag. Ohio Gravure Technologies, 15 Mar. 2012. Web. “Printing and Marketing.” PSSMA. N.p., Oct. 2014. Web. 30 Jan. 2015. “Printing and Publishing.” Environmental Protection Agency. N.p., n.d. Web. 30 Jan. 2015. Sartor, Michael. “Gravure Printing.” Label & Narrow Web. N.p., Sept. 2007. Web. 30 Jan. 2015. Wuerl, Peter. “Gravure: More Ups than Downs.” Graphic Arts Monthly 79.4 (2007): 38. ProQuest. 4 Feb. 2015.

Lindsay Mitchell

Lindsay is a third year Graphic Communication major at Cal Poly with a concentration in Design Reproduction Technology, and minors in Packaging and Integrated Marketing Communication. After college she is open to exploring a few different career paths and is looking forward to what the future holds! Lindsay is very interested in user experience design and working as the bridge that connects the needs of the user and the needs of a company. She is also interested in packaging fields, as well as marketing careers. However, when she is not thinking about the future, Lindsay loves hiking with her friends and enjoying the beautiful San Luis Obispo sights.

SUSTAINABILITY IN PACKAGING Kelsey Burgett

ABSTRACT Over the last decade or so, the world has seen a large decline in the amount of printed products. As a result of this, packaging companies must be more selective when determining which printing process to use to print a job. Currently, gravure and flexography dominate the flexible packaging industry, both offering advantages and disadvantages to a printed piece. When choosing a process, one should consider its environmental, economic, and social sustainability. Then, depending on the requirements of the job and competitive strategy of the company, they will be better able to choose which printing process is better suited. This analysis will outline the strengths, weaknesses, and overall characteristics of gravure and flexography in the packaging industry. Overall, flexography is best suited for short or long run jobs that require high quality printing. Flexography can also print on a large variety of substrates, both smooth and rough, unlike gravure, which can only print on smooth substrates, and can accommodate printed electronics.

INTRODUCTION Just as letterpress and moveable type became a thing of the past as faster and more efficient processes developed, so too will the current processes and printing presses. As print becomes more obsolete and publications move to the Internet and other digital forms, it is important to focus on improving things that are still printed and will remain printed for many years to come. The packaging industry, for example, will require printing for as long as packages are needed. As a result of this, it is important to determine the best method of printing for the largest range of application that will be the most sustainable as we move into the future. In terms of packaging, there are two processes that dominate the industry: gravure and flexography. Each process offers different advantages and disadvantages to the industry, as will be discussed later. As the printing world becomes controlled by sustainability, three factors are analyzed and used to determine which printing process will dominate in the future: environmental sustainability, economic sustainability, and social sustainability. By comparing the strengths and weaknesses of both gravure and flexography in each of these areas, we will be able to determine which is best suited to dominate the printing industry. In gravure, a copper cylinder is engraved with small, recessed cells. On the press, the cylinder sits in a bath of ink, which each cell picks up and holds. The un-engraved portion of the cylinder is wiped clean with a doctor blade, leaving only the ink in the cells to be transferred to the substrate. An impression roller pushes the substrate against the cylinder, allowing all the ink to transfer. Gravure is used heavily in packaging because its â&#x20AC;&#x153;remarkable density range makes it the best choice for fine art and photographyâ&#x20AC;?(1). It is also used in the publication and product markets because of its speed and continuous image. In flexography, relief plates are used and can be made using a couple different methods, such as photopolymer, engraving, or laser engraving. On the press, an ink roller sits in a bath of ink. This roller transfers the ink to the anilox roller, which meters the ink to a uniform thickness and transfers it to the plate cylinder, which has the raised image. The substrate travels between the plate cylinder and the impression cylinder; this presses the substrate against the plate and ensures the transfer of the ink. Flexography is used heavily in packaging because of its simplicity and its use of water-based inks, which lowers its volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions, the reactions in the presence of sunlight with nitrogen oxides to form ozone. 59

Flexography is also used in a small portion of the product market. In the packaging industry, both gravure and flexography are typically printed on a web because it allows faster printing speeds.

Substrate

Impression Cylinder

Doctor Blade

Engraved Cylinder Ink

Ink Tray

Gravure Process

Plate Cylinder

Flexible Plate

Doctor Blade

Impression Cylinder Fountain Cylinder Substrate

Ink

Ink Tray

Anilox Cylinder

Flexography Process

RESEARCH AND METHODOLOGY When it comes to environmental sustainability, companies must monitor VOC emissions, make-ready waste, and the reusability of the plates or printing surface. After the Federal Clean Air Act Amendments were passed in 1990, which sought to reduce VOC emissions, federal and state environmental protection agencies have been working to implement programs and regulations to do just that. Printing facilities tend to emit VOCs throughout the printing process and are now required to monitor and reduce their emissions. Debra Jacobson from the Printers’ National Environmental Assistance Center (PNEAC) states that VOCs can be released by fountain solutions, inks and coatings, press washes, and cleaning products (13). In the gravure packaging industry, either water or alcohol based inks can be used. Solvent-based inks tend to dry faster, but water-based inks are more viscous, which gives them greater color density. Some have found, however, that waterbased inks can be a “problem…at press speeds above 1,000 feet per minute,” according to an overview by Castle Ink (7). This is because they take longer to dry and the press must be slowed down in order to provide sufficient drying time and avoid future problems. Even if gravure printers choose not to use water-based inks, there are ways in which the VOC emissions can be reduced. One such way is by recapturing the solvents from the air. The air passes through a recovery system, which typically consists of beds of activated carbon that absorb the solvents from the air. Steam is then used to separate the solvents and re-condense them. More than 95% of the solvents used in ink can be recovered through this process and can then either be reused or destroyed. In addition to recovering solvent from the air, gravure printers focus on controlling the temperature of the ink. By keeping the ink at room temperature, less solvent is released into the air, as concluded in a study performed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Gravure Association of the Americas (GAA) (24). This study found that “total solvent consumption…was slightly greater at 66°F than 79°F due to the amount of solvent needed to reach target viscosity during make-ready.” Even though ink kept at colder temperatures required more solvent to bring it to target viscosity, as temperature rises, solvents evaporate faster and require even more solvent to maintain viscosity. In flexography, the most commonly used ink is water-based, although solventbased and UV curable inks can be used as well. Water-based inks are much more environmentally friendly, as they reduce VOC emissions, however they can also 61

cause problems when printing on certain substrates. Films and foils are not very receptive to water-based inks and despite advances in coatings and treatments that would allow them to be more receptive, there are still many complications. In order for the flexographic printer to make the switch from solvent-based to water-based inks, adjustments must be made to the press itself that will treat the surface of the substrate, increase drying time, replace the current rollers with ones that will accept the ink, and more, as listed in a fact sheet written by Fred Shapiro for PNEAC (21). Other substrates, such as paper and paperboard are much more accepting of water-based inks and can be printed on without treatment, but other press adjustments must still be made. Despite lower VOC emission from inks, flexography traditionally tends to use more solvents during plate making, as will be discussed more later on. Both processes use other types of solvents throughout the process when developing the plate or cylinder, and cleaning after printing. The emissions from these solvents must be monitored just as carefully. When creating a gravure cylinder, typically no solvent is used. After the cylinder is engraved, it is electroplated in chrome for durability. For flexography there can be more waste associated with plate making depending on the process used. There are several ways to create a flexographic plate, photopolymer plates being the most common as they are very resilient, and flexible. Imaging the photopolymer plates requires two washes, first to remove the unexposed photopolymer and second to remove residual tackiness. These washes can be done with either solvent or water, and according to Doreen Monteleone for PNEAC in an article titled â&#x20AC;&#x153;Environmental Management of Photopolymer Flexographic Printing Plates,â&#x20AC;? the biggest difference between using solvent and water to wash the plates is in the treatment of the water (19). The quality of water washable plates has greatly improved since their invention. In addition to monitoring VOC emissions, printing companies must control any other outputs of waste they may produce, such as waste from make-ready, the reusability of the plates or printing surface. Gravure does not produce much make-ready waste because there are few things that can be done in the way of color management. Due to the simplicity of gravure and the way the ink is held in the cells, the only way to drastically adjust colors is when the cylinder is being engraved. That said, it is important to monitor the viscosity of the ink during printing, especially for long runs at high speeds, because changes in ink viscosity can change the appearance of the print. As discussed earlier, the study 62

performed by the EPA and GAA found that gravure inks kept at room temperatures performed better and maintained their viscosity, therefore decreasing the amount of make-ready waste. While there are more complicated ways to make local color adjustments on the press, they are not often used and require technical skills to perform. Color control for packaging will be discussed later on. Registration is performed much like on any other press. Therefore, the amount of make-ready waste for gravure is determined by the amount of time it takes to register each unit, given that the viscosity of the ink is monitored and all other elements, such as pressure, are adjusted correctly for the given substrate. For flexography, there tends to be more make-ready waste, as local color corrections often need to be made by adjusting the amount of ink metered to the plate cylinder. In general, most color correction and management should be done during prepress, as it can adjust how the plate is imaged depending on the profile used. It is important to monitor dot gain during registration, as too much dot gain can result in a loss of detail. In addition to environmental sustainability, economic sustainability is important to maintaining competitive advantage in the package printing market. Several factors go into determining this, including the durability of the plate versus the cost and printing speed. When it comes to durability, gravure has a clear upper hand. A gravure cylinder is able to run several millions of impressions without any change to the consistency of the color. This is useful for very long run jobs that do not require much variation. Unfortunately, creating a gravure cylinder is extremely expensive, as it requires precious metals, takes a long time to engrave, and is expensive to transport. Typically in packaging only one engraving head is used for the entire cylinder, which can be over ten feet in length, in order to ensure perfect color calibration. While using multiple heads can reduce the amount of time needed to engrave the cylinder, extra time must then go into calibrating each engraving head to ensure that the size and depth of cells are exactly the same. This is especially important for packaging where brands rely heavily on accurate color reproduction. The benefit of this over flexography is that the cost of engraving does not change in proportion to design complexity. Engraving directly into the cylinder also allows for a continuous image. With no gap necessary to hold a printing plate, the press can be run at extremely high speeds and still produce high quality images. In addition, the size and weight of gravure cylinders makes them very difficult and expensive to transport, if the 63

cost of plates

engraving and electroplating is not done in-house. So despite being able to run for millions of impressions, the cost of producing the cylinders may be too high for printing companies to maintain competitive advantage. Even though some companies are currently developing ways to make changeover and set up times shorter, the cost of engraving the cylinder is still just as high. The current industry trend towards shorter run jobs and on-demand work will also make it challenging for gravure to maintain its competitive advantage, especially as digital printing continues to expand and improve in quality.

design complexity

Gravure

Flexography

Flexography, on the other hand, can use a couple different methods of plate making. This gives flexography a competitive advantage in the packaging market because it gives research companies the incentive to improve the sustainability, quality, and durability of flexographic plates. For example, MacDermid Printing Solutions has developed a more resilient plate that “minimizes press bounce, thus allowing faster press speeds,” as noted by Steve Katz in his 2010 article for Label & Narrow Web (14). These kinds of plates have enabled flexography to achieve a level of quality that rivals gravure. In flexography, “the cost of plates increase with the complexity of design,” according to David Argent, an editor for Paper, Film, and Foil Converter. In the same article, titled “Gravure Versus Flexo Printing Part two,” Argent states “the playing field is now level” between gravure and flexography because of the fact that both presses can be equipped with state of the art controls that just about equalize the features, amenities, and cost of the two (9). Flexography, unlike gravure, has lower initial production costs but given new technology it can also be used for long runs. According to a 2003 article for Package Printing by Tom Polishchuk, “the market increasingly requires a more 64

complex job, produced faster, and on shorter runs” (20). 12 years later, this is still true if not even more so. For this reason, flexography may be much more prepared for the future, as it can produce short run jobs and long run jobs for a lower cost at a quality that is now rivaling gravure and lithography. Overall, new technologies and advancements in flexography are allowing it to approach the speed, quality, and durability of gravure, but with decreased production costs for plates. Social sustainability in terms of versatility and adaptability in application and future trends is also crucial in our analysis of these two printing processes. Adaptability in application refers to the variety of substrates, inks, and future trends that can be used while maintaining a high level of quality. In terms of the packaging industry and branding, it is ideal that a printing process can print on a large variety of substrates with uniform color reproduction. Gravure is able to print on a wide range of substrates, including cardboard, plastic, film, foil, laminates, vinyl, and thin paper. Unfortunately it cannot print on rough or porous materials, because high points on the substrate tend to pick up more ink whereas low points have a hard time picking up any ink, resulting in missed cells. This can cause ink to dry in smaller cells and will be missed on the next impression. For this reason, gravure is limited to printing on smooth substrates. Flexography on the other hand, can print on a very large variety of rough and smooth substrates including corrugate, paper (coated or uncoated), film, foil, vinyl, synthetic substrates, and more. This is possible because the plate is flexible yet resilient, which allows it to print on a range of textures. Unfortunately, this is also what limits the quality of flexography. According to an article by Ian Baitz for Graphic Arts Magazine, “the hardness or softness of the flexo[graphic] plate affects its ability to hold fine lines and reverses and influences dot gain,” all of which affect the quality of the final appearance (10). So the increased flexibility that is necessary to print effectively on a rough substrate in turn decreases the quality. Overall, both processes have relative difficulty printing on rough substrates, however flexography tends to do a better job with lower detailed images. When it comes to the quality of the print, color reproduction and resolution are taken into account. Flexography traditionally has harsh vignettes and gradients, as there is a limit to how small of a dot can be produced. Companies like Esko are working towards developing and implementing high quality plates that will provide “perfect ink laydown with the right solid density, vibrant brand colors, supreme platemaking consistency and the only fully digitally controlled 65

platemaking workflow available in industry” (4). According to FIRST specifications, “some print conditions require lower screen rulings,” because of the limitations of certain substrates and plates (11). For example, thinner and smoother substrates, like coated paper, can be printed at 110-175 lpi using digitally imaged photopolymer plates, while rougher substrates like corrugated is typically printed between 55-110 lpi. As a result, flexographic quality is limited by the substrate that it is printing on, as stated earlier. Additionally, a high amount of dot gain is common for high tint values, for which printers must compensate to prevent losing highlight and shadow detail. Gravure can produce very fine details, but a typical electromechanical engraving head can give fine lines and type a ted edge. Some companies have attempted to accommodate for this by using specialized hybrid engraving heads that combine laser engraving with electromechanical. This helps to fill in the spaces between the cells and reduce the look of the serrated edge. Because of this “quality and reproducibility of gravure printing,” gravure is in rapid growth, according to a 2006 article by Dr. Peter Harrop for IDTechEx and so is commonly used for packaging when a very high quality image is desired (12). When producing images, gravure has the ability to create a third dimension of color with the use of deep cells. Because the ink is able to dry very quickly, dry trapping is always used. This allows for thick layers of ink to be laid down and produce very deep colors, without having to increase drying time. This is ideal for package printing because realistic images, like food, can be produced in high quality. For products that need high quality reproduction, or color accuracy, gravure is ideal. For the same reason, however, gravure has trouble reproducing highlights. This is because highlight cells are so small and the ink dries very quickly; if the substrate takes too long to reach the cylinder, ink in the highlight cells can easily be missed. This can be accommodated for using electrostatic assist, which raises the surface level of the ink and helps it to be completely pulled out of the cell. This can cause problems later in the bindery, as adding static to the paper can make other processes more difficult. Future trends, such as printed electronics, are also extremely important in determining which printing method is the most adaptable for the future. Printed electronics is already widely invested in and is expected to grow enormously over the next couple years. Having the capability to produce an electronic product that can be flexible, disposable and low-cost lends itself to a plethora of applications, especially in the packaging market. In an interview for Packaging Digest, Davor 66

Sutija, CEO of Thinfilm (a printed electronics supplier) discusses their Near Field Communication Barcode tags. He states that the tags allow “low-cost track-andtrace monitoring for temperature-sensitive medical products like pharmaceuticals and vaccines, and food perishables such as meat, seafood and produce” (16). The problem is, a majority of printed electronics research was done using digital or screen printers, which are not ideal for large-scale production, especially for packaging. For this we turn to gravure or flexography, both have which proven themselves capable of printing with high quality on the smooth, thin, and flexible substrates required for printed electronics. In 2010, a study observed different combinations of gravure printing variables to find the most effective way to print electronics. They found that overall, “gravure-printed nanoparticle lines are promising because of their low surface roughness, high conductivity, and potential scalability to industry” (22). Using these conditions, the smallest line they were able to print was 30μm wide and 70μm thick. For flexography, printed electronics is just as promising. It can print a uniform layer of ink, produce fine features, and print on a very wide range of substrates. A study done by Cal Poly San Luis Obispo tested the limits to printing electronics using flexography. They found that good results could be produced, however certain guidelines were helpful to produce the best quality product. Things that affect quality are the orientation of the artwork, as cross press direction will print larger than press direction, and the resolution of the imaging limits the size of features that can be held on the plate (23). Higher resolution imagers will produce plates with finer lines that can print smaller images. Overall, the smallest line they were able to produce was around 25μm, 5μm smaller than was possible using gravure.

CONCLUDING REMARKS Overall, both printing methods have their advantages and disadvantages. As we move into the future of printing and packaging it is important to determine which one is better suited to adapt. By analyzing the environmental, economic, and social sustainability of each process, we are able to determine which has the upper hand. From this, companies will be able to decide whether they will print their job using flexography or gravure, depending on which fits the requirements of the job and competitive strategy of the company better. When it comes to environmental sustainability, VOC emissions and waste must be considered. Both printing methods can adapt well to water-based inks and produce high67

quality products using them. Flexography tends to produce more make-ready waste, as it requires more color management than gravure, where little to no color adjustments can be made. For economic sustainability, the cost of the job largely depends on the run length. Set-up time for gravure is much more costly and time consuming, however it can be used for extremely long run jobs and consistently produce high quality images. Flexography requires less cost and set-up time, but cannot typically run for as long as a gravure cylinder. This is beginning to change as new advancements in plate-making have developed more resilient plates that will be able to run as long as a gravure cylinder with similar quality consistency. The final factor is social sustainability, which determines which method is more adaptable to the largest range of substrates, inks, and future trends. While both gravure and flexography are able to print on a large range of substrates, gravure requires substrates that are extremely smooth for the complete transfer of ink, but can print at the same level of quality across many substrates. Flexography is able to handle rougher substrates, but must compensate by sacrificing image quality and resolution. When it comes to printed electronics, both appear to be well suited for producing the required image. However flexography has been found to produce a smaller line than gravure. Overall, it appears that flexography is better suited to adopt future trends, as it can produce high quality images at a lower cost than gravure, which is useful for short and long run jobs. In addition, it is able to handle a larger variety of substrates, and with future developments it will be able to produce very high quality images.

REFERENCES “About Gravure.” About Gravure. Ohio Gravure Technologies, 1 Jan. 2009. Web. 4 Feb. 2015. <http://www.ohiogt.com/pe/gravure_about.html>. “Commercial Printing, Gravure.” Encyclopedia for Business. 2nd ed. Advameg, 2004. Print. “Flexible Packaging Using Flexographic Printing.” Flexible Packaging & Print Packaging. ESKO, 1 Jan. 2015. Web. 4 Feb. 2015. <http://www.esko.com/en/solutions/digital-flexo/flexible-packaging/>. “Full HD Flexo: A New Standard for Flexo Plates.” Making Flexo Printing Plates Using Full HD Flexo. ESKO, 1 Jan. 2012. Web. 1 Mar. 2015. <http://www.esko.com/en/products/overview/full-hd-flexo/overview/>. “Minimising VOC Emissions from Victoria’s Printing Industry.” EPA Victoria 940 (2004): 2-3. EPA Victoria. Web. 1 Mar. 2015. <http://www.epa.vic.gov. au/~/media/Publications/940.pdf>. “Print Process Descriptions: Printing Industry Overview: Flexography.” Printing Process Descriptions: Environment and Printing: The Printers’ National Environmental Assistance Center: PNEAC: The Environmental Information Website for the Printing Industry. PNEAC, 1 Jan. 2011. Web. 3 Mar. 2015. <http://www.pneac.org/printprocesses/flexography/moreinfo6.cfm>. “Printing Industry Overview: Gravure.” Printer Ink. Castle Ink. Web. 3 Mar. 2015. <http://www.castleink.com/category/371/Print-Process:Gravure-Printing- Process.html?language=en>. “The Great Plate Debate.” Flexography and Sustainability 1.2 (2010): 2-3. Graphics.kod. Kodak. Web. 2 Feb. 2015. <http://graphics.kodak.com/ KodakGCG/uploadedFiles/FlexcelNX_Sustainability_WhtPaper_091510_ lo.pdf>. Argent, David. “Gravure Versus Flexo Printing Part 2.” Paper, Film, and Foil Converter. 1 Aug. 2009. Web. 3 Mar. 2015. <http://www.pffc-online.com/ processmanagement/7352-gravure-versus-flexo-0809>.

Baitz, Ian. “A Foundation in Flexography - Graphic Arts Magazine.” Graphic Arts Magazine. 15 Sept. 2010. Web. 3 Mar. 2015. <http://graphicartsmag. com/articles/2010/09/a-foundation-in-flexography/>. Flexographic Image Reproduction Specifications & Tolerances. FIRST 4.0 Supplemental Flexographic Printing Design Guide. Section 3.4 “Screen Ruling.” FFTA. Harrop, Peter. “Flexo vs Gravure.” Flexo vs Gravure. IDTechEx, 6 Apr. 2006. Web. 1 Mar. 2015. <http://www.idtechex.com/research/articles/flexo_vs_ gravure_00000465.asp?donotredirect=true>. Jacobson, Debra. “What Are VOCs And Do Printing Related Materials Contain Them?”PNEAC: Fact Sheets and Case Studies: All Printing Technologies: What Are VOCs. PNEAC, 21 June 2011. Web. 4 Mar. 2015. <http://www. pneac.org/sheets/all/vocs.cfm>. Katz, Steve. “Flexo Plates.” Label & Narrow Web. Label & Narrow Web, 7 May 2010. Web. 3 Mar. 2015. <http://www.labelandnarrowweb.com/ issues/2010-05/view_product-reviews/flexo-plates/>. Li, Angelica and Chung, Robert, “Sustainability in gravure packaging printing.” 2010. <http://scholarworks.rit.edu/books/87>. Lingle, Rick. “Printed Electronics Agreement Advances Packaging, The Internet of Things.” Packaging Materials, Equipment, and News. Packaging Digest, 16 July 2014. Web. 4 Mar. 2015. <http://www.packagingdigest.com/ labels/thinfilm-nfc-internet-everything-140716>. McLoone, Chris. “Still Going Strong.” PackagePRINTING. 1 June 2008. Web. 4 Feb. 2015. <http://www.packageprinting.com/article/gravure-printing packaging-applications-update-109664/2>. Moldvay, Caitlin. “Printing in the US.” IBISWorld Industry Report 32311 (2012). Print.

Monteleone, Doreen. “Environmental Management of Photopolymer Flexographic Printing Plates.”Printers’ National Environmental Assistance Center. PNEAC, 7 June 2011. Web. 1 Feb. 2015. <http://www.pneac.org/ sheets/flexo/photopolyflexplates.cfm>. Polischuk, Tom. “State of the Industry-Flexible Packaging.” PackagePRINTING. 1 Apr. 2003. Web. 3 Feb. 2015. <http://www.packageprinting.com/ article/state-industry-flexible-packaging-14341/1>. Shapiro, Fred. “Water Based Inks for Flexographic Printing.” Printers’ National Environmental Assistance Center. PNEAC. Web. 4 Mar. 2015. <http:// www.pneac.org/sheets/flexo/waterbasedinks.pdf>. Sung, Donovan, Alejandro De La Fuente Vornbrock, and Vivek Subramanian. “Scaling and Optimization of Gravure-Printed Silver Nanoparticle Lines for Printed Electronics.” IEEE Transactions on Components and Packaging Technologies 33.1 (2010): 105-14. Print. Twomey, Colleen. “Optimizing Flexography for Printed Electronics, A Case Study.” Printed Electronics Symposium. 2014 SIGA/ FlexTech . Las Vegas Convention Center, Las Vegas. 1 Oct. 2014. Lecture. “The Effect of Ink Temperature on Solvent Losses and Print Quality.” Environmental Protection Agency. 1 May 2010. Web. 1 Mar. 2015. <http://www.epa.gov/ dfe/pubs/pdf/gravure.pdf>

Kelsey Burgett

Kelsey is a third year Graphic Communication major with a concentration in Design Reproduction Technology. This is her first year in TAGA, where she is a member of the Design Team and helps create the style of the journal. In March, Kelsey is headed to Munich, Germany to study graphic communication abroad. While she is there, she hopes to immerse herself in culture and study different design aesthetics. Over the summer, Kelsey had two internships doing graphic design for small local businesses. After graduation, she plans on pursuing a career in design, particularly for packaging. She is originally from San Diego, California and she loves going to the beach. Kelsey also loves traveling, art, photography, and trying new foods.

THE EFFICACY OF CONVENTIONAL MERCURY VAPOR UV CURING AND LED UV CURING Natalee Consulo Lena Haidar Mark Mac Manus

ABSTRACT Over the last decade or so, the world has seen a large decline in the amount of printed products. As a result of this, packaging companies must be more selective when determining which printing process to use to print a job. Currently, gravure and flexography dominate the flexible packaging industry, both offering advantages and disadvantages to a printed piece. When choosing a process, one should consider its environmental, economic, and social sustainability. Then, depending on the requirements of the job and competitive strategy of the company, they will be better able to choose which printing process is better suited. This analysis will outline the strengths, weaknesses, and overall characteristics of gravure and flexography in the packaging industry. Overall, flexography is best suited for short or long run jobs that require high quality printing. It can also print on a large variety of substrates, both smooth and rough, unlike gravure, which can only print on smooth substrates, and it can accommodate printed electronics.

INTRODUCTION The purpose of this study is to provide accurate detailed data related to the printability differences between conventional UV flexographic printing and LED UV flexographic printing. Ultraviolet curing for printing purposes, also known as UV curing, is a photochemical process where high intensity ultraviolet light is used to instantly dry the coating, ink or adhesive printed on the substrate. There are many advantages of UV curing over traditional drying methods. These advantages include greater consistency, increasing production speed and facilitating superior ink-to-substrate bonding and resistance to abrasion. Currently there are three inking systems: water, solvent, and energy curable, of which UV is most common. UV ink systems provide many benefits, including ink holdout, ink durability, and less dot gain. Dot gain, also known as Tonal Value Increase (TVI), is the phenomenon where ink halftones grow in size when printed on to the substrate. Upon its impression, the dot will almost always increase in size in virtually every printing method. This can be potentially detrimental to images because the ink dots can increase the density of the image making it darker and incongruent with the desired physical visual manifestation of what was on the screen or in the original image. There are ways to compensate for this in file preparation for print however in the end having less dot gain means an image with greater contrast. This is very important in the print and packaging industry to maximize image quality. The higher the image quality of the product, the nicer it is perceived to the human eye. UV ink systems can deliver, the necessary quality that clients demand. LED UV technology has recently been commercialized for the narrow web flexographic press and there are few existing data sets comparing the two differing technologies. UV is used in the flexographic industry because of the high quality and high durability of the product once it has been cured. There is a large range of substrates that UV can adhere to whilst delivering a wide range of rich colors. This study examines the economics, sustainability and workflow influences of conventional UV flexo and LED UV flexo printing.

Conventional UV and LED UV flexo printing is expensive at the onset. Both technologies require initial capital cost and depending on the size of the press, each ink unit requires an individual lamp to cure its respective ink. However, the differences between the two curing methods are discrepancies in heat energy loss, the space required for the curing lamps and press speed. The outcome of this study documents findings of key variables, potential savings and process benefits and contrasts conventional UV flexo printing with LED UV flexo printing. Variables analyzed include: energy consumption, substrate temperature under lamp, ink color gamut (impacted by ink opacity), curing speed, curing effectiveness, ink composition distinctions, and cost of ink. One of the most notable disadvantages of conventional UV printing is the substantial heat generated by the lamps. This is particularly problematic when working with heat sensitive substrates such as films. Films generally are made from a polymer whereas paper is generally made from trees. Plastic is much more susceptible to heat damage therefore making it problematic with conventional UV film printing or packaging. Because of this, only certain types of films can be used. The thinner the film, the more likely it will shrink or break on press. The heat limits the types of substrates conventional UV can print on, exemplified by the lack of ability to print on heat shrinkable sleeves, also known as shrink sleeves. Shrink sleeves are made from thin plastic polymer that has the ability to mold to a product when heat is applied. LED UV runs much cooler but it also produces light in a different portion of the UV spectrum. The actual unit produces significantly less heat than that of conventional UV. They both have different UV wavelengths and the photosensitive composition of the ink must be customized to the curing system. Therefore, most conventional UV ink systems do not work the same with LED lamps and in turn, the ink must be reformulated to be compatible with the LED UV wavelength. With these changes in ink composition comes differences in ink viscosity and ink opacity. This change directly affects the ink gamut after print, either increasing it or decreasing it or changing it completely. A color gamut for a printer is a visual representation of what the printer can print. This affects quality of the work when color matching the final product to the image that the printer or the client has digitally represented on screen or in a proof.

There are some significant challenges to UV curing. Among them: UV inks cost more than conventional (water based or solvent) inks, lamps and energy consumption are expensive in comparison to drying without UV inks and lamps. In addition to standard flexographic print, flexographic food packaging runs the risk for potential migration of uncured material from the substrate to the food, potentially causing contamination. Ultraviolet curable inks do not make sense for all packaging applications but in many cases, UV inks could be more widely used in the industry to take advantage of UV benefits. This project will demonstrate information in an unbiased manner that could sway any production printer from using conventional UV or LED UV or vice versa. Printers now have an option to choose to use conventional UV or LED UV, and this knowledge will allow printers to justify their choice.

LITERATURE REVIEW UV Curing Systems Conventional Mercury Vapor UV The primary method of UV curing in flexography is the use of mercury vapor lamps. Mercury vapor lamps are efficient in comparison to standard lights. One of the advantages to mercury vapor is the lifetime of the bulb. The lifetime of the bulb is about 24,000 hours with a clear bright white output. After the 24,000 hours have expired, the bulb starts to dim and curing quality diminishes. They are a high intensity light, most widely used in factories, warehouses and sports arenas as bright overhead lights. The conventional mercury vapor lamps produce UV light in addition to the bright white light enabling UV ink to cure on press. (Schiler). From an environmental standpoint, the lights contain traces of mercury, which must be disposed of properly. The mercury in the tube is a liquid at room temperature. In order for radiation to take place, the mercury needs to be vaporized and ionized so the tube will conduct electricity. Very similar to fluorescent tubes, the starter that is needed to create the light is contained in the lamp itself. A third electrode is mounted near one of the main electrodes and connected through a resistor to he other main electrode. In addition to the mercury, the tube is filled with argon gas at low pressure. Once the power is applied, the argon is ionized and strikes a small power area between the 81

starting electrode and the main electrode. It discharges heat and eventually there is enough to create arcs between all the electrodes. Because of this, mercury vapor lamps take around seven minutes to start up. In turn, maximum brightness of these lights take significantly longer than most lights. (Hugot,1972). This is an important consideration in high-speed print production in time is a considerable factor. Traditional flexo curing methods use mercury vapor UV to cure inks. When using UV ink curing systems, the UV spectrum of the light source is critical. The lamps are constructed to emit a wide band of UV light energy from 365 nm to 440 nm on the spectrum. Ink composition and activators must react to that specific range of UV light.

arc tube mount support

outer bulb

quartz arc tube

main electrodes starting electrode starting resistor stem mogul base

Figure 1 Conventional Mercury Vapor Light Bulb

Light Emitting Diode (LED) An alternative to mercury vapor lamps is LEDs. Light emitting diodes emit light through a complex process called electroluminescence via a semiconductive metal. A semiconductor is a metal that can be either conductive or nonconductive depending on the environment that it is in. A semiconductor with extra electrons is called N-type or negative material, since it has extra negatively charged electrons. A semiconductor with extra room for electrons is called P-type (positive) material because it has extra positively charged gaps called holes. In a P-N junction, free electrons are attracted to the positively charged areas and the negatively charged electrons move across a gap from one side to the other, resulting in the flow of electrons (Uchida, 1988). As an electron travels to a hole, it carries energy, but in order to fit into the hole it must release any extra energy, and when it does, the extra energy is converted to photons. The UV LED emits UV radiation from 395 nm to 400 nm in the ultraviolet range. Again this is an important consideration when using ink with photoinitiators that require a certain UV range to react and cure because if the wrong ink is used, the UV curing system wonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t cure the ink properly.

Light emission

+ I p n

I R

Figure 2 LED Diagram

Flexographic Printing Inks UV Ink Formulation Similar to water and solvent based ink formulation, the ink formulation for Ultraviolet ink contains resins that assist with curing the ink. The resins that are in the vehicle contain oligomers and monomers. Photoinitiators are used to trigger a reaction with these two molecules. A high dose of ultraviolet light is a catalyst that triggers the photoinitiators present in the resin. These oligomers and monomers couple together, polymerize and solidify. The photoinitiator serves as a method of absorption of the UV light from a wavelength of 200â&#x20AC;&#x201C;400 nanometers (the UV spectrum). Once it is absorbed it causes a rapid polymerization of the ink on the substrate, adhering it with a durable strong bond.

Monomer

Oligomer

Large Reactive Species

Photoinitiator

Liquid film before exposure to the UV light.

UV Light

Reactive Species

Photoinitiator forms reactive species when exposed to UV light.

Polymer Propagation: Species react with monomers and oligomers.

UV-cured coating. A solid cured coating results from the completion of polymerization.

Figure 3 Ink Photoinitators

Differences The main differences between the conventional UV lamps and the LED UV lamps are the energy consumption and the wavelengths at which they emit UV. The energy usage is significantly higher with conventional UV than that of LED and the conventional UV power unit is significantly larger physically in comparison to LED lamps, taking up critical real estate in the pressroom. There are also different photoinitiators used in the vehicles that react at different wavelengths. The UV wavelengths are a large factor in curing the inks. Each respective technology needs 84

special ink that correlates with the energy output. LED lamps have less latitude with a range of only 5 nm for curing (395–400 Nm). This could be potentially hazardous for precision curing because of the small band in comparison to the band of the conventional UV (365–440 nm). Issues could arise for non-cured ink migrating its way onto the product, or worse, the food product. As long as the correct inks are used with their respective curing system, no issues should arise. During the “Emerging Trends” session at the Flexographic Technical Association Forum in San Diego, California in April 2013, Mike Buystedet, Flint Ink, presented on flexographic UV LED inks and the UV LED curing system. Many tests were run using UV LED curing systems. Summarizing these findings, the LED UV ink had high color strength and a larger expanded gamut and a much denser black. They were able to print UV metallics and UV adhesives that are generally hard to print. The tests also showed that curing these inks on glossy, matte, and product resistant coated substrate was possible which is not a general standard in the flexographic industry. In regards to the system, the heat sensitive material ran well and testers were able to increase the speed of the press providing greater utilization. All applications were validated by running multiple tests, showing many benefits to the LED technology. The “instant on” nature of LED lamps was proven very efficient to the process and reduced make ready time (Conference Proceedings). As a result of lower maintenance, yield time was improved. LED lights have no moving parts, no shutter failures and no maintenance is necessary. Once the press is running the lights turn on and when the run is over they turn off. The LED UV needs no time to warm up like the conventional UV. Additionally, there were no web breaks because of an extremely hot UV housing. They were able to print on shrink film, which has never done before. The total yield improvement rose 4% (Conference Proceedings). In spite of the many [apparent] advantages of LED UV there are many questions that still remain. Some of which include actual testing the LED UV product to verify that the conference proceedings were accurate. Testing needs to be done in order to display unbiased results for the industries’ disposal. It is a very new technology that is not used in the Graphic Communication industry simply because mercury vapor ultraviolet light is an industry standard. The following analysis of hard

data shows the flexographic industry comparison between the current industry standard, mercury vapor UV, and LED UV.

RESEARCH METHODS AND PROCEDURES The purpose of this study is to provide data related to the differences between conventional UV flexographic ink curing and LED UV flexographic ink curing. This study examined the print quality and system effectiveness of conventional UV flexo and LED UV flexo curing methods. The variables were tested on an industry standard narrow web flexographic press using both LED UV curing lamps and conventional UV lamps, and were evaluated in order to compare the two systems. The results are meant to allow companies to make decisions concerning implementation of curing systems based on their current needs. The variables tested along with the methodology used for testing were as follows: Tone and Color Reproduction a. Tonal Value Increase (TVI) - Tone blocks were measured using a X-Rite 530 model spectrodensitometer in order to determine the accuracy of the printed dot size. b. Color Gamut - L*a*b* values were measured using a X-Rite 530 model spectrodensitometer, and delta-E values were calculated in order to determine whether there was a difference in color reproduction when using the two different UV curing systems Print Process Capabilities a. Positive and Negative Type - The positive and negative type test on the print test sheet is examined using a Beta Flex to see how well positive and negative type is reproduced in the various runs. b. Slur - The slur target on the print test sheet is examined using a Beta Flex in order to see if there were any problems with slur in any of the print runs. c. Solid Ink Density (SID) - The solid ink density was examined on the various runs using a Beta Flex to better understand how well the ink was laid down on the substrate. d. Trap - The trap effectiveness was studied using a Beta Flex.

Ink Curing Speed and Effectiveness a. A pass/fail test was used to determine whether the ink was fully cured or not at high and low press speeds Substrate Temperature Under Both Lamps a. An infrared thermometer was used to measure the temperature of the substrate under the lamp during printing. Types of Substrates and Distortion a. A print rule was measured with a ruler to determine whether any distortion of the substrate occurred due to exposure to the UV curing system. Cost of Ink a. Ink costs were compared based on the list price, by type of ink, as well as, ink mileage. Additional Information Outside of Designed Experiment a. A separate test was run to investigate the effects of UV curing on a shrink film substrate

RESULTS Lena Haidar, Mark Mac Manus, and Natalee Consulo, Graphic Communication students at Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, under the advisement of Professor Colleen Twomey designed and conducted the experiment in September of 2013 at the Flint Group’s Center for Technical Excellence in Plymouth, Minnesota. The Flint Group facility provided industry standard press conditions. The equipment provided by the Flint Group included a Mark Andy 4150 narrow web flexographic press and conventional UV and LED UV curing systems. All experiments and processes were monitored and evaluated by the researchers. The press was run by Scott Shutt, an experienced flexo press operator at the Flint Group. The designed experiment tested different combinations of variables using eight press runs. The constants included 0.020” 3M 1015H (medium density) sticky back for the plates. Following Flexographic Image Reproduction Specifications & Tolerances (FIRST) recommendations, DuPont Cyrel DFR 0.067 digital photopolymer plates with a relief of 0.022” were used. Each color station was equipped with these anilox rollers: a 1200 CPI (cells per inch) anilox with 1.29 87

BCM (billion cubic microns) volume on the yellow print station, a 1200 CPI anilox with 1.25 BCM volume on the magenta print station, a 1200 CPI anilox with 1.29 BCM volume on the cyan print station, and a 1000 CPI anilox with 1.25 BCM volume on the black print station. Steel chambered doctor blades were used. In order to validate the original press runs, two control test runs were performed. The first control test was printed on paper using conventional UV curing at a slow press speed. The second control test was printed on film using conventional UV curing at a slow press speed. These data collected from the control tests was consistent with the original runs and therefore validated the previous print runs.

Figure 5 Target File

The test target provided measurements of various print variables. A color bar was placed on each side of the target in order to test the ink density, ink durability, and L*a*b* values of the C, M, Y, and K inks. L*a*b* values define colors within a color space, where L measures lightness and a and b measure color-opponent dimensions. Other items on the test target were positive and reverse type, trap, tonal blocks, ink durability (using the scratch, alcohol swab, and tape tests), grey balance, slur, and distortion rule (Ploumidis). Each run in this experiment is defined as follows on the next page:

Original Press Runs: Run A (Film, Conventional UV, low speed) Run B (Film, Conventional UV, high speed) Run C (Paper, Conventional UV, low speed) Run D (Paper, Conventional UV, high speed) Run E (Paper, LED UV, low speed) Run F (Film, LED UV, low speed) Run G (Film, LED UV, high speed) Run H (Paper, LED UV, high speed) Verification Runs: Run I (Paper, Conventional UV, low speed) Run J (Film, Conventional UV, low speed) Ink Color Gamut (impacted by ink opacity) The ink color gamut was measured with a spectrodensitometer. Fifteen samples were randomly selected from each run and the Cyan, Magenta, Yellow, and Black were measured at their respective 2%,10%,30%,70%, and 100% densities. The average highs and lows are explained below with patterns appearing per similar characteristics. Each test run was designated a letter with itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s corresponding detail. Those press runs are as follows: (A) Film, Conventional UV, Slow run (B) Film, Conventional UV, Fast run (C) Paper, Conventional UV, Slow run (D) Paper, Conventional UV, Fast run (E) Paper, LED UV, Slow run (F) Film, LED UV, Slow run (G) Film, LED UV, Fast run (H) Paper, LED UV, Fast Run (I) Paper, Conventional UV, Slow run (J) Film, Conventional UV, Slow run

Tonal Value Increase - Yellow

TVI Yellow Conclusions • • • • • •

Lowest overall dot gain (TVI) on paper is run (H) Paper, LED UV, Fast Run (2- 70%), (E) Paper, LED UV, Slow Run (100%) Lowest overall TVI on film is run (F) Film, LED UV, Slow Run (2-70%), (G Film, LED UV, Fast run (100%) Highest overall TVI on paper is run (C) Paper, Conventional UV, Slow Run Highest overall TVI on film is run (A) Film, Conventional UV, Slow Run (H) Paper, LED UV, Fast run = Most accurate 2%-70% (G) Film, LED UV, Fast run = Most accurate at 100%

Tonal Value Increase - Magenta

TVI Magenta Conclusion • Lowest overall dot gain (TVI) on paper is run (H) Paper, LED UV, Fast Run (2- 70%), (E) Paper, LED UV, Slow Run (100%) • Lowest overall TVI on film is run - (F) Film, LED UV, Slow Run (2-70%), • (G) Film, LED UV, Fast run (100%) • Highest overall TVI on paper is run (C) Paper, Conventional UV, Slow Run & (D) Paper, Conventional UV, Fast Run • Highest overall TVI on film is run (A) Film, Conventional UV, Slow Run (30- 100%) & (F) Film, LED UV, Slow Run (2-10%) • (H) Paper, LED UV, Fast run = Most accurate 2%-70% • (G) Film, LED UV, Fast run = Most accurate at 100% 91

Tonal Value Increase - Cyan

TVI Cyan Conclusions • Lowest overall TVI on paper is run (H) Paper, LED UV, Fast run (2-70%), (E) Paper, LED UV, Slow Run (100%) • Lowest overall TVI on film (on average) is run (B) Film, Conventional UV, Fast Run (2-70%), (G) Film, LED UV, Fast run (100%) • Highest overall TVI on paper (on average) is run (C) Paper, Conventional UV, Slow Run & (D) Paper, Conventional UV, Fast Run • Highest overall TVI on film is run (A) Film, Conventional UV, Slow run (30- 100%) & (F) Film, LED UV, Slow Run (2-10%) • (H) Paper, LED UV, Fast run = Most accurate 2%-70% • (G) Film, LED UV, Fast run = Most accurate at 100% 92

Tonal Value Increase - Black

TVI Black Conclusions • Lowest overall TVI on paper is run (H) - Paper, LED UV, Fast Run (2%, 10%, 70%), (E) - Paper, LED UV, Slow Run (30%), (C) Paper, Conventional UV, Slow Run (100%) • Lowest overall TVI on film is run (A) Film, Conventional UV, Slow Run (10- 70%), (G) Film, LED UV, Fast Run (2%, 100%) • Highest overall TVI on paper is run (F) Film, LED UV, Slow Run (2%) & (G) Film, LED UV, Fast Run (10-30%) • Highest overall TVI on film is run (A) Film, Conventional UV, Slow Run (30- 100%) & (F) Film, LED UV, Slow Run (2-10%) • (G) Film, LED UV, Fast Run = Most accurate at 100% 93

TVI Conclusions These graphs display the TVI for all paper samples for each color in detail. There are slight differences in the TVI, but the differences are so minute they are negligible for TVI in runs using 60# Elite/C2500/40# paper and SF 2.6M WH BOPP TC/S692N film. Although considered negligible, the information the conclusive information is provided below. • Consistently, with CMY, (G) Film, LED UV, Fast Run, delivered the lowest TVI at 100%. From 2-70%, (F) Film, LED UV, Slow Run most consistently delivered the lowest TVI on film, however overall (H) Paper, LED UV, Fast Run always delivered the lowest values. • Consistently, with CMY, (D) Paper, Conventional UV, Fast Run delivered the highest TVI at 100%. (C) Paper, Conventional UV, Slow Run delivered the highest TVI from 2-70% with CMY. • Black delivered inconclusive results, each data piece followed no pattern however, with confidence, (G) Film, LED UV, Fast Run delivered the most accurate black dot at 100%. • Deductively, in reference to CMY, LED UV delivered the lowest TVI from 2-100% and conventional UV delivered the highest TVI from 2-100%. With regards to black, no conclusive results can be made from this test. The most consistently accurate dot was LED cured on paper and film. • Color Gamut  Color gamut is the range of colors that a screen or press can reproduce. Every printing technology produces a different color gamut based on what colors it can achieve with a given ink set, substrate, press speed, ink metering, and plate. The L*a*b* values of 100% CMYK samples were measured and averaged for overprint colors in order to approximate a color gamut for every press run. Numerical Representation of Color Difference Color differences between the conventional UV and LED UV systems were determined using the delta (∆) E value of the L*a*b* averages. The industry standard L*a*b* formula was used and the ∆E value was calculated using the following formula:

The ∆E values were calculated for each of the press runs and the corresponding high or low speed. The following table contains the measured results. LAB ∆E Color Comparisons

Film, low speed

6.1574

1.7457

7.8233

0.9431

Film, high speed

5.7753

1.4565

1.4179

1.1613

Paper, low speed

4.9692

2.4922

2.2275

4.3153

Paper, high speed

9.8986

3.2416

0.8298

3.4899

In order to understand the data above, the following chart represents what the corresponding numbers mean, 0 is defined as invisible and 6 has a clear visible difference.

Delta E Value

Meaning

0-1

A normally invisible difference

1-2

Very small difference, only obvious to a trained eye

2-3.5

Medium difference, also obvious to an untrained eye

3.5-5

An obvious difference

A very obvious difference

(“Delta E, Delta H, Delta T: What Does It Mean?”)

The ∆E values calculated in the chart above were compared to standards for color difference in the chart below. These are accepted standards on where ∆E values differentiate (“Delta E, Delta H, Delta T: What Does It Mean?”). According to both charts, there were color differences in the LED UV samples and conventional UV samples were clearly detectable by the human eye. Looking at the first comparison in the chart of run A (Film, conventional UV, low speed) and run F (Film, LED UV, low speed), significant differences were visible in color for both the yellow and cyan color samples, while there were small unnoticeable differences with black and magenta. Additionally, there was a significant difference in ∆E values was also seen on the comparison of run D (Paper, conventional UV, high speed) and run H (Paper, LED UV, high speed), where the color differences for yellow were very significant. Because there are considerable differences in color between the test runs, it is important to understand the capabilities of the press and it’s conditions. The color-coded L*a*b* ∆E data chart above, illustrates other areas in which the color differences were detectable to the human eye, both trained and untrained.

Graphical Representation of Color Difference The averages of the L*a*b* values were graphed using CHROMiX ColorThink software. In the two-dimensional mode, the axes represent a and b values, where a values measures the color value from red to green and b measures the color value from blue to yellow. In the three-dimensional graphical display, L, or lightness, is represented on the vertical axis. The conventional UV values are represented by a square on the graph and LED UV values are represented by a circle on the graph. The color gamut of sRGB, a well-known color gamut in the RGB display industry, is displayed as a reference. Based on the graphed L*a*b* values, there is a noticeable difference in color on the film substrate, which is to be expected due to the greater ink holdout on film. The following data collected displays that conventional UV curing methods were able to achieve a wider color gamut when compared to color values measured on the LED UV cured sheets. The following graphs represent the difference in the color values for cyan, magenta, yellow, and black achieved using conventional UV and LED UV curing systems:

When analyzing the distance between the placement of the squares and circles, conventional UV and LED UV, respectively, there are many color values that show little difference. In some instances, however, there is a clear visual representation of the color values of the conventional UV extending further away from the graph representing a wider color gamut for that curing system. Given these color differences and the graphical interpretations, it appears that conventional UV curing produces a wider color gamut. Distortion of Substrates When using conventional UV curing systems, there has been some concern in the industry with the type of substrate used. According to the 2008 May/June issue of Package Printing & Converting International Magazine, “Radiated and conducted heat can distort films in both the x and y directions during the printing process. This distortion can then go on to cause problems throughout the production cycle and in particular affect registration and die cutting” (“Curing of Heat Sensitive Materials”). There have been significant advances made to decrease the amount of heat emitted by conventional curing systems, but there are still some thinner films that cannot be successfully cured (see figure 6). There was no measurable distortion along the x and y axes of both the SF 2.6M WH BOPP TC/S692N film and 60# Elite/C2500/40# paper used in this experiment.

Figure 5 - Image of press sheet and a ruler measuring distortion

Although there was no measurable distortion of this film, there was significant distortion measured in the thinner shrink film seen in figure 6 during both the fast and slow press runs of conventional UV curing and the slower press speed of LED UV curing. The distortion of the thinner film was so severe that it broke. The lower heat emittance of LED UV during the higher speed press run allows for this thinner film to successfully cure without any significant distortion when running at higher speeds. After analyzing the printed substrates, both the paper and the plastic film printed inks that were successfully cured on press without any notable distortion. Although there was no measurable distortion, the TVI and color gamuts differed from film to paper. Ink Curing Speed and Effectiveness The IPA Swab Test, an industry accepted testing method, was used to determine ink curing effectiveness. The test requires a cotton swab, the substrate, and isopropyl alcohol. The cotton swab is immersed in the alcohol and the swab is then moved with consistent pressure in one direction over the print sample. While consistency was strived for, some variability existed: pressure of cotton swab during application, amount of alcohol on the cotton swab, speed of swabbing, the durability of the substrate, and ink composition resistance to alcohol. The average number of strokes required to remove the ink from the test sheet are shown in the charts below:

Average Number of Strokes Required to Remove Ink for Conventional UV Print Samples

100

Cyan Ink Samples

Magenta Ink Samples

Yellow Ink Samples

Black Ink Samples

(A) Film, Conventional UV, low speed

1.9 strokes

2.3 strokes

2.8 strokes

1.2 strokes

(B) Film, Conventional UV, high speed

2.1 strokes

2.9 strokes

3.5 strokes

1.1 strokes

28.1 strokes

26 strokes

26.1 strokes

1 stroke

(D) Paper, Conventional UV, high speed

10.9 strokes

12.9 strokes

13.3 strokes

1.1 strokes

Average Number of Strokes Required to Remove Ink for LED UV Print Samples

Cyan Ink Samples

Magenta Ink Samples

Yellow Ink Samples

Black Ink Samples

(E) Paper, LED UV, low speed

4.9 strokes

4.4 strokes

5.4 strokes

1.1 strokes

(F) Film, LED UV, low speed

2.4 strokes

3.2 strokes

3.7 strokes

1.2 strokes

(G) Film, LED UV, high speed

2.1 strokes

2.3 strokes

2.6 strokes

1.2 strokes

(H) Paper, LED UV, high speed

2.4 strokes

2.3 strokes

3.1 strokes

1 stroke

The conventional UV test runs on paper seem to be highly durable, indicating better or faster curing. The most durable results came from run C (Paper, Conventional UV, low speed) and run D (Paper, Conventional UV, high speed). Following these, run E (Paper, LED UV, low speed) performed relatively well compared to the other runs. For the cyan ink samples, run E averaged 4.9, while the other LED UV runs averaged 2.1 and 2.4. For the magenta ink samples, run E averaged 4.4, while the other LED UV runs averaged 2.3 and 3.2. For the yellow ink samples, run E averaged 5.4, while the other LED UV runs averaged 2.6, 3.1, and 3.7. For the black ink samples, run E performed similarly to the other runs. The number of strokes for the black ink samples is significantly less because black is the most difficult to cure. This is because black ink absorbs, or blocks, UV light. Special photoinitiators or special black ink formulations can be used to help improve this issue (Vest). Paper printed with conventional UV seems to be the most durable . On paper, conventional UV curing outperformed LED UV curing, as well as all film samples. LED UV is negligibly better when printing on film. None of the LED UV samples exceeded an average of 3.5 strokes before the ink was removed from the print sample. The samples for film in both LED UV and conventional UV may be similar because the ink remains on top of the glossy surface of the film and is unable to adhere as well as the ink does to the paper. There is noticeable difference in curing effectiveness on paper when using UV curing, but no conclusions can be drawn about the other test runs at this time. Further testing draw more detailed conclusions on ink cure effectiveness. 101

Substrate Temperature Under Both Lamps The heat of the substrate was measured during the press run using a General速 IRT206 infrared thermometer. The infrared thermometer measured the heat of the substrate as it exited the second curing unit. The infrared thermometer was held approximately eight inches away from the substrate and measured the same area of the web in the same unit in each test run. The temperature was read once make-ready was complete and the press was running in condition for the test. Both conventional UV and LED UV curing systems emit heat as a byproduct, which transfers to the substrate. Figure 4 contains the measured temperatures of both the paper and film substrates at low and high press speeds. The low press speed for the test runs was approximately 150 FPM and the high press speed was approximately 400 FPM. The temperatures in the chart show that LED UV curing systems generate less heat compared to conventional UV curing systems. Because of this, a wider range of heat-sensitive substrates may be used with LED UV curing systems. According the press operator, Scott Shutt, thicker films can be used for conventional UV curing systems, but thinner film may experience a significant distortion due to the exposure to higher temperatures produced by conventional UV curing systems. The measured temperatures for the two tested substrates, paper and film, were slightly higher at the lower press speed. The faster web likely generates more turbulence, subsequently carrying some of the heat away from the lamp housing.

Conventional UV

LED UV

Percent decrease in temperature from conventional UV to LED UV

Paper, low speed

108

88.5

18.06%

Paper, high speed

104.5

16.75%

Film, low speed

107.5

19.07%

Film, high speed

104

86.5

16.83%

Figure 4 Substrate temperature in degrees Fahrenheit read at the cyan unit

102

Photographic Representations of Print Process Capabilities Positive and Negative Type The positive and negative type printed clearly at all point sizes (1pt-24pt) for all runs. Below are magnified pictures of the 4pt type on the high speed runs on both paper and film. Run B (Film, Conventional UV, high speed)

Run D (Paper, Conventional UV, high speed)

Run G (Film, LED UV, high speed)

Run H (Paper, LED UV, high speed)

Slur The slur targets showed no notable slur for all press runs. Below are magnified pictures of the slur targets for the high speed press runs for both conventional UV and LED UV samples on paper and film.

Run B

Run D

Run G

Run H

103

Solid Ink Density (SID) The solid ink density was consistently good for all press runs. The samples showed even ink coverage. The magnified pictures below show the solid ink density of both conventional UV and LED UV samples on paper and film at high speed runs. Run B

Run D

Run G

Run H

Trap The trap effectiveness was determined to be up to standard for all runs, and there were no notable differences seen between the conventional UV and LED UV curing systems.

104

105

Types of Substrates and Distortion When using conventional UV curing systems, there has been some concern in the industry with the type of substrates that can successfully be printed. According to an article entitled, “Curing of Heat Sensitive Materials,” in the 2008 May/ June issue of Package Printing & Converting International Magazine, “Radiated and conducted heat can distort films in both the x and y directions during the printing process. This distortion can then go on to cause problems throughout the production cycle and in particular affect registration and die cutting.” From the data collected, the conventional UV curing system heated the substrate to a high of 108° F, while the LED UV curing system heated the substrate to a maximum of 88.5° F. LED UV curing systems emitted 16.75-19.07% less heat than conventional UV curing systems. For both curing systems, there was no measurable distortion along the x or y axes of both the SF 2.6M WH BOPP TC/S692N film and 60# Elite/ C2500/40# paper used in this experiment. Cost of Ink In order to obtain information about ink pricing, Mike Buystedt, Vice President of Narrow Web North America at Flint Group Packaging & Narrow Web was interviewed. There are some pricing considerations when comparing conventional UV and LED UV. Conventional UV curing has been on the market longer than LED UV curing and currently has a greater market share. The larger demand of this technology has created a well-established supply chain and a steady level of pricing. Because LED UV curing is a relatively new technology and is not as well established as conventional UV curing, the demand is not as high. This current state of the market causes a discrepancy in pricing between LED and convention UV ink. 31 30 LED UV ink prices are currently 15-20% higher than conventional UV ink because of supply and demand reasons. As LED UV curing systems gain popularity, the price of the ink will decrease. However, the raw materials used to manufacture LED UV inks are more expensive. Additional Information Outside of Designed Experiment Outside of the designed experiment, a test run was done on shrink film to demonstrate the significant distortion in which the film became warped and shrunk (see figure 6). Distortion occurs when using the conventional UV curing system at any speed. LED UV curing caused the shrink film to distort only at a low speed (150 FPM), in which the dwell time for the web is greater. Distortion 106

occurs when using both conventional UV and LED UV curing methods on shrink film at slow speeds. However, at a faster speed, LED UV curing systems is capable of running shrink film. There have been significant advances made to decrease the amount of heat emitted by conventional UV curing systems, but there are still some thinner films that cannot be successfully cured.

CONCLUDING REMARKS TVI analysis showed that LED UV delivered the lowest TVI from 2-100% and conventional UV delivered the highest TVI from 2-100%. The results are inconclusive for black ink, however, after studying TVI results for black, LED UV has a more accurate dot on press once cured in comparison to conventional UV. After performing the alcohol swab test, it was made obvious that the results were not consistent throughout the data collection process. With the testing procedures used, conventional UV proved to be more durable on paper than any other run. There was no notable difference in the ink durability of the other samples. More testing should be done to collect further data about the difference between ink cure durability when using conventional UV and LED UV curing methods. There were significant differences in heat admission from the two types of curing systems. Overall, the heat emitted from conventional UV curing lamps was greater than the temperatures measured for the LED UV curing lamps. There was no measurable distortion of the substrates in any of the runs. In addition to the differences seen in the above characteristics, it is also important to note the difference in ink prices. Although the growth of the LED UV demand may reduce the current ink prices, the current prices of LED UV ink are 15- 20% higher than that of conventional UV ink. As the LED UV curing technology grows and develops, there is room for significant improvement and cost reduction. With all of these considerations in mind, printers can decide which curing system aligns with their current needs. Although there is some capital investment involved in implementing the new LED UV curing technology, there are important benefits that companies should consider. With capital investments excluded, LED UV curing systems could easily be implemented into a companyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s current system.

107

REFERENCES Bardi, M., & Machado, L. (2012). Accompanying of parameters of color, gloss and hardness on polymeric films coated with pigmented inks cured by different radiation doses of ultraviolet light. Radiation Physics & Chemistry, 81(9), 1332- 1335. doi:10.1016/j.radphyschem.2011.11.068 “Curing of Heat Sensitive Materials.” Package Printing & Converting International Magazine June 2008: n. pag. Web. “Delta-E Calculator.” ColorMine. N.p., n.d. Web. 21 Jan. 2014. <http://colormine. org/ delta-e-calculator/>. “Delta E, Delta H, Delta T: What Does It Mean?” Efi. Efi, n.d. Web. 23 Jan. 2014. <http://w3.efi.com/en/services/fiery-wide-format-services/~/media/ Files/EFI/ COM/Services/Delta%20E_H_T.pdf>. “An Evaluation of Flexographic Inks on Wide-Web Film.” EPA. N.p., n.d. Web. 28 Jan. 2014. <http://www.epa.gov/dfe/pubs/flexo/flexosum/flexosum-info. pdf>. Fleming, Dan. “Introduction”. Flexographic printing. Department of Paper Engineering, Chemical Engineering, and Imaging, Western Michigan University Hugot, A. A . (1972). U.S. Patent No. 3665235. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Neral, B. B., Šostar-Turk, S. S., & Vončina, B. B. (2006). Properties of UV-cured pigment prints on textile fabric. Dyes & Pigments, 68(2/3), 143-150. doi:10.1016/j.dyepig.2005.01.022 Ploumidis, Dimitris. “Density & Dot Gain.” E-FlexoGlobal — the Technical Journal for the Global Flexo Industry. Salmon Creek Publishing, 2008. Web. 12 Jan. 2014. <http://www.flexoglobal.com/flexomag/08-July/flexomag ploumidis.htm>. “RadTech International North America.” RadTech International North America. RadTech International, n.d. Web. 21 Apr. 2013. <http://www.radtech. org/>. 108

Radtech International UV and EB Curing Technology Expo & Conference 2010: Baltimore, Maryland, USA, 23-26 May 2010.. Bethesda, Md.: RadTech ;, 20112010. Print. Rentzhog, Maria. “Flexographic Printing Inks.” Characterisation of Water-based Flexographic Inks and Their Interactions with Polymer-coated Board. Stockholm: Surface Chemistry, Department of Chemistry, Royal Institute of Technology, 2004. N. pag. Print. Schiler, Marc (1997). Simplified Design of Building Lighting, 4th Ed.. USA: John Wiley and Sons. p. 27. Sesetyan, Talar. “Label Stock: Paper vs. Film.” Label & Narrow Web. N.p.,18 July 2005. Web. 28 Jan. 2014. <http://www.labelandnarrowweb.com/ issues/2001-09/view_features/label-stock-paper-vs-film/>. Uchida, A. (1988). U.S. Patent No. 4727289. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office “Ultraviolet Curable Inks Technical Manual”. Nazdar. Shawnee, KS. 2012 Vest, Ryan. Personal interview via E-mail. 3 Mar. 2014.

109

Natalee Consulo Natalee Consulo is a graduate of the Graphic Communication department at California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo. She concentrated in Graphics for Packaging and earned her minor in Packaging through the Industrial Technology department. During her senior year, Natalee was the Production Manager at University Graphic Systems, a student run print company on campus. She was also involved with Cal Polyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s winning 2014 Phoenix Challenge team, Mat Pica Pi (a social club in the department), and was a recipient of the Rossini Scholarship. Natalee has been working as a sales project manager at WestRockâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Merchandising Displays since July 2014.

Mark Mac Manus Mark graduated Cal Poly in 2013 with a Bachelor of Science in Graphic Communication and minors in Packaging and Spanish. Since graduation he has worked as the Packaging Development Lead at Cartamundi USA, the largest private printer in the world, where he grew the US packaging business by $22 million in annual revenue. Since then he has moved on to work at Avery Dennison in San Francisco as a Product Development Specialist for Packaging and Print, working directly with fashion brands such as Gap Inc. (Gap, Banana Republic, Athleta and Old Navy), The North Face and Marmot Mountain.

110

Lena Haidar Lena Haidar graduated from the Graphic Communication department at California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo in 2014. She concentrated in Graphics for Packaging and also earned a minor in Packaging. While at Cal Poly, Lena was involved in Poly Pack, a club that focuses on educating students about the packaging industry and connecting them with industry professionals. During her time at Cal Poly, she also participated in various packaging projects, including Cal Poly‘s winning Phoenix Challenge team in 2014. In the 2012–13 school year, she was the Sheetfed Offset Production Manager at University Graphic Systems, a student-run commercial printing and digital imaging company on Cal Poly’s campus. She was a recipient of the Rossini Scholarship, which supported the research and findings highlighted in this project. Since July 2014, Lena has worked as a print production account specialist at RR Donnelley in Torrance, California.

111

112

113

114

MEET THE CAL POLY TAGA TEAM

115

MEGAN FUKAMAKI External President Third year Graphic Communication major from Dublin, CA, concentrating in Web & Digital Media. As Co-President of TAGA, I oversee the Digital, Marketing and Production teams. I also have the privilege of being the incoming General Manager of University Graphic Systems, Cal Polyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s student-run commercial printing enterprise. When not living in the Graphic Arts building, I enjoy live music, swimming, breakfast foods, and deciding what color to dye my hair next.

ISABELLA MONTALVO Internal President Third year Graphic Communication major with a concentration in Design Reproduction Technology and a minor in Packaging. I am the Co-President of Cal Poly TAGA after having been an active member since my freshman year. I am responsible for leading club meetings and coordinating projects between the Research, Design and Production teams. I am originally from South San Francisco, California and enjoy drawing and painting.

116

AMANDA ORNELAS Research Coordinator Third year Graphic Communication student with a concentration in Graphics for Packaging with a packaging minor through the Orfalea College of Business. As the Research Coordinator for TAGA, I am responsible for reaching out to professors as well as undergraduate and graduate Cal Poly students to obtain student-written papers that fill the journal. I am originally from Torrance, California, and in my free time I enjoy playing sports and spending time with my friends and family.

INDIA TATRO Production Coordinator Third year Graphic Communication student with a concentration in Graphics for Packaging. I am responsible for taking the final design of the journal and turning it into a book. My favorite part of TAGA is the hands-on experience I get from helping to produce the journal from start to finish. I am originally from Walpole, New Hampshire, so when Iâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;m not doing projects for TAGA I go outside and enjoy the warm weather here in California.

117

ANTONIO FLAMENCO Design Coordinator Third year Graphic Design student with a minor in Media Arts and Technologies. For design, I am responsible for all graphic elements within the journal ranging from color palettes, fonts, layout, typography and overall aesthetic of the journal. In my free time, I enjoy photography or running the trails around the San Luis Obispo area.

KALEA LOUIE Digital Coordinator Third year Graphic Communication major with a concentration in Web and Digital Media and minor in Computer Science. As the Digital Team Coordinator, my team gets to explore and engage in other forms of media such as photography, videography, and website building. After graduation, I hope to combine my experience with both Graphic Communication and Computer Science to find work in a computer graphics/animation related field.

118

MAYRA MEJĂ?A Marketing Coordinator Third year Graphic Communication student with a concentration in Web & Digital Media. My role invovles recruiting members and maintaining social media, in order to promote TAGA. I work efficiently to organize fundraisers and social events for the club as well. Whenever I have free time, I enjoy going home to Lodi, California and spending time with my family.

119

120

Katy Barnard

Amber Beckley

Kelsey Burgett

Heather Collins

Natalie De Golia

Rachel Goldman

Kristen Hwang

Carly Lamera

Jacqueline Luis

Molly McCarthy

Robin Perlstein

Habib Placencia

Rebecca Sand

Kristina Sanders

Cassidy Sargent

Gregg Taxerman

Alec Vitale

Alyssa Wilson

121

Not Pictured: Maddie Hagarty Ian Kaufman Briana Louis Julie Marzan Kashka Singh Adrienne Wong

122

123

124

COLOPHON This journal was produced entirely the TAGA student chapter within the Graphic Communication (GrC) department at California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo. All design, print production, binding, and finishing work was completed in on-campus facilities. Design

Programs used: This journal was designed using Adobe InDesign, Illustrator, and Photoshop CC. The typeface used was Avenir. Production All prepress work was done with help from GrC professor Xiaoying Rong. Files were prepared for print using Kodak Prinergy. A Creo Trendsetter was used to produce plates for the cover. The bookmarks were printed via sheetfed offset lithography, and done in-house using the GrC department’s Heidelberg Speedmaster CD74 press. Students worked on the press with help from University Graphic Systems manager Reina Stephenson. The journal was produced on the GrC department’s Konica Minolta bizhub C1100. The stock used was 100# gloss text and 100# gloss cover, generously supplied by Verso Corporation and Spicers Paper. The President’s Message was printed via letterpress using a Linotype machine in Cal Poly’s Shakespeare Press Museum. Substrates were cut to the proper size using the Polar 92X Cutter, and the journal was perfect bound using a Mueller Martini Amigo 1580 Perfect Binder, with help from GrC professor Bryce Beatty. Eletronic Publication The Cal Poly TAGA website (calpolytaga.com) was created using WordPress (wordpress.com) and Adobe Dreamweaver CC.

125

THE LINOTYPE MACHINE Cal Polyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Graphic Communication department has had Linotype machines for over 60 years. When the department was first created, all type was set by hand. Over time, the department acquired several Linotype machines. In the 1960s, there were 18 machines in the building, ranging from a Model 2 dating from 1905 to a paper-tape-fed Linotype Elektron D, a very fast and fully automated typesetting machine. During the 1970s and 80s, the department scrapped all but one machine, a colorcoded instructional machine that had been used to teach the function of the various cams and followers in it. It was moved to the Shakespeare Press Museum (SPM) and was on display there until 2015 when we moved it into storage. In the summer of 2013, we arranged for the long-term loan of a four-magazine Linotype Model 31, originally built in 1941. Its history is unknown except that it was used for newspaper composition during its lifetime. SPM advisor Brian Lawler brought the machine from History San Jose, a public museum in Santa Clara, back to Cal Poly. A few months later it was moved into our museum. The machine had been running in recent years but still needed a tremendous amount of work. Professor Lawler rewired the machine and brought it up to code to be powered by Cal Poly Facilities. It took another 11 months to get the power delivered. From there, Lawler called on a friend, Bill Berkuta, to help get the Linotype machine running. It took seven weekend visits from the L.A. expert. In July 2015, after replacing a burned-out thermostat, Berkuta and Lawler turned on the pot, melted the type metal, and were able to cast a line of type! It took over three years of work, and now the machine runs pretty darn well. For this yearâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s TAGA journal, the students, aided by Lawler, set the type on the Linotype machine for the introductory message. It was the greatest amount of machine composition done in the department since the late 1970s! The type printed very nicely, and represents the first production job run on the restored Linotype machine.

126

127

128

SPONSORS & SUPPORTERS

129

130