Two New Pressing Plants in USA

[Serif]

vaporizers don't use a mirocontroller, serif. Just a probe, a chip, a multiplexer and a 3 digit LED display..

So it doesn't have brain.. which makes it less smart.. As as all know, things with a brain do more things more smartly..

And I thought things that are "no-brainers" were the smartest choices...

The vape I'm referring to is actually a microprocessor-controlled one.

From the Vaporfection website:

"The VaporSense is the combination of a digital microprocessor temperature controller and a thermo coupling temperature sensor wired to the temperature controller."


It is nice to know that it's giving the thermomemter a good reading, but the Eucalyptus leaves beg to differ until more time has elapsed than the digital readout would indicate.

Peace,
Chip Swarf

[Serif]

On the other hand, the temperature reading can at least let one know that a certain temp limit has not likely been exceeded by very much. This, coupled with (not coupled _to_) the idea that a certain amount of heating time is required for the Ricci flow metric, then you might have a decent way of avoiding cooking the trichomes... I mean pressings.



- Leaf Garrish

[montalbano]

wrong spots ...

OK the sense of my msg was more human oriented than technical. Yes temp control works and it used to work, I agree with Mike, and hey these guys have put a lot of efforts to innovate, to add an extra to the standard vinyl records pressing. That's OK.

But! Some examples

- leaking steam valves
- noisy records when listening
- difficult records to press: it happens

or

- heavyweight records with deep groove depths
- lightweight records with deep groove depths
- heavyweight records with light groove depths
- lightweight records with light groove depths

These stuff will affect the pressing parameters.

OK, you can change the parameters on the temp of the moulds. But what about hydraulics?

In my view, you should be able to try add e.g. more steam or to make a longer cycle without looking to the temps in order to try to allow the record to better form. The pump will be squeezing in the meantime. Or - reversed - if you have no issues, and the customer agrees, you will have the chance to press the record a little less so that it's more heavy and solid.

All of this is HUMAN control and the turntable is the only judge.

But temp control has its own advantages too, no doubt.

One very good thing about the temp control is that you can forget about the quality of the steam. Because the temp on the moulds will effectively be the only variable affecting the forming of the record. Now if you have a bare pressure gauge control, you can just watch or control the steam pressure. But temps of wet and dry steam are different, at the same PSI. Just have a look @ steam tables. And the heat transfer given by the steam will be also affected by calcium and by the rest of shit resting into the pipes. Calcium and rust are insulators. Just to make a couple examples.

[montalbano]

I was thinking about this again
And this thing came up
You put two sensors in upper and lower moulds
You don't automate anything with them - you leave the native automation if there is any
You just let them act as a proximity sensor acts, so red and green light - off and on
The green light lits when the desired temp is reached
This way the operator can have a view on the temps and check whether the timings are OK or not
And moreover the skilled operator can watch whether the moulds have the same speed or not - this used to be done with paraffin
But if this thing works it would be of great help to understand e.g. why records tend to dish etc.
It all depends on the reliability of these temp controls

Red light, green light - extra indicator during pressing - in parallel with Toolexs or any other automations system

OK if it really works patent is mine

Cheers

[opcode66]

Yea, I was thinking that if you had multiple temp sensors equdistantly placed and you averaged the temperature readings then that would give you a fairly accurate idea of what temp the mould is actually at. Maybe???

[montalbano]

These guys seem to be really serious and they really know what they do.
I've seen that they are using the double steam technique - I don't know if in all of their presses, anyway it was the standard system in original Alphas: normal steam for preheating, then choked steam for max temp before the press closes, taking advantage of the latent heat, then just a few seconds more steam while press is closing, with the condensate outlet valve open and finally cooling. This allows to save some seconds of steam injection.
We have been talking about advantages and disadvantages of temp control but effectively we don't know how it is really used there. They make std weight, 180 and 200 g records. So they need a timer control working along with the temp control in the moulds. You need some extra time in heating and cooling when pressing 180g records on the Alphas, but if you think about it, the temp on the dies is the same as in the standard weight records. So they need a timer control. Same example is also for the Picturediscs where ram has to rise slower in order to avoid breaking the labels.
So I am almost sure that they have used the temp control in parallel with timers, as a yes/no consent for the controller to go towards the next step. So the preheating (on auto presses), heating and maybe the cooling cycles are probably driven by adjustable timers, but at the same time the temp control is acting as an extra "flag" which has to give the OK before going on with the next step. E.g. 4.5 seconds of steam while press is closing or say 6 seconds for heavyweight records. Before going on to the next step (cooling) there is an extra check if desired temp is reached or not. If it's not, steam valve stays open and the same check is repeated every .5/1 second. Same for cooling: say 11.5 seconds and before letting the press open the temp check takes place and so on and on.
This method works. It adds consistence to the records for sure, minimizes rejects and gets rid of steam pressure variations.
Now if you replace the native automation with a brand new PLC - no problem. But the problem is to replicate the native automation in the PLC: Alpha's automation is more complex than it seems, it checks whether a certain proximity sensor is lit within a certain time etc.
Another way could be to use relays. I mean extra relays connected to the solenoid valves. The temp sensor always keeps the contact (normally on, so no voltage cut) unless the desired temp is reached. In this case it goes off and the valve shuts. Same for cooling. The native automation keeps going, giving the on and off signals, but these are extra switches just before the solenoid valves so they can act as a final signal bypass or cutoff.
BTW you can achieve a similar result by using a pin thermostat in the inlet steam pipe just before the moulds and the same in the recirculation pipe of the cooling tower (this way you don't have to use an expensive chiller). Example with water: if temp goes below 24°C (example), the thermostat makes the recirculating pump shut down. And turn on again when water temp goes above the desired value.

[montalbano]

Thanks Jay
We will do that sooner or later. But no automation based on temp. Indication yes, automation no.
Pallas in Germany has a PLC modified Alpha controller, in one of their Youtube videos you can see some of these strangely "fat" controllers - but moulds temp control is not implemented there as far a I know.
Anyway the whole topic is much more complex than programming a PLC which is anyway a great thing. The knowledge the whole plant's architecture and the energy systems is much important as well in order to engineer a flexible automation system.
E.g. if the burner for some reasons - and it happens 2-3 times a day here - stops to blow out all the air for safety reasons, the whole process will take about one minute to be completed, and in the meantime the pressure of the steam supplied to the presses will decrease by 2-3 bar.
And I don't want to keep the press closed for 1 minute or more due to the fact that the target temp is not reached. Pins, bushes, moulds, rings but moreover the parts in the center of the press are subject to a 100 Ton pressure while the press is closed - so I prefer to make a reject in this case rather than keeping steam valve open to inject useless steam (this means 8-9 bar steam).
You want consistence in records? Calculate the max possible pressure differential in your system, and drive the boiler a little bit higher in pressure accordingly. Put a little Spirax-Sarco automatic pressure reducing valve before the steam inlet valve of each press. Here you go... I've done it... it works!

[opcode66]

The point I'm trying to make is that some processes really require a human, not a chip. You can't program wisdom and experience into a chip...

Vinyl is not going to die. Younger guys like us are moving in. We are learning. We will carry the torch.

I think there are plenty of guys who would take free help. So, if you really wanted to you could apprentice at a number of pressing facilities at any time. At some point, I'm going to take a few weeks off and do exactly that.

[opcode66]

it wouldn't be just automating a process, you are talking about automated a plant. all the systems work together. the press is not sitting there working independent of all the other systems. that is what i get from reading this thread. yes, you can automate a number of things on the press but without input and coordination with water, heat, steam, and electricity usage of all the presses in the shop this might not be possible or worthwhile on one press alone. also, unless you start to taking readings to all sorts of things your chip would never know if there was a leak in the water lines or something like that. human interaction and decision making will always be required at certain points.

anyone running a plant want to chime in?

[Serif]

Please, no need to flame or dis. Trolls have feelings, too. 0:

I still don't know why a press has to be improved on, today, since the pressings of yore in my small collection of faves were made in the '70s. Is it just to minimize economic burden on operators and the desire to be green? I'm all in favor of solar-powered studios and plants, wherever and as soon as possible.

Still, all these funky, repeatedly-enjoyed grooves just waterski circles around any CD. Nasville Skyline on LP is just about as good as it gets, iuam.


Peace mon,
Andrew

[Serif]

I like buzz, even if Steely Dan are "through with Buzz." );

It just seemed as if the thermal-sensing microprocessor-controlled approach is a really high tech over-engineered thing bordering on a good Eastern European joke (no offense to Solidarnosc') (but, remember the electric pencil?) and that, while interesting, is not really needed in order to deliver excellent pressings (?). Why not just run those SMT's full tilt, but stock? The steam punk technology was adequate to supply the entire intergalactic music-buying market in the days before 8-track, CD, and Blu-Ray. As indicated, my time-based pressings are still groovy. Is it publish or perish? Or do we actually need to improve the performance of '70's-era pressing technology? In the movie, Brazil, it was demonstrated that the future wants old technology - not new. (;



Just curious (please, no daisy cutters or bunker busters),

Nick Sulfide

[JayDC]

The real question for me is, what are the most common flaws in a rejected pressing? It would be very interesting to design a unit that could detect flaws, punch out labels and toss rejects into the grinder.. automagically

[montalbano]

About the automatic detection of rejects, it was an Alphas standard. If record is untrimmed, the unloading am drops it out from the stack. And there are also sensors to check if a record has been unloaded from the press or not, if the cake is loaded or not, etc. All of this was already implemented partly in the AD1202 and fully in the AD1207.
But if you mean an auto fine check of rejects, then it is impossible!
Recent example. We were pressing a record and there was always a slight crick-crack at the end of the B side. Next record: the same. And again. So first I thought about a cold spot in the upper mould where we mount the B side. But then I listened to some records pressed during the past weeks on the same press and they didnt have this issue. So I started to think about galvanics. But positives were OK. And the issue was always in the B side ... I looked a little strange to me.
So our mechanical told me: look - in my view the problem is due to the puck. And it was like this. We had pressed some 180g records with different moulds some days ago on that press, the extruders settings were then set back to the settings for 145g. But the setting of the cake's weight is not numerical, it can't be, you have to do this job manually and visually by simply screwing the cake former a little upper or lower above the holding plate.
Now in this case the cake was fairly too big, and at the same time we found out that the o-rings of the air cylinder activating the lower plate were slightly leaking. So once the cake was formed, it was pushing against the plate as usual, activating the proximity sensor which stops the extruder's motor, but due to these leaks the plate was sometimes moving a little instead of keep pushing steady, and this caused the proximity sensor to go off again and the motor to restart for a few seconds, to stop again due to the proximity sensor to change its status again. So the cake was always a little bigger than needed and with uncompacted flash at the bottom. Apparently, the records were formed OK and also looked OK, but effectively this exceeding material - which was spilling out from the cake former - was cooling faster than the rest of the puck and when the record was pressed it was squeezed with the rest going always somewhere on the B side - cause the ram pushes from below.
How could you check such an issue with an automation? A record with crick-cracks at the end of the B side will be OK for the press automation, and it would be OK even for a human visual inspection - because you don't see anything bad on the record.
The only way to inspect a record is to listen to it from beginning to end. We pay a person to do this, for every title (not every record of course). Like 99% of the other plants in the world - which do the same - even when much bigger than us (in this case they will pay 2 or 3 people instead of one - and I'm sure they could allow large investments on automation). There must be a reason for that...
But as far as automation makes life easier, in parallel with the human control, then it is more than welcome.

[dietrich10]

where is Thomas from BP for this thread?
I know you did some mods to his SMTS

[Serif]

I wonder how small a leak from the O-ring can be practically detected in this scenario, given the operating conditions. As JayDC indicated, it should be sense-able, yes? But I love your old-school trouble-shooting, M.

Also, p. 443 of the AES Disk Recording Anthology on Disk Playback & Testing ("Automatic Detection of Impulse Noise" by G. R. Kinzie, Jr. & D. W. Gravereaux) has a picture of a "record fault locator" [sic], but it reads as if it's actually just a fault detector. It's not as cool as the RCA disk fault locater that my studio landlord (E.E.) used to use (and might still have!). He described it to me a while ago. I think it was like this: two turntables synchronized to rotate together and, I believe, with joined playback arms - one is normal (for playing pressings); the other plays a circular graph paper and has a couple of inking styli. The inking arm on the second player (not unlike a polygraph) would daub a little red mark for, say, a click, and a blue mark for, say, a scratch. The operator would be able to examine the graph paper and see what the nature of the impulse was and _locate_ fairly accurately where the impulse occurred. Steam punk! (early 70's-era technology)


Rube E. Nibb

[montalbano]

Mossy has retired into a cloister to meditate for a while ...
All your posts are full of interesting ideas driven by passion and enthusiasm.
However, Opcode's got the real point. A 100% automated process hasn't ever been implemented throughout these years for two reasons:

- costs in research and payback of the investment
- TIME to do it: the existing plants have a number of machines which are in most cases just enough to manufacture and deliver in time, and facts are telling that only some parts of the process have been improved - according to every plant's strategy.

For example, people at GZ have implemented a computer-controlled DMM cutting which is quite innovative: they did it in-house with their engineers, they probably took the native SAL system, circuit breaker, feedback control, etc. and added some more in-house built features to implement this computer controlled QC which is significant, because with DMM you skip the degreasing bath and the whole silvering process, thus if QC on the DMM master is OK, also the positive will be, unless problems will occur in electroforming of the stampers and in the separation from metal to metal which are anyway already automated processes (not the separation - but it is just a matter of oxydation and chromic acid does this job very well).

I wonder why such a big plant with such big resources and personnel hasn't done anything yet to automate the pressing process or the QC of the records. George is often reading, so he might tell, but I am almost sure that he would tell us that the large amount of formats they are producing, and so the huge amount of variables arising from this, would require such a big investment and time that it would not give significant advantages from the actual situation they have, that is to pay 2-3 "Frauen" who listen to the records in the listening room. Which - anyway - is the same thing which any customer does when he gets the record.

So this was - as far as I understood - the sense of Opcode's post. It is not a matter of be for or against total or partial automation: the pressing plant is a company and like any company there are strategical choices also for the investments.

Now for example fancy stuff like Picturediscs, splattered records, shaped records, card-format records, gives good profit to the plants, so probably they are more interested in these kinds of investments and if the existing situation is not giving problem, they keep it.

I have 4 automatic sleeving units here at Phonopress. Already mounted on each of the 12" Alphas. Never used it. I prefer that the operator puts the record into the sleeve and ensures it's OK. I have very good reasons to do that. Sometimes customers supply their own labels. If paper is too porous, two labels will be picked up and pressed with the record. Or it might happen that some fine dirt will get its way underneath the stamper during the pressing: this will cause a dip in all the following records - so you have to stop, backsand the stamper, remove the dip and restart. Etc. It is not that frequent, but it happens. Yes, stampers are locked by rings, but everything expands and contracts during the thermic cycle. So...

Hey - it's not that I agree or disagree with anyone here. I'm just telling you how things work in a 30 years old plant.

[dietrich10]

first maybe i am reading too much into this....with too much seriousness to where this thread has gone

@Jay-there are so many variables at many old plants that keeping things running as they are=a happy day for them. I am not sure there are any that wish for more automation. and would pleased if someone promised them a full working week with nothing breaking down.


turning a more modern currently produced hydraulic press into a vinyl press would be a better starting point for your idea.

sounds like you should buy yourself an smt, toolex, lened or hamilton press. improve it. show the plants what you have done and contract yourself to upgrade their presses

I think both jay and opcode need to offer their services for free to work at a plant pressing for a full day.or week

[opcode66]

@Montalbano - Exactly my point. Thank you for commenting.

@D - You tried...

@Any Press/Plant operators - I would very much like to come and work at a pressing plant some time first quarter of 2012. I would offer my time for free for about a week. I understand I don't have experience but I am a fast learner. I would like to know more about that side of things. Please PM me if you are interested in a free hand for a week.

[Aussie0zborn]

Moderator's Note : a number of posts have been deleted for being off topic.

One thing I learned in my days of cutting, plating, pressing (and even printing labels for the records I cut, plated and pressed) is not to re-invent the wheel - I wasted a lot of time and money doing that. If it aint broke - dont fix it. And that's the attitiude most pressing plants would have today.

When the water pump failed and the timer-controlled presses would open without the moulds having cooled, the vinyl acts like glue so the stampers are stuck together as the press opens - coming out in a crumpled mess rendering them useless. Can you picture eight presses doing that one after the other? When the first press to open does that you know the others are going to do the same thing but you are powereless to do anything but watch the trainwreck unfold. Thermo-control would have alleviated this problem and missing release dates, as everybody here knows, doesnt make you popular.

Then there was the time we pressed a record for a very close friend on the day of his show - the press closed while the mian steam valve was still shut and pressed the vinyl with cold moulds. The stampers were ruined and yet we had to press 100 records so that he could sell them at his show that night. Only two weeks ago, he reminded me of that record and said his dad still played that pressing of the record. I hoped his Dad cant hear the horrenous surface noise. So when I think of those two incidents, yeah... I like the idea of thermo-control.

The reason I mentioned the QRP pressing plant (the original subject of this thread) is that they have gone to the trouble of converting their presses to thermo-control to give themselves a unique point of difference with other plants. If they have the time and inclinaiton to do it then good luck to them.

[GeorgeZ]

...
For example, people at GZ have implemented a computer-controlled DMM cutting which is quite innovative...

We improved only the pre-mastering + mastering + cutting processes so far. All of us (6 guys) work in pre-mastering/mastering department, here called "Electroacoustic". This year we work hardly on implementing of the new system also for our lacquer VMS-70 lathe - mainly electronic and hardware parts and the most important tasks have been already done. Every lathe is now driven completely from our PC DAW with its software track-pitch computer and no delayed signals to the lathe are needed. Later maybe also some compensations of distortions will be added.

The pressing department and QC are separate parts of factory and we have no direct influence on their work. Moreover, we are not pressing experts. Yes, we plan to automatize QC in the future, but now we only experiment with possibilities. The software part of QC analysis is in prototype status and works well, but the hardware part (automatic turntables) needs to be done. The biggest problem will be to teach our QC operators to be skilled enough for being able to use the sophisticated software with its analyzing possibilities and correctly interpret results.

Experienced operators are required for all the innovative improvements which are only handy tools helping us to produce better records (I hope), nothing more. Surprisingly I vote for no fully automated production lines...