i got enough that do to be honest.
Liquetex carbon black is one, Carbon black tatoo ink is 2 and some other brands wich where not that impressive
Yshield supplies al kinds of coatings for RF that are loaded to with either graphite or carbon black. problem for me is that they are all water based, and i got best results with thinner based coatings. since i cant disolve the 2....
im ****** water based inks to be sprayed need such low surface tension that you ened to resolve to alcohol with acrylic. but the alcholol makes the carbon act weird. i did not have this problem with thinner and particals. maybe because it dried much much quicker. another problems it that the acrylic binders dont like only pure alcohol, so some water is needed wich screws up the surface tension and dry time again last resort i would love to try is one of these inks sliglty diluted with alcohol and use soem old epson printer to create a flat bed printer. or use one of the carbon based pogment inks special for direct to garment printing (wich use epson nozzles) would be fun playing with the amount of black/grey and see what happens
Last edited:
First PEDOT
Looks promising. Has PEDOT
SS been used before? Where did you get the idea?From Wiki:
PEDOT
SS poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene) polystyrene sulfonate
It is used as a transparent, conductive polymer with high ductility in different applications. For example, AGFA coated photographic films with a thin......virtually transparent and colorless PEDOT
SS as an antistatic agent to prevent electrostatic discharges during production and normal film use, independent of humidity conditions.
So what you're actually saying is, that conductive ink loses it's conductivity as soon as you apply it to Mylar, but remains conductive when applied to paper. Is the conductivity you measure when applied to paper not the moisture in the paper that conducts and the ink doesn't at all? Otherwise it wouldn't make any sense.
I found it while searching the web with Google for conductive coating. Don't know if it's used before. I think it is quite new on the market to buy in small affordable quantities..Looks promising. Has PEDOT
Also alexberg mentioned it here in post #923. The link to where to buy is one post later. But it's water based, so still a lot of questions.
Earlier water based coatings I tried measured ZERO after one hour of playing music or just simply fell off after drying.
Not my favourite type of coating water based so far, but there is always hope.
Heraeus produces it for solar cells and calls it Clevios. SigmaAldrich produce it for lithography and writes this:
Features and Benefits Antistat coating for plastics and glass.
There is also PEDOT:TMA
This material is widely used for quantum-dot en oled technology
Kazap, is what you're saying here that the coating has degraded and can't take on the charge any more? Or is the coating degraded so it's leaks more to the air? Everybody's writing about the second option, leaking. But I've never heard about the first option. Am I reading / interpreting incorrect?
Last edited:
For what volume and percentage
Correct, deep blue
Pedot is a chemical name, like Fe for iron. Is now used more than ever, see my previous post for what uses. Several suppliers have it readily available.
Are you willing to share how you mixed it to a ready use and what values you got?
My English is not that advanced to comprehend the underlined statement.
There are a lot of carbon black printing inks on avail. However, unless you can arrange ball shaped carbon particles as a chain or have it flake (not mentioning fiber) shaped you're out of luck.
LOL I'm getting my own previous answers back as an answer to my new questions.
None of the readily available Hereaus solutions in the PDF has the right resistance value. All resistance values are 10^3 to 10^6. Exception is CPP103D which is 10^7-10^8 (still too low) and this has a thickness of 6 micron, which is way too thick for ESL-63. So my questions remains, what ready formulation?
No way I would of read the thread from the beginning.
Secondly, formulations are really simple thus may be easily diluted. I've got 10^10 diluting Staticide which is suspiciously bluish in color BTW. This way adding glycol and ethanol in proportion given you'll be able to get thinner layer. Another way to go will be to use either acrylic or urethane or even vinyl acetate (kids glue) water suspension to keep layer thick enough.
Thirdly I've posted IDP related site. There are ABS based IDPs. Get a sample, usually free. ABS is soluble in ketones or ethylacetate or dichloromethane or in other polar solvent. Here it goes ready to use lacquer.
Secondly, formulations are really simple thus may be easily diluted. I've got 10^10 diluting Staticide which is suspiciously bluish in color BTW. This way adding glycol and ethanol in proportion given you'll be able to get thinner layer. Another way to go will be to use either acrylic or urethane or even vinyl acetate (kids glue) water suspension to keep layer thick enough.
Thirdly I've posted IDP related site. There are ABS based IDPs. Get a sample, usually free. ABS is soluble in ketones or ethylacetate or dichloromethane or in other polar solvent. Here it goes ready to use lacquer.
Yes it should be higher IMO. That is if you are trying to read Ohms per square. You're measurement method is not correct for ohms per square measurement. Looks like a German Quad Musikwiedergabe panel to me by the glue method (melt), the way it is sprayed (not even) and the resistance (too low). It 's not likely I'm right to it's origin as you're in the US right?
The positive thing: you're meter wouldn't read any higher than 50 Meg, so maybe you should be glad it isn't much higher ;-)
How to measure ohms per square? YouTube
Last edited:
Appreciate the input 👍Yes I’m in the US
The panel came out of an older Quad 63 (s/n 7k)that seems original but who knows for sure.
I got similar readings from a Quad 989 panel as well.
I know that most of the Quad panels are something like 50 Meg Ohm.
Yes, it will play but it will never get you (not even close) the low distortion levels of 1% or even 0,5% that are feasible for the Quad ESL-63.
I think (nothing to verify that, just my 2 cents) this was a production compromise to be able to produce in quantities and keep it affordable.