Fuji Procecssor Replenisher

[orka81]

Hi All,

In an effort to cut costs, I have been asked if it's feasible to not use replenisher in our Fuji FLP-1260 processor.

The thinking behind this is that replenisher is more expensive than developer and if replenisher is used to prolong the life of the developer, then why not abandon the replenisher altogether and just perform more chemistry dumps to keep the overall chemistry sparkling squeaky and clean?

Is this possible, or if so, even advisable?

Thanks in advance
orka81

 

[cjwworld]

That depends if the developer has gum mixed in and I assume that you can purchase dev with some in.. I use an one step processor to process, using dev only. I would say, to just use water and check to see if you can get dev with added gum

 

[Cory Smith]

In the grand scheme of things, this would probably be the last place I would look for cost savings.

The replenisher is used to keep the developer working at a consistent rate. Without it, i'd imagine you would have serious consistency issues and your inital batch would have a reduced lifespan.

The replenisher probably costs more because it's a more concentrated product than your startup bottles.

 

[KevinC@EFI]

Hi Orka81 -

Without knowing more about the plate, chemistry, and CTP type (if you're using CTP) that you have, there is no definitive answer. However, no matter what those answers are, you'll end up with quite a bit of plate variation to deal with.

The job of the replenisher is not only to extend the life of the developer, but also to keep it consistent from plate-to-plate, day-to-day, and so on. Without replenishing, the developer will lose activity due to oxidation (unless it's a low-pH negative chemistry like we use on our Sword Excel plates) as well as due to usage (getting weaker with each plate developed).

As the developer gets weaker, it can't do it's job as well. You'll see this as dot gain / growth on positive plates, and eventually background retention that will tone on press. That change may be over the course of a few plates, a few hours, or at most a few days - depending on system and usage.

If you are really looking to get rid of the cost of developer, this isn't the solution - you'll pay for it in the press room instead, probably 10x over. You're better off evaluating process-free technologies that get rid of the chemistry altogether, as well as all processing equipment, power, floor space and electricity costs. Kodak offers the Thermal Direct plate with these benefits, and Fuji has a similar product. I'm sure Steve will chime in with the benefits of Agfa's so-called "Chemistry-Free" products too, which may serve your needs depending on your situation.

Let me know offline where you are and what your pressroom needs are and I'll do what I can to get you going in the right direction, no matter what your vendor of choice.

Kevin.

 

[orka81]

Thanks all,

for the replies. This is what I was hoping for. I wasn't fully aware of all the reasons for the replenisher, but am glad it plays a crucial role in maintaining and prolonging the developer cycle.

orka81

 

[David Watson]

Orka81-

Just noticed this thread. We run a FLP-1260 using LPNV2 plates. I have been successfully mixing developer with the replenisher for over a year now with great results.
Like the other responses here, I agree that you can't just nix the replenisher, but in OUR case we are able to save a few thousand dollars a year by mixing the two.

I spent a good deal of time researching the chemistry, and monitoring the processor and plates before I actually tried it. I invested in a good pH meter, and started to test the pH in the tank 2 or 3 times a day, recording the results. I also tried to stabilize all the other variables (there are many!). Once it was as stable as possible, I did a chemistry dump, a thorough maintenance, and then started diluting the replenisher with developer. I noticed absolutely no change in tank pH, highlight dot, or maint. requirements. I told the pressroom manager what I was doing, and he was closely monitoring results on press, but the operators knew nothing about it. There was not a peep from the pressroom.
Most of our jobs print 200 LPI.

Currently we mix 1.5 repl. : 1 dev. My original goal was to mix 1:1, but it's running so well that I have not messed with it.

I feel the need for a disclaimer:
Your mileage may vary! Like I said, this works in OUR situation. I am not recommending that anyone do this, nor am I saying that this is even a good idea. I'm just putting it out there. Downtime in the pressroom is expensive! Also, I would not have attempted this without a GOOD pH meter, and a GOOD plate reader, it's simply too risky.

David Watson
Edwards Printing Co.

edwardsprinting.com

 

[orka81]

David-

Thanks for the tips. I might give this a try after our next chemistry dump.

orka81