Ink & Fountain solution Designed & Developed to work together

[D Ink Man]

Lukew, Everbody is willing to throw consumables at you to try to "FIX" the problem. Trial and Error.

The biggest problem is no one wants to do the WORK. This is what needs to be done.

Again, this is called SERVICE.

Wow, til I'm red in the face.

D

 

[Asures]

Lukew, Everbody is willing to throw consumables at you to try to "FIX" the problem. Trial and Error.

The biggest problem is no one wants to do the WORK. This is what needs to be done.

Again, this is called SERVICE.

Wow, til I'm red in the face.

D

D - I totally agree with that statement. There really is a lack of support from the vendor side but there are a whole lot of "Try This and Try That." I read another one of your postings discussing the importancy of service from vendors and this is a prime example..

Luke - Have you tried getting your suppliers all at the round table to express your need for assistance? How about your vendors bringing in manufacturers' support to tackle your issues? Regardless of what country you may be in, there surely must be some level of support that your vendors provide unless you strictly shop price.

On another note, I'd love to go to Aussie Land.

Hmmm....Isn't Fosters Australian for beer? I could taste it now, yum yum.

 

[Lukew]

If you are willing to try a new fount, take a look at ABC Allied's newest offering Titan Elite. You should be able to get it in Aus from Bermuda Printing Supplies.

We are using this at this stage, and it has a lot of benefits over other founts we have used although isn't without it's issues. I will say, I don't believe our current problem is fount related, but more likely to be ink related (proof in point - I put an extremely high quality ink on the press "Habitat" and the issue goes away)
We are also waiting on the correct shore A hardness rollers to be made, possibly this will solve some issues.

This thread wasn't meant to concentrate so much on our issues but the issues that pressrooms around the world must encounter due to products ie ink & fount not being extensively tested to confirm suitability.

I have ordered the Mitsubishi fount additive and will post when I have added it to our fount.

I can't make a comment on the amount of technical support available for larger print shops, but I can say that any small shops I've worked in there isn't a great deal of thorough technical support from vendors offered, it's generally a case of "try & if it doesn't work we will offer another product or ink"

We most certainly have never had an ink company be willing to alter the ink for us. Possibly as they simply ship the ink in from overseas and on - sell it..

 

[Coastline]

We are using this at this stage, and it has a lot of benefits over other founts we have used although isn't without it's issues. I will say, I don't believe our current problem is fount related, but more likely to be ink related (proof in point - I put an extremely high quality ink on the press "Habitat" and the issue goes away)
We are also waiting on the correct shore A hardness rollers to be made, possibly this will solve some issues.

This thread wasn't meant to concentrate so much on our issues but the issues that pressrooms around the world must encounter due to products ie ink & fount not being extensively tested to confirm suitability.

I have ordered the Mitsubishi fount additive and will post when I have added it to our fount.

I can't make a comment on the amount of technical support available for larger print shops, but I can say that any small shops I've worked in there isn't a great deal of thorough technical support from vendors offered, it's generally a case of "try & if it doesn't work we will offer another product or ink"

We most certainly have never had an ink company be willing to alter the ink for us. Possibly as they simply ship the ink in from overseas and on - sell it..

It's good to hear that your are mostly pleased with this Fount's performance; we have found that some more recent plate offerings are having similar issues running without IPA, due to their reduced grain like the Polyester plates you are using; Titan Elite has helped a lot in this area.

I think your right about technical support from vendors; it can often be relative the size of the printer, which is a shame as it means you have to end up doing your own troubleshooting.

 

[D Ink Man]

My culture and upbringing has always been to provide excellent PRODUCT and excellent SERVICE. It shouldn't matter whether a printer buys one pound or a million pounds.

The printer is what is known as a CUSTOMER. They deserve to have a good working product and the service behind it. They pay money for this.
It has been the direction of the ink suppliers to offer their products via a price first business module. The larger ink companies are the most guilty. Here's what happened beginning in the late 80's. These large ink companies began acquiring small and mid size ink producers. These smaller size companies built their business on the aforementioned, product and service. What the big boys did is just acquire them for the print customer sales they had, but failed to realize what the little companies did to establish their customer base.
As time went by, the two ink industry giants changed the landscape. They got into cut throat, low balling, price scheming competition and began the ruins of the industry. No longer did they care about investing in training and retaining highly qualified experienced technicians.

Hence, that brings us where we are today. Cheap ink and no service. To make it worse the ink giants have consolidated their product lines and are not willing to formulate and customize an ink to fit a piece of press equipment or for a special requirement. It is all about the ever loving dollar.

I don't know if they will ever wake up and learn how to create profitability for their companies by utilizing the practices that once made the ink industry great.

D Ink Man

 

[Green Printer]

My culture and upbringing has always been to provide excellent PRODUCT and excellent SERVICE. It shouldn't matter whether a printer buys one pound or a million pounds.

The printer is what is known as a CUSTOMER. They deserve to have a good working product and the service behind it. They pay money for this.
It has been the direction of the ink suppliers to offer their products via a price first business module. The larger ink companies are the most guilty. Here's what happened beginning in the late 80's. These large ink companies began acquiring small and mid size ink producers. These smaller size companies built their business on the aforementioned, product and service. What the big boys did is just acquire them for the print customer sales they had, but failed to realize what the little companies did to establish their customer base.
As time went by, the two ink industry giants changed the landscape. They got into cut throat, low balling, price scheming competition and began the ruins of the industry. No longer did they care about investing in training and retaining highly qualified experienced technicians.

Hence, that brings us where we are today. Cheap ink and no service. To make it worse the ink giants have consolidated their product lines and are not willing to formulate and customize an ink to fit a piece of press equipment or for a special requirement. It is all about the ever loving dollar.

I don't know if they will ever wake up and learn how to create profitability for their companies by utilizing the practices that once made the ink industry great.

D Ink Man

D ink Man I like this a very good piece.

The question I have is why so many kinds needed? I have seen the exact same ink run on an ABdick using polyplates, Sakurai 66 using polyplates, Ryobi 52 using poly plates, Hamada 48 using poly plates, Ryobi 3304 using poly plates, Didde web 175 using polyplates, all the rest metal plates Goss web, Heidelberg QM, 52 up to 102, KBA 162,105, shinohara 75, Komori 20",40", Didde 860, Didde Tandmer, Harris 438, Multi, Davidson, Chief 17, Chief 22, Solna 564, Solna 225, Solna 425 and many others. The polyplates all used the same poly fountain solution. The metal plates all used the same metal plate fountain solution. All types of dampners, sock ,3m sleve , bareback, brush,duotrol, dahlgren,Kompak,alcolor,spray. IN all cases no alcohol or alcohol subs.The substrates range from bible paper to 30 point SBS.

With good quality products(no pricing BS) service is still needed but very minimal when the products are made correctly and consistent batch to batch. As a customer you rarely will need to make the calls about the stuff not working.

The big boys change product almost every batch don't tell the customer. They wait for the phone call that it isn't working and then swear that nothing has changed. Then they tell you all of things that you need to check to make it work. When all you did was put in a new can of ink of the same type and brand and all of a sudden every things goes to pot. Service tech are still needed but not for this kind of BS especially when the ink companies know what was changed before the product was sent out and then they blame and point fingers at every thing possible involved from plates to fountain solution to blankets to substrate to roller setting to PH.

Years ago I got tired of this BS told some of the suppliers that are down and out liars proved and verified with lab test.
If we ever have a tech come in they better know the material and if they say it is some else's problem I tell them to get the H out of our shop because i would have not called them if we did not do a complete investigation before we called and I don't have time to play your games. We don't cry wolf for every little problem that arises. We want the techs to respect us as much as they require respect and don't like to go on BS trips.

 

[Green Printer]

Lets do a few more items

Many techs are well versed in their product line and that is about it.
The pressroom is a cumulation of many technologies all that inter react with each other. To be a good tech you MUST know the cumulation and what they do to each other. Without the vast knowledge required of all aspects of the process the techs are just guessing and I have seen this repeated hundreds of times.

Ink companies I suggest that you get a tech who knows your ink how and y it does what it does with different types of fountains solutions,blanket pressures,ph, salt formation, wash contamination, roller pressures and types, plate types, toning, scumming and hundreds of other aspects associated with the process.

You might come to realize that an ink costing you 10 to 15 cents per pound more to produce will save you hundred of thousands in tech calls and product rejects.

About 5 years ago a major US ink manufacturer elected to produce a high end product that cost about 5 or 6 % more to produce and their customers loved it and the service calls went to almost ZERO. The problem was that the ink was too good and the customers were using about 35% less ink to do the same amount of work. The very good product was dropped like a hot potato. It was saving tens of thousands on service work, very happy customers and killing sales volume at the same time. Sales volume won out.
If this type of technology were used throughout the world ink consumption would drop 30 to 35% or more doing the same amount of work.

This technology scares the hell out of the ink manufacturers if it ever becomes main stream. They try to suppress it any chance they get.

 

[D Ink Man]

Thank you Green Printer for those good points. I believe I'll address your reply as a couple of subjects.

1) I understand your point about a particular ink product line running on a vast array of presses and consumable usages. That's well and fine. Every paste ink manufacturer has a stalwart series of 4/C Process Sheet Fed inks that is their biggest seller. That series may sell, in my estimation for example, anywhere between 25-70% of the total sales of the total 4/C Process Sheet Fed sold. That leaves 25-30% of an alternate, less usage group of series that makes up the sales. So if the big giant ink company cannot come up with a series to satisfy a print customer, where do they stand? It is a TAKE IT or LEAVE IT attitude the giants have taken.

The other factor is, since they no longer employ 'Qualified, Experienced Technicians', they have limited themselves. Why? Because the Q.E.T. had the ability to go on a customers press and figure out what else was going haywire in their print process. Please remember, the offset lithographic process is a very complex process. It is loaded with constant changing variables like temperatures and coverage take offs, as example. So what happens, the ink company will throw that 25-30% alternate series at the printer "TO TRY". That is the only alternative the printer has from them. No chance of a custom fit formulary product.
The necessary WORK (on press fingerprinting and lab bench work) is no longer part of the equation. This is where SERVICE sir comes into play and is a key element missing in our marketplace today.
The big boy ink company does not care. By the shear amount of volume and sales they have around the globe, they are willing to lose you to Brand X ink, because the ink industry leaders know it will be no skin of their a$$.
So what almost always happens in this scenario is the printer will get fed up with Humongous Ink Company and they will go to another ink supplier to find relief. And here is the worst part. The same unresolved issues could be repeated with the next ink vendor because most of what is left out there for reps are what I like to refer to as FLEDLINGS. You'll get donuts, you'll smell the expensive after shave, you'll see the pretty 3 piece suits and you might even get football tickets.
But in most cases, you will still come in every morning to your same old problems. Expertise is suddenly running dry my man. If you can find a legitimate INK SERVICE TECHNICIAN, cherish and hold on to him like the Holy Grail. You will be glad you did when trouble passes your way. And trouble will come, usually at the most inopportune times. Get a partner my friend. You may thank me one day.

2) If you're having consistency problems, batch to batch, get rid of that ink supplier. And lastly, the customization and true dedicated personal service is invaluable.
I can see by your reply you probably have not seen this attribute for quite a long time. Hope this shed some light and truth into your mindset.

Sincerely,
D

 

[D Ink Man]

Lets do a few more items

Many techs are well versed in their product line and that is about it.
The pressroom is a cumulation of many technologies all that inter react with each other. To be a good tech you MUST know the cumulation and what they do to each other. Without the vast knowledge required of all aspects of the process the techs are just guessing and I have seen this repeated hundreds of times.

Ink companies I suggest that you get a tech who knows your ink how and y it does what it does with different types of fountains solutions,blanket pressures,ph, salt formation, wash contamination, roller pressures and types, plate types, toning, scumming and hundreds of other aspects associated with the process.

You might come to realize that an ink costing you 10 to 15 cents per pound more to produce will save you hundred of thousands in tech calls and product rejects.

About 5 years ago a major US ink manufacturer elected to produce a high end product that cost about 5 or 6 % more to produce and their customers loved it and the service calls went to almost ZERO. The problem was that the ink was too good and the customers were using about 35% less ink to do the same amount of work. The very good product was dropped like a hot potato. It was saving tens of thousands on service work, very happy customers and killing sales volume at the same time. Sales volume won out.
If this type of technology were used throughout the world ink consumption would drop 30 to 35% or more doing the same amount of work.

This technology scares the hell out of the ink manufacturers if it ever becomes main stream. They try to suppress it any chance they get.

Just a little confused Green. Any ink that produces 30-35% better mileage is 30-35% stronger in color strength by pigment content.

Like an Einstein equation almost:
Ink Color Strength ran @ Equal Density = Ink Mileage

Another note; Stronger better mileage ink is not always good from a long term, changing coverages runnability standpoint.

It does not scare the hell out of me. I believe I have understanding of this. D

 

[Sustainable]

Just a little confused Green. Any ink that produces 30-35% better mileage is 30-35% stronger in color strength by pigment content.

Like an Einstein equation almost:
Ink Color Strength ran @ Equal Density = Ink Mileage

Another note; Stronger better mileage ink is not always good from a long term, changing coverages runnability standpoint.

It does not scare the hell out of me. I believe I have understanding of this. D

Hi D Ink Man

It does work as green printer has said. It has nothing to do with an increase in pigment load. It is the ability to transfer thin ink films throughout the train to plate to blanket to substrate. It also has to do with the water droplet size and the ability of the ink to form what appears to be a continuous film. Looking at the ink film using a 100 power or higher magnification you can see very few spaces between the ink. Benny Landa;s nanograph is the extreme case of this type of technology.

 

[Lukew]

Just a little confused Green. Any ink that produces 30-35% better mileage is 30-35% stronger in color strength by pigment content.

Like an Einstein equation almost:
Ink Color Strength ran @ Equal Density = Ink Mileage

Another note; Stronger better mileage ink is not always good from a long term, changing coverages runnability standpoint.

It does not scare the hell out of me. I believe I have understanding of this. D

I will go out on a limb and say that possibly the ink in question was developed around a particular fountain solution, but perhaps I'm wrong.

I get the feeling that all the ink manufacturers apart from one company, are still developing ink that has the same properties/ink make up that ink did many many years ago, an ink designed to with stand a solvent based fountain solution.

It is strange that ink manufacturers always are under the opinion that to have an ink with better mileage it needs to have a higher pigment content.
This is where the problem starts, an ink that is too high in pigment can in deed cause issues.

Take the solvents out of the fountain solution & then develop an ink to suit and you will find that ink mileage goes up significantly without the use of extra pigments or fillers. Since the ink has been developed to work with the fount and it is designed to run at a particular ink film thickness, you do not have stability issues during running like you would if you ran a heavily pigmented ink.

Example: Run a ink set with alcohol then take alcohol away ink mileage improves somewhat
Run a high quality ink set that is devoid of fillers & is designed for a particular solvent free fount ink mileage increases significantly

 

[D Ink Man]

Hi D Ink Man

It does work as green printer has said. It has nothing to do with an increase in pigment load. It is the ability to transfer thin ink films throughout the train to plate to blanket to substrate. It also has to do with the water droplet size and the ability of the ink to form what appears to be a continuous film. Looking at the ink film using a 100 power or higher magnification you can see very few spaces between the ink. Benny Landa;s nanograph is the extreme case of this type of technology.

My contention is that inks that are 35% stronger are more likely to run into RUNNABILITY PROBLEMS when spread out over multiple pressrooms, multipe presses, different paper stocks and a myriad of various consumable products. And the most important factor you should have learned from previous posts "COVERAGE_"COVERAGE"_"COVERAGE"! It is an ever changing landscape in 99.44%+ of pressrooms. That is my point.

Please do not skew my reply with this micro emulsion business. I understand that completely and maybe Sustainable you should have guessed that from previous postings at Print Planet. Especially Ink.

As far as Benny Landa, he was about 20 DRUPA shows too early with that technology. We will all be pushing daisies before that ever has a chance to be commercially acceptable and practical. You can archive this reply, I have the salt and pepper and I am ready to eat it if I'm wrong. See you in Heaven my friend, or that other place.

D Ink Man

 

[D Ink Man]

I will go out on a limb and say that possibly the ink in question was developed around a particular fountain solution, but perhaps I'm wrong.

I get the feeling that all the ink manufacturers apart from one company, are still developing ink that has the same properties/ink make up that ink did many many years ago, an ink designed to with stand a solvent based fountain solution.

It is strange that ink manufacturers always are under the opinion that to have an ink with better mileage it needs to have a higher pigment content.
This is where the problem starts, an ink that is too high in pigment can in deed cause issues.

Take the solvents out of the fountain solution & then develop an ink to suit and you will find that ink mileage goes up significantly without the use of extra pigments or fillers. Since the ink has been developed to work with the fount and it is designed to run at a particular ink film thickness, you do not have stability issues during running like you would if you ran a heavily pigmented ink.

Example: Run a ink set with alcohol then take alcohol away ink mileage improves somewhat
Run a high quality ink set that is devoid of fillers & is designed for a particular solvent free fount ink mileage increases significantly

Lukew, I am afraid the limb broke. I have to strongly disagree with you about ink mileage and having it to do with anything other than pigment load, color strength.

The scenarios you suggested will certainly change the transfer characteristics of an ink, no question. But the bottom line is this:
Pigment Load~Same Density = INK Mileage

Are the concerns and problems you are having solved yet?

You need a Serviceman Lukew. Oh that's right, I already touched upon that a bit. D

 

[Lukew]

Lukew, I am afraid the limb broke. I have to strongly disagree with you about ink mileage and having it to do with anything other than pigment load, color strength.

The scenarios you suggested will certainly change the transfer characteristics of an ink, no question. But the bottom line is this:
Pigment Load~Same Density = INK Mileage

Are the concerns and problems you are having solved yet?

You need a Serviceman Lukew. Oh that's right, I already touched upon that a bit. D

We are now going to give another ink a run due to the fact that the sales/tech guy from the particular ink company that we were having trouble with really offered zero assistance over the phone, nor did he come in to see the problem. Please note both ink sets that give us problems come from them.

I'm not saying that a higher pigment load in the ink doesn't give you higher ink mileage (Obviously it does) but there is a limit before you encounter troubles.

Have you tested a non solvent based fount and a ink designed around it back to back with a solvent based fount and a normal ink?

I have and also noted significant more ink mileage with the non solvent based fount & the ink thats to go with it even though that ink in reality would have less pigment then a normal ink set. This was compared to a solvent based fount running 0% Ipa and then 10% Ipa with two seperate ink sets.

 

[Deleted member 16349]

I'm not saying that a higher pigment load in the ink doesn't give you higher ink mileage (Obviously it does) but there is a limit before you encounter troubles.

Just curious. When printers talk about an ink having more or less mileage, how do they determine this?

Do they do a mileage plot or is it usually based on ink key settings and ink fountain roller speeds, etc.?

Is it an objective or a subjective result?

Thanks.

 

[Lukew]

Just curious. When printers talk about an ink having more or less mileage, how do they determine this?

Do they do a mileage plot or is it usually based on ink key settings and ink fountain roller speeds, etc.?

Is it an objective or a subjective result?

Thanks.

My observations for the above were done with the same plates/stock and measuring the amount of ink used over XXXXX amount of sheets.

Although when it comes to everyday running apart from the initial testing of inks, you get to know how much ink you use for instance on large repeat jobs.

No you can't go by the ink duct key or ink fountain roller speeds. As all those settings can easily be effected by the flow properties of the ink.
EG: K+E Novavite 918/950 will always have lower duct key settings & ink fountain roller speeds then say Toyo hyplus 100 but you will find over a large run your using more of the K+E.

For PMS colours sometimes you can go by the duct keys, but overall you will still notice better results via the amount of ink used per the same job/stock.
Flint Novavite PMS we struggled like hell to hit a lot of solid PMS colours for a full size sheet without maxing out the duct keys and ink fountain roller speed. Put toyo PMS in and the colours could be matched easy with duct key settings near half or even less, and you would notice less ink being used on repeat jobs.

 

[D Ink Man]

In my experience and as a general statement, TOYO sheet fed inks are stronger versus Flint K+E. The process inks are most likely to be stronger than the base mixes comparatively.

Lukew, I must say I have never 'tested' the non-solvent versus solvent scenario you suggested. However, I have done enough similar work in the lab and in the field over the years to vouch about the ink mileage statement.

There should be minimal doubt that a non or low solvent fount/ink combination has its advantages in the print world. These micro emulsions we speak of, and water droplet sizes can be quit beneficial to the overall lithographic print process. There are certain surfactants that can be contained in both fount and ink to achieve this desirability.

Speaking of low solvent, I will say this. I believe we look more at these low VOC types of products because of the trend towards the environmentally friendly movement. And the Green Theme in my opinion will be one that lasts. Most sheet fed inks today are well below 5% ink solvent levels. Founts overall have not reduced the ratio of VOC's to the levels of ink by comparison. That is not to say that good low solvent founts are not out there. They are. But I believe that the older types of higher solvent products are more user friendly for the operators. With that said, much progress has been made in R&D to make the low solvent products better workers. D

 

[Green Printer]

Just a little confused Green. Any ink that produces 30-35% better mileage is 30-35% stronger in color strength by pigment content.

Like an Einstein equation almost:
Ink Color Strength ran @ Equal Density = Ink Mileage

Another note; Stronger better mileage ink is not always good from a long term, changing coverages runnability standpoint.

It does not scare the hell out of me. I believe I have understanding of this. D

The following were test live job runs in a sheetfed plant.
Same job same paper, same press, same fountain solution, same color, same voc 5%, same pigment load, run at the same density, 100,000 impressions total 50,000 using ink A, 50,000 running ink B. Ink A requires 24#, Ink B requires 20#. Why the discrepancy in ink usage.
You can do the same test using the same ink and changing fountain solution. Fountain solution A 50,000 impressions, drain tanks mix fountain solution B run 50,000 impressions you will see differences in ink usage. The test showed Fountain solution A used 26# of ink, Fountain solution B used 21# of ink.
Why is there a difference in the milage it should be exactly the same with the same pigment load?

 

[Deleted member 16349]

The following were test live job runs in a sheetfed plant.
Same job same paper, same press, same fountain solution, same color, same voc 5%, same pigment load, run at the same density, 100,000 impressions total 50,000 using ink A, 50,000 running ink B. Ink A requires 24#, Ink B requires 20#. Why the discrepancy in ink usage.
You can do the same test using the same ink and changing fountain solution. Fountain solution A 50,000 impressions, drain tanks mix fountain solution B run 50,000 impressions you will see differences in ink usage. The test showed Fountain solution A used 26# of ink, Fountain solution B used 21# of ink.
Why is there a difference in the milage it should be exactly the same with the same pigment load?

Good question. Probably there are lots of reasons. It is these kinds of questions that are of most interest because they address very fundamental phenomena in the process.

I don't tend to think press runs can be controlled to a high level of consistency. To say that a whole run was run consistently at a specific density is probably not totally true. Seemingly small variations during the run can add up to different results. For commercial inks a variation of 0.05 density points can be about 8% of ink volume.

Also density is not directly related to the amount of ink printed in a solid ink film. It is close but not exactly related. The same amount of ink printed smoothly on a substrate will show a higher density than a if it is printed less smoothly on the same substrate.

Then there could be a difference in the amount of ink going to screen dots relative to solids under slightly different physical conditions.

Deming has had some interesting demonstrations he used for his statistical lectures. If I remember properly, he has a test that has a paddle with holes in it and balls of the same size but of two different colours are in a box. x number of balls for one colour and y number of balls for the other. Then he does a random test. He puts the paddle in the box and scoops out balls that sit in the holes of the paddle. Results are recorded and the test repeated several times.

The point of the test is that if one uses accepted statistical methods to calculate and predict a result you get one answer but the actual test always tends to show a slightly different result biased to one side of the prediction.

He states that the results that are consistently off the theoretical statistical prediction for this test are caused by small physical differences in the different coloured balls. He could not explain the reason but the point is that people should be aware that there are physical reasons for things not resulting as one expects. One might find out what they are or maybe one doesn't, but there are always reasons.

The level of control of a test is critical to find out the actual reasons and basically in printing one does not really have very well controlled conditions. But still the question is a great one because it requires deeper thinking about what is happening or what is required to find out the causes of unusual results.

 

[D Ink Man]

The following were test live job runs in a sheetfed plant.
Same job same paper, same press, same fountain solution, same color, same voc 5%, same pigment load, run at the same density, 100,000 impressions total 50,000 using ink A, 50,000 running ink B. Ink A requires 24#, Ink B requires 20#. Why the discrepancy in ink usage.
You can do the same test using the same ink and changing fountain solution. Fountain solution A 50,000 impressions, drain tanks mix fountain solution B run 50,000 impressions you will see differences in ink usage. The test showed Fountain solution A used 26# of ink, Fountain solution B used 21# of ink.
Why is there a difference in the milage it should be exactly the same with the same pigment load?

Green,

Your example seems a bit contradictory.

Why did Ink A use 20% more than Ink B on the first run?; Identical running conditions as you stated, including fountain solution!

Why did Ink A use 8.33% more on the second identical run versus the first run?

Fountain Solution A resulted in 23.8% more ink usage versus Fountain Solution B

My guess is that poor density control occurred somewhere during these runs, for whatever reason.

My suggestion would be to compare 2 different Process Series, K-C-M-Y, with knowing the absolute color strength if any exists. Then closely measure each process ink (4) for ink consumption. Keys to the success and making this truly valid will be absolute DENSITY CONTROL. And the longer the print run, even further validity could be realized.

A press run of 1 million impressions 500K vs 500K is suggested. I understand that this may be some endeavor, because for a live run of that size can be rare. But if you get the opportunity, it will take multiple SERVICEMEN to assist in the print run. Men that can follow a proven mileage analysis in accurately weighing each ink and feverishly recording print densities, temperatures, ink film thicknesses (Important!, remove that darn guard if necessary) fount conditions and total data collection.

Then and only then, after the SERVICEMEN have accurately calculated and formally reported on their findings, will the ink mileage test be valid..

I am sure that RIT has done studies on this subject. Perhaps we can search some archivial reports from them to start the engines of this endeavor.