Inline score and fold

[bhm8hwcm]

I presently run an older stahl 49 folder and do relatively basic folding on it. For what I paid for it on ebay a couple of years back it does a great job and has been a money maker. 20 years ago I ran a folder quite a bit so I do consider myself to be a fairly proficient operator.

One think I do not do on the folder is inline scoring and folding (aside from a basic 8pg). I get a number of heavier coverage trifold brochures etc and would like to score first and then fold using the right angle. Due to the age of my present folder I do not do this as I can not get proper consistent pressure for quality scoring out of the delivery for single sheets (not folded).

I am thinking about buying a much newer folder to do inline scoring to minimize cracking but I do not recall how great of a job this does on heavy solids. What are other people doing? Are people offline scoring (I do now on a rollem) and then folding or are you getting good results with inline scoring and folding.

Should I invest in a better folder for inline or stick with offline scoring? As a note, my concern is for offset jobs and not digital.

thanks.

 

[Al Ferrari]

You should invest some time researching the Tricreaser by Technifold: Technifold USA - The Worldwide Leader in Bindery Solutions.

I think UpDate, https://updateltd.com/ also has a competitive product. What is new about this approach is that a relatively soft male "blade" is used against a hard female grove, and there are several with/depth choices for both the male and female parts.

I do not have this, but wish I did. Let us know if you decide to go this route and how it works out for you.

Al

 

[nhprinter]

Technifold works great for us.

 

[halmac]

You should check out Morgana Digifold. We have a Morgana folder and a Morgana scoring machine. There is a scoring/folding machine too (Digifold). They are British made and run on 220, unfortunately. There is also an Italian made machine that does both up and down scoring in a single pass.

 

[Treg]

Technifold has greatly improved our scoring and slitting abilities on our MBO'S. It will never do what a letterpress score can do but for 90% of your everyday score and fold jobs it works great!

 

[ondemandbindery]

You have a lot to consider with this situation. And only you know your market and what you do. I think the first question I have for you is how often would you need to score jobs in a given day? The second is what are your run lenghts? And the third is what projects are you missing out on because you do not have scoring capability? All of these devices discussed are great and I use some of them and have seen them in action. However, I also used "old school" for scoring on folders prior to the new technology and you would never know the difference. You have to look at the ROI really. The worst thing you have going for you are the small diameter rollers in the folder but you can still get great work off of them. Just keep in mind you will not match letterpress quality. With offset work and not working in Digital you can cut some corners but you should also think about when Digital will impact your market. What you have working for you is some seat time operating folders.

John Weaver

 

[ben082010]

I've recently purchased the a tri creaser from technifold but am running into a problem with cracking on 80lb text weights. For 100lb text and up so far has been great, however the 80lb which I run a lot of does not work. I actually run into a problem of the sheet splitting. Either we are running too much pressure and the sheet splits or I'm not running enough pressure and cannot get a decent score. We run 100% UV with full coverage.

 

[Al Ferrari]

If you purchased that tri creaser recently, then you should have access to Technifold support. What do they have to say?

 

[ondemandbindery]

Let me get to my PC in the morning and I will try to help you. Tell me about your folder and if you are using the devices on the knife shafts? Also, keep in my Technifold is good with problem solving but your problem may not be related to the scoring system and I hope you were not oversold on realistic expectations with lighter stocks.

 

[ondemandbindery]

Ok. There seems at times to be frustrations with these scoring devices and who gets the blame for bad scoring. Scoring any type of lighter weight stock with a rotary score is a challenge. I use to score and fold a project for a Printer that used a double hit black on 80lb text (offset respectively). Scoring it just did not have the impact they were expecting at the end of the day. I even letterpress scored it one time and there was a slight improvement but certainly not worth the additional cost of paying for a clunky letterpress to run sheets through it. At the end of the day we just made sure the folding was grain correct and let it eat. The customer loved and never knew the difference between the 2 processes. Now the Morgana or any type of knife scoring system may have the market fix for this but I do not have a definitive answer on that. So with that all being said, a lot of the reduced scoring qualities may be the machine andnot the scoring devices.

By nature, the male score is going to look for the least amount of resistance. Just like a storm running down a river it wants the easy way out . I hope that makes sense. If you have worn and tired shafts, shaft ends, or whatever you can spend the company's bonus budget on scoring devices and it won't help the problem. If you really want to address your problems with realistic expectations, go to the Technifold website and go through the archives for their newsletters. The one that comes to mind was the correct positioning of the set screws of the collars in relation to 360 degrees respectively. The new score system they sell I recently saw in action had no set screw in the female collar. I personally would not want that as I want the option of locking down the female collar or not but what they have done is try to help with this problem of wobble, flex, and jiggle in the shaft systems. This also applies to the Ultimate score. Same theory.

HTH,
John Weaver

 

[Al Ferrari]

Hi John,

I think most of us lock these set screws with the shafts positioned such that the collar set screws for both shafts are simultaneously facing us, thus creating high spots, no matter how small, that will face each other on every revolution. Would there be a significant improvement on the problem if we took the trouble to have ALL of the screws on one shaft facing 180 degree from the ones on the other shaft?

Al

 

[ondemandbindery]

Here lies the problem with the set screw theory. Any slippage at all in the drive belts tied to the shafts and that theory goes out the window. So with that being said I will "give up" one of my secrets LOL. If you are having a splitting problem, lets make sure there is not a ratio problem with the collars on the shaft and the creasing device. If either one is running at a different RPM dynamic than the other you will get a tug O war or so to speak in the sheet. Now understand that this can adversely affect sheet control but sometimes you have to recognize the problem and work your way back. And for the record, the Stahl will create a more consistent platform for the creasing just because they are built like battleships. Did that help you out any?

John Weaver

 

[Al Ferrari]

On my '82 Stahl 3 unit TF 56 machine all rollers and shafts are on a single gear train, so belt slippage and turn ratio problem analysis do not apply.

Two days ago, I did have an occasional splitting problem scoring on the 2nd unit, but only for about an inch at the lead edge. It only happened on about 20 sheets on a 2400 run (conventional 59 mm steel blade against factory supplied grooved hard rubber collar).

I was not able to catch it happening, but the split never walked more than that 1 inch into the spine of two different 16 page signatures, so think it may have been happening on the 3rd unit fold rollers, which I have not had time to check.

My apologies to all for drifting a bit off topic.

Al

 

[Al Ferrari]

Splitting problem solved. The grooved collar was not positioned so that the grove would be centered under the blade.

Al

[Edit] Plus, there was a bit of end play on that 2n unit lower shaft. This last explains why the split never walked into the stock more than a bit past the lead edge, since the lower collar would re-center itself with the allowed end play. This is an important lesson for all about this symptom and it's remedy.

 

[ben082010]

Okay, so if I'm understanding this right I should be double checking the shafts and make sure they are rotating inline with one another? The tri creasers are the new version which have a set screw on one and the other is free wheelin. I'm running them on an MBO Navigator if that makes any difference to trouble shooting?

Like I said before I don't expect it to run 100% on 80lb text, but I definitely expect it to be better than without them and not splitting the sheet. I have also checked with Technifold's Tech help and sent sheets down to them to try out also and they had the same problem. I have talked with another local bindery that I use once in a while who also has tri creasers but he doesn't run into this problem. Although he won't fill me in on his secrets - I can't really blame him. Thanks for all your help.

 

[TheProcessIStheproduct]

Tri_crease

Tri_crease

Talk to tri-creaser, the problem with thin sheets is you have to really crank pressure down to keep from twisting, but that much pressure will cause light stock to split so they have blue bands to replace the normal black ones that have a bigger OD so you can retain grip without splitting the sheet

 

[ondemandbindery]

Splitting problem solved. The grooved collar was not positioned so that the grove would be centered under the blade.

Al

[Edit] Plus, there was a bit of end play on that 2n unit lower shaft. This last explains why the split never walked into the stock more than a bit past the lead edge, since the lower collar would re-center itself with the allowed end play. This is an important lesson for all about this symptom and it's remedy.

Hey Al, this thread is anything related to scoring. You said score in the second unit for a fold in the 3rd unit. What is your orientation on fold? I may have a quick tip for you.

 

[ondemandbindery]

Okay, so if I'm understanding this right I should be double checking the shafts and make sure they are rotating inline with one another? The tri creasers are the new version which have a set screw on one and the other is free wheelin. I'm running them on an MBO Navigator if that makes any difference to trouble shooting?

Like I said before I don't expect it to run 100% on 80lb text, but I definitely expect it to be better than without them and not splitting the sheet. I have also checked with Technifold's Tech help and sent sheets down to them to try out also and they had the same problem. I have talked with another local bindery that I use once in a while who also has tri creasers but he doesn't run into this problem. Although he won't fill me in on his secrets - I can't really blame him. Thanks for all your help.

Ok. you are running 35mm shafts which is more stable than say a 30mm. Great machine. The arguement about the new scoring systems with a free wheeling female is the overall diameter is very small and a weight reduction. It make sense really but I would have to take a whack at a couple of jobs to give a real opinion. How old is your machin and what is the condition of your knife shafts and the ends respectively? Here is another question. When you are processing the jobs, how close are you running your sheet in the production cycle (ie sheet gap)? As for the Bindery keeping his secrets close to his vest, I totally understand and I appreciate that you do also. Unfortunately though, you will find a solution. I tend to dance with this issue from time to time. I just lost a client over this as they wanted to know how I was processing something and I stood my ground. It is my time, efforts, and experience in the industry that earned me the right to out smart someone on a job.

 

[ondemandbindery]

Talk to tri-creaser, the problem with thin sheets is you have to really crank pressure down to keep from twisting, but that much pressure will cause light stock to split so they have blue bands to replace the normal black ones that have a bigger OD so you can retain grip without splitting the sheet

I have run some tri-creaser and they make good stuff too. I could potentially see this working. This very well could help match the correct speed of the scoring collars and substrate. This was a trick we used when running the ultimate scoring systems on the main units years ago. And it has one flaw but for the price you can make some pretty scores with that setup.

 

[Al Ferrari]

Hi John,

Max width on folder is 23", so 19 x 25 sheet runs with 19" lead edge and 25" side guide.

19 x 25 was grain 25 (not the best, grain was against the spine).

1st unit: 19 x 25 folds to 12.5 x 19, perf on exit.

2nd unit: 12.5 x 19 folds to 9.5 x 12.5 score on exit (here is where the end play caused the splitting).

3rd unit: 9.5 x 12.5 folds to 6.375 x 9.5, high folio lip.

Is that enough info to earn a tip?

Al