DIY Toner Transfer Paper (cheap and easy))

[DirtyLude]

Mark,

You showed me three examples of 20 mil traces. There is no components with 10 or 8 mil pads and all these traces look to be the same size as the pads so again .020" is the minimum reasonable size for thermal transfer, which is the width of the smallest pads. I have included a photo of what I am talking about. This is a snapshot of ExpressPCB with three of the smallest components and the smallest pads. The pads line up nicely with 20 mil traces. Do you disagree? can you prove to me where your 10 mil traces are again. And no those also are not 8 mil traces. Again the smallest pad is 24 mil. so your traces should be much smaller than the smallest pad.

The good news is the photo transfer method just using the sun and the same laser output with Pulsars foil can achieve 6 mils without a problem which again is an industry standard as the minimum for PC boards.

Your mistake is thinking that I'm using 0.05" lead spacing IC's. Your image shows spacing relative to a 0.05" lead pitch IC. The IC's on my boards are 0.5mm. If I used 20mil traces then there would be no space between the traces at all. 0.5mm is about 19mil length. The 8mil trace image is using an IC with 0.4mm lead spacing, that's less than 16mils from centre lead to centre lead.

I've been doing this for quite a while now. Try to assume I know the basics like the difference between 10 and 20 mil.

 

[DirtyLude]

e.g. For the Pulsar paper experiment the board I made was for the LM3S811 Luminary Micro. You can see the package information at the end of the datasheet. Annoyingly you need to register to download it, though.

Luminary Micro - LM3S811 Microcontroller

The first RF Node board I show uses a QFN chip (it's an MSP430F2012). As far as I know, QFN only comes in 0.5mm spacing.
https://www.electro-tech-online.com...-transfer-paper-cheap-easy-13.html#post771932

0.5mm lead spaced parts are very common; If ExpressPCB doesn't have them, you should at least try using something more advanced like Eagle CAD.

 

[Angelgroove]

Response to Mark Higgins

Your mistake is thinking that I'm using 0.05" lead spacing IC's. Your image shows spacing relative to a 0.05" lead pitch IC. The IC's on my boards are 0.5mm. If I used 20mil traces then there would be no space between the traces at all. 0.5mm is about 19mil length. The 8mil trace image is using an IC with 0.4mm lead spacing, that's less than 16mils from centre lead to centre lead.

I've been doing this for quite a while now. Try to assume I know the basics like the difference between 10 and 20 mil.
__________________
Mark Higgins

I do not doubt you are very experienced at making PC boards, that is not the issue here. What I can see is that you are quite good at making PC boards. Can you please take a zoomed in picture of the top of the board where we can read the printing on the top of the MSP430F2012 chip. Do you have a link showing photos how you did this with pictures of all the steps. Can you replicate your board, and have it come out the same? Have others replicated your board using your same steps?

This is important because I do not believe any manufacturer using the thermal transfer method can put down anything less than a .020" trace repeatable and reliably. This is an issue here and it should be resolved one way or another. Especially in relation to Pulsar's product line.

If you can show your steps and a zoomed in pic of the top of the TI chip, I will believe you, and if that bears out truth, you are leader amongst us who can do what most cannot. Believe me that is a big deal especially mounting these components.

I also have shown the ability to put down reliable traces with a photo resist traces down to 3 mils, 0.080 mm. Currently the smallest width lead in resist etching system is 3 mil limited, no matter what system you use. That is the width of a human hair. I plan to put in a solder mask and use a low temp solder paste. The goal I have is to see if an industry standard can be done at home with minimal expense and done with maximum safety.

 

[3v0]

This is important because I do not believe any manufacturer using the thermal transfer method can put down anything less than a .020" trace repeatable and reliably. This is an issue here and it should be resolved one way or another. Especially in relation to Pulsar's product line.

There is NOTHING to resolve ! What you believe is irrelevant in the face of reality.

DirtyLude, myself, and several others have used the system and it works. Many people who know how to do toner transfer can do below .020" even without the Pulsar paper.

The Australian distributor for Pulsar has made a tutorial that is about the best I have seen to date. There is no point in duplicating it.

The quality of result from any of these methods depends to some extent on the operators skills.

Nuff said.

3v0

 

[DirtyLude]

This is important because I do not believe any manufacturer using the thermal transfer method can put down anything less than a .020" trace repeatable and reliably. This is an issue here and it should be resolved one way or another. Especially in relation to Pulsar's product line.

So, let me get this straight. Out of the two alternatives; you not doing the Toner Transfer process properly, or me and others in this thread lying, you chose to believe that we are probably lying without doing any research on your own to verify either story. You must have a lot of friends.

1. Because you gave it one try and cannot do less than 20mil does not mean others can't. For once, do something that I suggest and go to the Homebrew ML that I linked earlier. Pulsar advertises all over their site less than 10mil and shows plenty of images. IF YOU CAN'T GET LESS THAN 20mil YOU ARE DOING IT WRONG. Talk to the Pulsar support guy, who is very helpful, about fixing your process. It's obvious that you don't have a lot of experience here, why can you not take advice? If you want more examples of people being able to do Toner Transfer with finer pitch, they have a search site called google. "toner transfer pcb" will give you loads of examples.

2. There is a post right here in this thread that I've already linked to that shows my process. It's using Pulsar paper, but it's the same process I use for Photo paper. I'm not going to take video if that's what you want.
https://www.electro-tech-online.com...ansfer-paper-cheap-and-easy.94601/#post760928

3. In the 8mil example close up picture you can clearly see the Wiznet W5100 markings on the chip. Here is the datasheet with package description. 0.4mm pin pitch
Image:
https://www.electro-tech-online.com/attachments/20090402-pcb-003-jpg.28060/
Datasheet with Package description.
https://www.wiznet.co.kr/rg4_board/...s_1&ss[p_num]=25&bd_num=15828&key=0&mode=down

It's nice to get really small traces but ultimately not useful to me or I would say most hobbyists. There's a reason I haven't done less than 8mil on a real board that I've made and populated, that's because I just don't need any smaller. I don't get any benefit out of it and without small easy vias, I don't see general hobbyists having any use for it either. ARM7 chips have all sorts of core power supply pins and PLL pins all mixed in with regular I/O pins, which makes making single sided boards with ARM7 chips a complete mess and even double sided board are a mess without being able to make vias under the chip. Those pcb's I have to get made in a boardhouse. If all you want is accuracy, check the direct print inkjet work done by some people. Check the pics in the Homebrew PCB group under 'C88 Test PCB'. Perfect solid 1mil trace test. Really nice. Unfortunately too much work for me for something I don't need.

I'll take a close up picture of a couple of my MSP430 QFN chips mounted on boards for you after work. Here's the Eagle board and schema files for that RF Node test board, for now, though. They can be viewed in the free version of Eagle Lite.

**broken link removed**
**broken link removed**

 

[mramos1]

Guys,

As you know there's lots of threads here that show it works and lots of methods (all about the same really). Maybe AngelGoove should go search/read the forums here before preaching to the MANY that are doing it, some for a long time.

AngelGroove, you are doing something wrong based on what I saw with your pictures. Needing to load the image in a graphic editor? Maybe that's your printer or toner.

 

[Angelgroove]

Thermal etch TI chip (.65mm pin spread)

Okay gang,

I tried the thermal transfer again and you can see the high resolution picture below. In it notice the traces and the ground-plane. The ground plane has little to no etch per sq mm. Compare that to any trace and you see pitting on all of them. That again tells me the larger the pads the larger the traces the larger the pins on the components gets one to a better board. The board measures 1-1/4" square or 30 mm square.

Another thing too, without a wave machine, how on earth does anyone reasonably solder this chip up. Even with a fine needle solder tip, you need a microscope and a robot to solder these up by hand. By all means, please tell how you assemble this chip.

I will do this same circuit in a photo resist method next week and post its results. Hopefully no pitting.

 

[Angelgroove]

Sorry but I do know what I am doing

So, let me get this straight. Out of the two alternatives; you not doing the Toner Transfer process properly, or me and others in this thread lying, you chose to believe that we are probably lying without doing any research on your own to verify either story. You must have a lot of friends.

1. Because you gave it one try and cannot do less than 20mil does not mean others can't. For once, do something that I suggest and go to the Homebrew ML that I linked earlier. Pulsar advertises all over their site less than 10mil and shows plenty of images. IF YOU CAN'T GET LESS THAN 20mil YOU ARE DOING IT WRONG. Talk to the Pulsar support guy, who is very helpful, about fixing your process. It's obvious that you don't have a lot of experience here, why can you not take advice? If you want more examples of people being able to do Toner Transfer with finer pitch, they have a search site called google. "toner transfer pcb" will give you loads of examples.

snipped

I for one with any internet form, with out the references, the dates, the paper than cannot be found or anything like that is merely an opinion and not fact filled.

What I am doing here is reasonably trying to replicate what other have done and simply report it. That is the scientific process. Take it with a dose of salt if you like it is merely my opinion and if there is a fact it then is true. I show everything based on facts like the outside board dimensions so that anyone can verify the leads. I also do not dispute the process merely am saying what are the problems. I am not about to spend money on new equipment that may or may not fix any problem. I have spent too many years of chasing down problems and it usually ends up as a giant rat hole with no end in sight. If I cannot do it with my high end equipment, I am not about to trade it in for specialized equipment simply to prove a point. I am quite happy with 20 mil traces. If I need smaller, it will then be a photo resist method.

I think what has happened is you have spent a lot of time and money getting all of this just right. I am not interested in doing that and merely want to do simple boards that I can reasonably put one together. That is it in a nutshell. If that means 20 mil traces then so be it.

What I also hear is hurt ego. Well simply do the scientific process to your proofs. If you do not, it is merely an opinion, and expect to be questioned. If that is all this website is about, Puslar better take the front row here and show their work and how they did it. Because after all it looks to me Pulsar is making a lot of money here, and its is no wonder why some do not trust the process.

 

[DirtyLude]

For QFN I use a hot air rework station. I really like working with QFN now as it's pretty easy. I put down a bit of paste, tiny bit on the thermal and a bit around the pads, drop it on and hit it with some hot air and it sits right down in place. Parts will align themselves to a degree, with tension when in reflow.

You can see in the close up, the little beads that are left behind from my cheap solder paste. Since doing this one I've been mixing a little extra flux in my paste before using it.

I tried to take a close up of my breakoutboard chip, but close up, the text was way too faint and unreadable.

...and here is the assembled board with the vias. Unfortunately this will not be the final prototype for my generic RF Node. I just found too many improvements I can make to it.

 

[DirtyLude]

I for one with any internet form, with out the references, the dates, the paper than cannot be found or anything like that is merely an opinion and not fact filled.

What I am doing here is reasonably trying to replicate what other have done and simply report it. That is the scientific process. Take it with a dose of salt if you like it is merely my opinion and if there is a fact it then is true. I show everything based on facts like the outside board dimensions so that anyone can verify the leads. I also do not dispute the process merely am saying what are the problems. I am not about to spend money on new equipment that may or may not fix any problem. I have spent too many years of chasing down problems and it usually ends up as a giant rat hole with no end in sight. If I cannot do it with my high end equipment, I am not about to trade it in for specialized equipment simply to prove a point. I am quite happy with 20 mil traces. If I need smaller, it will then be a photo resist method.

{cut}

What I also hear is hurt ego. Well simply do the scientific process to your proofs. If you do not, it is merely an opinion, and expect to be questioned. If that is all this website is about, Puslar better take the front row here and show their work and how they did it. Because after all it looks to me Pulsar is making a lot of money here, and its is no wonder why some do not trust the process.

You did absolutely no research and declared less than 20mil impossible using toner transfer. That's not scientific, that's being lazy and jumping to conclusions based on almost no evidence. A simple google search or even referencing the Pulsar site where you bought your product, or using the references provided you earlier would have helped you, but instead you told me I was wrong.

There's being thorough and there's being disrespectful. What you are doing is being disrespectful.

Pulsar has documented the method a lot. Check their website. I'm not certain what more I can say about that. You've been told again and again to do so and you simply don't for some reason. Talk to the support guy at Pulsar. He'll chat you up for a week about this.

I think what has happened is you have spent a lot of time and money getting all of this just right. I am not interested in doing that and merely want to do simple boards that I can reasonably put one together. That is it in a nutshell. If that means 20 mil traces then so be it.

You think this is what has happened because of all of the evidence to suggest this? For someone that likes proof and facts you jump to conclusions so easily it's frightening.

I don't actually use Pulsar paper. I've used it a few times to test with, but I still don't get results with it using a clothes iron that I get with regular Staples Photo Paper. I use a regular clothes Iron and I have no expensive equipment for making these. I do have a hot air rework station, but it's a cheap chinese one for $160.00, and it has nothing to do with making boards. You would know this if you had read this thread and the many others on here about PCB's.

I found a picture a while ago of the first pcb I ever made using this process and posted it in another thread. This was sometime in 2005. Probably lucky, but right from the start I was able to do a decent board using nothing but my HP laser, my iron, and some ferric chloride. I attribute the success to following instructions. My methods and tools haven't changed since then.

Guys,

As you know there's lots of threads here that show it works and lots of methods (all about the same really). Maybe AngelGoove should go search/read the forums here before preaching to the MANY that are doing it, some for a long time.

He was told that a while ago and like all advice in here he ignored it.

 

[3v0]

Give Frank at Pulsar a call and he will help you.
If he can not get it to work for you he will buy back his supplies.
That would be a loosing deal if it did not live up to what it is said to do.

3v0

 

[Angelgroove]

For QFN I use a hot air rework station. I really like working with QFN now as it's pretty easy. I put down a bit of paste, tiny bit on the thermal and a bit around the pads, drop it on and hit it with some hot air and it sits right down in place. Parts will align themselves to a degree, with tension when in reflow.

Sounds good. I like the idea of a reflow, got any kind you like that are cheap from Ebay? You could in actuality reflow the whole board to protect and build up the rest of your traces.

What conclusion can I draw from here thus far?
1. The thermal toner style will work down to 10 mils and maybe down to 8. The traces will be pitted and nothing outside of loading them up with solder will fix that. I used to do that in High School when we had poor quality .062" traces. For hobby purposes this should work just fine. Anything over 20 mil will be tolerable.

2. You need special equipment to achieve the super small VSOP devices. I primarily stay away from them because that to me is the purview of professionals. We do not need to get so small, we need microscopes to do that kind of work.

3. I still feel that photo resist is the way to go if you do desire the VSOP devices only because you should not get the pitting and your line accuracy (we haven't even gotten into the waviness of the lines) increases because photo positive developed can hold a 2µm accuracy. I hear nothing as to this ad-hock toner system in expected accuracy. At 1200 DPI and mechanically transferring all of that in an system that creates too many unknowns (consistency between lamination passes for instance).

 

[3v0]

There is technique involved in both toner transfer and photo resist as you are finding out. Neither is difficult when done correctly.

Had you bothered to read the info on the Pulsar site you would know about their foil. Pulsar foil is laminated over the top of the toner. The foil seals the pores in the toner responsible for pitting. It also reinforces the the toner.

Another key to getting fine traces is to use 1/2 ounce copper.

If you want to do reflow checkout the tutorial on the SparkFun.com site on using an electric skillet. I use a Teflon pan on a gas burner. I have a professional quality hot air rework station but prefer the pan.

I hear nothing as to this ad-hock toner system...

Cheap shot. Call Frank if have questions. Or shoot him some email and he will post here. At any rate it would be the right thing to stop badmouthing stuff you know so little about.

We welcome anyone who can show us how to do better PCBs.

3v0

 

[DirtyLude]

What conclusion can I draw from here thus far?
1. The thermal toner style will work down to 10 mils and maybe down to 8. The traces will be pitted and nothing outside of loading them up with solder will fix that. I used to do that in High School when we had poor quality .062" traces. For hobby purposes this should work just fine. Anything over 20 mil will be tolerable.

What the what? Where do you get this stuff from? I can do 8mils without difficulty, I've done 6mils on a test board and I can likely do better than that. I'm getting pitting with the new etching method I'm using. The hydrochloric acid/pyroxide. Even then, I'm not getting this wavyness you are talking about. Ferric Chloride gives me clean nice lines, no pitting. I really like the acid etchant, but I'm only using it now for test stuff that I don't care about. The copper looks rashed for me, but I don't use that green Pulsar sealant stuff, either.

2. You need special equipment to achieve the super small VSOP devices. I primarily stay away from them because that to me is the purview of professionals. We do not need to get so small, we need microscopes to do that kind of work.

Because I use a hot air workstation on a QFN chip you've concluded that all small outline chips need "special equipment". I wouldn't do QFN's anymore with a regular iron, but I have in the past. Otherwise 0.5mm leaded packages I always use the iron. Search on Youtube for SMT soldering and there are videos that show different methods for iron soldering small pitch chips.

3. I still feel that photo resist is the way to go if you do desire the VSOP devices only because you should not get the pitting and your line accuracy (we haven't even gotten into the waviness of the lines) increases because photo positive developed can hold a 2µm accuracy. I hear nothing as to this ad-hock toner system in expected accuracy. At 1200 DPI and mechanically transferring all of that in an system that creates too many unknowns (consistency between lamination passes for instance).

You ramble a lot and make a lot of conclusions that are contrary to the facts that are presented. It's very strange.

 

[MrDEB]

Don't know what pcboard art work your using?

I myself use express pcb.
Made .006inch (.15mm) using the PULSAR system.
Tried using 2 oz boards = big mistake due to undercutting)use 1/2 or 1 oz boards.
To use a TTS you must apply the toner to the copper using even heat with even pressure.
I myself use a laminator (big improvement over an iron)
run it through the laminator several times, reversing each pass.
You must cool the board down in water quickly after laminating.
as far as trace size, express pcb smallest is .006(.15mm)
have done several traces, just for experimental purposes. WHY would you want traces that small??
need a magnifier glass just to see them.
Use of the foils seal the toner (laser printers leave small holes in print)
I would think the same using photo etch?
I have no wavy traces.
the TTS seems so much simpler than photo transfer method IMO.Not to mention lower cost. Not condemning the photo transfer system, just reading and comparing costs.If you make a mistake before etching you just ate the cost of the photo sensitive board.
For someone to condemn one system over another due to possible quality of transfer, without actually using is not playing fair.
Try a system before you condemn it and talk about wavy traces, pitted traces etc.
THE PULSAR SYSTEM works great.

 

[3v0]

You ramble a lot and make a lot of conclusions that are contrary to the facts that are presented. It's very strange.

Sort of reminds me of talking to Crashsite. Do you suppose ?

3v0

 

[Angelgroove]

Some more rambling

Mr. Deb,

You and I are on the same page here. 6 mils is ridiculously small. I think some of the people here have eyes that are microscopes.

3VO,

I use your foil and it does not fill in as you say. What I have done is found a method tonight that is a clear background and fills in the black with no light shining through. This has been the difficulty as you well know for many decades but even though it is difficult it just popped into my mind and worked.

I like your white foil because it can overlay itself. You even say on your website that white is washed out and that true white comes about in more than one application. Gee is that so, then your green foil which is a thinner product as compared to the white according to you, can fill? I am sorry but this is a contradiction. Tell you what send me a sample of your white foil, let me evaluate its possibility here on the clear substrate. I believe you have my address.

My only problem has been to think this heat transfer method is the only way. Well it is not interestingly so.

Dirtylude,

Wrangled feathers and stomping about will not get your way which I do not understand. You take my opinions and turn them around like a tortured animal. This really is not that big a deal to get so upset over.

Bottom line is your stance with such small is your right. Quit pushing it like it is the holy grail, it is not. For most simply being able to build a PC board is a welcome thought to any electric process. We are not in a race here to who can build the smallest trace. The integrated circuit industry has already got you beat.

I would like to see you use a soldering iron on a 10 mil trace. Maybe you make a U-tube video for the only person on the planet that can solder with a soldering iron on 10 mil traces. This is a tall tale.

 

[Angelgroove]

I am not trashing this website

This simply is a rebuttal and not trashing a website. I am sure there are people who get very good results with the TTF system. I am not discounting that. What I do have a problem with is making claims that certainly cannot be true. Like the foil filling in. According to Pulsars own website the white which is a thicker product looks washed out and you have to apply multiple layers. So you all can see where I am going with this. Too many people getting into a group think mentality over claims started by one or two people that are either luck or not the case at all. The fact is if the white is washed out the green cannot do a better job as it is a thinner product. I am not after color here I am after filling in and no pin holes. Making a claim that pinholes are filled by a single application of a foil product is not true.

That is what I am trashing, outlandish claims.

And the system is ad hoc. If any manufacturer would find out in a warranty claim that its use was outside the norm of its operation they would void that printers warrentee. I do not worry about such things but again this is an ad hoc use of a laser printer using it in a manner inconsistent with the normal operation of a printer. I went through three laser printers before I came upon one that met the manufacturers specs. Think I would have been able to do that if they found out I put paper in that is not recommended my them? You want a system here you have to build your own laser printer. Actually that is what you probably would be warranted in doing and then people like me have no right to complain.

As far as the expense of a photo resist process. Yes it is about double the cost of a TTF system. And the waviness comes about not to the naked eye but under a magnifying lens or zooming in on a photo. The problem here then is the complexity of a long trace next to a ground plane with only .012" original clearance could short out. You then talk about an expense. You saw the board with a naked eye saw no problems yet when you got the board altogether it does not work and all due to a something that occurred in the TTF process. I have no problem here if we just agree that due to the mechanical nature the TTF is good to about .015 to .020" in resolution. Yes you can get .008" but good luck. The photo method is 1000 times tighter in resolution.

 

[DirtyLude]

I would like to see you use a soldering iron on a 10 mil trace. Maybe you make a U-tube video for the only person on the planet that can solder with a soldering iron on 10 mil traces. This is a tall tale.

How hard is it to take 5 minutes to do some research, when the place to do the research and the search criteria have been given to you?

This is what I found, doing 30 seconds of searching on Youtube, like I instructed you to do and you ignored. Again.

YouTube - Soldering a 32-pin TQFP ATmega8
YouTube - How to Hand Solder a QFP, Part 3
YouTube - Professional SMT Soldering No. 2 (Revised) - Surface Mount

I use the Sparkfun method where I load a decent amount of solder on the pins and then use wick to soak up excess. There are other threads in here talking about different peoples methods and how they do it, but I don't expect you will search for those.

 

[3v0]

I do not own or work for PulsarProFx.com.

The green foil is for covering the microscopic pin holes in the toner not filling gaps where toner is missing.

3v0