Monotype Computer Control: First Run

Posted on by kpmartin Posted in Caster Computer Control, Composition Casting, Kevin — No Comments ↓

I have my 12-point Binny Old Style diecase set up, so last Saturday, I tried my first run with my laptop controlling my Monotype Composition Caster.

The text is a little note to include when I ship type across the border, attempting to discourage customs inspectors from unwrapping and pi-ing the type. Up until now this has been an MS Word document, from which I copied and pasted the main text into a new document to feed to Bill Welliver’s CompCAT software. So, no typos.

The casting job seemed to run well, although some of the type has burrs or fins on the body. The low em-quads have a fin up from the trailing edge, indicating the the upper mould blade is not staying closed tight against the mould crossblock. I guess it is time to take the mould apart and clean it.

I used some carbon paper to take a proof without having to wash ink off the type:

Although the input file had no typos, the words “clear” and “neatly” cast as “llear” and “eeatly” respectively. So letters that should have cast from positions J4 and K8 cast from J1 and K4 instead, both being the exact positions of the previously-cast letters.

One possibility is that some of the front airpins are slow to drop, so the 1 and 4 pins stayed up for an extra casting cycle. This would be more plausible if it were the same pin in both cases, but it seems very unlikely that there should be two sticky pins and that they both happened to stick when the next letter to cast was in the same column (J or K), and nowhere else in the job. Note that in each case the desired pin is a higher number than the (sticky) one. This would not be a valid explanation if the caster had cast “cc” instead of “lc” (J4 then J1 in the reversed casting order) because the 4 pin sticking up would have been overridden by the smaller-numbered 1 pin.

Another possibility is that the computer is occasionally failing to send a new selection code to the interface, so the same letter is cast twice in a row. The fact that the correct and cast letters happen to be in the same column would then be just coincidence. Given that the diecase layout is designed to keep the common letters close together, that is not a particularly unlikely coincidence. I’ve also noticed hints of communication problems when the air compressor starts up, and those two errors are roughly one compressor cycle apart.

I’m feeling that my measurement of plausibility here may be a bit skewed: On the one hand I appear to be finding it implausible that the two errors should happen to occur when the two letters involved happen to be in the same column, yet on the other hand I’m happy to treat that as just a coincidence. I should probably just cast the job a few more times to better qualify when the errors occur.

The USB protocol for writing to the device does not include any sort of verification: The host computer just sends the data and the device is expected to listen for it. It looks like I will have to modify the software to read back the device status to ensure that the written data was received, and if not, to send it again. At first I will make the software signal an error when this happens rather than resending, so I can verify that this is indeed the source of the problem. Fixing intermittent problems is always so much fun…

Tagged with: ,

Mystery Diecase Combs Identified!

Posted on by kpmartin Posted in Monotype, Mystery Parts — No Comments ↓

I previously posted about some Monotype diecase combs which were too long for any diecases that could be used on the Composition Caster. I did not think they were for the newer Monomatic caster because I thought the diecases for this machine were divided into four 9×9 blocks of cellular matrices.

After looking through the poor quality copy I have to the Monomatic II parts manual, I found that this caster supported both the divided diecases and also ones holding a single 18×18 grid of matrices.

Parts diagram for the undivided diecase

Parts diagram for the divided diecase

It is still a bit of a mystery to me how the caster can handle both styles of diecase, since in the divided diecase, half the matrices are (what appears to be) an entire column (0.2″) displaced from their positions in the undivided diecase. I think the resolution of the quandary lies in the method used by the Monomatic to select the diecase column:

The Composition Caster uses 14 air channels to select one of 15 columns in the original style diecase. If no air channels are selected, the diecase positions by default to column O. Any single air channel, when selected, positions the diecase to the corresponding column A through N. If multiple channels are selected the diecase positions to the one closest to the A position. More advanced features of the caster (including the 17-column diecase) use combinations of these air channels to control them.

The Monomatic uses 9 air channels to select one of 18 positions. Of those, 8 select one of 9 positions in a manner similar to the composition caster: No channels selects the highest position, and the 8 channels individually select the next 8 positions. The last air channel acts as a shift, putting a spacer in the mechanism to move the diecase by 9 positions, thus allowing access to a total of 18 positions.

Not relevant to this particular topic, but the same mechanism (8 individual selector channels, default to a 9th position, with a shift) is used for row selection and set-size wedge positioning. These 3 sets of 9 air channels, plus a channel to force a low quad, along with the original S, .0075, and .0007 channels make up 31 channels, and the Monomatic uses exactly the same paper tower to read the ribbon as the composition caster does.

The difference between the divided and undivided diecases could be accommodated by changing out the column-selection spacer that is activated by the shift mechanism.

Finding Missing Composition Matrices

Posted on by kpmartin Posted in Composition Casting, Kevin, Monotype Composition Caster — No Comments ↓

I have a Monotype diecase for Lanston 12-point #21EFG Binny Old Style which includes most French accents, but was missing question and exclamations marks in both roman and italic, as well as the small cap Z.

I was quite pleased to find recently, in a box marked “Symbols and Ornaments/Misc Comp Mats”, the missing matrices. Well, most of them; the roman exclamation mark is actually Lanston #272 Caslon Old Style, but close enough.

The matcase and the dusty stash of matrices.

I also wanted to cast a dingbat (a 5-point star) as part of my first computer-controlled casting job. This came from a separate box of symbol matrices I have. This box is unfortunately full so it can’t take the symbol matrices from the somewhat decrepit cardboard box in the photo.

The matrices to put into the diecase

I opened up the diecase, cleaned out some type metal that had found its way between the matrices, and put in the missing matrices. The star replaced a plus sign, the two exclamation marks replaced some filler matrices that were just there to take up the positions, and the small-cap Z and question marks replaced a dash, a period, and an italic ô in the 8-unit row. The matrices I removed were returned to the box. If I had Unit Shift on my caster I could have moved the ô to the next row instead of taking it out.

The diecase opened up, with the matrices replaced, and the outgoing ones loose on the table.

I also replaced three of the combs in the diecase, because the combs already there must have had burrs on their ends. They would not slide smoothly into their grooves in the diecase. This was when I discovered a set of strange 18-position combs in my parts collection.

After finishing my casting job I will be putting the plus sign back and returning the star symbol to the wooden box of symbol matrices.

Mystery Monotype Diecase Combs

Posted on by kpmartin Posted in Kevin, Monotype Composition Caster, Mystery Parts — 1 Comment ↓

When running a Monotype Composition Caster to cast from cellular matrices, the matrices are usually contained in a diecase, which holds a 225, 255, or 272 matrices in a grid arrangement. The caster positions this diecase to select the appropriate matrix over the opening of the mould where the type is cast.

These diecases use one of two styles of parts to allow the individual matrices a bit of vertical movement relative to each other, while still preventing the matrices from all falling out of the diecase altogether. In the diecases made in the USA by Lanston Monotype, the matrices are held by combs which wrap around three sides of a wasp-waist in each matrix. The combs either have 15 or 17 positions for matrices.

I was rummaging through my collection of Monotype diecase combs and found this mysterious set of combs:

This seems to be a near-complete set of combs for a diecase, including one blank bar (on the left), the two special combs that fit to the outside edges of the grid of matrices, and 13 regular combs that fit between rows of matrices. But the strange part is that these combs have positions for 18 matrices, and I am not aware of any diecase configuration that contains 18 columns of cellular matrices.

I don’t know if I also have an empty diecase around that would use these, and I wonder if these are leftovers from a now-disused experimental diecase design, just like the other odd diecase I have. Used as part of a 15×18 diecase layout, this would have made 270 matrices available for casting, but it would have required a new design for the rear airpin block, possibly using airpin combination F+N as another column selection (just as N+L and N+I combinations select columns “NI” and “NL” in the current incarnation of the caster). This larger diecase would have been made obsolete by the Unit Shift feature, which provided 272 matrices in the diecase and allowed more flexibility in character width selection (without Unit Shift, all 15, 17, (or 18?) matrices in each row must cast to the same width).

I should note that although the later Monomatic caster used an 18×18 diecase, this was divided into four 9×9 quadrants, each with its own set of 9-position combs, so these are not for the Monomatic.

Postscript: Mystery solved—as described in a newer post, the Monomatic had two diecase styles: the divided ones that I’m more familiar with, and undivided ones that would use exactly these combs.

Looking for Papermaking Tutoring near Québec city

Posted on by kpmartin Posted in Other people — 1 Comment ↓

One of our customers near Québec city would like someone with papermaking experience to visit them to help them improve their papermaking techniques. Although my contact there speaks English I expect that it would be greatly preferable to have someone fluent in French to do this.

If you think you could help them out, please get in touch with us and we’ll hook you up with them.

Video: First run of Monotype Compostion Caster Computer Control

Posted on by kpmartin Posted in Caster Computer Control, Composition Casting, Kevin — No Comments ↓

I just posted a video on YouTube of the first run of my Monotype Composition Caster under control of my laptop computer.

I have been working on the hardware and software for this interface on and off over several years, and this is the first time it has had all the features required to properly operate the caster. The last thing to be added was the cycle sensor, which detects the time when the caster would normally have been reading the punched paper ribbon that this interface supersedes.

The interface operated flawlessly, though in subsequent runs (including on a live Zoom demo for the virtual American Typecasting Fellowship conference) it has had some electrical problems. It turns out that when the air compressor kicks in, some electrical noise often causes the communications to the interface to freeze, and the computer can no longer read the status from the interface. On reviewing the software on the laptop I see that reading the status from the interface is done with no timeout. Oops, my bad!

You can also see clearly in the video that the casting part is not tuned properly, as the type is being produced with fins instead of sharp corners, some type has no face on it, and the line length is drifting a lot so the type gets jumbled. This is in addition to the fact that I don’t have the matrix case to match the file I’m reading on the laptop, so the output, had it been fit to print, would still have been a sort of substitution cipher of the correct text.

I have also been adding some features to the software on the laptop to make it easier to skip from one casting line to the next or previous, or back to the start of the file, or to make it loop on a single line of type or loop the entire file. By the way, the application on the laptop is written in Java.

Papermaking Workshop is back!

Posted on by kpmartin Posted in Hand Papermaking, Our own courses and workshops, Past Events, Us — No Comments ↓

After about 17 months delay, we’re pleased to announce that we will be holding one of our Introductory Papermaking workshops, on Saturday August 21st, from 9am to 4pm.

Because the COVID pandemic has not entirely cleared up, our workshop format will be a bit different from usual. The main change is that the workshop will be held outdoors, either in the open, under canopies, or on our open covered porch, depending on the weather that day. We will also be modifying how some of the equipment is used to minimize sharing, and of course hand sanitizer will be available as required.

This workshop had originally been scheduled for March 28th, 2020, but had to be cancelled because of the rising number of COVID-19 cases. You can check the original announcement for a bit more detail on the course.

Return of workshops?

Posted on by kpmartin Posted in Hand Papermaking, Our own courses and workshops, Us — No Comments ↓

We’re still under various restrictions due to the COVID-19 pandemic, but they are slowly easing up a bit. Unfortunately, our local region has been identified as a hot spot for the disease so we are staying under stricter restrictions that the rest of Ontario for at least an extra couple of weeks.

We don’t feel it is practical to hold a workshop with everyone wearing masks, so we would like to wait until we are allowed to have small unmasked indoor gatherings of strangers, and that might be a while yet.

We could perhaps hold an outdoor workshop, but that is dependent on the weather, making these hard to plan. A sudden downpour and everyone has to scatter for cover, so everyone has to mask up to enter the building… Though it might be interesting to see the result of a mould left out in the rain with the wet paper still on it! Maybe we have enough awnings and tents to keep everyone dry during light rain; I’ll have to see what we have.

Replacing a defective light switch

Posted on by kpmartin Posted in Basement Workshop, Kevin — No Comments ↓

A few years ago I installed improved lighting in my basement workshop. Recently I’d been noticing that the light switch sometimes made a “pop” or slight sparking noises when I switched it on or off. This seemed to be getting worse, so it was time to replace the switch. The original switch was just a household-duty 15 amp light switch, so I thought I should perhaps upgrade it to something more robust. The local Home Depot didn’t seem to stock commercial-duty switches, but I found a switch that has 20 amp capacity and also has a more definitive “click” action.

After replacing the switch I dismantled the old one for an autopsy. Here is what the contacts looked like:

The contacts had clearly been suffering from arcing. There was a sooty deposit inside the switch in the area of the contacts as well.

So what I am wondering is: why did this happen? The switch is rated for 15 amps, and it is switching 8 fluorescent fixtures each drawing a maximum of 1 amp, for a total of 8 amps. Each fixture holds two 32-watt tubes, so if the actual current draw of the fixture is probably closer to 0.6 amps each (2×32 watts for the tubes + guessing 10 watts for the ballast losses divided by 120 volts) for a total of 4.8 amps overall. Either way the switch contacts should have had plenty of capacity.

My only guess is that although the electronic ballasts in the lamps normally draw at most 1 amp, they may have a much higher peak current on startup as they charge up an internal power supply. Thus each time the lights were turned on the switch would encounter much higher current for a few milliseconds. If the switch contacts bounced much as they closed this would cause a bit or arcing, each time eroding the contacts a bit and making the contacts worse for next time.

Hopefully the new switch has a more definitive snap-closing for the contacts (reducing bounce) and more capacity to dissipate the heat generated by arcing so it will last more than the 8 years the first one did. I actually accidentally bought a double-pole switch, so even if these terminals fail again I can move the circuit over to the other as-yet-unused pole of the switch.

Updated Catalogue, New Prices

Posted on by kpmartin Posted in Things we sell — No Comments ↓

I’ve just updated our catalogue to (finally) list some new products (kenaf and hemp/cotton pulp, powder retention agent) and remove some discontinued ones (liquid coagulant).

Unfortunately we’ve also raised our prices on several products, notably our moulds and deckles.

You can download a fresh copy from this page in our Products section.

Top