Dibond vs. e-panel (or others)? Also, how to stabilize?

[Brad P]

I am currently shopping for a large supply of Dibond and have become aware of a major cost savings I could achieve by using e-panel (or maybe even another aluminum composite panel). 

I currently think of Dibond as the highest quality Mercedes of aluminum composite panels.  I don't know if that's perfectly true anymore.  Where I live, I can get e-panel locally and for 1/3 the price at a local signage supply store.  What's more, I wouldn't have to ship in Dibond (I live on Maui) or have to deal with all the shipping/damage hassles.  This has me wondering whether there are really any meaningful differences between Dibond and e-panel for my applications -- printing and mounting 3' x 4' floating wall mounts basically as described in https://luminous-landscape.com/mounting-prints-on-aluminium-composite.  I may print larger some day, but not with this shipment.

Am I right in thinking of e-panel as a Ford?  Or is it closer to a BMW?  Could you please comment on durability, rigidness, expansion, delamination or other meaningful quality differences between Dibond and e-panel (or other aluminum composite panels) in your experience?

* Both sheets I've priced are 3mm thick
* While both are the same thickness overall, e-panel's aluminum sheets on each side of its polyethylene core are about 2/3rds the thickness of Dibond's.
* Dibond was developed by 3M Composites and is made in the USA.
* E-panel is manufactured according to specs from 3M Composites in China (like iPhones - I don't think that fact necessarily means a difference in quality though might raise a question)

Bottom line, I am trying to use the highest quality components throughout my work.  I want my work to be pretty damm long lasting and to be highly respectable in my material choices.  In this pursuit, I might be willing to trade out a Mercedes for a BMW or Audi because of cost/logistical issues -- but never for a Ford.  (Please take no offense Ford owners, they are fine cars.)

[Ernst Dinkla]

I am currently shopping for a large supply of Dibond and have become aware of a major cost savings I could achieve by using e-panel (or maybe even another aluminum composite panel). 

I currently think of Dibond as the highest quality Mercedes of aluminum composite panels.  I don't know if that's perfectly true anymore.  Where I live, I can get e-panel locally and for 1/3 the price at a local signage supply store.  What's more, I wouldn't have to ship in Dibond (I live on Maui) or have to deal with all the shipping/damage hassles.  This has me wondering whether there are really any meaningful differences between Dibond and e-panel for my applications -- printing and mounting 3' x 4' floating wall mounts basically as described in https://luminous-landscape.com/mounting-prints-on-aluminium-composite.  I may print larger some day, but not with this shipment.

Am I right in thinking of e-panel as a Ford?  Or is it closer to a BMW?  Could you please comment on durability, rigidness, expansion, delamination or other meaningful quality differences between Dibond and e-panel (or other aluminum composite panels) in your experience?

* Both sheets I've priced are 3mm thick
* While both are the same thickness overall, e-panel's aluminum sheets on each side of its polyethylene core are about 2/3rds the thickness of Dibond's.
* Dibond was developed by 3M Composites and is made in the USA.
* E-panel is manufactured according to specs from 3M Composites in China (like iPhones - I don't think that fact necessarily means a difference in quality though might raise a question)

Bottom line, I am trying to use the highest quality components throughout my work.  I want my work to be pretty damm long lasting and to be highly respectable in my material choices.  In this pursuit, I might be willing to trade out a Mercedes for a BMW or Audi because of cost/logistical issues -- but never for a Ford.  (Please take no offense Ford owners, they are fine cars.)

Alusuisse was the original developer and patent holder of AlucoBond, DiBond and all the varieties based on that composites/sandwich concept. Plant in Singen, Germany still produces that quality. That Alusuisse was integrated in Alcan and Alcoa successively obscured the fact that this technology is originally a Swiss/German invention. Meanwhile the 3A Composites GMBH manufacturing group is back in Swiss hands; Schweiter Technologies. http://www.alucobond.com/about-us.html?&L=1

Patents are no longer restricting the production by third parties so other manufacturers in China for example have changed the market. Knowhow of 3A Composites group has been spread too to other plants on other continents. The differences in quality can be found in the thickness of the aluminium layers at both sides, the hardness/rigidity differences of those aluminium sheets/foil and the polyethylene core quality differences.

Check whether the sheets are plane when they arrive, storage and transport can have an influence. For the sizes you mention I think that the 3mm thick third party composites are sufficient. Depends on the frame at the back too. Check the thickness of the aluminium outer layers, 0.3mm exists in alternative composite panels too, I would not go for 0.2 at that size. If possible request identical strips of both DiBond and the alternative with the same specification. Say 4 inches wide and 2 feet long. Same weights on the center and the ends resting on some bars. Check the bending and keep them like that for a week. The last will tell whether there is creep.  Delamination of the PE and Alu is unlikely, the bond is based on melted surfaces of the polyethylene itself and surface treatment of the Alu before their marriage. Then there is the surface quality for the lamination to the print. You could check that by bonding the two strips with the two sided tape you use, reverse that tape for both half lengths as the tape could have different bonding qualities too. Split the strips again and check where most tape stays. Might require a lot of force.

On the history of AlucoBond, in English; http://media.alucobond.com/40years/eBook-E/chronik40jahre_buch_Englisch_neu.pdf

Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
January 2016 update, 700+ inkjet media white spectral plots

[Brad P]

Danke Herr Dinkla.

With some further research, it appears that the e-panel 3mm panel product, although manufactured according to 3M Composites specs, has only a .2mm aluminum exterior layer.  It also appears that the aluminum used could be somewhat inferior since, unlike the case with Dibond (including the US manufactured Dibond), I have not found any references to e-panel's aluminum meeting ALGm1 standards (or any other standards that I can see).  The ALMg1 standards appear to provide minimum standards on aluminum alloy rigidity and corrosion resistance. So one might infer that e-panel is using an inferior aluminum alloy. 

I am interested still in other thoughts, particularly on the thickness and quality of e-panel's aluminum/construction and actual experience with e-panel in large prints.  If no one ever has any problems with e-panel over a long period of time, is Dibond like using a hammer when a flyswatter is what is needed?  But here are at least a few data points suggesting that Dibond may be a meaningfully superior product. 

[Ernst Dinkla]

Danke Herr Dinkla.

With some further research, it appears that the e-panel 3mm panel product, although manufactured according to 3M Composites specs, has only a .2mm aluminum exterior layer.  It also appears that the aluminum used could be somewhat inferior since, unlike the case with Dibond (including the US manufactured Dibond), I have not found any references to e-panel's aluminum meeting ALGm1 standards (or any other standards that I can see).  The ALMg1 standards appear to provide minimum standards on aluminum alloy rigidity and corrosion resistance. So one might infer that e-panel is using an inferior aluminum alloy. 

I am interested still in other thoughts, particularly on the thickness and quality of e-panel's aluminum/construction and actual experience with e-panel in large prints.  If no one ever has any problems with e-panel over a long period of time, is Dibond like using a hammer when a flyswatter is what is needed?  But here are at least a few data points suggesting that Dibond may be a meaningfully superior product.

Meneer Dinkla in Dutch, which I prefer.

Well they thought AlucoBond was already a sledgehammer for some tasks so they made DiBond :-)

What I use is e-panel 2mm thick but I glue an expanded PVC sheet 10mm thick on its back in a vacuumpress with a one component polyurethane, the edges of the last 60mm withdrawn? from the e-panel sides, so out of sight. This ensures a planer print too. The print is first laminated to the e-panel and then the e-panel cut together with the print to the actual size, about 5mm cut off all around. The harder DiBond alu is then a disadvantage. The 10mm expanded PVC is glued at the back, about 45 minutes curing in the vacuumpress. Two tiewraps for hanging are ingeniously integrated in the expanded PVC sheet and they can be replaced for the next exhibition. Tiewrap quality has been tested in an outdoor endurance test for more than a year. 12kg per tiewrap is possible but that is 3x the load they get. Done panels up to 4x3 feet and with the vacuumpress limitations this could be done up to 5x3.6 feet, which I find big enough and suits my printer's max width as well. No customer complaints so far. So half an answer to your questions.

Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
January 2016 update, 700+ inkjet media white spectral plots

[Brad P]

Bedankt, Meneer Dinkla!

Using PVC sheets instead of aluminum L or U bars as reinforcement is a fantastic idea and now has my brain spinning on solutions.  A derivative of what you are doing might well be a 100% solution for me with my local e-panel supply.  Thank you very much for sharing this idea.   

Being a photographer trying to do my own production 100% from capture to sale, I have no vacuum press nor space for one.  So I cannot accomplish exactly what you are doing.  Wish I could. Currently, I use a 44" Drytac cold laminator with Neschen Gudy 831 (rebranded Seal Print Mount 831 in the US, hopefully without modification) to mount Canson Platine and Rag Photographique prints to Dibond.   Trying to keep my workflow streamlined yet highest quality in terms of product and equipment, I suppose could now do either of the following:

1. Try using the very tacky 831 film to mount PVC (or some other material, maybe even plexi) to the e-panel after mounting a photograph to the e-panel.  Offhand, I suspect I won't be able to generate enough pressure to form a good enough bond between the two panels without damaging the print or e-panel.  Or

2.  Instead, use a type of epoxy or other high quality glue (researching good adherent qualities to both the e-panel and reinforcing sheet material) to accomplish a similar result.  In any event, this would likely be a stronger bond and solution than epoxy and aluminum L or U bars mounted to Dibond.   

Have you tried or do you have any thoughts on that?

With my kindest regards,

Brad

[azmike]

Brad,

Let me share my experience.  I use very much the same technique as Mark Segal so helpfully explained in the referenced article. Rather than mounting the aluminum angles with epoxy I use 3M VHB foam tape (#4950).  I exhibit in a small co-op gallery so the volume is low and that I can do all of the mounting myself is an advantage. I cut the panel to finished print size with a cordless circular saw (with a fine tooth blade), and lightly sand the edges. I found a Dibond look-alike (Max-Metal) in 3mm thickness at a local sign shop (couldn't find Dibond locally).  Suspect the aluminum layers are much less than .3mm. That said, it has worked well for the largest prints of 2' x 4' that I have done.  I need to take care when buying the 4'x8' sheet at the sign shop to avoid sheets that are damaged or have an obvious curve to them. If I were going to do a print of 3x4 I would increase the aluminum angle (from 1/2x1/2) to either 3/4" or 1" to increase the bond area for the 3M tape as well as the stiffness of the angle. If you use the tape method be sure to clean the angle and the panel with alcohol first, and then give it a bit of pressure to make sure it's bonded.  I do use Print Shield on the face of the print (Moab Entrada matte)...mostly so the customer can dust the print.

Hope this helps.

Mike Coffey
Prescott, Arizona

[Brad P]

 Thanks Mark –  I will look into that 3M tape.

[Ernst Dinkla]

Bedankt, Meneer Dinkla!

Have you tried or do you have any thoughts on that?

With my kindest regards,

Brad

Excellent that intro, skip it for other messages though :-)

Both the expanded PVC and the e-panel surface are roughly sanded by hand and then cleaned with 85% ethanol (the blue stuff ). One component, expanding polyurethane glue(wood construction glue)  applied on the expanded PVC side. There will be some humidity left in that PVC by the cleaning which is good for the polyurethane curing. Print face down on the glass plate in the vacuumpress and the PVC sheet put in the center, some temporary tabs at the side to keep it in the center. Thick paper layer on top. The vacuum press ensures that the sandwich will be plane and the polyurethane glue will expand and equalize well that way too. This gives a rigid bond which I prefer above the  more flexible adhesion of a mounting tape and I guess epoxy glue, the last is more temperature sensitive than the urethane glue. In theory the rigid bond between e-panel and expanded PVC should create some curvature of the panel in changing temperature conditions. What I measured of that is little and happens symmetrically, a warped panel is way worse.

I went for this solution after some disappointing third party mountings; print surface defects on matte papers and the fall from the wall of a mounted print. I thought about extra corner stiffening for the alu U profiles at the back so warp would be less and one profile getting loose being less likely. Then I checked alu profile pricing etc and came to the conclusion that a 10mm  sheet of expanded PVC was less costly and the work about equal if I had to add the corner enhancements. Next I had to get the hanging solved. Tiewraps have that inherent adjusting, price is good.

Shows the prototype, also used for testing.


Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
January 2016 update, 700+ inkjet media white spectral plots

[Brad P]

OK now. 

After a weekend researching products and procedures, I think I have formed a view, but I would still be interested in anyone's views (and especially yours, Meener Dinkla)

I am going to work with the official Dibond product (the brushed silver version) and aluminum U brackets.  I was almost sold on the expanded PVC and e-panel solution, and I did locate local vendors of these products on my island.  I became convinced that with the right adhesive between the PVC and e-panels to manage their different thermal coefficients of expansion (some specialized polyurethane adhesive as mentioned by Ernst and additionally his use of the vacuum press), I think that is an elegant solution for anyone and should be perfectly fine.  Unless -- and here's my pivoting point -- one must ship most of one's product several thousand miles through multiple vehicles and modes of transport for delivery to customers.  I am pretty certain in my case that the weight of the PVC panel would end up causing unwanted damage as the package is tossed around in transit -- especially from my location.  If my market were more local, I would have pursued that option.

By acclamation in my research, Dibond appears stronger and will by itself remain flatter due to its thicker and stiffer aluminum exterior.  It is actually used to build furniture and in construction.  E-panels may suffice, but Dibond should do better when it must exist without the added support that would be provided by a PVC board backing.  Using aluminum brackets saves a lot of weight and makes shipping through the carriers less problematic.  Also, as a secondary consideration, I don't need to worry so much about separation of the Dibond and aluminum brackets due to different thermal expansion rates since they are nearly the same.

I was very tempted and was truly in the process of placing material orders to follow your method, Ernst, until i thought about additional shipping damage and costs.  I can't exaggerate about how many damaged articles I receive in inward bound shipping where I live.  That really is the deciding factor for me.  Does that make sense?

By the way, in case you've never been here, here's my favorite subject, Haleakala.  Haleakala ("House of the Sun" in the Hawaiian language) is a mountain over 3000 meters high.  It occasionally snows.

[Jeremy Roussak]

By the way, in case you've never been here, here's my favorite subject, Haleakala.  Haleakala ("House of the Sun" in the Hawaiian language) is a mountain over 3000 meters high.  It occasionally snows.

I've nothing to add to the true theme of the topic, but on mention of your favourite subject (which looks amazing), this article from the New Yorker sprang to mind. It will be particularly appreciated by those who own iPhones.

Jeremy

[Ernst Dinkla]

Unless -- and here's my pivoting point -- one must ship most of one's product several thousand miles through multiple vehicles and modes of transport for delivery to customers.  I am pretty certain in my case that the weight of the PVC panel would end up causing unwanted damage as the package is tossed around in transit -- especially from my location.  If my market were more local, I would have pursued that option.

My market is more local and when shipped at most it is mainland Europe so trailer work. Going through my notes at the time I made the first mountings my way; 1sqm panel; mounted on 2mm e-panel + 10mm PVC = 7.5kg  and for 3mm e-panel + U brackets it is 6.17kg. For 1.5sqm panel 11kg versus 8.3kg. If it has to go by plane that makes a difference, for land freight volume counts more and there is hardly a difference then. On "tossed around", lower weight may not help there either but that remains open for discussion. The few I shipped for EU destination were packed with bubblefoil and 3 layers of 3mm hardboard, two on them at the outside, one in between the two panels and <shaped hard carton around the inner hardboard edges. Heavy package without doubt.

There's no reason to advocate my mounting method more, I just have it optimized to my ideals; easier registering of the print on the e-panel as both together are cut to the exact size after the lamination, side view shows only 2mm thickness (paper not counted), plane despite using 2mm e-panel, no fear a bracket gets off. Material + labor costs are not very different. The cons are weight and where a U bracket allows some horizontal shifting on the wall the tiewraps allow adjusting the angle with less effort.

Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
January 2016 update, 700+ inkjet media white spectral plots

[jtmiller]

Ernst

What do you use to cut the bonded panel to avoid harming the image?

Thanks

jim miller

[Ernst Dinkla]

Ernst

What do you use to cut the bonded panel to avoid harming the image?

Thanks

jim miller

The print gets a protection spray treatment first and then time to dry, I still have a drying cabinet for silkscreen frames that works fine for that task. Print is slightly smaller than the e-panel. At the lamination stage I also add tissue paper and that paper sticks at the edges then. A board cutter cuts nicely through the tissue paper + print paper + e-panel if there is not too much to cut off in width, about 5-8mm. The tissue paper is transparent enough to show the cut marks made with Qimage Ultimate. Tissue paper is often still clinging at the edges after the cut and stays there till the end of the job. Additonal tissue paper is used in the vacuumpress when the image side is resting on the glass and the PVC sheet is glued on top. It works with Museum Etching, German Etching, Photorag, Photorag Baryta, RC papers and I guess with a lot more media.

Edit: a board cutter similar to this one, not everyone in the US seems to know them, http://grafomed.at/schneideschnelle.htm
I have a Krause that goes up to 155cm, >5'.  These days worth more than what I paid for it in the 1980's :-)

Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
January 2016 update, 700+ inkjet media white spectral plots

[jtmiller]

Ernst

Thanks for the link. They just look like big paper cutters.

jim

[Brad P]

Since we're dealing also with stabilization of the panel, I've added that to the subject of this thread.

Ernst, thank you for detailing your weights.  I had been contemplating a heavier (but still expanded) version that I had found locally.  I imagine a lighter material than I was handling would work better, shipping wise too.

Regardless, I had moved on to consider using solid rectangular aluminum bars instead of U extruded aluminum to stabilize the back of a Dibond board more along the lines you have.  Specifically I've been looking at 1/2" x 1 1/4" (12mm-32mm) or even wider aluminum bar frame.  It is not so much more expensive to use bar than extruded material considering the entire costs of production.  And it could really be an aesthetically pleasing, distinctive and more rigid result without adding much weight and cost, especially considering the appearance of the brushed silver dibond.  Who knows, it might be tempting to hang the picture up backward!   From my research and a couple telephone calls, Aluminum 6061-T6 seems to combine the right combination between structural rigidity and strength, workability, corrosion resistance and price.  See this website for more information (not an endorsement, just an example) http://store.buymetal.com/aluminum/rectangular-bar/6061-t6511.html. 

I am only a 24 hour amateur at arriving with this particular aluminum grade spec as the best for this type of application, so if anyone has any thoughts reading this I am all ears.

Brad

[jtmiller]

Width in pursuit of rigidity doesn't have a good payback. Rigidity goes like thickness cubed. Extruded box section is about as good as it gets and doesn't require a lot of  material wall thickness. Think of it as I beam with the central member split into the two walls.

OTOH, if you find the depth that results excessive then you have tradeoffs.

Good discussion!

jim

[stcstc31]

i use

https://lionpic.co.uk/r/25940/Lion-SUB25-Aluminium-Sub-Frame-Profile


and fix with VHB tape


regularly for pieces over 1.5m . i then put a 25mm thick MDF split batten inside for hanging

[Ernst Dinkla]

i use

https://lionpic.co.uk/r/25940/Lion-SUB25-Aluminium-Sub-Frame-Profile


and fix with VHB tape


regularly for pieces over 1.5m . i then put a 25mm thick MDF split batten inside for hanging

That looks way better in all aspects than what I have seen from other distributors.
Weight is considered an advantage by the manufacturer :-)

I do not grasp the pricing, say a meter square panel and a 90x90cm frame, what will be the price for the last?


Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
January 2016 update, 700+ inkjet media white spectral plots

[Richard.Wills]

We use those, as well as the slimmer 8mm version https://lionpic.co.uk/p/35572/SUB08-Aluminium-Sub-Frame-Length-per-metre, which we carry set sizes of from the chop service. Held together with corner hardware (pairs of L-plates).

The kits Stephen linked to are for pre-cut pairs of lengths - for a 1000x800mm piece, you might choose a pair of 800mm and a pair of 600mm lengths.

For larger panels, and for when the workshop is below 15C, UHB 9120G from Indasol, complete with the appropriate primer makes a very permanant bond.

[Brad P]

i use

https://lionpic.co.uk/r/25940/Lion-SUB25-Aluminium-Sub-Frame-Profile

That looks like a fantastic set of products and could save tons of time.  Is the tape holding up well?  I have read many times that tape forms a weaker bond than epoxy or other liquid adhesives, but there are different views on that even in this post.  Sure would make mounting easier though.