BWAHAHAHA!!

Elken: I agree. This is a problem. Turns out Wikipedia let me down. It takes an embarrassing little amount of googling to discover that with heat (90 degrees celcius) and about an hour to and hour and a half of stirring in water, you can break PVA down.

No, before anyone panics, this does take a good amount of time at room temperature. But this still bothers me. Seems while people have gotten the timing right so far, this may not be the way.

I have had an exposed piece of PVA in water at room temperature for 3 days now. It exhibits all of the symptoms that Elken describes. Didn't last night, does now. If going with water right now you have to limit the time for sure. This also may explain that maybe there is not a glue after all, and the surface is dissolving.

I am very bothered by this . No seriously I am very bothered by this .

Cautious is always good. This just took too long to show itself. Thanks Sonic.

Mark.

The good news is that we can probably adapt the same principle to any number of PVA safe chemicals.

The bad news is that not every anti-glare seems to be permeable as in recent posts. It is unlikely that these will take to stripper either.

Here's the thing though. Other, supposedly PVA safe chemicals exhibited the same result (Mineral Spirits).

I am thinking that the solvent that Elken used on the good piece is the way to go. But we need to google the heck out of this one .

Mark.

The other thing to bear in mind (as mentioned earlier) is that the graininess seems to occur only when in combination with rear TAC permeation, and bending of the polarizer.

If you apply straight to the top with no peel, basic testing indicates that very little if any damage will be done, but this is still very unnerving.

Mark.

Greg,

Before moving the actual panel location, I would experiment with moving your field fresnel slightly farther from your panel. The field fresnel being too close to the panel will cause the fresnel lines to show in the projection even without the a/g removed, and I'm guessing it applies doubly after the a/g is removed.

Congrats, good luck with it, and PLEASE don't forget the photos, as Brianabs puts it, "we all need out fixx here."

I just confirmed that, as predicted, the grain is definitely from flexing on polarizer removal from the substrate (combined with solvent use). That is good news.

edit but bad news if you have salvaged your original polarizer. This indicates that damage was definitely done to the polarizer if it was flexed. Solvents somehow bring out the damage that was done.

Mark.

Sorry to be the bearer of that news .

A couple of thoughts. I am remembering my old materials science courses I took in college; never thought I'd ever use them ...

When you google PVA, be careful because the acronym sometimes refers to Polyvinyl ACETATE which is the stuff white glue is made of. As far as I can tell, Polyvinyl ALCOHOL (sometimes refered to as PVOH), is made through a hydrolytic reaction of Polyvinyl Acetate. PVOH has a crystal structure, is optically isotropic (clear, uniform), and becomes chemically resistant through cross-polmerization under exposure to UV radiation. Both are water soluble.

This is not the kiss of death for us, however. Because, as you state, it might be useful for us to dissolve the top-most layer of the polar bear to remove the a/g TAC. Now in regards to the "shredding" and "grain-formation": there are definately some stress induced effects going on here. The upshot of which is that we may be able to get away with a CALCULATED amount of degredation (dissolution) of the "top skin" of the polar bear provided it hasn't been stressed.

Regarding the mineral spirits degrading the PVA I am a little baffled. I dont think the chemical resistance chart posted earlier refers directly to mineral spirits being PVA safe? I think "mineral spirits" is a generic name for various petroleum distillate combinations, and not any specific formulation. I may be completely wrong about this, and it needs to be verified. It would be interesting to see if the PVA degredation occurs upon immersion in Benzine, Xylene, or some other "pure" solvent.

The "rag method" still has great potential and I don't think we should abandon it quite yet. But as always, it needs more testing... I am thinking, as did elken, that perhaps this method with something other than water may be successful.

Yes. And this has been proven (short term results) to be most successful. Even if the polarizer was stressed, the rag technique will not show grain in a full day. One of my tests actually had the rag competely evaporated and there was no grain.

edit and of course if the polarizer was never removed than it was never stressed.

It just is hard to look down at this seemingly flawless, shiny, dark, grainless PVA surface and believe that any serious damage has been done. gregeast will probably agree on that one. Still we have taken a step away from the goal of this technique. I want something that is inherently safe, to minimize the chances of something going wrong.

Mineral Spirits (White Spirits, Stoddard Solvent) do come in several different types and grades. Not sure what type or grade mine is.

Still, the only way to do this at all may be partial softening of the top layer of PVA or dissolving the TAC away, if there really is no adhesive there.

I look forward to your long term soak in stripper SIMUL8TOR. But it would be best if you keep it only on the one surface. We don't want to have both sides dissolve away, or you won't be able to asses what was done to the PVA.

edit of course, we can predict pretty surely that the PVA will have broken down as stripper is not PVA safe. The reason why it works is because it too has advantage of controlled duration.

Mark.

My opinion is that if you are almost done a rag technique at this very moment, I would not stop it. The worry applies to any PVA that has come into any contact with water. So if you are far along I would just go for glory. If you have not started it would be wise to wait a bit, see if anything else comes up. But it is my guess (only a guess based on the results I have seen so far) that this is not that serious.

Mark.

To those interested, I've started another thread for the purpose of documenting and keeping a quick reference of the methods used and any ill effects to the polarized film (PVA) which may be found during time and use of the individual's projector. Please advise should you feel that the introduction should offer addtional information.

http://www.lumenlab.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=8283&hl=

sim

Pretty much all alcohols are said to damage the PVA to certain degree. Same with mineral spirits (by experimentation). Basically, we still don't have a solvent that is perfectly safe.

I feel the reason that panel is not taking to water will be due to the type of plastic used for the anti-glare sheet. If it is not TAC it is not likely going to be porous, so there is no known technique to remove it. That is, even stripper may not work.

It is also possible you did not give it long enough. There is a point at which it will not release and a point very soon after that it will. This is believed to be because the water basically needs to seep through the TAC, and that takes time. Once the first water molecules make it the full distance, a flood ensues.

I find it strange that you were able to flake the anti-glare off. There is no way you could do that with the TAC panel (Compaq) that I have been testing. The glass would probably break first.

It is possible that you have a TAC layer coated with an anti-glare spray that is sealing the panel. You may be able to sand that down and then apply stripper/water. You may be best to hold out for a polishing or encapsulating technique with that panel.

Mark.

I really am thanking you for your research . I just read that and it sounded like I was blaming you or something.

Mark.

Just to be completely sure, are you definitely only flaking off the anti-glare, and not sections of the whole or part of the polarizer?

The flakes are definitely clear, not grey at all?

Again, sorry to ask a funny question, but I just need to make sure. The way this thread has been moving, something like that could quite easily be lost.

Mark.

Yes the flakes are clear not tinted. And I can still peel up the polar bear underneath the flaked up antiglare.

I'll try another 12 hour soak with half the panel sanded.

My lcd is currently soaking. Finished wetting the paper towel at 3:30 pm, gonna soak for twelve hours. (I'm gonna be up late tonight!) will let you all know how it goes. A lot of people here have the 512N so hopefully this will pave the way for a lot of peoples if it works.

Excellent Mikau, please post your info here for our quick reference and for others to use when deciding how to and what to expect should they decide to attack their antiglare issue. Please read intro for the information that is requested.
http://www.lumenlab.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=8283&hl=

sim

This will be very useful info. Keep us updated and best of luck ...

Hopefully you are in complete acceptance of the latest posts. And the unknowns that come with it. That said, it's awesome to hear you are still confident in the technique. I am confident things will either not work at all (with zero damage) or you will have complete success.

I should remind that you should carefully try to bring it up periodically. This has gained more importance now, as it seems if you can keep the overall PVA water exposure down you will minimize, if not bypass the chance of deterioration. But if you need to apply anything that seems forceful, you probably need to soak longer. And whatever you do, make sure you do not use hot water.

I am thinking the refined version of this technique will use cold water with the panel in a refrigerator.

Of course, we need to investigate safe low temperatures for panels before that can be done. And it is possible it won't release under cooler temperatures. PVA dissolving is apparently very temperature dependent.

Another reminder (I just tell everyone this) make sure that water only gets on the surface of the antiglare. Not over the edges, and certainly not onto the glass substrate. The other reminder is that the water will only loosen the anti-glare up to within a couple millimeters of the soak area, so you need to get it within a couple millimeters of the polarizer edge (without spillage).

Thanks for giving it a go .

Mark.

I stripped the ag on my 8" hami tonight just got done runing the projector 2 1/2 hours
what can I say the whites are brighter contrast is much better and the colors?...Im lovin it.I did the paint stripper method.I will try to take some screen shots tomorrow.


I totaly covered the panel with stripper one shot I also cut my squeegee the exact width of the panel waited 30 minutes and did one pass with the sqeegee.
I got 95 percent of the ag off this way. The rest was touch up on the corners.

Great pjgibbs, can you post general information at this link, it would help others so they don't have to searching thru all this. Thanks.

http://www.lumenlab.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=8283&hl=
sim

Nice work.

Mikau: hope you didn't fall asleep . That thing may come off now. Give it a test (carefully). If it doesn't go good in the masked area, give it longer. Your lack of posts is making me anxious. It's just not like you .

Mark.

Pjgibbs
That looks great, another ag cat skinned.

Can't wait to see the 512N "stripped." You guys are making me jealous.

Mikau fell asleep. . People are taking the 12 hour extremely rough guideline a bit too seriously. FWIW, I'm also the guy who stamps the expiry dates on yogurt .

edit: I think I should run that duration experiment again. We need a much more accurate idea to keep the PVA minimally exposed.

Mark.

Unbeleivable, I've been using my pj intensely now playing around with contrast, brightness, gamma, vibrance, sharpening both in my adapter's settings as well as power strip and fddshow. I'm getting richer fuller colors each time. And I'm not projecting on a LFusion screen just a cheap brand from ebay, I can only imagine if I did. Movie character faces are just jumping out now. I'm in disbelief that this thing is actually projecting such a quality solid image. Even while having a 60 watt lamp on it's as if it doesn't even bother me now.

WOW, what a mind full on this thread!

quick question, how can you see the AG from the glass when you are looking at the front of the panel?
is it easily identifiable, or not?

I don't know if this was covered earlier, but I dont remember, and now it'll take a week of constant reading to go back................

Thanks
Ricoks

If your panel was in it's casing, the frontmost surface that the image shows up on is an anti-glare layer. It is dull, and if you look closely it has tiny bumps.

If you look at the panel, you have glass, and then a stepped up area glued on that looks like a sheet of plastic. This is actually a laminate of many films, each serving a different purpose. The topmost film is the anti-glare. It is about the thickness of a sheet of paper.

Mark.

Something funny just occurred to me. I have been calling you SIMUL8TOR. . It's hilarious for me because I remember reading your post a long time ago asking that when this is done, that people at least quote your name right. And I though Who is writing his name wrong?.

This can only mean one thing. You're not the real SIMUL8TOR are you? .

And am I the only one worried about what Mikau is doing? I can't believe it is really going to take 12 hours.

Sorry um... SIM,
Mark.

hehe...no problem Mark, just really appreciate you and Elken jumping into this in the beginning of all this.

In the meantime....KAU, KAU, KAU....here little mikau.....KAU, KAU, KAU.

sim

Oh gawd do i have to sing and then shoot an dinosaur,,,

aka evolution,,,,, ref kau kua kua kook ka

I did the water method for 12 hours but after removing the paper towel and rag from my monitor I tried to see if there was an area of the anti-glare that was loosen enough so I could start , using my finger nail I couldn't find any .
Looking at the edge of the monitor I can see the glass and next to that the polarizer and that it ,I start to ask myself since my panel is aleast 5 years old that there my not be any anti-glare on it , how can you tell that the anti-glare is there .

i would say it is easy to notice when you shine a light to the lcd (a lamp). If there is a perfectly defined reflection of the lamp, then there is no (or a very ineficent one) but if you see a difused relfection (virtually no reflection) then there is an antiglare doing the work it was designed to do.

Another 12 hours on the HP L1530 and still not a whole lot better. The antiglare is still flaking off. In bigger sections now, but still flaking.

This must mean that the water is affecting it, but just not quite enough. Oh well the panel was ruined anyway.

Has anyone stripped a Sharp 15.4" WuXGA yet? I'm thinking about taking the plunge.

Look at the other side of the LCD. See how clear the reflection is when looking at a light. Now look at the other side. Is it really cloudy looking and not very clear ? That is the antiglare. Also you might need to use a Razor Blade and use the flat edge and slide it under the antiglare to get it started.

Also my 5.5" screen had antiglare but it was very clear and not cloudy and it was on BOTH sides , but I think that was an exception. In fact it may just have been a scratch resisteant layer and not antiglare, because it was a LCD for the car not the home.

Please take note,,

the antiglare side will always be the side, viewed in its original configuration,,

but some panels actually have a non shiny side on the reverse side too,, have found at least two like that, but most modern units will be shiny on the backlight side, and A/G on viewing side..

and also, I am not sure about the prolonged water treatment,,

at this point in time, it seems that as distasteful as it seems, the paint stripper method is short exposure, ergo minimal effect on sub layers,,, only concern beyond that being, neutralization, of stripper, from causing ongoing effects..

The original method being the one that I first used,, (acetone) more than three weeks out has caused no ill effects, whatso ever..

mind you the water method, will work for certain brands, as exampled, back amonst the posts here very well..

so if you venture into this,, do a test first, if you can,,,

we are very nearly to have the full replacement sorted out, so if reusing original 'polar bear' fails at least there is a backup,,

clive....

who, if anyone, has purchased (or is currently using) polarizers from polarization.com for the complete polarbear replacement method ?? thanks.

concerning a/g removal... ie. water method, stripper method... I realize now that I should have been more patient with the stripper method.. I believe stripping outside (that day the air temp was about 50°F) was the cause of a "slower" response using stripper (optimum results are from 70-90°F)... however, after having removed the polarbear/ a/g combo from the panel, I successfully used both stripper (to remove any remaining a/g), and a product called "oops" to remove the remaining adhesive on the back of the polarbear with no ill side effects on a 3x3" piece of polarbear... by FAR, the worse thing to use on the samples was water... either from the stress induced when removing from the LCD glass, or from water getting in from the sides of the samples, the "grain" would show or "threads" would pull away from the polarbear itself. So, my suggestion would be to only use water on a panel mounted polarbear (most people are going this route anyway, but I thought I should mention), but if you have completely stripped the polarbear, I would suggest using stripper and oops for polarbear "cleanup"... one thing going for this is application time, which is very short for oops (only 1-2 minutes), and stripper (30-45 minutes), opposed to *hours* using water.

after attempting to turn my panel around in order to use a piece of "salvaged" polarbear over the triplet, I found that this would require a major modification to my box in order to get the electronics away from the lamp, as well as extra room in the box length required to put the optics in an unsplit design, which would be required to get any sort of "quality" projected image. (ie. split optics and polarbear at triplet resulted in strange "glowy" effects according to elken) ... that said, I ordered some polarizer from polarization.com, but in the meantime i've stripped a Samsung 730B and retrofitted this into my box. (wasn't too hard... at least easier than turning the 520D around)... but now I have to "deal" with the a/g on the new panel... this time i'm going to be more patient... by that I mean leave the new panel alone until I see results from my (now) 15" test panel..

Sorry to keep you all hanging. The full replacement route is currently being undertaken by myself and a few others. I can confirm that I have received my replacements but have yet to do anything with them. Big lack of spare time at the moment.

Hopefully I can cobble together something during the week.

Mark: Have a 2"x3" piece sitting with stripper on PVA side for past 12 hours. Little checking reveals no obvious deterioration to the human eye. Will continue for another 12 hours.

Question: I don't have the can of stripper in front of me right now, but can anybody tell me if this solvent looses it's corrosive potential after being exposed for a certain number of hours?

sim

When using stripper for paint I found that if I tried to recycle it on another painted section, it didn’t work very well. I don’t know if it was due to the chemical reaction being spent or if the volatile ingredient evaporated. Just guessing I’d say the latter and what is left would be the gel. Take a sample of it and a control from the can and put it onto a painted surface to see how in compares. Another observation when I’ve used stripper is it doesn’t need to be in contact with the paint for it to work. I have applied it using a paintbrush and the paint on the handle came off even though no stripper was on it. This indicates that the solvent has evaporated quickly enough in sufficient quantities for it to react with the handle.

DJ

still a very happy stripper here.

i, too, figured that the long term effects of stripper would be minimal - bcause after as little as 30minutes it appears to become a neutral, oderless sludge.

35-45 minutes is a very short exposure tho gadget. i performed my process at night - out in the cold of my garage. the panel was exposed to new coats of stripper for over 3 hours. no visible damage.

since then i've done another 15" without issue. took the same time to complete. didn't hesitate to use more stripper to finish the job off. any reluctant left overs i would just reapply stripper too until a perfect mirror finish was all that remained.

i must have wipped the analysers surface up 10 times in some areas. no scratches.

used m/spirits to remove left over/spent stripper only. not to remove antiglare or glue of any form.

removed the meth with paper towel and compressed air.

just my experience.

sorry, my post wasn't clear on this point. I fully agree with you, stripper (and oops in my case) are both short exposure, compared to *hours* that water remains in contact... this is confirmed in my experience as well.

Hey dantheman, think you could post a little of your stripping on this thread. It would help others for easy & quick reviewing, just read intro for info needed. Thanks.
http://www.lumenlab.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=8283&hl=

sim

yeah my panel is about 5 years old and had a non-shiny rear polarizer too... it is completely stripped(both sides complete removal of the polars) ..got some 5" square replacements that will do for testing from surplus shed(scuffed, a couple of bends etc)...and I didn't have one of the FFCs snapped in correctly and thought I had taosted my panel but got it working this am....tried the polars and couldn't figure out why it wasn't working till I remembered that the polars had to be crossed to each other.... something to remember for those who are ordering polars as replacements....

done done

surplus shed shipped those cheap test polars i ordered to my parents house (not where i had designated) , so they will be shipped from there to me on monday.

what a waste.

Mark, I did not fall asleep. I was up till 5:00 am last night. The computer was off. I had nothing to do but wait till the soaking was done so nothing to report untill then.

I have one word to describe how it went:

DISASTER!

After soaking it for 10 hours, I was going to wait for the remaining two but I thought, what the heck, 2 hours won't make that much differance. A took the paper towel, cleaned up the water and began peeling at the edges. Geez.. I don't know about the others but on the 512N the antiglare/polarizer layer is so thin, it feels like one layer.

Anyway I couldn't get between the layers with my finger nail so I got a knife blade and carefully tried to separate the layers. Suddenly the knife went under, I wasn't sure if it was under the antiglare alone or completely under the layer. I looked real closely and eventually concluded I was under the antiglare. Hooray! I then began gently prying up the edge by tilting the knife to lift it. Once I got a large enough piece for me to grab, I grabbed it and pulled gently. Stuck. I pulled a little harder and it peeled up a little but still wouldn't let go. I then remembered some had said it doesn't always come up easy and sometimes needs a frim pull. I grabed it and slowly, firmly peeled up. I heard a tearing sound like paper ripping. "that didn't sound to good" I thought. I pulled up a little more and the piece I was pulling on ripped off completely. I turned the piece over.

CARAAAAHAHAHAAAAAPPP!!!!!!

A thin clear layer of the antiglare showed at the edge of the piece I had torn off. But in the middle, stuck to the antiglare, was a small grayish clear substance. I knew what it was. A piece of the polarizer. Even after a 10 hour soak, the glue was stronger then the polarizer so the polarizer broke off first. Thats when I first knew I was screwed.

Heart broken, I put a new paper towel on the lcd and decided to let it finish the last two hours. At 3:30 am I returned down and began peeling. Things just got worse and worse. The polarizer kept ripping off when I tried to peel it. It was a mess, a real mess. In some spots only the antiglare came off, in most spots the antiglare and the polarizer. And in some spots I could have sworn the whole substrate came off.

I realized at that point, my lcd polarizer is done for. I have only one choice now, remove the substrate completely. I slowly began peeling off the whole substrate. I got about a quarter of the top two corners off when suddenly, as I was peeling, the glue between the polarizer and whatever is underneath it split apart. I effortllessly peeled off the remaining layer of antiglare stuck to polarizer. Well the antiglare is off, along with the polarizer, but in about 5 pieces.

What a nightmare. But I knew the lcd was broken by now anyway, I set it back in the projector and turned the lcd on without the bulb. I shined a light throw it and held the polarizer/antiglare sheet in front. I could not believe it. The lcd still works! Man the durability of my lcd never ceases to amaze me. "takes a licken and keeps on ticken". I never thought I'd say this but Lcds are tough. Easy to break if you want to I suppose but if you excersize common sense and treat it with care they really seem able to withstand a lot!

Anyways, in disgust I threw the pieces of the polarizer/antiglare in a bucket of water. Then went to bed at 5:00. I had nightmares of being ripped apart by an angry lcd. lol okay I made that up. But I did dream I found out they sold polarizers at the post office! COOL!

Well this morning I got my coffee and went down to see how the sheets in the bucket faired. Now keep in mind these things had been soaking under the paper towel for twelve hours, and were then submerged in a bucket of water for about 7-8 hours. I took a sheet out and tried to separate the polarizer from the antiglare. I don't believe it. It still won't budge. Its sticking just like it did before.

In spite of the nightmare, I feel I was able to come to the following conclusions:

1. I feel I can safely say The 512N is not compatible with the water soaking technique. The antiglare must be a differant material that is not porous, or it has a glue that does not dissolve with water.

2. I am a collosal idiot.

3. Drinking milk while peeling your antiglare is a bad idea. (I spilled it on the floor)

4. This method is clearly not compatible with all monitors.

5. I'm even less smart then I thought.

But last and foremost this:

6. This method may or may not work with your monitor. Therefore the following method should be observed. Soak your antiglare, soak it good. Once your done, try to gently lift the antiglare. If it does not come off easy, STOP! Either soak it longer, or quite! You could rip your polarizer off!

In my oppinion we need some sort of safety device. For instance, attaching a piece of tape to your antiglare and pulling at the tape. If the tape peels off before the antiglare, its not loose enough.

Now if you'll excuse me I have a cliff to jump off of.

The end.

Dam Mikau, I don't know why but I feel for you bud. If anybody I would had hope that you would have succeeded especially after all your posts on the Ushio issues and LL's design, etc... But at least all is not lost, now you have no other alternative but to get a new polarbear which is now the ultimate move. Stay in there Mik., the fat lady hasn't sung yet. Your expectations will soon be answered.

By the way, by any chance did you lightly sand the antiglare before the soak?
sim

That damned fat lady refused to sing and choose sit on me instead. (SQUASH!)

No I didnt' sand. Heard it was unecessary and potentially dangerous.

Yeah only one way to go know. Polarizer replacement. But I still have a little substrate on the lcd that I'm going to have trouble with. Will post about it in a bit.

i can confirm my english has improved a bit... i have laught at mikaus humor coments...

the milk was not a good idea at all

now more serious, what do you see under the polar? I would say a glass... then it is easy to remove all the rest with the paint strip method, don´t you think?

Thats a downer bud