Image degradation in a diffusion transfer process

(1)

Rochester Institute of Technology

RIT Scholar Works

Theses Thesis/Dissertation Collections

5-1-1981

Image degradation in a diffusion transfer process

Peter Petch

Follow this and additional works at:http://scholarworks.rit.edu/theses

This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Thesis/Dissertation Collections at RIT Scholar Works. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses by an authorized administrator of RIT Scholar Works. For more information, please [email protected].

Recommended Citation

(2)

ROCllESTER INSTITTJl'E OF TECHNOLOCY

COLLEGE OF GRAPHIC ARTS AND PHOTOGRAPHY

PERMISS

ION

FORM

Title of Thesis

PROCESS

IMAGE DEGRADATION IN A DIFFUSION TRANSFER

I Peter Petch hereby grant

permission to the Wallace Memorial Library of the Rochester

Institute of Technology to reproduce my thesis in whole or in

part. Any reproduction will not be for commercial use or profit.

(3)

IMAGE DEGRADATION IN A

DIFFUSION TRANSFER PROCESS

by

Peter Petch

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Science in the School of Photographic Arts and Sciences in the College of Graphic Arts and Photography of the Rochester Institute of Technology

May, 1981

Signature of the Author

Photographic Science and Instrumentation

Certified by

Thesis Advisor

(4)

11

IMAGE DEGRADATION IN A

DIFFUSION TRANSFER PROCESS

by

Peter Petch

Submitted to the

Photographic Science and Instrumentation Division

in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Bachelor of Science Degree

at the Rochester Institute of _Technology

ABSTRACT

The Diffusion Transfer Process is now _widely used in

the Graphic Arts _industry, and it is important to determine

to what length different factors affect the optimum use of it.

The effects of _exposure, age of the processing solution, and

line _frequently on the image _quality of the Kodak PMT system

were studied. Exposure was varied _by _exposing the material

to a standard illuminance for different amounts of _time; the

processing solution was aged _by _bubbling air through it for

varied amounts of time; line _frequency was varied _by _using a

Kodak sinusoidal target and _examining the images of two

different frequencies.

Data was obtained from microdensitometer traces of the

images produced and _{statistically} analyzed to determine the

significance of the factors involved.

It was found that line _frequency was the most signficant

(5)

Ill

processing solution. The interaction of line _frequency

and age of the _processing solution was also found to be

(6)

IV

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I wish to thank _my _advisors, Professor John Carson

of the School of Photographic Arts and Sciences, and Mr.

Brent Archer of the Graphic Arts Research Center for their

invaluable help. I also wish to thank the Graphic Arts

Research Center for the use of their facilities and _equip

(7)

V

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page No,

List of Tables vi

List of Figures vii

Introduction 1

Discussion of Work 3

Background 3

Advantages 4

Materials for Camera _Ready _Copy 5

Applications of the Diffusion Transfer Process .... 7

Copy Dot vs. Standard Procedure 8

Materials 11

Experimental 12

Criterion for Image Degradation 14

Results 16

Summary and Conclusions 24

Bibliography 2 6

Appendices 29

Appendix A Data 31

(8)

VI

LIST OF TABLES

Tables Page No.

1. Kodak Variable-Transmittance

Sinusoidal Test Object 13

2. Two _Way Table for Factors A and B 43

3. Two _Way Table for Factors A and C 43

4. Two _Way Table for Factors B and C 44

(9)

Vll

LIST OF FIGURES

Figures Page No.

1. Kodak PMT System 6

2. Standard Reproduction Procedure 9

3. CopydotReproduction Procedure 10

4. Sample Microdensitometer Trace 15

5. Slope vs. Exposure 0 hours Aging 18

6. Slope vs. Exposure 2 hours _Aging 19

9. Slope vs. Exposure 8 hours _Aging 2 2

(10)

INTRODUCTION

The photomechanical transfer process is a method to

photograph _copy and transfer the image _directly to another

carrier. It differs from what was the standard _way of

proceeding in the Graphic Arts _exposing _copy to make

a _negative, _developing a negative, then _exposing the

negative to paper, film, or _printing plate. The photo

mechanical transfer process allows the operator to start

with a positive _image, make one exposure and finish with

a positive image.

This process, which is a diffusion transfer _process,

has become _widely used in the graphic arts _industry in a

variety of forms and for a number of different applications.

It is _important, _therefore, to study the importance and

effects of the major factors that _may affect the process.

The determination of the effects of the major factors could

help to determine limits and guidelines for the effective

use of this diffusion transfer process.

The purpose of this research project is to determine

the importance of factors such as exposure and activator

age in the case of one particular application of the

photomechanical transfer process, the copy dot process.

There will not be an attempt to determine and give reasons

for what _happened, but to observe and analyze the results

(11)

degradation of the image in the process. It is hoped that

this project will be of assistance _determining what directions

(12)

DISCUSSION OF WORK

The diffusion transfer _process, is a process _whereby

a positive image is composed of _extremely minute particles

of _silver, is produced _by the release of silver halide from

a conventional negative emulsion in unexposed areas; a

suitable solvent (i.e. thiosulphate) transfers this silver

halide to a receptor _sheet, where it becomes reduced. The

metallic silver plates out on the receptor layer _surface,

suitably nucleated, with _very high _covering power to give

a high _density image.

BACKGROUND

The first attempts to make positive go as far back as

Lefebre's work in 1857. Even the _relatively recent work of

2 2

Stenger and Herz or Stevens and Norrish , who pressed developer

soaked plates onto gelatin _surfaces, were no more than scientific

curiosities observed _by _{experimenting} photographers. It was

Andre Rott, a photo engineer _working at Gevaert Photo-Producten

NV in Antwerp, in 1938, who observed that a positive image was

formed on a baryta coated base _by the transfer of silver from

3

a negative. Further work led to the _filing of a British patent

which described the essential elements of diffusion transfer

reversal. The process involved a method _whereby a negative and

positive image layer were immersed in developer and then brought

into contact, then, development of silver salts transferred

(13)

Also in 19_38, Edith Weyde, who worked in the Agfa

Laboratories of the J.G. Farben Industrie in Leverilusen

noted that spots on photographic _images, caused _by fixer

contaminated developer were transferred into the baryta

layer, and that if the emulsion layer was pealed _off, a

sharp rendition of the positive image could ge observed.

This seemed to cause the _dissolving of some silver halide

by the fixer contaminated _developer, which then diffused into

the baryta _layer, where _they were reduced to metallic silver.

The growth of the diffusion transfer reversal process

became rapid and sparked the paper and information explosion

which has resulted today. Table _top _developing machines,

2

first designed _by Dr. Werner Eisbein in _1949, started the

trend for large volumes of _duplication, and initiated a

period of development which led to the _marketing of a wide

range of document _copying equipment and consumables based

on diffusion transfer reversal. _However, _{by 1963,} sales of

diffusion transfer reversal _copy materials declined due to

the development of automated _copy systems based on electro

photography.

ADVANTAGES

Among the most important advantages of this process

(14)

First there is silver economy. The usage of silver in the

duffusion transfer process is not _high, _only about 10% of the

coating weight for radiographic materials. But the optical

density and yield is a factor four times higher per gram used.

The actual usage for office _copy application is even down

further (0.5 _8/m2) .

Second, there is the cleanliness of the process. _Assuming

10% of the film area is imaged in a graphic processor; the

silver ends _up in the _fixing bath. On the other _hand, the

diffusion transfer _processing leaves it in the original negative,

transferring 10% onto the positive. Thus the silver stays on

the sheets for _easy collection, while _practically nothing goes

5 into the effluent.

Finally, it is time saving. It eliminates _developing the

negative and it eliminates _exposing and _developing the final

carrier. It makes the job of _making mechanicals easier and

faster.

MATERIALS FOR CAMERA READY COPY

The process itself is very simple. The basic materials

used in preparing camera _ready _copy consist of a light-sensitive

negative paper, a _chemically sensitive paper or transparent _film,

a ready-mixed processing fluid, and a small uncomplicated

(15)

o

p-3 H

k! i

(16)

The light sensitive negative paper is exposed to the

copy, using either a process camera or contact _printing frame.

It is then placed emulsion to emulsion on the _chemically

sensitive receiver material and run through the processor

containing the processing fluid. The processor first separates

the two _materials, soaks the light sensitive paper in the

processing fluid, and then presses them together between the

two rollers. When the two components exit from the processor

they remain united (under safelight conditions) while the

chemical reaction takes place. _They are then separated,

the light sensitive material is _discarded, and the positive,

after a brief _wash, and a few minutes to _dry, is _ready for

use.

APPLICATIONS OF THE DIFFUSION TRANSFER PROCESS

The diffusion transfer is useful for _preparing the

following:

Paste-ups

Camera Proofs

Reflex Proofs

Direct Prints from High Contrast Film Images

Resized _Typography

Screened Paper Prints

Headlines

In Position Proofs

Intermediates for Diazo Proofs

Transparencies for Overhead Projection

Special Effects

Document Copies

(17)

The specific application of the diffusion transfer process

to which this project is related is called _copy dot.

COPY DOT VS. STANDARD PROCEDURE

The _copy dot process is a reproduction process which

is used in the production of _newspapers, newsletters or

any other type of duplication where time _saving in the

manufacturing process is essential. The aim of the _copy dot

process is to shorten the reproduction process without exper

iencing a major loss in _quality of reproduction.

In the standard procedure used in reproduction processes,

a halftone negative is obtained from a positive original

7

(either reflection _copy or _{transparency)} . Then, the space on

the line _copy where the image is to go is blocked out with

black or red, so when the line negative is _obtained, the

space is transparent Then the stripping process takes place,

the halftone negative is joined to the line negative, either

by taping the edges, or _using an appropriate adhesive, over

the provided clear space. A plate is then made from this

composite _negative, that is then used to do the printing

of the material onto the paper.

In the copy dot process, a halftone positive is first

obtained. This positive is placed together with the line _copy

7

(18)

(19)

(20)

11

this process and the standard process is that here we have

the halftone _already incorporated with the line negative.

It is from this last fact that the process derives the name

copy dot, since the halftone dots are copied onto the line

negative. After this _step the rest of the reproduction

process remains the same.

MATERIALS

The materials used in this project were the following:

The Kodak PMT Negative _Paper, which is a light sensitive

ortho-chromatic camera _speed, negative paper designed for making line

or halftone exposures in a process camera. It can be handed

and processed under the light from a Kodak Safelight filter

No. 1A (light red), or an equivalent safelight _filter, in a

suitable safelight _lamp equipped with a 15-watt bulb. The

paper must be kept at least four feet (1-2 meters) fromufche

safelight. Prolonged exposures to safelight illumination must

be avoided. The Kodak PMT Receiver Film, which is a non-light

sensitive, though _chemically sensitive, receiver _material,

which is processed to obtain a film positive. The _processing

fluid used was the Kodak PMT Activator, which is a one _step,

ready to use processing chemical used in a diffusion transfer

(21)

12

EXPERIMENTAL

The experimental part of the project consisted of three

steps; exposure _variations, _aging the activator, and

microdensitometry.

The negative (light sensitive) material was exposed in

a vacuum frame to a tungsten "point source". The illuminance

was kept constant at 42 3 _lux, exposure _being varied _by

varying the exposure times. After a series of trial exposures,

the final exposures used were _0,5, _0.8, _1,0, _1.2, 1.4 and

1. 6 seconds.

The targets used were a Kodak Sinusoidal target

(variable-transmittance sinusoidal test object) and a 21 step No. 2

Kodak _Step Tablet f The Kodak Sinusoidal Target consists of

transmission sinusoids of various frequencies with the modulation

varying between 35% and 68%.

The No. 2 Kodak _step tablet consists of a tablet with a

neutral _density range from 0 to 8. The density increases

by increments of about 0-15 _density units in 21 steps.

The next _step in the experimental section was the aging

of the Kodak PMT Activator. The major causes of _aging of the

(22)

13

TABLE 1

Kodak Variable Transmittance

Sinusoidal Test

(23)

14

the most _practical mode of _aging _being oxidation. _Therefore,

in order to age the activator, air was bubbled through it for

2, 4, 5, 8 and 10 _hours, on the assumption that about one hour

of _aging is equivalent to one _day in an open _tray (the activator

should last _up to seven days in an open _tray) . All the

negative paper was then processed together with the receiving

material in a copyproof CP38-53 type 9400/9401 diffusion

transfer processor under similar _{circumstances,} _only _varying

the age of the activator.

The images produced were then scanned on an Ansco

Model 4 microdensitometer _using an effective slit size of

7.5 x 150 micrometers. The efflux objective was 8X micro

scope objective (numerical aperture 0.20) and the influx

optics consisted of a 10X microscope objective (numerical

aperture 0.25) and a 10X eye piece.

CRITERION FOR IMAGE DEGRADATION

The criterion used as a measure of image degradation

on the receiver material was the slope, in terms of _density/MM,

of the image of the Kodak sinusoidal target produced in the

receiver sheet. The slopes were obtained about a point _termed,

the critical _density point.

The critical _density point is defined as the _density

on the lith film used for the line negative above which the

(24)

15

p

^

/

\

1

j

/

f

i '

1

.^-

1

s-.Crt_ -

i-:;

1

z

1

1 J____ f

t_iiii H"1

II

"."V-i. tj. j--" -~ ^^--L. - ...Xt-|j-::X

-- -p!-j-j!.

-'-Mil

-;--':-,-_

-i-H-^-l-1--_UI.

-]-'1- I

" | i|

3.0 DEN, 2.0 1.0 Critical Point FIGURE 4

(25)

16

Since the specific application of the diffusion transfer

process to which this project relates is the _copy dot process,

it is the reproduction of the halftone dots that will deter

mine the image quality. The _density gradient of the halftone

dots about the critical _density point will therefore be a

factor in the determination of image quality, the steeper

the gradient, the sharper the boundaries of the halftone dots

will be. This _point, on the receiver _film^ was determined

to be at about 0.4 _density units.

In agreement with the application _{in mind,} the frequencies

scanned were 4 _cycles/MM, which represents an upper limit

on contact screen rulings (these rarely go above 100 lines/inch),

and 1.67 cycles/MM which represents a medium screen ruling.

RESULTS

A number of slopes were measured for each of the exposure

variations and ages of the activator for the two frequencies

mentioned (4 cycles/MM and 1,67 cycles/MM). These were

averaged and then plotted as a function of exposure for the

different _aging periods. _Finally, a factorial analysis was

done on the available data to determine the statistical signi

ficance of the various factors tested.

It was found that the main factor _affecting the _density

gradient of the images was the _frequency of the target. The

(26)

17

also _being more sensitive to image degradation than the lower

frequency- The second factor in order of effects, was found

to be _expsoure, with the exposure that determines the 50%

dot _processing the steeper _slopes, with the image degrading

with either more or less exposure. _Finally, the activator

age was also found to be _{statistically} _significant, in the

case of the high _frequency, and _{statistically} insignificant

in the case of the lower frequency, A _{statistically} signi

ficant interaction term for the _frequency of the sinusoids

and the age of the _activator, while the interaction term

for the target _frequency and exposure found to be _{statistically}

(27)

SLOPE VS. EXPOSURE 0 HRS. _Aging

-IS

1

U flflj^_OUT -

-^v v_ ^*^ \ ^p* \ \ p _t

1K'/MW ? \

>p

[ . _

>*..

/ \ 4 cycles/MM

Z j ~_ ~7 _{i_} / \ s~ \ f ₁

j3-D - h"^^<-^^ L.

/ ^/ ^ \ ^^

/ ^ "^V \

f j^" _|_\, ^,"-"""""*^^ / ^ .' /* V

/ S ^^

7 ^ ^"^

/ i ,c / cycies/MH ^^^.^

(28)

19

SLOPE VS. EXPOSURE 2 HRS. Aging

8 0

f~"

"""v

i ^\

TTFTtf-r^rHW X ^.

7 \

^t*"^ ""

^ "7 N

"^i^ / >

V y

\ f

k. ^

S '1

40 '

f-J?*"*

--s^ -/ _|_ 4""'***.

*

f

~]

/ S .rnrrayc.es/MM

t~

>

/ ~i_

<Mr 40 60

j

LUX, SEC,

(29)

20

1

-8-Q-"*-/mm

3 cyclesj/E4 ,_I

^^

~

V nl

S '

>'

5

> _?K

y ^

y _^

/ _{~^^____^} s._~L^

>p

= ~"

X ^"^

t/ < ^v

r p^

^ ^

^P yfL S, *Si

P V

7 ~VE1 cyJcles/EE : I S

A

on _^n^ _n

!

LUX, SEC,

(30)

21

oU

DEK/ES.

i? "">

Z-' _S

/ \ 4 eyeIes7FE

2 \v

-> ^^v

tJt3-^

-~*""^>^ ^^v.

f lxL

z*

> "^^

'

y \s^

j Ix^s.

/ ^^

\^v ~7

\ Nl

s*f \ **^

"~r~"*

-+*? 1^82 cmcIbs/NM

-.

2t 40 _5D

-+-4

LUX. SEC,

(31)

22

SLOPE VS. EXPOSURE 8 HRS. Aging

1 j 1

_,

R 1 .

n'P'M/mm

*~*^

, ,

Aim-J-"""'^

X^

4 cycles/MM "

r^. ^v ? -.p / >p 40

-^,4-! p* ^

.' ***->~. .' "^v >p ^^v_ y S

I / **

^" ^ / ^k-p -/ _/ yP yT 1 ^ y^_

^ E-SZ spaEasfSSJ.

i LJ

LLLi LLJ U U

Lp-rmdr

Hp

1 \\\rr

₁

1 1

₁

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1

LUX, SEC,

(32)

23

Er-. _;

_a.

-i__<3Vcles/]V^ _i

y "^^ _^

Z ^s_ v

-4-f ^ >

^ir

.

Z "^Srp**

N

^/ \

A ~~~~"^^_ ^^

\_~"*"s>

/^ 1 5 ^s\.

y ^^

<T ^<

/ ^r >

V pp^ _v..

p yP

>

Z ^^ ^.

,pf i

JS

V y

X 1 ?T- T 11*11

/* _Jn~t~7 _cyces/Mi>. p

2'Q 4^ fifl '

4 ^|i-J=T

|1

[Mil

1

llllill

LUX. SEC,

(33)

24

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

After _completing the three steps (exposure variations,

aging of the activator and _{microdensitometry)} outlined

in the section titled _{experimental,} and _analyzing the

results _obtained, it was found that all the factors involved

were _significant, though not all to the same degree. It

was found that the most significant factor was the _frequency

of the sinusoidal target examined, or what would be equivalent

in the graphic arts, the screen ruling. The results indicated

that the higher the screen ruling, the steeper the slope,

which is what was used in this project as the criterion of

image quality. It was also found that the higher screen

ruling was more affected _by image degradation that the

medium screen _ruling used.

The next factor, in order of importance, was found

to be exposure, with the image _quality _reaching a peak at

the exposure that determined the 50% dot and _showing degrad

ation with either increases or decreases in exposure.

The final factor/the age of the activator, was found

to be statistically insignificant in the case of the medium

frequency (1.67 cycles/MM) but statistically significant

at the high frequency (4 cycles/MM). Appropriately, the

interaction term for the activator age and target _frequency

was found to be statistically significant in the factorial

(34)

25

Finally, the use of the edge gradient as the

criterion for image _quality does not seem to be the most

appropriate one. Variations in measurement were found to

be large. To obtain the best results, it is suggested that

extremely slow _scanning speeds be used on the microdensitometer,

and high speeds be used in the chart recorder. The effect

of these speeds would be to make the process _exceedingly

time consuming. Alternate methods that should be investigated

as a criterion for image _quality are _density _swing (maximum

density-minimum density) and line width of the images obtained.

Other factors recommended for _study as to their effects

on the diffusion transfer process are the effect of different

sources (with different special characteristics) and also the

effect of extreme temperatures on the diffusion transfer

materials (the negative _material, the _receiving sheet,

(35)

26

(36)

27

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. _Wooduff, Thomas _Jr., SPSE Handb-ok of Photographic

Science and _Engineering, John _Wiley and _Sons, New

York-London-Sydney-Toronto.

2. Stenger, E., and A. Herz : Photogr. Rundschau. 61:5(1024);

2. Wiss. Photogr. 22; _194(1923); Stevens, G.W.W. , and

R.G.W. Norrish: Photogr. _J., 78,513 (1938) .

3. Rott A: Gevaert Photo Production N.V. , Brit. Pat.

614.155 _(1939);

4. Weyde, E : "Das Copyrapidverfahren Der Agfa,"

Mitteilungen

aus den Forschunsiaboratorien der _Agfa, Band _I, _Springer,

1955, p.262 _ff; Schaum, G , and E. Weyde; Agra

Veroeffentlichungen VI. _198, 1939; Weyde, E.:

2. D. Fabenindustrie A.G. Pat 887.733 _(1941); German

Pat. Appl. DT 974.769 (1940).

5. Schultze, D.F. : "Graphic Arts Applications of Silver

Diffusion Transfer Systems," Journal of Applied Photo

graphic _Engineering, 5: 163-166 (1979).

6, Kodak Publications Q-71, Copy Preparation and _Platemaking

(37)

28

7. Noemer,E.F , The Handbook of Modern Halftone

(38)

29

(39)

30

(40)

31

APPENDIX A

Data

Slope

-Density Units/MM

0 HRS _Aging

0.5 Sec. Exposure

1.67 cycles/MM 4 cycles/MM

14.88 25.60

18 29 27.83

16.00 21.33

11.64 21.33

Average 15.20 24.02

0.8 Sec. Exposure

42.67 64.00

32.00 51.20

36 57 51.20

28.44 64.00

Average 34.92 57.60

1.0 Sec. Exposure

36.57 51.20

36,57 64,00

42.67 75.29

51.20 80.00

Average 41.75 67.62

1,2 Sec, Exposure

1,67 cycles/MM 4 cycles/MM

35,56 80.00

35.56 64.00

32,00 80.00

(41)

32

0 HRS. _Aging _(continued)

1.4 Sec. Exposure

1.67 cycles/MM ₄ _cycles/MM

21.33 _33.68

24.62 29.09

30.48 35.56

23.70 33.68

Average 25.03 33.00

1.6 Sec. Exposure

13,62 45.71

24,62 40.00

23.70 37.65

19.39 45.71

Average 20.33 42.27

2 HRS. _Aging

0,5 Sec. Exposure

14.00 14.22

10.67 21.33

19.86 16.00

4,24 16.00

Average 12.19 16.89

0.8 Sec, Exposure

18.29 51.20

32:00 64.00

38,44 51.20

32.00 51.20

(42)

33

2 HRS. _Aging (continued)

1.0 Sec. Exposure

25.60 51.20

23.30 64.00

25,60 64.00

32.00 51.20

Average 26.60 57.60

1.20 Sec. Exposure

26.70 45.70

30.50 53.30

27-80 42.70

29,10 40.00

Average 28.53 45.40

1.40 Sec. Exposure

40.00 64.00

32.00 40.00

24.60 45.70

27.80 40.00

Average

41.10 47.40

1.6 Sec. Exposure

26.70 64.00

21,30 40.00

24.60 45.70

21.30 40.00

(43)

34

4 HRS. _Aging

0.5 Sec. Exposure

14.20 28.40

11,60 16.00

9.80 11.60

7.10 18.30

Average 10.70 18.60

0.8 Sec. Exposure

32,00 42.70

23.30 42.70

25.60 42.70

32.00 42.70

Average 28.20 42.70

1.0 Sec. Exposure

21.30 42.70

38.40 51.20

25.60 42.70

32.00 51.20

Average 26,80 47.00

1.2 Sec. Exposure

28.40 42.70

28,40 36.60

25.60 26.90

(44)

35

4 HRS, _Aging (continued)

1,4 Sec. Exposure

1.67 cycles/MM ₄ _cycles/MM

26,90 _8.50

28.40 _14.20

21.30 21.30

Average 26.25 _14.60

1,6 Sec. Exposure

12,80 13,50 12.20 11.60

Average 12,50

6 HRS. _Aging

0,5 Sec, Exposure

1 67 cycles/MM 4 cycles/MM

7.10 21.30

14.20 19.70

9.10 25.60

16,00 23.30

Average 11.60 22.50

0.8 Sec. Exposure

28.40 51.20

21,30 51.20

25.60 64.00

21,30 51.20

(45)

36

6 HRS. _Aging _(Continued)

1.0 Sec. Exposure

32.00 51.20

32 00 42.70

32.00 42.70

25.60 32.00

rage 30.40 42.20

1.2 Sec. 1.67 cycles/MM

Exposure

4 cycles/MM

36.60 28.40

36.60 30.10

42.70 42.70 42.70 32.00

Average 32.9 0 4 0.00

1.4 Sec. Exposure

1 67 cycles/MM 4 cycles/MM

21.30 18.30

25.60 19.70

28.40 18.30

21,30 18.30

Average 24,20 18.70

1.6 Sec. Exposure

18.30

-15.10

-25 60

-18.30

(46)

8 HRS _Aging

37

0.5 Sec. Exposure

7.60 7.40 4,60 9.10 24.00 23.30 18.30 16.00

Average 7.20 20.40

0.8 Sec, 1,67 cycles/MM 25.60 25.60 32.00 23,30 Exposure 4 cycles/MM 42.70 42.70 51.20 36.60

Average 26.60 43.30

1.0 Sec, 1.67 cycles/MM 32.00 32.00 28.40 25.60 Exposure 4 cycles/MM 51.20 51.20 64.00 51.20

Average 29.80 52.30

1.2 Sec 1^67 cycles/MM 36,60 36.60 34.10 34.10 Exposure 4 cycles/MM 64.00 51.20 42.70 51.20

(47)

38

1.4 Sec. Exposure

36.60 64.00

26.90 56.90

34.10 64.00

36.60 46.50

Average 33,60 57.90

1.6 Sec. Exposure

21.30 64.00

19,'70 42.70

21.30 42.70

25.60 46.50

Average 22.00 49.00

10 HRS. _Aging

0,5 Sec. Exposure

12.80 32.00

9.10 21.30

12.00 13.70

10.70 22.10

Average 11,20 22.10

0.8 Sec. Exposure

32.00 64.00

23.30 51.20

28.40 42.70

32.00 32.00

(48)

39

1. 0 Sec. Exposure

51.20 42.70

32.00 32.00

32.00 36.60

Average 36.80 35.80

1.2 Sec. Exposure

36^60 42.70

32.00 51.20

30 10 51.20

32.00 46.50

Average 32.70 47.90

1.4 Sec. Exposure

36.60 25.60

30,10 32.00

42.70 29.40

32.00 32.00

Average 35.40 29.50

1.6 Sec, Exposure

18.30

15.10

25.60

16.00

(49)

40

(50)

41

APPENDIX B

STATISTICS

3 Factor Factorial Analysis

Line _Frequency

-Factor A

Exposure

-Factor B

Activator Age

-Factor C

Analysis of Variance From Summing-Over Tables

Sums of squares calculated from table No,

Factors of A and B

Total sum of squares = _19810.88

sum of squares for A = _-3066.36 sum of squares for B = _7017.54

sum of squares for the interaction (AB) = 735.98

Sums of squares calculated from Table No.

Factors of A and C

Total sum of squares = 6562.71

sum of squares for A = 3066.36

sum of squares for C = 2180.35

(51)

42

Sums of squares calculated from Table No.

Factors B and C

Total sum of squares = _11713.50

sum of squares for B = _7017.54

sum of squares for C = _2180.35

(52)

43

TABLE 2

Two _Way Table for Factors A and B

quency

0.5 0,8

Esposure

1.0 1.2 1,4 1.6 Total

1.67 68.09 170.50 191.85 191.01 175.58 116.38 913.41

4.00 124.51 299.90 304,62 296.58 219.00 138.67 1383.28

Total 192.60 470.40 496.47 487.59 394.58 255.05 2296.69

Frequency

TABLE 3

Two _Way Table for Factors A and C

Activator Age

10 Total

1.67 171.01 149.60 132.15 142.60 ! 154.30 163.75 913.41

4.00 298 29 286.99 160.10 177.80 ! 277.30 182.80 1383.28

(53)

TABLE

Two _Way Table for Factors B and C

Activato

Age

r

0.5 0.8 1.0

Exposure

1.2 1.4 1.6 Total

0 39.22 92.57 109.37 107.56 58.03 62.60 469.30

2 29.08 82.98 84.20 73.93 96.40 70.90 436.59

4 29.30 70.90 73.80 64.90 40.85 12.50 292.25

6 34.10 78.60 72,60 72,90 42.90 19.30 320.40

8 27.60 69.90 83.90 87.70 91.50 71.00 431.60

10 33.30 76.40 72.60 80.60 64.90 18.75 346.55

Total 192.60 470.40 496.47

f

i

.1 i

487.59

_j

394.58 255.05

1

i

(54)

45

GRAND ANOVA SUMMARY

Source SS v MS F Ratio

Calculated

A _3066.36 ₁

3066,36 45.91

B 7017.54 5 _1403,50 _21.01

C 2180 35 5 436.07 6.53

AB 735.98 5 147,20 2.20

AC 1316.00 5 263,20 3.94

BC 2515.61 25 96.75 1.45

ABC 1669.86 25 66.79

Total 18501.70 71

F = 4 24

1,25,05 *'A*

F5,'25,05

" 2-60

F = ₁ ₉₆

25,25,05 '*