# Optical Forums > Ophthalmic Optics >  Hard Coating Machine

## Samuel Jong

I have to make a choice between SCL and Optimal for the hard coating machine. Please advise, which one?

----------


## csiopticians

SCL the good one :idea:

----------


## Samuel Jong

Can you give me the reason?

----------


## csiopticians

Mostly big company / independent lab using this machine, but A man behind the gun. Hard coat problems critically depend on environment. Humidity, varnish, solvent.

----------


## Samuel Jong

> Mostly big company / independent lab using this machine, but A man behind the gun. Hard coat problems critically depend on environment. Humidity, varnish, solvent.


Which the independent lab is using the SCL in Indonesia?

----------


## Mauro.Airoldi

Trea are several difference betwen SCL and Optimal:
1

----------


## Mauro.Airoldi

sorry....
I have both two the macchine, the difference are:
1    SCL has a robot more flexible (progreammable),  It is nice if you coat different substrate.   Optimal is a step by step and the process can't be modify too muth.
2    SCL (last version) use better meccanical components   
3    SCL spare parts are very expensive but it has long life time,   Optimal spare parts are not expensive but the life time....bad
4  SCL has a load-unload sitem with 6 position, it is good if you need to leave the plant to work aloone 
5   SCL has US at different frequency  (You can modify it)   It is nice for transitions and fragil substrate.

My last one is SCL

----------


## Jacqui

Mauro: Do you have any contact information for SCL??

----------


## IC-UC

SCL is the one for us. They are helpful and have oodles of knowledge. They also have respect for their customers which is rare to find and will always try help when needed. Their machines are well designed and operate well.
Once they set up the machine and you are able to keep it in spec, you will find very few problems.

Jacqui you can contact Denis Gehrig on +33 450 820 720, or try their website www.scl-intl.com

----------


## Mauro.Airoldi

Denis Gehric is the right one, he is the son of the  founder and ha a lot of experience  (he is based in France).
If you like contact Oprimal info@optimal-optic.de

----------


## Jacqui

Thank you guys :D

----------


## LDG

> sorry....
> I have both two the macchine, the difference are:
> 1    SCL has a robot more flexible (progreammable),  It is nice if you coat different substrate.   Optimal is a step by step and the process can't be modify too muth.
> 2    SCL (last version) use better meccanical components   
> 3    SCL spare parts are very expensive but it has long life time,   Optimal spare parts are not expensive but the life time....bad
> 4  SCL has a load-unload sitem with 6 position, it is good if you need to leave the plant to work aloone 
> 5   SCL has US at different frequency  (You can modify it)   It is nice for transitions and fragil substrate.
> 
> My last one is SCL


   It should be noted that in the above comparison the Optimal machine is early generation and entry level (very basic), being compared to an SCL machine that probably cost double the price.

Optimal provide a range of machines from very basic and cost effective, ideal for small labs and startup companies to large highly sophisticated, specially designed equipment for big name lens manufacturers. Optimal also provide a wealth of experience in cleaning and coating fields.

Regarding the points above:

1: Optimal also provide robot handling systems. However on entry level equipment the mass transfer system is easy, efficient and yet still fully configurable. The process remains fully flexible and all lenses can be processed.
2: Optimal use high quality components and maintenance is very easy.
3: Life time of all parts is very good. As with any machine, some parts can fail sooner if the correct maintenance is not regularly performed.
4: Load/Unload conveyors also available on Optimal machines.
5: Fully configurable ultrasonics are available on Optimal equipment, different frequencies, full power adjustment etc.

  Optimal manufacture a lot of special machines, and should be contacted if you have specific requirements. 

I will not comment on problems with SCL equipment. I have worked with both Optimal and SCL machines, the process is almost the same and in a well managed lab both will produce high yields. The biggest difference is the price tag.

  Please note that the contact information for Optimal posted above is also incorrect. info@opt-tec.com is the correct address.

  I work with Optimal, and felt the need to comment as I found some of the information in this thread to be misleading.

----------


## Mauro.Airoldi

Your Feedback is different from mine...
My experience came from production e comparison with 2 CHC60, 1 CD1000 and 1 CDa1000, so ... same experience...i've.
I don't say that Optimal is bad... It is ok... but in comparation of tecnology, process support and price my last order was for a SCL.
I buy last plant in 2008 and the differnce betwen CD1000 and CHC120 (same size +/-100-120 lens hour) was +/- same price.

----------


## Samuel Jong

I am just thinking that the DI Water System of Optimal is so simple.

----------


## Francois Chemoptic

Dear all,

I know my comment comes a bit late, but it's time to tell the truth to the optical community...
SCL  started with this type of simple machines for labs in the early 90's  when the only competitor was Groupe Couget which machines were far from  performing. FISA was also there, but the size of the machines was much  too big for normal sized labs. That's why the door was wide open for SCL  at that time and the company could find the way to success...Initially  they offered lacquers from Tokuyama Soda and later when LG Chemicals  decided to get on the market, they offered LG lacquers, always  pretending that they were manufactured by them. This matter is just  their business but it's already a huge lie! Anyway, when you think about  their cleaning/rinsing process, you may find it strange that it is  rinsing with cold water and without ultrasonics. Well, there you may  have two ways of seeing it: the first one is that they didn't know that  the soaps go away much easier with warm water than with cold water and  that without ultrasonics, only the surface of the lenses can be  cleaned/rinsed! anyway, when the user runs this process, there is no way  of seeing the trouble because the solvent from the lacquer (in that  case methanol) is doing it. That's where the second way of considering  this process lies...actually, on rinsing with the solvent from the  lacquer, the latter gets contaminated and ages faster...when the machine  manufacturer also sells the lacquer, you understand that there is a  trick behind this. Either way, just reconsider now, SCL technology...;)
When  Optimal started its business in the late 90's early 00's, it took SCL  as a model, that's why the same 'mistakes' were reproduced. However, at  that time Optimal was not selling lacquers, so there is nothing to  complain about...
But in any case, now that you know the truth, ask  your dip coating manufacturer for heating and ultrasonic systems in all  cleaning/rinsing tanks!

----------

