Fiber length and bonding effects on tensile strength and toughness of kraft paper
Source abstract
Abstract
Fiber length and fiber-to-fiber bonding effects on tensile strength and fracture toughness of kraft paper have experimentally been investigated. Laboratory sheets were made from kraft pulp, each with a distinct set of fiber lengths. Additionally, the fiber–fiber bond strength was improved by carboxymethyl (CMC) grafting. The tensile strength and work of fracture toughness results were compared to predictions from a shear-lag model which considers the fiber–fiber bond shear strength, the fiber tensile strength and fiber pull-out work. The tensile strength and fracture work for papers with weak fiber–fiber bonds increased with fiber length consistent with the shear-lag model. CMC-treated fibers provided strong fiber–fiber bonds. Papers made from such fibers displayed high strength and work of fracture independent of fiber length which indicates that the failure process is governed by fiber failures rather than bond failures. The fracture toughness, expressed as the critical value of the J-integral, increased strongly with fiber length for both untreated and CMC-treated papers. The results show that long fibers and CMC addition are extremely beneficial for improving the fracture toughness.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Material Properties and Processing · Advanced Cellulose Research Studies · Natural Fiber Reinforced Composites
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (39)
Show source-provided references
1. Biermann CJ (ed) (1996) Handbook on pulp and papermaking, 2nd edn. Elsevier, Amsterdam
2. Carlsson LA, Lindstrom T (2005) A shear-lag approach to the tensile strength of paper. Compos Sci Technol 65:183–18910.1016/j.compscitech.2004.06.012 ↗
3. Cox HL (1952) The elasticity and strength of paper and other fibrous materials. Br J Appl Phys 3(3):72–7910.1088/0508-3443/3/3/302 ↗
4. de Ruvo A, Fellers C, Kolseth P (1986) Descriptive theories for the tensile strength of paper. In: Bristow JA, Kolseth P (eds) Paper structure and properties. Marcel-Dekker, New York, pp 267–279
5. Duker E, Lindström T (2008) On the mechanisms behind the ability of CMC to enhance paper strength. Nord Pulp Pap Res J 23(1):57–6410.3183/NPPRJ-2008-23-01-p057-064 ↗
6. Ewalds HL, Wanhill RJH (1989) Fracture mechanics. Edward Arnold, London
7. Fengel D, Wegener G (1989) Wood chemistry, ultrastructure, reactions. deGruyter, Berlin
8. Ingmanson WL, Thode EF (1959) Factors contributing to the strength of a sheet of paper. Tappi J 42(1):83–93
9. Kallmes OJ, Perez M (1966) Consolidation of the paper web. Technical Section British Paper and Board Makers Association, London, pp 779–800
10. Kallmes OJ, Bernier G, Perez M (1977) A mechanistic theory of the load elongation properties of paper, Paper Tech Ind, vol 18, Part 1, No. 7, 222–228, Part 2, No. 8, 243–245, Part 3, No. 9, 283–285, Part 4, No. 10, p 328–331
11. Karlsson H, Fransson P-I, Mohlin U-B (1999) STFI FiberMaster. In: 6th international conference on new available techniques, SPCI, Stockholm, Sweden
12. Kelly A, Tyson WR (1965) Tensile properties of fiber-reinforced metals: copper/tungsten and copper/molybdenum. J Mech Phys Solids 13:329–35010.1016/0022-5096(65)90035-9 ↗
13. Kelly A (1970) Interface effects and the work of fracture of a fibrous composite. Proc R Soc Lond A319:95–11610.1098/rspa.1970.0168 ↗
14. Laine J, Lindström T, Glad-Nordmark G, Risinger G (2000) Studies on topochemical modification of cellulosic fibres. Part 1. Chemical conditions for the attachment of carboxymethyl cellulose onto fibres. Nord Pulp Pap Res J 15(5):520–52610.3183/NPPRJ-2000-15-05-p520-526 ↗
15. Laine J, Lindström T, Bremberg C, Glad-Nordmark G (2003) Studies on topochemical modification of cellulosic fibres. Part 5. Comparison of the effects of surface and bulk chemical modification and beating of pulp on paper properties. Nord Pulp Pap Res J 18(3):182–18710.3183/npprj-2003-18-03-p316-324 ↗
16. Lindström T, Wågberg L, Larsson T (2005) On the nature joint strength in paper—a review of dry and wet strength resins used in paper manufacturing. In: Advances in paper science and technology, Transaction of the 13th fundamental research symposium. The Pulp and Paper Fundamental Research Society, Cambridge, UK, vol 1, pp 457–562
17. Lindström T, Fellers C, Ankerfors A, Glad-Nordmark G (2016) On the nature of joint strength of paper—effect of dry strength agents—revisiting the Page equation. Nord Pulp Paper Res J 31(3):459–46810.3183/NPPRJ-2016-31-03-p459-468 ↗
18. Niskanen K, Kettunen H, Yu Y (2001) Damage width: a measure of the size of fracture process zone. In: Baker CF (ed) The science of papermaking, transactions of the 12th fundamental research symposium, Oxford, September 2001. The Pulp and Paper Fundamental Research Society, UK10.15376/frc.2001.2.1467 ↗
19. Page DH (1969) A theory for the tensile strength of paper. Tappi J 52(4):674–681
20. Page DH, El Hosseiny F, Winkler K, Lancaster APS (1977) Mechanical properties of single wood fibers, part V: elastic modulus. Tappi J 60(4):114–118
21. Page DH, Seth RS, de Grace JH (1979) The elastic modulus of paper. I. The controlling mechanism. Tappi J 62(9):99–102
22. Panek J, Fellers C, Haraldsson T (2004) Principles of evaluation for the creep of paperboard in constant and cyclic humidity. Nord Pulp Paper Res J 19(2):155–16310.3183/NPPRJ-2004-19-02-p155-163 ↗
23. Rice JR (1968) A path independent integral and the approximate analysis of strain concentration by notches and cracks. J Appl Mech 35:379–38610.1115/1.3601206 ↗
24. Salmen L, Carlsson LA, de Ruvo A, Fellers C, Htun M (1984) A treatise on the elastic and hygroexpansional properties of paper by a composite laminate approach. Fiber Sci Technol 20:283–29610.1016/0015-0568(84)90048-4 ↗
25. Scan Standard CM 64:00 (2000) Preparation of laboratory sheets for physical testing. Scandinavian Pulp, Paper and Board Testing Committee
26. Scan Standard P 80:98 (1998) Z-directional tensile strength. Scandinavian Pulp, Paper and Board Testing Committee
27. Scan Standard P67:93 (1993) Tensile strength, strain at break. Tensile energy absorption and tensile stiffness. Scandinavian Pulp, Paper and Board Testing Committee
28. Scan Standard P88:01 (2001) Structural thickness and structural density. Scandinavian Pulp, Paper and Board Testing Committee
29. Scan Standard P77:95 (1995) Fracture toughness. Scandinavian Pulp, Paper and Board Testing Committee
30. Shallhorn P, Karnis A (1979) Tear and tensile strength of mechanical pulps. Trans Tech Sec CPPA 5(4):TR92–TR99
31. Steadman R, Fellers C (1986) Measuring fracture strength of tough papers. Progress in paper physics seminar, Minnowbrook, NY
32. Timoshenko SP, Goodier JN (1970) Theory of elasticity, 3rd edn. McGraw-Hill, New York
33. Tappi Standard T 261 cm-10 (2000) Fines fraction of paper stock by wet screaming. Technical Association Pulp Paper Industry
34. Uesaka T (1983) Design for testing paper and paperboard. In: Mark RE (ed) Handbook of physical and mechanical testing of paper and paperboard, vol 1. Marcel Dekker, New York, pp 77–113
35. Yan H, Lindström T, Christiernin M (2006) Some ways to decrease fibre suspension flocculation and improve sheet formation. Nord Pulp Pap Res J 21(1):36–4310.3183/NPPRJ-2006-21-01-p036-043 ↗
36. Yan H, Norman B, Lindström T, Ankerfors M (2006) Fibre length effect on fibre suspension flocculation and sheet formation. Nord Pulp Pap Res J 21(1):30–3510.3183/NPPRJ-2006-21-01-p030-035 ↗
37. Watson AJ, Dadswell HE (1961) Influence of fiber morphology on paper properties. Part I: Fiber length. Appita J 14(5):168–178
38. Wellmar P, Fellers C, Nilsson F, Delhage L (1997) Crack-tip characterization of paper. J Pulp Pap Sci 23(6):J269–J275
39. Westerlind BS, Carlsson LA, Andersson YM (1991) Fracture toughness of liner board evaluated by the J-integral. J Mater Sci 26:2630–2636. doi: 10.1007/BF0238773010.1007/BF02387730 ↗