Surface characterization of paper and paperboard using a stylus contact method
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract Surface characterization is important and has many applications in the paper industry. Surface characterization requires both surface roughness and surface friction. The relationship between the two has not been fully established for paper and paperboard. It has been a common practice that only the average property and the standard deviation with the coefficient of variation (COV) are reported for surface roughness and friction measurements. This practice, however, provides few information on surface structure and can lead to wrong judgments because two samples having the same average and the COV can have different physical properties. To avoid such mistake, a new surface characterization method has been developed. To this end, surface roughness- and friction-profiles have been obtained using a latest version of Kawabata surface tester (Model: KES-SESRU, Kato Tech, Kyoto Japan). This new version uses the same stylus for both measuring surface roughness and friction under the same operating conditions. It was found that a correlation between the surface roughness and surface friction was very low. This indicates that they should be independent of each other. Therefore, both should be determined for surface characterization.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Surface Roughness and Optical Measurements · Material Properties and Processing · Adhesion, Friction, and Surface Interactions
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Forest Products and Biotechnology , 34967 Kookmin University , Seoul , , Republic of Korea
Funding
Korea Evaluation Institute of Industrial Technology
References (39)
Show source-provided references
1. Barnes, R. Variogram tutorial. Golden software, Inc., 2002.
2. Barnsley, M.F. Fractals everywhere. Academic press, 1993.
3. Briggs, J. Fractals: The patterns of chaos: A new aesthetic of art, science, and nature. Simon and Schuster, 1992.
4. Carstens, J.E. (1981) Layered paper having a soft and smooth velutinous surface and method of making such paper, US Patent, 4,300,981.
5. Constantine, A.G., Hall, P. (1994) Characterizing surface smoothness via estimation of effective fractal dimension. J. R. Stat. Soc., Ser. B, Methodol. 97–113.10.1111/j.2517-6161.1994.tb01963.x ↗
6. Falconer, K. Fractal geometry: mathematical foundations and applications. John Wiley & Sons, 2004.10.1002/0470013850 ↗
7. Gleick, J. Chaos: Making a New Science. Viking Penguin Inc., New York, 1987.
8. Hiemenz, P.C. Principles of colloid and surface chemistry, 3rd edition. Marcel Dekker, New-York, 1997, ISBN 0, 8247(9397), 8.
9. Hodgson, Berg, J.C. (1988) Dynamic wettability properties of single wood pulp fibers and their relationship to absorbency. Wood Fiber Sci. 20(1):3.
10. Hollmark, H. (1976) The softness of household paper products and related products in the fundamental properties of paper related to its end uses. In: Transactions of the symposium held at Cambridge. Ed. Bolam, F., pp. 684–695.
11. Hollmark, H. (1984) 20 Absorbency of tissue and towelling. In: Handbook of physical and mechanical testing of paper and paperboard. Marcel Dekker, New York. R.E. Mark edition, Vol. 2. pp. 143–168.
12. ISO 8791-4 (2007) Paper and board – Determination of roughness/smoothness (air leak methods) – Part 4 Print-surf method.
13. ISO 8791-2 (2013) Paper and board – Determination of roughness/smoothness (air leak method) – Part 2 Bendtsen method.
14. ISO 187 (1990) Paper and board – Standard atmosphere for conditioning and testing and procedure for monitoring the atmosphere and conditioning of samples.
15. Jeong, H.S. The analysis of paper roughness using power spectrum technique. Master thesis. Kookmin University, Korea, 2017.
16. Kawabata, S. The standardization and Analysis of Hand Evaluation, 2nd edition. Textile Institute, 97, 1980.
17. Kent, H.J. (1991) The fractal dimension of paper surface topography. Nordic Pulp & Paper Research Journal 6(4):191196.10.3183/npprj-1991-06-04-p191-196 ↗
18. Kaye, B.H. A random walk through fractal dimensions. John Wiley & Sons, 2008.
19. Ko, Y., Park, J., Melani, L., et al. (2019) Principles of developing physical test methods for disposable consumer products. Nord. Pulp Pap. Res. J. 34(1):75–87.10.1515/npprj-2018-0029 ↗
20. Ko, Y.C., et al. (2016) The fundamental absorbency mechanisms of hygiene paper. J. Korea Tappi 48(5):85–97.10.7584/JKTAPPI.2016.10.48.5.85 ↗
21. Ko, Y.C., Park, J.M., Shin, S.-J. (2015) The principles of fractal geometry and its applications for pulp & paper industry. J. Korea Tappi 47(4):177–186.10.7584/ktappi.2015.47.4.177 ↗
22. Ko, Y.C., Ratner, B.D., Hoffman, A.S. (1981) Characterization of hydrophilic/hydrophobic surfaces by the contact angle measurements. J. Colloids Interface Sci. 82(1):25.10.1016/0021-9797(81)90120-X ↗
23. Kornev, K.G., et al. (1999) Foam in porous media: thermodynamic and hydrodynamic peculiarities. Adv. Colloid Interface Sci. 82(1–3):127–187.10.1016/S0001-8686(99)00013-5 ↗
24. Kuilenburg, et al. (2015) A review of fingerpad contact mechanics and friction and how this affects tactile perception. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., Part J J. Eng. Tribol. 229(3):243–258.10.1177/1350650113504908 ↗
25. Land, C. (2004) Effect of moisture amount on HSWO waviness.
26. Leach, R. (2014) Surface topography characterization, Fundamental principles of engineering nanometrology, pp. 241294.10.1016/B978-1-4557-7753-2.00008-6 ↗
27. Mahr Company. (2019) MarSurf ps 10 Mobile roughness measuring instrument. www.mahr.com.
28. Mandelbrot, B. (1967) How long is the coast of Britain? Statistical self-similarity and fractional dimension. Science 156(3775):636–638.10.1126/science.156.3775.636 ↗
29. Mandelbrot, B.B. The fractal geometry of nature, vol. 1. WH Freeman, New York, 1982.
30. Militký, J., Bajzík, V. (2001) Surface roughness and fractal dimension. J. Text. Inst. 92(3):91–113.10.1080/00405000108659617 ↗
31. Modaressi, H., Garnier, G. (2002) Mechanisms of wetting and absorption of water drops on sized paper: effects of chemical and physical heterogeneity. Langmuir 18:642–649.10.1021/la0104931 ↗
32. Neimark, A.V., et al. (2003) Hierarchical pore structure and wetting properties of single-wall carbon nanotube fibers. Nano Lett. 3(3):419–423.10.1021/nl034013x ↗
33. Richardson, L. (1961) The problem of contiguity. General Systems Yearbook for the Society for General Systems Research 6:131–197.
34. Russ, J.C. (1994) Fractal surfaces. Springer Science & Business Media. revisited. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 235(1):101–113.10.1007/978-1-4899-2578-7 ↗
35. Vernhes, P., et al. (2008a) Gloss optical elementary representative surface. Appl. Opt. 47:5429–5435.10.1364/AO.47.005429 ↗
36. Vernhes, P., et al. (2008b) Statistical analysis of paper surface microstructure: a multi-scale approach. Appl. Surf. Sci. 254:7431–7437.10.1016/j.apsusc.2008.06.023 ↗
37. Vernhes, P., et al. (2009) Effect of calendaring on paper surface micro-structure: A multi-scale analysis. J. Mater. Process. Technol.. 209:5204–5210.10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2009.03.005 ↗
38. Wang, Y., et al. (2018) Relationship between human perception of softness and instrument measurements. BioResources 14(1):780–795.10.15376/biores.14.1.780-795 ↗
39. Yokura, H., et al. (2004) Objective hand measurement of toilet paper. J. Text. Eng. 50(1).10.4188/jte.50.1 ↗