Effects of a stylus on the surface roughness determination in a contact method for paper and paperboard
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract Surface characterization is important and has many applications in the paper industry. It includes both surface roughness and surface friction. In determining the surface roughness of paper and paperboard, non-contact methods such as air-leak methods In characterizing the surface roughness of paper and paperboard, it has been a common practice that the average roughness with the coefficient of variation (COV) has been conventionally determined. This practice, however, this runs the risk of drawing wrong conclusions since two different surfaces having the same average roughness and COV can exhibit totally different properties. To avoid such mistake, a stylus-type contact method has been developed to determine surface roughness of paper and paperboard such as printing & writing (P&W), kraft and liners. In this method, surface roughness profile has been generated to determine its variability which has been defined as the mean deviation from the roughness average, referred to as MDRA. In determining the MDRA, it is noted that thickness measurement is not required. In this method, stylus shape and size, contact force of the stylus to the surface, scan speed and resolution have been identified as the key parameters of generating stable surface roughness profiles. It has been further identified that the optimal conditions on these parameters should depend on paper grade. It is suggested that a stylus-type contact method should be used to determine surface roughness of paper and paperboard to help determine their practical applications such as printing, coating and embossing.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Surface Roughness and Optical Measurements · Adhesion, Friction, and Surface Interactions · Material Properties and Processing
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. Barros, G.G., Johansson, P.A. (2005) The OptiTopo technique for fast assessment of paper topography – Limitations, application and improvements. J. Imaging Sci. Technol. 49(2):170–178.10.2352/J.ImagingSci.Technol.2005.49.2.art00008 ↗
2. Beuther, P.D., Ko, Y.C., Pawar, P., Raynor Jr, W.J., Rekoske, M.J., Ries, T.D. (2012) Molded wet-pressed tissue, US 8,257,551, Kimberly Clark Worldwide. Inc., September, 4.
3. Buzio, R., Boragno, C., Biscarini, F., De Mongeot, F.B.. Valbusa, U. (2003) The contact mechanics of fractal surfaces. Nat. Mater. 2(4):233–237.10.1038/nmat8551269039510.1038/nmat855 ↗
4. Salcedo, M.C., Peñaloza, C.A., Ochoa, G.V. (2018) Experimental Study of the Correlation the Surface Roughness 2D and 3D in the Honing Process of the Steel Cylinder. Indian J. Sci. Technol. 11(29):1–9.10.12988/ces.2018.84157 ↗
5. Goedecke, A., Jackson, R.L., Mock, R. (2013) A fractal expansion of a three dimensional elastic–plastic multi-scale rough surface contact model. Tribol. Int. 59:230–239.10.1016/j.triboint.2012.02.00410.1016/j.triboint.2012.02.004 ↗
6. Goic, G.L., Favreliere, H., Samper, S., Formosa, F. (2011) Multi scale modal decomposition of primary form, waviness and roughness of surfaces. Scanning 33(5):332–341.2169570410.1002/sca.2025310.1002/sca.20253 ↗
7. Hanaor, D., Gan, Y., Einav, I. (2013) Effects of surface structure deformation on static friction at fractal interfaces. Géotechnique Lett. 3:52–58.10.1680/geolett.13.01610.1680/geolett.13.016 ↗
8. Hanaor, D.A., Gan, Y., Einav, I. (2016) Static friction at fractal interfaces. Tribol. Int. 93:229–238.10.1016/j.triboint.2015.09.01610.1016/j.triboint.2015.09.016 ↗
9. Hollmark, H. (1983) Evaluation of tissue paper softness. Tappi J. 66(2):97–99.
10. ISO 4287 (1997) Geometrical product specification – surface texture: profile method – terms, definitions and surface texture parameter.
11. ISO 13565-1 (1996) Geometrical Product Specifications (GPS) – Surface texture: Profile method; Surfaces having stratified functional properties – Part 1: Filtering and overall measuring conditions.
12. ISO 3274 (1996) Geometrical Product Specifications (GPS) – Surface texture: Profile method – Nominal characteristics of contact (stylus) instruments.
13. ISO 8791-2 (2013) Paper and board – Determination of roughness/smoothness (air leak method) – Part 2 Bendtsen method.
14. ISO 8791-3 (2017) Paper and board – Determination of roughness/smoothness (air leak method) – Part 3 Sheffield method.
15. ISO 8791-4 (2007) Paper and board – Determination of roughness/smoothness (air leak methods) – Part 4 Print-surf method.
16. Jeong, H. The analysis of paper roughness using power spectrum technique. Master thesis. Kookmin University, Korea, (2017).
17. Kawabata, S. – The standardization and Analysis of Hand Evaluation. 2nd ed. Textile Institute, 97, 1980.
18. Kaye, B.H. – A random walk through fractal dimensions. John Wiley & Sons, 2008.
19. Kent, H.J. (1991) The fractal dimension of paper surface topography. Nord. Pulp Pap. Res. J. 6(4):191–196.10.3183/npprj-1991-06-04-p191-19610.3183/npprj-1991-06-04-p191-196 ↗
20. Ko, Young Chan, Park, Jong Moon, Shin, Soo-Jung (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 ↗
21. Ko, Y.C., Park, J.Y., Melani, L., Park, N.Y., Kim, H.J. (2019) Principles of developing physical test methods for disposable consumer products. Nord. Pulp Pap. Res. J. 34(1):75–87.10.1515/npprj-2018-002910.1515/npprj-2018-0029 ↗
22. Land, C. Effect of moisture amount on HSWO waviness. Master thesis. Karlstad University, 2004.
23. Leach, R. (2001) Measurement Good Practice Guide No. 37. In: The Measurement of Surface Texture using Stylus Instruments. NP Laboratory, Ed.
24. Leach, R. (2014) Surface topography characterization. In: Fundamental principles of engineering nanometrology. pp. 241–294.10.1016/B978-1-4557-7753-2.00008-6 ↗
25. Mandelbrot, B.B. The fractal geometry of nature. 1982. San Francisco, CA, 1982.
26. Militký, J., Bajzík, V. (2001) Surface roughness and fractal dimension. J. Text. Inst. 92(3):91–113.10.1080/0040500010865961710.1080/00405000108659617 ↗
27. Persson, B.N.J. (2007) Relation between interfacial separation and load: a general theory of contact mechanics. Phys. Rev. Lett. 99(12):1–4.10.1103/PhysRevLett.99.125502 ↗
28. Pino, A.O., Pladellorens, J., Colom, J.F. (2010) Method of measure of roughness of paper based in the analysis of the texture of speckle pattern. In: Speckle 2010: Optical Metrology. International Society for Optics and Photonics.10.1117/12.869655 ↗
29. Rigdahl, M., Westerlind, B., Hollmark, H. (1984) Analysis of cellulose networks by the finite element method. J. Mater. Sci. 19(12):3945–3952.10.1007/BF0098075810.1007/BF00980758 ↗
30. Samyn, P., Van Erps, J., Thienpont, H., Schoukens, G. (2011) Paper coatings with multi-scale roughness evaluated at different sampling sizes. Appl. Surf. Sci. 257(13):5613–5625.10.1016/j.apsusc.2011.01.05910.1016/j.apsusc.2011.01.059 ↗
31. Snaith, B., Edmondst, M.J., Probert, S.D. (1981) Use of a profilometer for surface mapping. Precis. Eng. 3(2):87–90.10.1016/0141-6359(81)90041-610.1016/0141-6359(81)90041-6 ↗
32. TAPPI T402 sp-08 (2013) Standard conditioning and testing atmosphere for paper, board, pulp handsheets, and related products.
33. TAPPI T575 om-07 (2012) Roughness of paper and paperboard, stylus (Emveco-type) method.
34. Thwaite, E.G. (1982) Surface topography measurement and analysis. Aust. J. Phys. 35(6):777–784.10.1071/PH82077710.1071/PH820777 ↗
35. van Kuilenburg, J., Masen, M.A., van der Heide, E. (2013) Contact modelling of human skin: What value to use for the modulus of elasticity? Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., Part J J. Eng. Tribol. 227(4):349–361.10.1177/135065011246330710.1177/1350650112463307 ↗
36. Wang, Y., De Assis, T., Zambrano, F., Pal, L., Venditti, R.A., Dasmohapatra, S., Gonzalez, R. (2018) Relationship between Human Perception of Softness and Instrument Measurements. BioResources 14(1):780–795.10.15376/biores.14.1.780-795 ↗
37. Yokura, H., Kohono, S., Iwasaki, M. (2004) Objective hand measurement of toilet paper. J. Text. Eng. 50(1):1–5.10.4188/jte.50.110.4188/jte.50.1 ↗
38. Zhai, C., Gan, Y., Hanaor, D., Proust, G., Retraint, D. (2016) The role of surface structure in normal contact stiffness. Exp. Mech. 56(3):359–368.10.1007/s11340-015-0107-010.1007/s11340-015-0107-0 ↗
39. Zhai, C., Hanaor, D., Gan, Y. (2017) Contact stiffness of multiscale surfaces by truncation analysis. Int. J. Mech. Sci. 131:305–316.10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2017.07.018 ↗