13.02.2013 Views

Evaluation of the tensile stress-strain properties in the thickness ...

Evaluation of the tensile stress-strain properties in the thickness ...

Evaluation of the tensile stress-strain properties in the thickness ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Test<strong>in</strong>g speed<br />

Paper material and adhesives exhibit a visco-elastic<br />

behavior, i.e. <strong>the</strong>ir response <strong>in</strong> terms <strong>of</strong> strength will<br />

change depend<strong>in</strong>g on <strong>the</strong> test<strong>in</strong>g speed. Rate dependency<br />

was not addressed <strong>in</strong> this paper. However <strong>the</strong> purpose<br />

was to test <strong>the</strong> material <strong>in</strong> a time w<strong>in</strong>dow <strong>in</strong> which <strong>the</strong><br />

<strong>stra<strong>in</strong></strong> rate had negligible <strong>in</strong>fluence on <strong>the</strong> material <strong>properties</strong>.<br />

The <strong>in</strong>fluence <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>stra<strong>in</strong></strong> rate was studied for<br />

120 g/m 2 paper sheets prepared with chemical pulp 2.<br />

Two different test<strong>in</strong>g speeds were used, 0.025 mm/s and<br />

0.0025 mm/s. The mean times to break were respectively<br />

6.7 and 66 seconds. No <strong>in</strong>fluence on <strong>the</strong> Z-directional<br />

<strong>tensile</strong> strength was found. The tests <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> follow<strong>in</strong>g part<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> article were <strong>the</strong>refore performed at 0.0025 mm/s<br />

speed.<br />

Stress <strong>stra<strong>in</strong></strong> curves<br />

Fig 6 presents four typical <strong>stress</strong>-<strong>stra<strong>in</strong></strong> curves for 300<br />

g/m 2 , one for each type <strong>of</strong> pulp studied <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> present<br />

<strong>in</strong>vestigation. The curves were calculated by Eq (8). The<br />

elastic moduli presented <strong>in</strong> this <strong>in</strong>vestigation were obta<strong>in</strong>ed<br />

by l<strong>in</strong>ear regression <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Z-directional <strong>stress</strong>-<strong>stra<strong>in</strong></strong><br />

curves. The limit at which l<strong>in</strong>earity was good approximation<br />

varied depend<strong>in</strong>g on <strong>the</strong> pulps. For TMP <strong>the</strong> elastic<br />

moduli were calculated up to 50% <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> strength. For<br />

chemical pulp <strong>the</strong> calculation limit was set to 80% <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

strength.<br />

Fig 6. True <strong>stress</strong>-<strong>stra<strong>in</strong></strong> curves for <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>vestigated handsheets.<br />

Sheets prepared from chemical pulps were stiffer than <strong>the</strong><br />

ones made <strong>of</strong> mechanical pulps. TMP was characterized<br />

by a <strong>stra<strong>in</strong></strong> at break around 8%, whereas <strong>stra<strong>in</strong></strong> at break<br />

for chemical pulp ranged from 1.4% to 1.8%. The postpeak<br />

behavior changed drastically for different pulps. For<br />

chemical pulp 2 <strong>the</strong> post-peak behavior was unstable at<br />

any grammage. For chemical pulp 1, post peak <strong>in</strong>stability<br />

was also present for low grammage handsheets, but for<br />

higher grammage <strong>the</strong> failure was stable. For TMP<br />

handsheets <strong>the</strong> failure was always stable.<br />

Z-directional <strong>tensile</strong> strength<br />

In Figs 7 to 10 <strong>the</strong> Z-directional <strong>tensile</strong> strength is shown<br />

as a function <strong>of</strong> grammage. The strength values are<br />

obta<strong>in</strong>ed us<strong>in</strong>g two different techniques, i.e. measurements<br />

performed by <strong>the</strong> custom built apparatus us<strong>in</strong>g<br />

adhesive, and data measured us<strong>in</strong>g double adhesive tape.<br />

Fig 7. Grammage versus Z-directional <strong>tensile</strong> strength plot for TMP1 obta<strong>in</strong>ed<br />

us<strong>in</strong>g two different test<strong>in</strong>g methods.<br />

Fig 8. Grammage versus Z-directional <strong>tensile</strong> strength plot for TMP2 obta<strong>in</strong>ed<br />

us<strong>in</strong>g two different test<strong>in</strong>g methods.<br />

Fig 9. Grammage versus Z-directional <strong>tensile</strong> strength plot for chemical pulp 1<br />

obta<strong>in</strong>ed us<strong>in</strong>g two different test<strong>in</strong>g methods.<br />

Fig 10. Grammage versus Z-directional <strong>tensile</strong> strength plot for chemical pulp 2<br />

obta<strong>in</strong>ed us<strong>in</strong>g two different test<strong>in</strong>g methods.<br />

Nordic Pulp and Paper Research Journal Vol 22 no. 1/2007 53

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!