1

Whats important in liner and

medium physical properties
Roman Popil, Ph.D.
Roman@gatech.edu
Institute of Paper Science
Georgia Tech,
Atlanta
Presentation for a general technical audience,
sponsored by AbitibiBowater

Coosa Pines Al,
2
Who is Roman Popil ?

Georgia Tech/IPST senior research scientist in
Atlanta since 2002

Principal Investigator of Engineered Packaging
research consortium program

Manager of IPST Paper Analysis lab for
contract testing and research

yes, send those
samples to me !

Been in paper industry R&D since 1986:
MacMillan Bloedel, Honeywell-measurex

PhD in plasma physics from the University of
British Columbia

Canadian, eh ?
hmm
3
Paper Physical Analysis
Paper Physical Analysis
Testing Services at IPST
Testing Services at IPST
Contact Roman Popil, Ph.D.
Lab Manager
404 894 9722
Roman@gatech.edu
Testing, seminars, consulting, research
4
IPST@ GT Paper Analysis Lab
5
What was requested for this seminar
1.

Liner and medium properties how they relate to end-use
2.

The IPST testing lab capabilities
3.

Market rends, use of recycle
4.

Lab equipment for tetsing
6
What you will see in this talk ?
Specifically

How BCT is related to ECT related to liner and
medium compression strength

Why caliper and bending stiffness matter as well

Why RCT is not a good measurement for
product optimization

How SCT is better for product optimization

How to use the SCT for product development

Some basic paper physics for background

How the TSI with BW and SCT can be used to
predict RCT anyway (if you must have RCT)

How to implement in an Autoline to predict RCT
7
Why measure compression
strength of medium or linerboard ?
A warehouse of
stacked boxes, the
customer wants the
boxes to remain
stacked and protect
the contents
Linerboard shows a buckling
pattern from vertical applied load
ECT
creep
test
BCT
creep
test
Strains increase until box panels
buckle, fold and collapse

stacks topple
What happens instead.
8
United States Rule 41

since 1991
certificastion

for shipping containers

Old rule

Burst(Mullen)

Why ??

alternative rule

ECT

much better
The requirement for
ECT allows reduction in
basis weight my
increasing the strength
of the board
9
Whats going on out there ???
Reports
typical
values
Reports
guaranteed
values
Scandinavia 1 Scandinavia 2 Spain Germany
Basis weight Basis weight Basis weight Basis weight
Moisture Moisture Moisture Moisture
Caliper Caliper
SCT
CD
(STFI) SCT
CD
(STFI) SCT
CD
(STFI) SCT
CD
(STFI)
SCT
MD
(STFI)
Tensile stiff.
MD
Tensile stiff.
MD
Tensile stiff.
CD
Tensile stiff.
CD
Burst Burst Burst Burst
Cobb Cobb Cobb Cobb
Scott bond Scott bond
ZDT
Pick resistance
Air permeance Air permeance Air permeance
Roughness Roughness
Friction Friction
Scandinavia 1 Scandinavia 2 Spain Germany
Basis weight Basis weight Basis weight Basis weight
Moisture Moisture Moisture Moisture
Caliper Caliper
SCT
CD
(STFI) SCT
CD
(STFI) SCT
CD
(STFI) SCT
CD
(STFI)
SCT
MD
(STFI)
Tensile stiff.
MD
Tensile stiff.
MD
Tensile stiff.
CD
Tensile stiff.
CD
Burst Burst Burst Burst
Cobb Cobb Cobb Cobb
Scott bond Scott bond
ZDT
Pick resistance
Air permeance Air permeance Air permeance
Roughness Roughness
Friction Friction
Tests on liners medium
10
Country Requirement
Belgium Burst, FCT
Denmark Burst, Puncture
FEFCO Burst, ECT ,Puncture
France Burst, ECT
Italy Burst, FCT
South-East Asia Burst, Basis weight
Sweden Burst, ECT, FCT
Switzerland Burst, ECT
USA,Canada Burst, ECT, basis weight
United Kingdom Burst, FCT
Japan Thickness, ECT,FCT
Tests on corrugated board
11
Corrugated board weight trend
From the magazine:
Solutions! February
2006
143#
122#
102#
12
Compression strength is a key
property for box performance
Box compression is predicted by the McKee
(1963) equation:
Z D D ECT C BCT
CD MD
4 / 1 4 / 3
) ) ( =
Board edge compression
strength
board bending stiffness
Box
perimeter
BCT in lbs
ECT in lb/in
Ds in lb-in
Z = box (length + width) x 2 in inches
13
ECT is related to liner and medium
compression strengths
) 2 ( "
medium liner
SCT SCT C ECT o + =
Compression strength of
linerboard
Board take-up factor
(length of medium to liner)
C flute 1.42
B flute 1.25
A flute 1.50
Compression strength
of medium
14
ECT Methods: Clamp vs

Neckdown
vs

Waxed Edge
Sumitomo and Emerson ECT clamps, 200
grit sandpaper on jaw faces, 10 psi
pressure from spring clamps, we measure
5 psi

is that ok ?
References on T 839: Schampfer

10, 15,
Eriksson 40
L&W neckdown ECT sample
cutter, localizes compressive
failure
References: Koning

23, Frank,
38, Eriksson 40
15
Bending stiffness of corrugated board
2
2
board liner liner
h t E
D ~
Board caliper
Liner
modulus
Liner
caliper
liner liner
t E strength tensile linerboard =
16
Measurement of transverse shear
stiffness of board

using the IPST torsion pendulum tester
also requires 4 point measurement of
board bending stiffness
Ensis Papro DST

tester measures
the twisting frequency of 4 x 1

board
specimens
Both methods require cutting and
mounting of samples
17
How do we measure loss of
transverse shear from crushing ?

developed at IPST from 1
st

principles,
calibrated output using weights

damped twisting motion of a board is analyzed
by a computer program to find the twisting
stiffness

bending stiffnesses of the test specimen are
found by 4 point L&W tester

the transverse shear stiffness is calculated
using an equation

Ensis Papro (New Zealand) also has developed
a similar dynamic twist tester
IPST torsion pendulum
18
Box performance depends on the
strength of the components

Historically, strength of board and
components has been measured by:

Mullen burst

Ring Crush

Short Span Compression Test (SCT)

Edge Crush test (waxed method) also clamp
method
19
Other alternatives to measure
transverse shear:
BQM from XQ Innovations Australia,
measures the resonant frequency of a board
vibrated along the MD, -

no sample prep
required, one button press provides a number
in seconds
The measured area of
the board must not
have anything
underneath it.
MD
20
Hydraulic sample clamp actuated
by moving rings down
Rubber diaphragm bulges outward as glycerin gets pumped into the
chamber
Electronic
display of max
burst pressure
in psi
Note:
After burst you must

pull

the lever back
to neutral, otherwise
the diaphragm will
burst !!
CA

type Mullen for testing handsheets and paper up to 100
psi. Calibration foils are 30, 65 and 110 psi
21
Ctrl+9 to start a
new
measurement
PF2
Spec no. 1 or
100
L&W Burst tester for linerboard, Calibration foils are 110 and 160 psi
22
The line of the burst will often be along the MD
23
Burst measures a combination of
properties
From theory considerations the pressure to burst a sheet is
proportional to:
MD and CD tensile strengths, s

MD stretch at
failure, R diaphragm curvature
24
Burst is dependent on many factors
25
SCT and RCT testing worldwide

USA

Some are using only RCT

other only SCT

Some both, SCT on low basis weight
and RCT on high basis weight

Europe

SCT dominating

Asia

RCT almost only

Australia

Moving from RCT to SCT
26
Tests
Basis
Weight
Hard
Caliper Density
(g/m2) (microns) (g/cm3) md cd Ex (GPa) Ey (Gpa) Vxy Vyx G (Gpa)
Roll 96048
14# med 65.82 144.24 0.46 0.33 0.13 4.16 1.74 0.18 0.42 0.98
Roll 96044
16# med 78.16 162.74 0.48 0.55 0.17 4.7 1.13 -0.03 -0.13 0.96
Roll 96038
18# med 86.36 175.6 0.49 0.79 0.28 4.42 1.71 0.14 0.36 1.03
Roll 96033
20# med 94.58 183.65 0.51 0.94 0.36 4.41 2.05 0.17 0.37 1.14
Doug C 26#
med 125.25 252.9 0.5 2.03 0.8 1.85 4.31 0.32 0.14 1.08
Roll 99004
33# med 162.69 329.6 0.49 4.23 2.11 3.64 2.05 0.18 0.32 1.07
42# Liner A 203.97 293.26 0.7 9.31 4.61 7.13 3.54 0.17 0.33 1.94
42# Liner B 209.54 294.22 0.71 8.46 2.95 7.04 2.34 0.05 0.016 1.63
42# Liner C 211.78 318.84 0.67 11.42 3.66 6.46 2.59 0.14 0.34 1.55
2 pt L&W (mNm) In-plane Ultrasonic velocities data
Some typical properties for linerboard/
medium set
Density of medium is 0.5 g/cm
3
Density of linerboards are 0.7 g/cm3
Bending stiffness
27
Tests
STFI lbf/in
(cd only) Taber units in mN-m
MD Slope
(N/mm)
CD Slope
(N/mm)
MD
Ten.Stiff
(N/mm)
CD
Ten.Stiff
(N/mm) md cd md cd
Roll 96048
14# med 63.606 26.723 445.336 187.124 6.04 1.66 0.73 0.162846 0.071613
Roll 96044
16# med 86.484 24.94 605.6 174.643 6.8 2.82 0.93 0.276642 0.091233
Roll 96038
18# med 75.5 23.057 529.48 161.583 7.96 3.53 1.43 0.346293 0.140283
Roll 96033
20# med 81.783 27.492 573.532 192.661 8.8 4.52 2.15 0.443412 0.210915
Doug C 26#
med 112.549 41.728 788.64 292.429 13.55 12.38 6.43 1.214478 0.630783
Roll 99004
33# med 130.31 60.093 912.764 421.027 19.82 26.79 14.1
2.628099 1.38321
42# Liner A 194.91 88.752 1365.885 622.111 27.12 53.56 31.65 5.254236 3.104865
42# Liner B 182.951 61.354 1281.896 429.92 22.47 50.87 17.96 4.990347 1.761876
42# Liner C 191.789 70.67 1343.845 495.546 23.36 61.03 23.6 5.987043 2.31516
Instron (tensile) data
Bending Stiffness
(Taber Unit) (gmf-cm)
Some properties of
linerboard/medium
Virgin unbleached 42# softwood kraft
80/20 virgin/recycle
28
Box performance is predicted
based on strength of the
components of the board


Figure 1) Whitsitt Relationship of ECT to Composite Ring Crush
Whitsitt
1983, IPC
Related
ECT to
RCT:
(1)

ECT = 0.8 * (RCT
1
+ RCT
2
+ RCT
Med

) + 12
For linerboards > 42 lb/msf
(2)

ECT = 1.27 * (RCT
1
+ RCT
2
+ RCT
Med

) -

6
For linerboards < 42 lb/msf
Different equations
for different basis
weightshmmm
29
ECT predictive models based on
SCT are simpler
{ }
7 . 0
2
~
+ =
C
SCT SCT C ECT
medium liner
o
87 . 5 =
'

'
=
C
Z t ECT C BCT
Simplified McKee equation
for box compression:
Take-up factor for
the medium ~ 1.42
for C flute
Corrugated
board caliper
Box footprint
perimeter
30
Butthe linerboard industry still
sells by the Ring Crush spec

manual measurement, cannot be
automated

requires accurate cutting of sample

cant easily do handsheets
handling of the sample

measurement of sample caliper and
selection of the correct
fixture insert

it is actually a combination of
compression and

bending failure, this is not good for
optimization programs
Ford Highland Park plant

Model T magneto assembly
line
31
Ring Crush method
Sample and holder
between
compression platens

what could go
wrong ??
32
By golly, youre right

!!

These results are
absolutely ridiculous

!!
Ohhlets just send the report
out anyway

ha,ha.ha!!
The trouble of RCT measurement
RCT measurement is prone to
many types of errorssome can
be human

33
The RCT vs SCT debate
For RCT:
1.

Frank, Benjamin (Tappi J., Sept. 2007) RCT has lower
coefficient of variation, correlation with ECT is better because:
a) test occurs over a larger test piece more
averaging, smaller variability
b) Bending occurs in ECT and box failure
Against RCT:
2.

Seth, Fellers etc., SCT is the intrinsic compression strength of

the linerboard,
3.

Variability is inherent in the linerboard due to contaminants,
defects, formation
4.

SCT is more easily optimized through wet end deification,
furnish changes or refining
5.

RCT is not available on in-line automated testing machines.
6.

RCT requires more sample preparation and handling.
34
RCT is supposed to predict BCT
BCT test
35
Then which way is the length of the
test strip for CD and MD tests ?
Can you cut the strips exactly along MD or CD, should they be together
or spread apart, how far apart is good enough, what do you do for small
handsheets ?
36
Cutter for 15 mm wide 4 inch span
samples
However, parallel edges not so critical for SCT can use a ratchet
cutter for consecutively adjacent strips handy for handsheet samples
37
Got to use a different cutter for ring
crush though
Both look the same

need to read the small label !
38
Ring Crush
Samples are
6 inches long
and 12.5 mm
(1/2 ) wide
Use different
center island

inserts
depending on
the caliper for
the specimen
39
I dont know about you,
but I am wearing
gloves to protect my
nice new nail job !
Gloves ??
NahWhat for ?!
Calm cool technicians required with dry hands
40
IPST data ex Mike Schaepe
I sure hope
you like my
data !
Whats this ??
41
Short Span Compression Test is
SCT

STFI = SVENSKA
TRFORSKNINGSINSTITUTET (Swedish
Forest Products Research Laboratory , now
renamed Inventia)
Test method was developed
by Christer Fellers in the
late 1970s
The short span compression
test is not STFI
Christer gets another award from Jeffrey Suhling
42
Fun Fact (from a student presentation

)

Compression tests are all called *CT, e.g.
FCT, ECT, BCT, but SCT is rather new

Many call the short span compression test
SCT as STFI, pronounced stiffy

Why is this a bad

idea ??

Answer: ________
Unfortunately, I can
see your STFI

is way
down today
Ahem.. um, ah

my what

?!!!..
43
Corrugated medium comparison SCT
and RCT
ECT
SCT
RCT
ECT increased in accordance with SCT results.
RCT predicted ECT decrease.
Conclusion:
SCT is better suited for low grammage corrugated medium
than RCT.
IPC, Whitsitt 1985
44
Note the difference
between STFI and
RCT (about 2 X)
At very high
basis weights
and calipers, get
slip: more
surface
compression
SCT and RCT comparison
45
Effect of grammage and density
RCT
Christer Fellers

slide
Increased buckling for lightweights
decreases RCT with density
46
Sample strip
Pressurized
clamps
prevent
slipping
CD
0.7 mm gap between
clamping jaws
47
The L&W SCT
On-board test sample
moisture correction is
available, based on resistance
measurement requires
calibration that is furnish
dependent

unused at IPST
since all samples are
conditioned
Instrument is checked
periodically using a selected
standard paper sample kept in
a drawer with its data history
for instant comparison
For mill QC use

samples must be conditioned to 50% RH
equilibriumfastest way cut 6

x 15mm strips, place in microwave
oven for 10 seconds, hang separated strips in a draft for ~ 2 hours,
then

test
Simple
strip
insertion,
one button
operation
Strip edge
parallelism
not critical
48
After many years of service
Thermal dot matrix
printer dots fades,
rollers wear out
Green LED
read-out fades,
missing dots
Keyboard button
contacts become
erratic or fail
Unit must be in a conditioned lab, if taken into humid environments
(e.g. mill floor) electronics will be affected
49
Shows that specific
STFI is
independent of
basis weight and is
a property of the
fiber consolidation
SCT works because over the 0.7
mm test span there is no bending
Euler buckling
curves
50
Real compressive failure is
marked by material
breakdown and occurs when
the column height prohibits
buckling
When testing a strip, the crease is
often hard to see

looks like
nothing has happened
51
STFI or SCT (Short Span Compression Test) is
considered to be the intrinsic compression test strength
for linerboard

this is how you can understand

what affects it through a Page equation

model for SCT:
Note the
dependence on fiber
modulus (fibril
angle,species)
and sheet density
(wet pressing)
Can affect
this by low
consistency
refining
52
Effects of Processes on Compressive strength using SCT
Excerpted from
Paper Physics

by
Niskanen
53
Shows the only way to change
SCT is to change the furnish
and beating level of fibers
Recall the Shallhorn Gurnagul
model for SCT
Graphs excerpted from
the Handbook of
Physical Testing
Using SCT
54
Ring Crush is affected by the bending stiffness and the
caliper of the test specimen so is not a true
compression test
Note the dependence on Taber
and caliper in this empirical
relationship
Note that Taber is a bending stiffness
measurement
Tappi Journal 1998
55
Why the bending stiffness of linerboard matters
Video observation of ECT tests show:
a) No out-of-plane buckling at higher basis weights
b) Slight buckling at low basis weights for A and C flute boards
Schaepe and Popil
2006
Buckling of
linerboard
facings occurs in
A and C flute,
more so for
lightweights
56
We can calculate the buckling load for
linerboard using MD and CD Bending Stiffness
Taber has historically
been used for 2 point
bending stiffness of
liners and medium,
Taber measures
bending moment

M
not stiffness EI/b !
We did a lot of work with an L&W 2 point
stiffness tester, a more straightforward
design, cross calibrated instruments with
stainless steel shims.
From linear elasticity theory, the conversion
factor from Taber moment M to stiffness D
is:
67 . 1
3
=
|
|
.
|

\
|
= = M
b
L
M
b
EI
D
u
This means that Taber x 1.67 bending
stiffness !!
57
Wet pressing increases SCT but
lowers bending stiffness
12 /
3
Et D =
As density increases SCT
increases but bending stiffness
goes down
what is going on is
that the caliper
decreases lowering D
STFI vs density
200 gsm: y = 24.501Ln(x) + 42.411
R
2
= 0.9949
300 gsm y = 40.655Ln(x) + 61.97
R
2
= 0.9999
160 gsm: y = 12.587Ln(x) + 25.411
R
2
= 0.9895
100 gsm: y = 10.107Ln(x) + 19.315
R
2
= 0.954
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0.35 0.45 0.55 0.65 0.75 0.85 0.95
Density gsm
S
T
F
I

l
b
/
i
n
Lab data using kraft
handsheets pressed
to various densities
58
Wet pressing increases SCT but
lowers bending stiffness
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
0.35 0.45 0.55 0.65 0.75 0.85
Density (g/cm
3
)
G
e
o
m
e
t
r
i
c

m
e
a
n

b
e
n
d
i
n
g

s
t
i
f
f
n
e
s
s

(
m
N
-
m
)

10 gsm
150 gsm
200 gsm
300 gsm
12 /
3
Et D =
As density increases SCT
increases but bending stiffness
goes down
what is going on is
that the caliper
decreases lowering D
59
Wet pressing increases density
increases SCT but decreases
bending stiffness
12
3
Et
D =
For linerboard:
Modulus increases with wet
pressing from increased bonding
Linerboard
caliper
E SCT o
60
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0.25 0.35 0.45 0.55 0.65 0.75 0.85 0.95 1.05
Density (g/cm
3
)
E
C
T

(
k
N
/
m
)
100 gsm
160 gsm
200 gsm
Predicting ECT for handsheets using SCT and bending stiffness
relationships to determine the ECT as a function of density for handsheets
for various basis weights as specified.
More buckling occurs with increased wet
pressing so this limits ECT
The ECT buckling model is used to predict the
optimum liner density for ECT
The ECT buckling
model predicts the
optimal density for
160 gsm liner
single wall C flute
to be 0.75 g/cm
3
Note the Peak
ECT occurs
here
61
How can RCT and SCT be related ?

(current IPST ongoing research)

RCT is a combination of bending and
compression failure

SCT is compression failure only

McKee reasoning for plate failure as a
combination of compression and bending takes
the empirical form:
) 1 (`
) ( ) (
b b
load Buckling strength n Compressio
load failure n Compressio

=
Related to the bending stiffness which depends on
the structure e.g, round tube, plate, flute shape, etc.
62
Buckling load for a thin walled tube:
r
t E
cr

=
) 1 ( 3
2
v
o
r = 24.2. mm
t = 0.3 mm
l

= 6 mm
E x t is tensile
stiffness
For this formula to
hold need to fit one
half wave into the tube
height:
mm t r
m
l
7 . 4 72 . 1 = =
Yep, specimen is high enough to
buckle -

so we can use this formula
for buckling of the RCT sample
From Timoshenko and
Gere:
63
We can get a measure of the ring
buckling load using the L&W TSI
By measuring the speed of sound in paper,
basis weight and the caliper we can
estimate the tensile stiffness
The tensile stiffness is directly proportional
to the buckling load of a thin walled tube.
This can all be done instantly and
automatically
64
Combining measurements to
predict RCT
The Autoline for linerboard will have SCT, caliper, basis weight, and a
TSI

these measurements can be combined to fit an RCT model, the
model can be programmed into the Autoline software to provide a

calculated estimated equivalent value for RCT
But first lets review a few concepts before we see how to do this
65
MD
ZD
CD
Paper consists of 50 to 30% air
and a network of bonded fibers
aligned predominantly along the
MD

machine direction
Fibers: former wood cells,
typically 1

3 mm long, 50
microns wide
PAPER STUCTURE -
OVERSIMPLIFIED
SEM surface
SEM x-section
For box making applications, only CD
compression is considered
66
Paper as a 3D spring:
CD CD CD
E c o ~
MD MD MD
E c o ~
In 1D we have Hookes law for
the Force F to move a spring
distance x
F = k x
For a 3D solid slab such as paper, we have by analogy, (actually
a good physical analogy is the common cellulosic cleaning
sponge) the pressure or stress

required to displace the solid by
a strain

for each principal direction:
ZD ZD ZD
E c o ~
The Es here are the elastic moduli for each of the 3 directions
The s are the strains i.e. relative changes in displacement :

/

0
67
To a good approximation:
Es and sound speed
2
21 12
2
2
21 12
2
) 1 (
) 1 (
CD CD CD
MD MD MD
V V E
V V E
v v
v v
~ =
~ =
Moduli (MD or CD) = apparent density x velocity squared
We can measure the speed of sound propagating along the plane of

the
sheet using a pair of transducers:
time
Volts
Transmitted pulse Received pulse
?
68
Bimorph paddle

transducers
apart for far

reading
Close up of transducers for near

reading in shear mode, transducers
are rotated for longitudinal mode
IPC 1970s Robot Arm difference method technique
From successive pairs of measurements a 2 distances get
Poisson ration, and shear modulus

15 minutes per test
Measuring sound speed in paper
69
IPST Robot Arm from the 1980s
4 user selectable
measuring
stations
Robot arm end
effector rotates
for polar plots
Takes an hour
for a 2 degree
resolution plot
You know,
Id rather not
wait an hour

for just one
polar plot,
thanks !!
A typical lab techs response
Lars Ingman

marketed a version through Robotest
Sonisys

now has an updated version called UTI
70
L&W TSI comes to the rescue
8 pairs of transducers fixed distance, head comes down at a higher
pressure for basis weights > 100 gsm
Polar plot and V
2
produced in 6 seconds but:
Might be influenced by low density and high roughness to produce

underestimates of V
2
Socorrelation of V
2

from TSI vs tensile stiffness has to be verified
for particular sample sets
71
L&W TSI measures V
CD
2

= TSI_CD
CD TSI BW t V
t
BW
t V t E
CD
_
2 2
= = =
For the buckling load part in the RCT model we need E x t
This is the same as:
So the buckling load in an RCT model becomes:
{ } CD TSI BW C
r
t E
cr
_
) 1 ( 3
2

' '
=

=
v
o
With C

being constant since r and the Poisson ratios
do not change appreciably
72
Modeling RCT in terms of
combined compression and
buckling strengths
b b
Et SCT C RCT

=
1
) ( ) (
Based on McKee reasoning for the compression strength of a plate

but
instead replacing the buckling load of a plate by that for a thin cylindrical
ring (e.g. Roarks formulas) where:
P
cr
is the buckling load for a ring is proportional to Et
Et = tensile stiffness ( modulus E times sheet thickness t) = constant x (v
2
)
x basis weight
Can get v^2 ( specific stiffness) from L&W TSI output
so

can now get an RCT value by measuring SCT, BW and TSI_CD
The model for ring crush is proposed as:
73
Ultrasonic tensile vs Instron N/mm
y = 1.7524x - 73.305
R
2
= 0.9829
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
0 200 400 600 800 1000
Series1
Linear (Series1)
This shows that TSI * BW = Et when E x t is measured by
the Instron as tensile stiffness
T
S
I

x

B
W


(
N
/
m
m
)
Instron tensile stiffness (N/mm)
Ultrasonically
measured values
are always higher
than mechanical
equivalents
74
I
P
S
T

i
n
-
p
l
a
n
e

s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c

s
t
i
f
f
n
e
s
s

(
k
m
/
s
)
2
TSI index
TSI vs IPST V^2
y = 1.0821x - 0.1875
R
2
= 0.9782
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Series1
Linear (Series1)
Sample ID
42 lb kraft liner
33 lb medium
26 lb medium
56 lb liner WC
16 lb medium
18 lb medium
OCC 42lb liner
20 lb medium
3m mylar
yellow copy
inkjet mylar
WAM 33#
blotter
TSI checkout with IPST Robot
CD values
MD values
Correlation looks ok for a variety of various liners medium,
copy paper and plastic film
75
C = 0.349467355
b = 0.362403921
STFI (lb/in)) Ri ng Cr ush (lb) ET Model error^2
18.6 61.48 688.8574233 65.02243389 12.54883787
22.43 76.06 837.696652 78.83173899 7.682537056
22.069 101.15 1066.474227 91.41300701 94.80903252
30.813 118.4 1172.550736 109.5963138 77.50488992
31.231 122.4 1350.911968 120.5385411 3.465029404
33.467 129.6 1378.359952 125.192706 19.42424044
46.08 158.41 1640.9707 157.1106897 1.688207376
35.829 126.49 1421.312619 130.8608967 19.10473791
53.631 161.49 1652.173551 166.7145053 27.29545532
26.209 98.46 1136.489074 101.3153034 8.152757588
40.786 160.2 1556.65121 145.3418956 220.7632653
21.702 74.34 875.2949972 80.10608446 33.24773006
34.443 125.36 1285.666476 121.0113364 18.91087478
16.051 61.98 680.5922305 61.16781024 0.6596522
28.64 98.77 1063.086323 100.264588 2.233793158
22.178 87.82 961.1309916 85.70075308 4.491207499
14.288 39 661.461174 57.58578752 345.4314977
17.155 65.7 882.722197 73.96061475 68.23775609
7.539 15.15 281.03 26.46449812 128.0178676
8.599 21.9 331.8952 30.86274479 80.3307942
9.981 25.47 394.284 36.35707584 118.5284204
14.975 44.99 534.2069 51.11413764 37.5050618
22.193 74.09 747.9719 73.05644945 1.068226737
1331.101873 sum error
RSQ= 0.980453481
model:
RCT = (STFI)^b(Et)^(1-b)
Et = TSIxBW
C = 0.35, b = 0.36
q38
This is the spreadsheet analysis using Excel Solver

to fit the model
RCT = C x (SCT)
b

x (Et)
(1-b)

i.e., a McKee

style equation for RCT
using a combination of compression strength (SCT) and buckling load
( ~ Et which in turn, is TSI x BW)
Data is for a
series of
linerboards and
medium of a wide
range of basis
weights
64 . 0 36 . 0
) ( ) ( 35 . 0
CD
TSI SCT RCT=
Model to calculate an
equivalent RCT
Got data ? Send it to me to analyze ! Roman@gatech.edu
76
Ri ng Crush vs SCT
y = 3.591x - 1.3082
R
2
= 0.9371
y = 0.8825x + 12.246
R
2
= 0.9805
0
50
100
150
200
250
0 50 100 150 200
SCT (lb/in) or 0.35 SCT
.36
(TSI)
.64
R
i
n
g

C
r
u
s
h

(
l
b
/
6

i
n
)
Ring Crush (lb)
Bending model
Linear (Ring Crush
(lb))
Linear (Bending
model )
This shows that the r
2

improves from 0.94 to 0.98 if we use a non-linear bending
model for RCT: the value is that we get a better prediction for RCT using SCT,
BW and TSI_CD
MSE linear = 2.26 lbs
MSE bending model =
1.59 lbs
64 . 0 36 . 0
) ( ) ( 35 . 0
CD
TSI SCT RCT=
77
Will this always work ?

If just using Et = D x (TSI_CD) x BW the assumption of stiffness being
proportional to failure may not hold if:
1.

stress-strain curve is changed by increased or decreased
ductility of paper
2.

addition of filler, starch, impregnation with polymer, radical
change in fiber species
Compression
load
Compression Displacement
TSI_CD
RCT 1

linerboard
RCT 2

waxed linerboard
RCT

refined linerboard
Comparable

stiffnesses but different failure loads can occur
78
Relevance to Industry, you, me, the
world and everything else..
Current requirement to address the manufacture of recyclable boxes for food and
produce transport meeting FDA specs must be produced locally demand
cannot decline with a growing population.
Chinese corrugated production volume surpassed US already in 2008
Overseas product and shipping containers are not a threat to this
market: food transport and packaging
Mullens here are bogus
Doublewall BC box for
furniture shipping
Single wall B flute box for
PC monitor
79
Corrugated is not going away
Thank you:
Abitibi-Bowater
Awwright !!
Lets make boxes !!
Yeeaahh!!
Hasta la
Vista, RCT
!!
Questions, problems, testing, research

Roman@gatech.edu
80
Thank you
serving the paper industry since 1929to survive is to do
research, to thrive is to implement