Converting Quarterly title
The Official
Technical Magazine
of AIMCAL
small AIMCAL logo
  Search

Web Handling & Converting

Blogmaster: Dr. David Roisum

10

The choice of which instrument to use depends on many factors such as history of use in your company (such as having a legacy of prior measurements because you can’t readily translate readings or scales from one device to another), whether the instrument is to be mill duty (such as the original Schmidt Hammer) or more sensitive but at the same time more delicate, ease of use, price and many others.

However, the number one priority should be resolution.  A poor instrument or application is no better than a random number generator.  So what affects the resolution of any particular device and application?  A number of factors such as whether you are measuring on a parent or finished roll (surprisingly, the looser wound parent roll may sometimes give better results), roll geometries (diameter and width), who is holding the instrument (depends on care, experience and other factors).  Not surprisingly, the hardness of the roll affects the goodness of the roll hardness measurement.  Tissue (nonwovens, textiles etc) and board (foils etc) may at the ends of the scales of these instruments and may not result in good resolution.  Also, for reasons not yet clear, results on film are not as predictive (of roll defects) as they are on paper where hardness almost always works (even better than most test labs and million dollar scanners for profile applications).

I answered this question of how to ‘test the tester’ back in 1988 and the technique is as valid then as it is today.  It is simple; you compare the resolution of instruments (testers, grades etc) by taking a roll with a known upset and using the Z-test to determine which instrument (etc) can resolve a smaller value for a given confidence.  A known upset is easy to make in a wound roll by simply turning up all the TNT’s tightness knobs on the winder on the bottom half of a roll and then suddenly turning them in the loose direction for the top half.  Compare the standard deviation of hardness across the width two inches above and below this step change.  Alternatively, you can take a roll with a known violent profile variation and compare the variation of the hardness measurements at a gage band and at a gage valley.  Details and demonstration of application and results are given in the many places where you How to Measure Roll Quality has been published.

So, try before you buy, or at least test before you test.  At least one of the companies, TMI, will loan or rent a device for your evaluation.  This seems fair since there is no way of knowing for sure (especially for non-paper applications), whether these best of the best roll quality measurements is even any good.  Even if it is not sensitive to defects on one grade, do not give up yet, you should try it on another because that grade may perform better.

Comments

Tuesday, November 22, 2011 8:44 AM
The impact angle alters the reading on the scale as the rebound of the hammer mass is affected by gravity. Therefore it is imperative to always use the same impact angle. (TAPPI T 834 om-07 recommends measuring horizontally). Higher values will be obtained on the same roll when impacting horizontally as opposed to impacting vertically.


#276 David Roisum
Tuesday, November 22, 2011 10:40 AM
Thanks for the comment and reference. You are absolutely correct about holding in the same direction. On the top of the roll is usually easiest with the Rhometer, on the side is usually easiest with the others. In all cases, the angle should be perpendicular to the roll's surface in both planes and the trigger (or equivalent) pulled at the same speed. Never repeat a reading at the same location; if you need more readings, move around the circumference (for doing profile) or sideways (for doing averages) a couple of inches.

Post Comment

Name (required)

Email (required)

Website

CAPTCHA image
Enter the code shown above:

Blogmaster

David Roisum photo

Dr. David Roisum

Dr. Roisum is a well-known authority in the area of web handling and converting. He has authored seven books, including Winding, Rollers and Web-Handling and has coauthored or edited several others. He was a technical editor for Converting Magazine with a monthly column entitled "Web Works." An accomplished professional speaker and instructor, Roisum has been praised for his skill at translating highly technical information into a common sense practical reference. Dave has been honored by TAPPI with their Finishing & Converting Division Award, Thomas W. Busch Prize and Finest Faculty awards and is a TAPPI Fellow. Dave received his Ph.D. from the Web Handling Research Center where he later became an Industrial Advisory Board member.

Dave has worked for the Beloit Corporation as a designer of winding machinery and later as a manager of research, and for Kimberly-Clark as a converting expert serving all business units. He is now a principal of Finishing Technologies Inc., providing consulting services to more than 300 clients who convert or manufacture: paper, film, foil, nonwovens, textiles and many other materials. He has accumulated much practical experience working in nearly 1,000 plants over the course of more than three decades.