MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392123285 · doi:10.15376/frc.2005.2.827

Peeling Pressure Sensitive Tape from Paper

2005· article· en· W4392123285 on OpenAlex
Boxin Zhao, Robert Pelton, Vasiliki Bartzoka

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMaterial Properties and Processing
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdhesiveDelamination (geology)Materials scienceComposite materialPaperboardLogarithmRange (aeronautics)Failure mode and effects analysisSteady state (chemistry)MechanicsLayer (electronics)MathematicsMathematical analysisPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ability of adhesives to bond paper and paperboard is critical for most packaging and converting operations. Despite the huge body of literature describing both paper and adhesives technologies, there are only a few research papers describing paper/adhesive interactions. Described herein are the results of a systematic investigation of pressure sensitive adhesive (PSA) peeling from paper. The peel force versus peel distance curve depends upon the failure mode. A constant force is observed when the PSA cleanly separates from paper (i.e. interfacial failure) at low peel rate. By contrast, at high peeling rates, in the paper failure domain, the peel force climbs to a maximum and then relaxes to a steady-state value. The maximum peel force, which we call the peak force, corresponds to the fracture of the top layer of fibres during the initiation of paper delamination whereas the steady-state peel force occurs during the propagation of paper delamination. To characterize the range of behaviors it is necessary to conduct a series of peeling experiments over an extended range of peel rates. The results are best analyzed by plotting the peak peel force versus the peel rate on logarithmic axes giving what we call a peel map. For a broad range of tape/paper combinations, peel maps have similar shapes. The interfacial failure domain consists of a linear segment with a positive slope. This line intersects with a horizontal line segment at higher peel rates, corresponding to the paper failure domain. Principal component analysis, a multivariate statistical analysis, of a large set of peel maps was used to reveal the influence of paper properties on peeling. The peak peel forces in the paper failure domain correlated with standard paper properties linked to z-directional strength. The slopes of the peel maps in the interfacial domain were independent of paper properties but were sensitive to adhesive rheology. The absolute location of the interfacial segment of the peel map mainly was sensitive to the chemical composition of the paper surface and secondarily related to surface roughness. Water contact angles on paper were not good predictors of adhesion. Finally, we illustrate the utility of peak peel force in the paper failure domain as a measure of paper surface strength.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.506
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.172
Teacher spread0.166 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMaterial Properties and ProcessingFrench-language works237,207