PAPERmaking! Vol5 Nr2 2019

Nagasawa, Kaneko and Adachi, Journal of Advanced Mechanical Design, Systems, and Manufacturing, Vol.13, No.1 (2019)

exponential coefficient p 1 of bending resistance was almost equal to that of uni-axial tensile displacement. This means that the tensile relaxation of in-plane direction is a major factor in the bending resistance. Regarding the relationship between the release angle T 2,1 and the elapsed release time t 2ep , the linear approximation with the logarithmic term ln( t 2ep ) was introduced (Nagasawa, et al., 2016) as Eq.(3),(4). Here, the intercept b 0 was defined as T 2,1 (1) (at t 2ep =1s), b 1 was the gradient coefficient of Eq.(3), and the exponential coefficient p 2 was defined as the ratio of b 1 / b 0 . They describe the creep-recovery characteristics of folded angle.

T 2,1 =  b 1 ln(t 2ep ) + b 0 T 2,1 / b 0 =  ߠ ҧ ଶǡଵ = 1  p 2 ln( t 2ep ) , p 2 = b 1 / b 0

(3)



(4) 

Since the transient response seems to be caused by the relaxation and creep-recovery characteristics of paperboard during the folding process, the effect of fixture’s rotational velocity Z (folding) and Z ' (unfolding) on the release angle T 2,1 ( t 2ep ) was investigated for the range of t 2ep =0~10s when J = 0.6. The synchronized condition of Z = Z ’ was mainly investigated and its value was chosen as 0.02, 0.03, 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3 and 0.4 rps (0.13, 0.19, 0.31, 0.63, 1.26, 1.88, 2.51 rad ή s  ). For the sake of comparison of asynchronous condition, when the returning back velocity was chosen as a constant of Z ’=0.2 rps (1.26 rad ή s  ), the folding velocity Z was chosen as 0.02, 0.03, 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3 and 0.4 rps (0.13, 0.19, 0.31, 0.63, 1.26, 1.88, 2.51 rad ή s  ). 3. Results and discussion 3.1 Response of bending moment with rotational velocity In the synchronized condition of Z = Z ’= 0.2 rps (1.26 rad ή s  ), Fig.8 illustrated a representative case of bending moment resistance M with the folding angle T . Since the intermediate stage (20°< T <90°) appeared to be a sort of creep response of Maxwell type two-element model in Fig.8, the values of M p1 and M 90,1 (0) were expected to increase with Z . When varying the velocity Z = Z ’), the maximum peak bending moment M p1 , and the relaxed bending moment at t 1ep = 0s, 1s with 4 = 90°: M 90,1 (0), M 90,1 (1) were measured and shown in Fig.11. Eq. (5), (6), (7) were derived as linear approximations with the logarithmic term ln( Z /0.2) from the experimental result. M p1 = 0.013 ln( Z /0.2) + 0.244 (5) M 90,1 (0) = 0.0061 ln( Z /0.2) + 0.215 (6) M 90,1 (1) = a 0 =  0.004 ln( Z /0.2) + 0.175 (7) Seeing Eq.(5),(6), the bending moment under the folding process increased with the rotational velocity Z = Z ’). This tendency matched the prediction of Maxwell type relaxation response. However, the relaxed bending moment M 90,1 (1) decreased with Z = Z ’) from Eq. (7). This means that the dissipation energy or the bending moment drop increases with the rotational velocity Z for a short duration t ep1 <1s.

0.3

Eq.(5) Eq.(6)

0.2

0.1

Eq.(7) Eq.(8)

M p1 M 90,1 (0)

M 90,1 (1) M 90,1 (20)

4 = 90

㼻 , J = 0.6

0

Z Z ǯ ) /rps

0.01

0.1

1

Rotational velocity

Figure 11 Dependency of bending moment on rotational velocity. The unfolding velocity Z ’ was equal to the folding velocity Z . As the representative quantities of bending moment resistance, the maximum peak M p1 , the relaxed three states at the tracking position M 90,1 (0), M 90,1 (1) and M 90,1 (20) were plotted as the average (with the maximum and minimum bar).

Seeing the preliminary experiment (Nagasawa, et al., 2015, Fig.14), since the exponential coefficient of relaxation p 1

© 2019 The Japan Society of Mechanical Engineers

[DOI: 10.1299/jamdsm.2019jamdsm0004]

2 6

Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs