PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATE DUE

DATE DUE

DATE DUE

 

J9§1°§290§

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

11/00 animus-914

._.,.__ a _ ._____._ _

 

MODEL FOR PREDICTING APPLICATION TORQUE AND REMOVAL TORQUE
OF A CONTINUOUS THREAD CLOSURE

By

Supachai Pisuchpen

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE

2000

ABSTRACT

MODEL FOR PREDICTING APPLICATION TORQUE AND REMOVAL TORQUE
OF A CONTINUOUS THREAD CLOSURE

By

Supachai Pisuchpen

Classical engineering mechanics is applied in the analysis of the closure-
container system. The basic assumption that the system can be modeled as a
rigid-body leads to the TLRD method for determining the static coefficient of

friction of a closure-container system (p3, p4) and the predictive models for the

application torque and the removal torque. The static coefficients of friction were
measured for six closures and seven liners. The discrepancy found between
theoretical predictions of torque and experimental results is attributed to the
inability of the models to account for the viscoelastic properties of the liner
materials as a result of the damping effect. The “f factor” or the sealing force
ratio derived from the spring & dashpot model of the liner materials is a good
indicator for determining the capability of the liner materials to hold the sealing
force. Modifications to the predictive models by incorporating the viscoelastic

behavior are suggested.

Copyright by
SUPACHAI PISUCHPEN
2000

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

As ever, this research wouldn’t be accomplished without encouragement
and guidance. I gratefully acknowledge the expertise, valuable advice and
tolerance of Dr. Hugh Lockhart, Dr. Gary Burgess, and Dr. Gary Cloud.

I also wish to thank Bob Hurwitz who inspired me and gave valuable
suggestions in developing the testing device.

I heartily thank my parents for their interest, support and encouragement
to my judgement in goal of life.

Last but not least, I would like to acknowledge this latest of many debts to
my beloved wife, Wariya, who temporarily lost a husband to a research. I can

not thank her enough for her patience and understanding.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................... vi
LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................. vii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................... ix
1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................... 1
2. LITERATURE REVIEW .................................................................. 4
3. MATERIALS AND METHODS .......................................................... 19
4. RESULTS .................................................................................... 42
5. CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................ 57
APPENDIX-RAW DATA TABLES ........................................................... 60
BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................ 124

sew

10.
11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

LIST OF TABLES

. The Static Coefficient of Friction from Robert V. McCarthy’s Experiment ..... 18

Details of Bottles Used in the Research ........................................................ 19
Details of Closures Used in the Research .................................................... 20
Summary of the Dimension Parameters of Various Treatments Tested ....... 42
Static Coefficient of Friction at the Thread Interface, m, n = 5 ...................... 44
Static Coefficient of Friction at the Liner Interface, Its. n = 5 ......................... 45
Comparison of the Predicted Removal torque, T' and the Measured

Removal Torque, ISRT, and lRT ................................................................... 49
Comparison of T‘IT and ISRT/AT, and the “f Factor” or sealing force ratio .. 53
Comparison of T’IT and lRT/AT, and the “f Factor" or sealing force ratio ..... 53
Raw Data of the Static Coefficient of Friction at the Thread Interface ........... 60
Raw Data of the Static Coefficient of Friction at the Liner Interface .............. 90
Raw Data of the Measured Application Torque and Instantaneous

Removal Torque ......................................................................................... 1 17
Raw Data of the Measured Application Torque and Immediate

Removal Torque ......................................................................................... 1 19
The Predicted Removal Torque, T’ Calculated Using AT from Table 12 ..... 121
The Predicted Removal Torque, T’ Calculated Using AT from Table 13 ..... 121

ka ad kr for Equations (18) and (19) ............................................................ 122

vi

LIST OF FIGURES

1. The Most Popular Finish Designs of CT Closure ........................................... 5
2. Standard Code Letters for Continuous Thread Plastic .................................... 6
3. Plastic Container Thread Profiles .................................................................... 8
4. The Structure of F-217 Liner ......................................................................... 13
5. Force Field of Screw Thread ......................................................................... 14
6. Torque-Friction Tester and the Concept ....................................................... 18
7. The Conceptual Design for Measuring the Static Coefficient of Friction of

Closure-Container System ............................................................................ 24
8. Free-Body Diagram of the Liner and Finish in Contact ................................. 25
9. Free-Body Diagram of the Closure Thread and Container Thread

in Contact ...................................................................................................... 27
10. The Treatments Tested for the Static Coefficient of Friction at the Thread

Interface ........................................................................................................ 29
11. The Treatments Tested for the Static Coefficient of Friction at the Liner

Interface ........................................................................................................ 3O
12. Free-Body Diagram of the Closure-Container System .................................. 34
13. Relative Magnitude of Torque Contributed by Thread and Liner Factor ....... 35
14. The Spring-Dashpot Model for Liner Materials under Compression ............. 38
15. The “L” and “M” Thread Profiles Obtained from the Unscrewing

and Stripping Mold ........................................................................................ 43
16. Comparison of ISRT and T’ ......................................................................... 50
‘17. Comparison of lRT and T’ ............................................................................ 50

vii

18. Comparison of the “f factor" 10 sec and 15 min after Application ................ 55

viii

C.T.
TIP
TLRD
AT
RT
ISRT
lRT
Avg
Sd

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

Continuous Thread

Torque Inch Pounds

Top Load/Rotation/Deadweight Loading
Application Torque

Removal Torque

Instantaneous Removal Torque
Immediate Removal Torque

Average

Standard deviation

1. INTRODUCTION

A closure system is a mechanical device that seals the contents within a
container and can be removed to allow the contents to be dispensed. A closure
is applied to the “finish” of a glass, metal, or plastic container. It is an important
part of the container in maintaining integrity of the packaging system throughout
the entire process of storage, picking and packing. The security of the closure
depends upon a number of variables such as resiliency of liner, flatness of seal
surface on the container, and the most important; tightness or torque that it is
applied. Torque is a moment or twisting resistance that occurs during the
application or removal of a closure on a container. Application torque is a
measure of closure tightness created by the contact between a closure and a
container, whereas removal torque is a measure of the amount of moment or
twisting effort necessary to loosen while attempting to open it.

The literature review on the prediction of closure torque indicates that
there are not many works published in this area. In addition, most of the
published research on removal torque has been done on varieties of closure and
environment systems rather than development of a predictive model. As a
matter of fact, the latter area is as important and challenging as the former for the
investigators to unveil the phenomena hidden in the closure during exposure to
the environment.

This study was initiated to develop a model for predicting torque of a
continuous thread closure. The model will deal with forces and moments, and

the effects of forces and moments acting on rigid bodies at rest. This study is the

first step in developing a more complicated model reflecting the actual conditions
to which a closure system is susceptible in the environment. The closure system
engaged with a container can be viewed as a mechanical system to clearly
understand how it functions to provide a seal protection for the product. The
continuous threaded closure-container system is a torque dependent system.
The seal is usually accomplished through the use of a liner in a cap which is
applied with the proper amount of torque. The liner performs like a gasket to seal
around the finish. When the closure is properly applied, the liner is under
compression and reacts like a spring to keep the closure thread in contact with
the bottle threads and to secure the closure of the container. The closure-
container system thus functions through the interaction of many factors which
include sealing force, torque and other characteristics of threaded closures.

There are two main goals of this study. The first one is to establish the
method of determination of two static coefficients of friction; one between thread
of closure and thread of container and another between liner and finish of
container. This goal is important for developing a predictive model since
currently there is no means yet to determine the parameters, and a static
coefficient of friction mainly depends on types of material in contact, and types of
surface. The second goal is to develop a static model for predicting torque of a
continuous thread closure. This development of a predictive model is based on a
static equilibrium, which has no movement and deformation; it does not associate
with time and environment factors eg. temperature, humidity. In fact,

temperature and humidity fluctuations and their extremes in storage and

transportation can affect removal torque. In addition, shock and vibration from
handling or shipping and compression or top loading from storage also exist and
influence closure tightness as well. Understanding this model is very useful for
explanation of the translation of torque into sealing force, the effect of friction,
and the closure performance.

It is expected that the information from this study will be extended to
develop a model associated with time and environment factors, which describe

the closure-container systems when exposed to actual conditions.

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

1. Continuous thread closure

The advent of continuous thread closures arose from a Philadelphian
named Espy who conceived the idea of affixing a disc of cork inside the cap so
when screwed down on the neck of the jar, the cap brought the cork in
compressing contact around the mouth. The Espy patent issued in 1856 could
have been a landmark in closure history. However, there were deficiencies in
sealing effectiveness of the first design of thread. This brought inventors to
consider development in this area. In 1858, John L. Mason was granted patents
for his improved thread and improved mold for blowing bottles with threads. His
idea was to start a diagonal thread slightly below the top and let it fade away
before reaching the shoulder. After this improvement, many materials were used
in the closure and bottle industry, accompanied by the continuous improvement
of closure design. In 1927, plastic closures were introduced with a promise of
freedom of design e.g. colors, textures. As the new technology in resin
improvement became available, and more suitable for specific purposes, the
variety of products packed with plastic closures drastically increased. In basic
principle, the threads of the screw closure engage with corresponding threads
molded on the neck of the container; this style offers a mechanical means of
generating force for effective sealing. Acceptable mechanical properties and
protection can be accomplished by the use of plastic continuous thread closure.

Therefore, it has become a principal type of closure.

To standardize the dimensions and terms used in the closure industry, the
Closure Manufacturers Association has prepared a guide and standard for both
metal and plastic closures. By definition, a continuous thread (C.T.) closure has
a spiral thread, the design of which is tailored to the container finish and its
thread. Hence, a closure is retained on a container by threads that engage
corresponding threads of the container. Single lead threads having one thread
with a single start are the most common. The size and type of thread are usually
designated by the diameter in millimeters coupled with a number which signifies
the finish style, such as shallow, deep. Thus 28—400, or sometimes written, 400-
28 means 28 mm in major diameter and a shallow continuous thread. Series
designations for the most popular C.T. closures are 400 and 425 for shallow

continuous thread designs, 410 for medium CTs, and 415 for tall CTs (Figure 1).

 

Typleal 400 Series MIMI 410 3.11.; typical 415 Series
c.r. Closure (:3; Closure III: esure

Figure 1. The Most Popular Finish Designs of CT Closure

Source: The Closure Manufacturers Association, 1993, Closure Guides

A cross section of the continuous thread closure shows the basics of

closure construction in Figure 2.

 

' LINER WELL

  
  
  

o—E

PITCH

HELIX ANGLE I”

 

DRAFT ANGLE

THREAD START

 

BOTTOM VI EW

Figure 2. Standard Code Letters for Continuous Thread Plastic closures

Source: The Closure Manufacturers Association, 1993, Closure Guides

where E = Minor diameter of thread
E’ MAX = Similar to E, allows for molding draft angle.
T = Major diameter of thread
T’ MAX = Similar to T, allows for molding draft angle.
H = Vertical distance from bottom of closure to

the inside top surface

[3 = Helix angle

PITCH = Vertical distance between corresponding points
on adjacent threads.
The important closure dimension terms to recognize and understand are
defined by the Closure Manufacturers Association in the Closure Guides and

described as follows:

1. T dimension, and E dimension. T is the major diameter of the thread on a
CT. closure, whereas the minor diameter of the thread on a CT. closure is E.
The T and E dimensions are measured at the top of the closure at a point
near the end of full thread.

2. H dimension. The vertical distance between the inside top of the closure at
the sealing area and the bottom of the skirt excluding any liner (if used), or
Iinerless, or any other sealing elements.

3. Helix angle (8). The inclination angle made by the spiral of the thread in
relation to the horizontal axis is the helix angle.

4. Pitch. Pitch is the distance from any one point on a closure thread to the
corresponding point on the next thread. Thus, pitch is also equal to the
inverse of threads per inch.

5. Pressure angle. The angle of the tangent line at the point where the closure
thread contacts the finish thread. This is also known as the bearing angle.

6. Threads per inch (T.P.l). T.P.I. is the number of threads in a distance of

an inch. It is also equal to 1 divided by pitch.

The next issue to be considered in this study is plastic container thread
profiles. Although voluntary standards for plastic closure thread profiles have not

been developed yet, there are 3 standard container thread profiles (Figure 3).

 

 

 

 

   

Z—F’RESSI.IRE ANGLE

“L” Style “M” Style “P” Style

Figure 3. Plastic Container Thread Profiles

Source: The Closure Manufacturers Association, 1993, Closure Guides

Closure manufacturers have modified these standard container threads
into their closure designs along with variations of each. The closure sizes are
usually designed in accordance with the finish size of the container. For
example, if the finish size of the container has diameter of 28 mm., the 28 mm.
diameter of the closure is needed to fit this container. However, the closure
thread profiles modified from the container thread profiles have often been used
without relation to a specific container finish thread. In Figure 3, L style is
designated as an all-purpose thread for either plastic or metal closures and has a

symmetrical 30° pressure angle. M style is a modified buttress type with 10°

pressure angle which is the preferred style for plastic containers and is used
exclusively for this purpose, whereas P style is similar to M style, except it has a
full nose radius for use on certain pour-out finishes. Thus, plastic closure thread
profiles are designed to fit one of these three container thread profiles.
Thermoplastic materials are mostly used in manufacturing C.T. closures.
Most often polyolefins (e,g. polypropylene, polyethylene) are used but there is
some use of polystyrene. Each of these materials has specific properties that

influence the choice of thread profile, and the performance of closure.

1. Polyethylene. PE is available in three densities: LDPE, MDPE, and HDPE.
As density increases, the material becomes stiffer, glossier, and harder, and
also the tensile strength increases. HDPE is used for manufacturing

containers more than for closures.

 

Advantages Limitations
a. Flexibility allows for undercuts a. Limited heat resistance
b. Remains flexible over wide temperature b. Low abrasion resistance
range. c. Low barrier to oils, gases,
c. Good moisture and chemical barrier flavors and odors.
d. Good processabilty d. Stress cracking
e. Heatsealable e. Deforrn under loading, creep
f. Wide range of available colors f. May be degraded by UV
9. Variety of surface finishes is possible.

Source: The Closure Manufacturers Association, 1993, Closure Guides

Polypropylene. PP has unusually high resistance to stress cracking. This is
an essential characteristic for hinged closures. In thin hinged sections, it has
the quite remarkable property of strengthening with use. Thus, plastic

closures are widely made from PP.

 

Advantages Limitations

a. Higher heat resistance than PE a. Embrittle at low temperature

b. Flexible enough for certain undercuts. b. Limited abrasion and creep
resistance

0. Excellent moisture barrier c. Poor gas barrier

d. Good chemical resistance d. Limited stress cracking
resistance

e. Good processabilty e. May be degraded by UV

f. Stiffer and harder than PE

9. Vlfide range of available colors

h. Low weight per unit volume

Source: The Closure Manufacturers Association, 1993, Closure Guides

2. Liner

The closure liner, a material that creates a seal between the closure and

container, is critical in maintaining the quality of product and the integrity of the

seal on the container. The selection of the closure liner on a product-container

system can make the difference between the success and failure of a product.

The liner is composed of two major parts: a backing and a facing.

Compressibility, resiliency, and resealability are provided by the backing,

whereas the facing directly contacting a product provides barrier protection.

10

There are variables that should be considered when selecting the closure

liner for a certain product (Source: Crawford, Brian, Choosing the Right Closure

Liner). These variables can be categorized as follows:

1.

Product compatibility. A liner should be compatible with a closure and a
product. Basically, liner should be chemically inert to the product and
resistant to container’s content in compliance with the FDA regulations.
Macroseal. Physically, the liner must compensate for imperfections on the
container’s lip and on the closure in order to prevent the leakage of the
product.

Microseal. This means a seal against small molecules such as water
vapor, gas, flavor and odor. Loss of barrier protection characteristics has
direct results in product deterioration. Therefore, the loss of these
chemical molecules or the entering of environmental components from
outside into the container must be impeded.

Application and removal torque. They are partly related to the coefficient
of friction between thread of closure and thread of container, and between
the liner and container finish. Ideally, the amount of friction should
facilitate the capper in application and consumer in removal without
backing off during transportation. In addition, the torque is also related to
compression and tensile stress behavior in container finish, closure and
liner.

Other considerations. In some applications, particular properties may be

needed, for instance, heat resistance, tamperproofing.

11

Materials used for closure liners can be grouped into two categories:
homogeneous and heterogeneous composition. The use of a single material in
the liner is defined as homogeneous; heterogeneous refers to the incorporation
of two or more different materials. Recently, combinations of materials in liners
especially extruded polymers have become widely used because new technology
allows customizing properties needed from one material and combining with
other materials. Some of the commonly used combinations (backing/facing) are:

polyethylene/EVAlpolyethylene

polyethylene/foamed poIyethylenelpolyethylene

polyethylene/foamed EVA/polyethylene

high density polyethylene/foamed low density polyethylene
lhigh density polyethylene

polypropylene/foamed low density poIyethylene/polypropylene

acrylonitritelpolyethylene

pulp/Saran film

pulp/polyvinyl lubricant film

pulp/polyethylene coated paper

12

In 1972, F-217 liner was developed by Tri-Seal. This patented seal is a
coextruded structure: a low density polyethylene foam core sandwiched between

two layers of low density polyethylene film (Figure 4).

 

Identical top-bottom layers of solid Foamed plastic core,
plastic protects against product 4 engineered for optimum
penetration and evaporation compression and resiliency

Figure 4. The Structure of F-217 Liner

F-217 is one of the most popular lining materials used in the market. It is
a general-purpose liner and is recommended for sealing household, cosmetic,
liquor, drug, food, and other products.

Pulpboard, a backing material, waxed, coated with vanish, or laminated to
plastic films were the first combination materials used for liners. Vanished pulp
liners offer good resistance to heat and chemicals, low water-vapor transmission
and a glossy appearance, but they tend to be brittle. Therrnoplastics such as
vinyl, Saran, and polyethylene are also good choices for laminating or coating on
pulp as facing materials. The selection of type of coating is dependent on what
protections are needed. For instance, polyethylene is a good moisture protection
but inferior in barrier to most gases. So it is not suitable for oxygen-sensitive

products.

13

3. Mechanics of the closure-container system

To understand the mechanism of how torque is translated into sealing
force and the performance of the closure, one must know how the mechanics of
screws is adapted into the closure-container system. Since 1856, the continuous
thread closure has been in use; unfortunately, there are not many researches in
this area published. It is open for more studies to understand the mechanics of
the closure-container system. This, with the understanding of the physical
behavior of materials under load and the modeling of this behavior will lead to the
development of new theory.

Robert V. McCarthy (1956) conducted research in determining
performance of plastic screw thread attachments. By applying the concept of the
inclined plane to screw threads as shown in Figure 5, the equations which
describe the relationship between torque and sealing force can be developed.

The expressions can be summarized as follows;

 

. 'n '

I A I

U

§ 4 . F.

. ' r. 0030.003. *

E V A-A

g I " W'OI‘ fl " 3m . ’ ‘

‘ ‘ , eomeer
. " 0 mm:

 

 

 

 

 

 

l‘n—F

 

I
r o:
raceeensmo/. )c ""0 .
A

 

HELIX ANGLE] ' I
7v

Figure 5. Force Field of Screw Thread

14

 

cosBsina + .cosa
T=RL ”

 

(1)

cos l9.cos a - ,u.sin a

 

T’ = Fv J. ,ucosa — cos 6. sin a (2)
psm a + cos 6. cos a
where
T = the necessary torque to develop a particular holding
or sealing force
T’ = the torque required to remove the threaded attachment
Fv = the sealing force (axial force)
it = the coefficient of friction at the thread interface
or = thread helix angle
9 = contact angle

In fact, these expressions were originally developed by similar
summations of forces and moments of loaded closures in Boomsliter (1945).

One limitation of these expressions in predicting removal torque or sealing
force effectively is the assumption that all parameters remain constant during
loading. In fact, relaxation of the liner material causes the sealing force to decay
and must be included in the design of the closure screw thread. McCarthy
reported that the relaxation of plastic material associated with the closure skirt
amplifies the sealing force decay. The investigator developed further mechanical
models to simulate the major relaxation mechanism affecting the observed
sealing force decay. The model compared favorably with actual data. This
research, however, did not include the effect of liner behavior in the model.

Technically, torque depends mostly on the behavior of the closure liner rather

15

than the threads. Therefore, the model does not quite represent the actual static
equilibrium of the closure-container system.

There is no other research reported in this area since 1956 while the
technology in material and packaging machinery has been developing
continually. However, there was some research conducted to investigate various

effects on the removal torque of closure. Most was conducted by Dr. Lockhart of

-'.u--"i '

the School of Packaging at Michigan State University and Dr. Greenway of
University of Missouri-Rolla.

McCarthy’s research leaves an important aspect of closure-container

 

systems unanswered. As mentioned above on the effect of the liner, this
research continues the analysis of the effect of the liner further by using the static

equilibrium approach.

4. Coefficient of friction

Frictional behavior is important in many packaging applications involving
banding of unitized loads, lifting of packages, abrasion or scuffing. In addition,
the coefficient of friction plays a major role in the torque of the closure. Friction is
a measure of the force that resists the motion of one surface against another
surface. Furthermore, the force required to start the object moving is related to
the static coefficient of friction, while the kinetic coefficient of friction is related to
the force required to maintain motion. Fundamentally, the kinetic coefficient of
friction is always less than the static coefficient of friction because force to keep

the object moving is less than force to start the object moving. There are many

16

factors affecting the coefficient of friction. They can be classified into two
categories. External factors include those such as temperature, velocity of
sliding, and load. Internal factors involve nature of the contact surface (smooth
or rough), nature of the materials, presence or absence of lubricants.

To apply a predictive model in the design of the continuous thread closure,
an appropriate value of the static coefficient of friction is necessary. A great
variety of instruments have been developed to measure coefficient of friction
from a simple inclined plane to complex apparati. Precise values of static
coefficient of friction for the application of closures are not currently available for
particular plastics on container materials (eg glass, metal, plastics). McCarthy
developed a technique to simulate friction conditions for a closure screw thread.
The method employed a spring clamp of known k (spring constant) and a closure
of the subject material cut to relieve resistance to deformation in one diameter (d)
for a distance of at least 0.06” (Figure 6).

The jaws of the clamping unit were faced with neoprene. The torque-
friction tester was applied to a loose fitting closure. By applying a clamping force
generated by the spring, the spring compression force was a direct reading of the
radial force applied to the closure. The rotation of torque-friction tester would
unscrew a closure from a contact material (bottle), then the torque reading was
recorded. The coefficient of friction could be experimentally determined using a

relationship of T = p.Fc.d.

17

SPRING! I047 LB/ IN

 

 

   

CLOSURE SAMPLE

where k = spring constant, lb/in
x = displacement, in

T = urea

where T = torque, TIP
p = static coefficient of friction
Fc = spring compression force, lb
= closure diameter, in

Figure 6. Torque-Friction Tester and the Concept

The static coefficients at thread interface obtained from McCarthy’s

experiment are summarized in Table 1.

Table 1. The Static Coefficient of Friction from Robert V. McCarthy’s Experiment

 

 

Materials in contact ll
Polypropylene on glass 0.08
Polystyrene on glass 0.28

Linear low density polyethylene on 0.08

glass

 

 

 

 

18

3. MATERIALS AND METHODS

1. Materials and instruments

1. The closure-container systems

The systems were categorized into 2 groups; 28 mm and 38 mm diameter.
Tables 2 and 3 show the details of the bottles and closures tested.

Table 2 Details of Bottles Used in This Research

 

 

Designation Finish size-style, Material Description
mm
A* 20-410 HDPE Brick red color, round shape, made by

Owen-Brockway Plastics & Closures,
received 10/1197

 

B 28-400 HDPE White color, 60 ml volume, square shape,
made by Owen-Brockway Plastics &
Closures, received 08/25/99

1. Machine #48

2. Mold #5437

3. Product #25-006-024

 

 

C 38-400 HDPE White color, 100 ml vol , square shape
made by Owen-Brockway Plastics 8.
Closures, received 10l8/96

 

 

 

 

Note: A’ was eliminated from this research because the static coefficient of

friction could not be measured using the TLRD method.

19

 

 

Table 3 Details of Closures Used in This Research

 

Designation Finish size- Closure Liner material Description
style, mm material

 

A1* 20—410 PP PE foam FRST PP WH 7135 PE FM,
(F-217) white color, made by Poly-Seal
Corporation, received 10/1l97

 

B1 28-400 PP PE foam Fine rib closure, prod#lot#

(OB-Seal) 992526, white color, glued

1. outer cap-Philips HLN-120:
(OIP 32699)

2. the lining mat is 0.040 PL-
4025 08 seall lot #
151 171

3. Colorant: white OIC
#60110

made by Owen-Illinois,

received 1 1/17/99

 

B2 28-400 PP PE foam Fine rib closure, white color,
(OB-Seal) hand lined, non—glued, made
by Owen-Illinois, received

1 1/22/99

 

83 28-400 PP PE foam Fine rib closure, black color,
(OB-Seal) hand lined, non-glued, made
by Owen-Illinois , received

 

 

 

1 1/22/99
B4 28-400 PP Pulp/Saran(Pl Fine rib closure, black color,
SF) hand lined, non-glued, made
by Owen-Illinois , received
12I01I99
B5 28-400 PP Pulp/Saran(Pl Fine rib closure, white color,
SF) hand lined, non-glued, made

by Owen-Illinois , received
12I01l99

 

 

 

 

 

20

 

Table 3 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

86 28-400 PP Pulp/Polyvinyl Fine rib closure, black color,
lubricant glued, made by Owen-Illinois,
film(P/RVTLF) received 11/26/97
B7 28-400 PP Pulp/Polyvinyl Fine rib closure, white color,
lubricant hand lined, non-glued, made
film(P/RVTLF) by Owen-Illinois, received
1 1/22/99
B8 28-400 PP Pulp/Polyvinyl Fine rib closure, white color,
lubricant hand lined, non-glued, made
film(P/RVTLF) by Owen-Illinois, received
1 1/22/99
C1 38-400 PP PE foam Fine rib closure, white color,
(F-217) glued, made by Poly-Seal
Corp, received 11/12/94
C2 38-400 PP PE foam Fine rib closure, white color,
(OB-Seal) hand lined, non-glued, made
by Owen-Illinois, received
12lO1/99

 

 

 

 

 

 

Note: A* was eliminated from this research because the static coefficient of

friction could not be measured using the TLRD method.

2. Secure Pak torque tester electronic model (digital display)

3. Mitutoyo digimetric caliper

4. Bridgeport comparator

5. Clear casting resin and polyester catalyst for making closure specimens

for cross-sectional measurement

21

6. An instrument developed for determining the static coefficient of friction of
the closure-container systems.

2. Methods

1. Cross-sectional measurement of the closure-container system

Duplicate of treatments in Figure 10 applied on the similar diameter
containers were tested. A closure was applied on the container with the
prescribed application torque of 14 TIP for 28 mm diameter closure and 19 TIP
for 38 mm diameter closure. Then a closure-container system was placed
upside down into the prepared box 3x3x1.25 inches (the inside surface of the box
was covered with pressure sensitive tape). The clear casting resin and the
polyester catalyst were thoroughly mixed and poured into the prepared box. This
step was performed in the hood. The box was cured in the hood until the casting
was completely dry, after which the casting was removed from the box. Finally,
the casting was cross-sectioned using a band saw and polished to make a
smooth clear surface. The measurements of T, E, l, and the angles a and 0
were made using the optical comparator. On the bottles, the T dimension is the
major diameter of the bottle finish including the threads. The E dimension of the
bottle is the minor outside diameter of the bottle finish excluding the threads.

The diameter at the smallest opening inside the finish is the l dimension. The
angle a is the incline angle made by the spiral of the thread in relation to the
horizontal plane measured at the mean diameter of the thread interface. Finally,

the angle 9 is the contact angle between the closure threads and the container

22

threads measured along the vertical axis. The illustrations of these parameters

are shown in Figures 2 and 9a

2. The static coefficient of friction measurement

This research began with the use of McCarthy’s concept for measuring the
static coefficient of friction at the thread interface. A clamping unit similar to
McCarthy’s was fabricated and used. However, the static coefficient of friction
measured this way was very dependent on the speed of rotation, either clockwise
or counterclockwise. The data obtained were scattered and unrepeatable.

The results dictated the development of a better means which is simple,
controllable, and repeatable. The method developed in this research allows for
measuring the static coefficient of friction at the thread interface, and at the liner
interface regardless of the speed of rotation and the twisting direction. The
concept of the experimental setup is shown in Figure 7. The closure is attached
to a circular plate. The forces applied on both sides of the circular plate are just
sufficient to initiate sliding of the closure on the container at the contact point,
while the top load exerts a downward force on the closure. This conceptual
design was carried on to develop the testing device in Figure 7 which allows
placement of a top load on the closure while applying an increasing torque by
means of deadweight loading a string and pulley system. For convenience, this
device is named Top Load/RotationlDeadweight Loading Device. The short

name for it is TLRD. The results show that the method gives repeatable results

23

under various experimental conditions. In general, friction forces involved when
two bodies are in contact can be examined by the static equilibrium approach.
Beginning with a simple system, a static coefficient of friction between the liner
surface and the finish of the container is considered before stepping up to a more

complicated system.

F. /— Aluminum rod

op :oa .

A.

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 7 The Conceptual Design for Measuring the Static Coefficient of Friction

of Closure-Container Systems (TLRD Method)

To determine the static coefficient of friction at the liner interface, the
threads around the container neck have to be eliminated. Thus, the only contact
is between the liner and the finish of the container. A free-body diagram showing
the forces acting on the liner and finish in contact is given in Figure 8. It shows

that the top load F, in Figure 7 vertically pushes the liner surface against the

24

finish of the container, and the normal force F" is the reaction exerted on the liner

at the points of contact to balance the force F, shown in Figure 8.

 

 

 

 

 

Closure L—X

 

 

 

Liner

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Finish

 

 

 

\

Figure 8 Free-Body Diagram of the Liner and Finish in Contact

These forces are equal but in opposite directions, and are present
whenever the bodies are in contact, whether or not there is any tendency for one
to slide relative to the other. Thus, a force balance in the vertical direction

produces the equation.
Zg=q R=E (&
When a torque is applied to the closure, there is a tendency for the liner to

slide over the finish. The finish exerts frictional forces, fan the liner all around

the rim of the container.

Za=m (o
From symmetry, the net horizontal force created by this distribution is zero

(Equation (4)). but the torque is not. Each friction force f can be written as

25

f = pan and F" is the normal force acting at the same point. The torque around

the axis of the container created by this frictional force is f F— , where r— is the

mean radius from the axis of the container to the finish (Figure 8). Summing

torque from all contact points, the required T to start the liner sliding over the

 

finish is
T=m££ (6
Solving for Its yields:
T
. = _. 6
l1. FM. ( )

Equation (6) shows that u, at the liner interface is the ratio of the torque

required to initiate sliding to the product of the top load and the mean radius F: .

Clearly, if we apply a known load Fv on the liner, and then increase the torque
either clockwise or counterclockwise until sliding begins, the static coefficient of

friction between liner and finish then can be determined. For instance, if a liner
having a diameter of 28 mm (Z = 0.45425 in i 18%) is loaded with FV = 1.32 lb,

and the torque required to start the liner sliding is 0.41 TIP 1: 14% , the static
coefficient of friction of the liner in contact with the finish is 0.69 i 32%.

The next step is to determine the static coefficient of friction between the
threads of the closure and threads of the container, which is handled using a
similar approach. The threads are assumed to be in continuous contact. A
representative contact point is shown in Figure 9a where the closure thread

contacts the container thread at some angle 8. The closure spins freely in Figure

26

9a because there is no contact between the liner and finish yet. The experiment
was setup this way so that only thread-to-thread friction was involved. A free—
body diagram of this system under clockwise torque looking along a radius is

depicted in Figure 9b.

F

V

l

T in clockwise direction

 

 

  

\\‘

 

FH
‘— container
thread

p

 

A

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 9 Free-Body Diagram of the Closure Thread and Container Thread

in Contact

Solving the equilibrium equations yields the following:

ZFy =0, -Fv +Fn cosQ.cosa+y,.Fn.sina=0 (7)
where )1: is the static coefficient of friction at the thread interface, a is thread pitch
angle, p is thread pitch, and 9 is contact angle looking along the thread.

So F, = Fn.(cos 0.cosa + y, sin a) (8)

27

X F, = O, ,u, .Fn.0osa - Fncosflsina — F H = O (9)
where FH is the horizontal twisting force applied to the closure by the torque.
Rearranging Equation (9) gives:

F H = 141.01, .0030: - cosl9.sina) (10)

Then the required torque to start clockwise twisting is

T = F H .r, (11)
where Z is the mean radius at the point of contact.

Since Fn and F... are known from Equations (8) and (10), Equation (11) can be

written as

T=Fv.r,.

 

—[/1I cosa—cos 6.8ma] (12)

cos 6.003 a + ,u, sin a

The above equation can be related to the thread geometry by substituting for

sin 0t and cos on using the triangle shown in Figure 9b: sina = Tami cosa = 2'7” .

 

where I is the length of a thread in one complete revolution and p is the vertical

spacing between threads (thread pitch).

 

Then, T = FM: ,u,.2.7r.r, —_cos 0.p (13)
cos 6.2.7rJ, + ,u,p

Therefore, the static coefficient of friction between the thread of the closure and

the thread of the container under clockwise twisting is

= 038051121: + Fwy]
F2.Fv.2.fl —T.pJ

 

(14)

I”:

28

The equation for determining the static coefficient of friction under
counterclockwise twisting can be done in a similar manner except that the friction
forces are reversed. The result is

= cos 9.21127: — F, .p]
F2 .F,.2.7r + T.pJ

 

It. (15)

Equations (14) and (15) contain closure-container parameters (Z , 0,

p)which are readily measured: only T and F, are left to determine 0:. Then if we
apply a known load Fv and measure the torque T for starting a closure thread
sliding on container thread either clockwise or counterclockwise, pt can be
calculated. In addition, ll: should be constant regardless of the twisting direction
and the top load chosen.

To determine the static coefficient of friction between the thread of the
closure and the thread of the container, the closure-container systems selected
from Table 2, and 3 were based on the closure diameter, the types of mold, and

color. The combinations are presented in Figure 10.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

28 mm diameter 38 mm diameter
B C
L
L I I 1 r , I .
Unscrewing Stripping Unscrewing Stnpplng
mold mold mold mold
B1 B6 B2 B4 C1 C2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 10 The Treatments Tested for the Static Coefficient of Friction

at the Thread Interface

29

In this research, closures made from different types of mold will have
different thread profiles as a result of different contact angle. The unscrewing
mold of Figure 10 provides the “L” style thread profile. The threaded cores are
unscrewed out of the closures so that precise thread dimensions can be made.
In the stripping mold, the closures are stripped off the thread cores and have the
“M” style thread profile. In Figure 10, there are 6 different treatments, with 5 runs
for each treatment under clockwise and counterclockwise twisting. The series of
the top loads used in each run range from 400 g to 2000 g with increments of
200 9. Equations (14) and (15) were used to calculate the static coefficient of

friction.

The static coefficient of friction between the liner and the finish of the
container was also obtained. The combinations of the treatments are shown in
Figure 11, also with 5 runs for each treatment. The selection of the treatments
was based on the closure diameter, the types of liner, and the method of

attaching the liner to the inside of the closure.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

28 mm diameter 38 mm diameter
B C
I l I I I I l
81 82 84 86 87 C1 C2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 11 The Treatments Tested for the Static Coefficient of Friction

at the Liner Interface

30

In order to achieve contact only between the liner and the finish of the
container, all of the threads all around the neck of the container were eliminated
using the grinding and hand sanding tools. Hence, the container was ready for
testing in both twisting directions. The top loads used in this case were
dependent on the closure diameter and liner type. The loads of 150 g, 200 g,
300 g, 400 g, 600 g, and 800 g were applied to closures containing the 28 mm
diameter PE foam liner. Closures containing the 38 mm diameter PE foam liner
were loaded with 200 g or 300 g, 400 g, 600 g, and 800 g. The 28 mm diameter
paper pulp backing liners were subjected to a series of 600 g, 800 g, 1000 g,
1200 g and 1400 9. Equation (6) was used to calculate the static coefficient of

friction at the liner interface.
3. Predictive model.

The application of mechanics to the closure-container system can be used
to find the friction coefficients us and M separately when either application or
removal torque takes place. In actual conditions, when the closure is applied on
the container, both p, and p. are involved at the same time. The application
torque imposed during application of a closure on the finish of a container is
converted to compression of the liner against the finish-sealing surface. The
conversion of torque to compression force at the sealing surface is not
completely efficient because friction losses occur in the region of the seal as well

as in contact area between closure threads and container threads. There are

31

two predictive models derived from the application of mechanics; an application
torque model, and a removal torque model. Both models are developed by using
an approach similar to that discussed in the coefficient of friction section. Free-
body diagrams of the closure-container system under application and removal
torque are shown in Figure 12. When the horizontal twisting force F... is applied
to the closure by the torque T, the magnitude of the applied torque T is
composed of two parts: one from the liner interface and another from the thread
interface. At the liner interface, the contribution to the torque is the same as
Equation (5), which is repeated here as Equation (16) for reference in this

section.
T = F,.,u_,..r_, (16)
Figure 12a shows that the closure thread is under the container thread at
some contact angle 0 which gives a result similar to Equation (13); the

contribution to the application torque from thread-to-thread contact is

 

T = Fr; cos6l.p+2Jr.,u,.r, (17)
cos/9.2.7”, — ,u,.p

Then Equations (16) and (17) are combined to give the total application

 

torque
T=Fvlzl::::::;.§’:‘:;zf:.lmil
where T = Application torque, (TIP)
F, = Sealing force, (lb)
p = Thread pitch, (inches)

32

p4 and HS = Coefficient of friction at thread interface,
and sealing surface

7, and r— : Mean radius of the thread contact,
and sealing surface, (inches)

0 = Contact angle, (degrees)

Equation (18) shows that the sealing force during application can also be
calculated if the application torque is known. The removal torque is lower than
the application torque for mechanical reasons. The predictive model for the
removal torque is derived the same way as described above except that the FH

and friction forces are reversed as shown in Figures 12d and e. The result is

7": Fr E 21:44.); :cos6l.p 41’s.; (19)
cos 0.2.7”, + ,u, . p

Equations (18) and (19) are comparable to the McCarthy’s equations.

 

However, substantial differences occur in predicted torques using Equations
(18)and (19) are expected due to the liner factor included.
Equation (19) shows that the removal torque is composed of two

components. They are as follows:

 

F —[ 2.7r.,u, .2- — cos 0.p

,. , _. ] is the contribution produced by frictional restraint
0080.2Jr.r, + ,u,.p

between the closure threads and container threads. This will be called the thread

factor.
17.71.; is the contribution created by frictional restraint between the face

of. the liner and the container finish. This will be called the liner factor.

33

 

 

T', Removal torque

T, Application torque

 

 

Via " slat"
\ X\\\\ \X\

I
\\I‘<

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

l :
F?

 

 

 

5——

T, Application torque

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

. .. Closure container
“"9" Fv thread
f FH
F
" Finish
b
Liner H F 7 Closure container

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

thread

 

 

 

 

Finish

 

 

 

Figure 12 Free-Body Diagram of the Closure-Container System

34

 

 

closure

 

 

 

 

closure

 

 

 

 

If we use typical information of a 28-400 closure and a F-217 liner, then
the magnitude of each factor can be computed separately. It will be found that
the thread factor accounts for only 18% of total removal torque and the liner

factor accounts for about 82% of total torque as shown in Figure 13.

 

Thread
factor
1 8%

  

 

Liner
factor
82%

 

 

 

Figure 13. Relative Magnitude of Torque Contributed by Thread and Liner Factor
Figure 13 shows that the liner factor contributes much more to the
removal torque than the threads do. Hence, the selection of the proper liner in
relation to the container finish is very important in order to get the desired
removal torque.
Thread factor determines whether or not the closure threads are self-
locking. When a positive removal torque is obtained from the thread factor, the

closure thread is said to be self-locking. Thus, the condition for self-locking is
2741,; > cos I9. p (20)
Solving for m and relating the thread geometry to or gives

p, >cosfltana (21)

35

This relation states that self-locking is obtained whenever the coefficient of
friction between closure threads and container threads is greater than the
product of the tangent of the thread angle and the cosine of the contact angle.

For example, the 28-400 closure-container system has a thread angle 296° and
a contact angle 25.75° :I: 19%, which means that in order to obtain self looking, a
minimum static coefficient of friction at the thread interface of 0.047 i 19% is

needed to achieve this.

4. Sealing force

The sealing force is defined as the compression force at the sealing
surface resulting from the translation of torque to the vertical force. This is F, in
the previous analysis. Currently, there is no easy way to measure this force
directly in closure systems. This task is also interesting and challenging for
investigators. The sealing force depends on the mechanical properties of the
liner. At present, the specification of the tightness of closure-container systems
is partly based on the removal torque. Equation (19) shows that if a certain
similar removal torque is required on the different closure-container systems,
they will have different sealing forces. The sealing force, F, is what pushes the
liner on the finish of the container. The removal torque is what needs to be
applied to start the various surfaces sliding against friction forces. Therefore, the

sealing force is a better indicator of the mechanical seal of the liner than the

36

removal torque. A low sealing force means that the compression force pushing
the liner is low, so the mechanical seal protection is weak.

The mechanical characteristics of the liner significantly influence the
sealing force. The most important of these properties in relation to the sealing
force is viscoelasticity. Familiar examples of this behavior are present in many
cases involving packaging materials. When foam cushions are used in a drop
test, they do not completely return to their original initial thickness. Corrugated
boxes also show similar behavior in a compression test. A box under
compression will immediately relax if the test is momentarily stopped and never
return to its original height after unloading. The concept to remember is that in
viscoelastic materials, the force required to compress it is always more than the
force required to restrain it during expansion.

A model consisting of a spring and a dashpot is useful in conceptualizing
the viscoelastic behavior of the liner materials. The spring is considered an ideal

solid element obeying Hooke’s law and the dashpot is considered an ideal
fluid element. The spring and dashpot can be connected in various ways to
portray viscoelastic behavior. The particular combination of these elements used

here is shown in Figure 14.

37

F application

moving
down at I 1

speedv 4

force
l (compression)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

/ / / / / /
mefim=kx+cv
a

F force required to
restrain it while it
1 moves back up
. (removal force)
movmg up

atspeedv [ j
T k c

/////77
=kx-cv

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

removal

Figure 14 The Spring-Dashpot Concept for the Liner Materials under

Compression

The force required to compress the liner and then restrain it during

removal are expressed in Equations (22) and (23),

F

applicau'on

F

nmval

=kx+av

= k.x — c.v

(22)

(23)

where k is the spring constant, x is the amount of compression, c is the

damping constant, and v is the compression rate.

At a particular compression x, the ratio of FM”... to Fappncauon is

an _ k.x — c.v

 

F

Wm,” k.x + c.v

< 1 (24)

During compression, both the spring and dashpot push up and resist force

Fawumn, but during expansion, the spring still pushes up while the dashpot pulls

down. Basically, a dashpot acts to make the material want to stay in the shape

38

that it is in, while the spring acts to return it to its original shape. The magnitude
of the damping and spring effect is dependent on c, and k respectively. If there is
very little damping (low 0 as in metals), then the ratio of Fremova. to Fappucauon is
close to 1. At the opposite extreme, If there is a lot of damping (plastics, foams),
the ratio is close to 0.

The above analogy says that the sealing force Fv in the predictive
equations for the application torque is like the applied compression force F in
Figure 14a, and F, in the predictive equation for the removal torque is like the
restraining force during removal in Figure 14b, which is smaller by some factorf
(0<f<1). The “f factor” in the spring-dashpot model depends on the size of “c” in
relation to “k" and on how fast the closure is twisted during removal. This can be
used to relate the F" in both equations by using:

F v in removal torque = f .F, in application torque (25)

Substituting F, from Equations (18) and (19) yields:

rm

Rearranging Equation (26) gives:

 

 

 

k .T'
= " 27
f k,.T ( )
where k... = 7, 2AM” +_cos6.p ”13.; (inches)
0050.21”, — p,.p
kr = Z 21”!” -_cos6l.p +y_,.r_s (inches)
cos 6.21”, + y,.p
T’ = The measured removal torque (TIP)

39

T = The measured application torque (TIP)

The “f factor” is actually the ratio of the sealing force during removal to the
sealing force during application so it is named “the sealing force ratio”. If the
sealing force during application torque is equal to the sealing force during
removal, then the liner is 100% efficient in holding the compression force.
Consequently, the “f factor” or sealing force ratio can be used as the indicator to
indicate how good the liner retains the sealing force. A low “f factor" means that
the sealing force degrades too much. This indicator is very useful for the
selection of the liner to achieve the desired removal torque.

The purpose of the predictive models was to evaluate these ffactors. The
models were used on all combinations of 28 and 38 mm diameter closure-liner
system and five replicates of each combination were investigated. The Secure
Pak torque tester electronic model calibrated according to ASTM D 3474-90, was
used to measure the application and the removal torques. The procedure
followed was essentially that outlined in ASTM D 3198-97: Standard Test Method
for Application and Removal Torque of Threaded or Lug-Style Closures. The 28
and 38 mm diameter closures had a prescribed application torque of 14 TIP and
19 TIP respectively. There were two types of removal torque evaluated: the
instantaneous removal torque, and the immediate removal torque. The
instantaneous removal torque is when the samples are tested within 10 seconds
after the closure is applied. The torque required to unscrew a closure 15 minutes
after application is the immediate removal torque. The ratio of these two types of

removal torque to the application torque was calculated and compared with the

40

theoretical ratio. Additionally, the “f factor” of each combination of closure and
container also was calculated using Equation (27) and compared to the above

ratio.

 

41

4. RESULTS

1. Cross-sectional measurement of the closure-container system

The casting treatments of 28 mm and 38 mm diameter shown in Figure 10

were applied with the prescribed application torque of 14 TIP and 19 TIP. They

were measured the dimensions using the optical comparator. A summary of the

data is shown in Table 4.

Table 4 Summary of the Dimension Parameters of Various Treatments Tested

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Parameter 28 mm diameter 38 mm diameter
Unscrewing mold Stripping mold Unscrewing Stripping
mold mold
8-81 8-86 8-82 8-84 C-C1 C-CZ
T (inches) 1.0755 1 .0755 1 .0755 1 .0755 1 .4630 1 .4630
E (inches) 0.9790 0.9790 0.9790 0.9790 1.3605 1 .3605
l (inches) 0.8380 0.8380 0.8380 0.8380 1.2210 1.2210
p (inches) 0.167 0.167 0.167 0.167 0.167 0.167
angle a 2.96 2.96 2.96 2.96 2.16 2.16
(degree)
,‘I 0.514 0.514 0.514 0.514 0.7059 0.7059
g 0.45425 0.45425 0.45425 0.45425 0.64538 0.64538
angle 9 25.75 20 42.25 44.25 41.5 39.75
(degree)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Note: The dimensions shown are to 4 decimal places because the optical

comparator has this sensitivity, but the closures varied as follows;

T i15%, E 112%, I 115%, E:24%, Z :18%, angle 9 i 19%

42

 

As indicated in Table 4, the effect of the types of the closure molds
substantially shows on the contact angle 0 of 28 mm diameter treatments. It was
found that treatments made from the unscrewing mold had the contact angle 0
about one half the value of those made from the stripping mold. This difference
can be explained by the thread profiles: the “L” style and “M” style. The “L" style
thread made on the unscrewing mold is the general purpose thread; it has the
symmetrical threads with 30° pressure angle. The “M" or modified buttress
thread found in the stripping mold has the angle of 45° from a line drawn
perpendicular to the neck finish at the top, and 10° on the bottom. The examples

of these thread profiles of the treatments tested are shown in Figure 15.

 

B-B1: Unscrewing mold B-82: Stripping mold
The "L" style The "M" style

Figure 15 The “L" and “M" Thread Profiles Obtained from the Unscrewing and

Stripping mold

Therefore, when each type of thread profile makes contact on the “M"
style container thread, the systems have different contact angles. The 38 mm
diameter treatments, however, show only small differences in the measured

contact angle 9 of these two types of molds. This is related to the amount of high

43

compression force generated during application. It is about 10-20 lb higher than
that in the 28 mm diameter treatments. This amount of high compression force
causing deformation occurred enough to stabilize the contact angle without
further deformation even though they were tested on the different thread profiles.

Thus, the thread profiles strongly affect the contact angle of the 28 mm
diameter closure-container systems but only slightly affect the 38 mm systems.
2. The static coefficient of friction measurement

A similar set of treatments tested in the former experiment was conducted
by the TLRD method for measuring the static coefficient of friction at thread
interface. The purpose of this test was to see what the static coefficient of
friction values were in which they were measured directly from the closure-
container in contact. The summarized results are shown in Table 5.

Table 5 Static Coefficient of Friction at the Thread Interface, pt, n = 5

 

 

 

 

 

 

28 mm diameter 38 mm diameter
Unscrewing mold Stripping mold Unscrewing Stripping
mold mold
8-81 8-86 8-82 8-84 C-C1 C-C2
HDPE-PP HDPE-PP HDPE-PP HDPE-PP HDPE-PP HDPE-PP
white black white black white white
Average 0.18 0.185 0.173 0.171 0.112 0.115
Standard 0.018 0.021 0.017 0.016 0.014 0.013
deviation

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Note: m i 37%

44

 

The static coefficient of friction at the thread interface of all treatments
shown in Table 5 is distributed within the narrow range from 0.171 to 0.185.
There is no difference in m between the white color treatments and the black
color treatments in both types of mold. Comparing pt obtained from 28 mm
diameter treatments and 38 mm diameter treatments, it shows that M of the 38
mm system is slightly lower than the 28 mm system. The difference should come
from the effect of manufacturing of closures, and the formula of materials used in
processing closures. These factors can greatly affect on material properties of
the closures. The standard deviation shows that the values obtained are
repeatable, so it indicates that this method is consistent in measuring the static
coefficient of friction at the thread interface.

The static coefficient of friction at the liner interface, [.13 is determined from
the liner sliding against the finish of the HDPE container. The closures from
various combinations of liners and methods of attaching the liner were tested by
the TLRD method. The results are tabulated in the columns for each treatment in
Table 6.

Table 6 Static Coefficient of Friction at the Liner Interface, [43, n = 5

 

 

 

 

 

28 mm diameter 38 mm diameter
8-81 8-82 8-84 8-86 8-87 C-C1 C-C2
Average 0.76 0.50 0.162 0.181 0.181 0.472 0.363
Standard 0.124 0.073 0.027 0.030 0.030 0.085 0.073
deviation

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

45

 

Note: u. :l: 32%

8-81: PE foam—HDPE, glued

8-82: PE foam-HDPE, non-glued

8-84: Paper pulp coated with Saran-HDPE, non-glued

8-86: Paper pulp coated with polyvinyl lubricant film, glued

887: Paper pulp coated with polyvinyl lubricant film, non—glued

C-C1: PE foam-HDPE, glued

C-C2: PE foam-HDPE, non-glued

The static coefficient of friction depends on not only the roughness of the
material surface but also other material properties such as adhesion,
compressive stress, and shear stress. This experiment shows the complexity of
friction phenomena. The effect of different types of liner on the static coefficient
of friction was determined in the 28 mm treatments. The measured results of 28
mm treatments shows that p. of the PE foam-HDPE is substantially higher than
Its of the paper pulp coated-HDPE. The reason why the PE foam liner in contact
with HDPE finish has more friction than the coated paper pulp is that the PE
foam surface provides more adhesion in the contact area than the coated paper
pulp liner does. In addition, the friction force f is required to overcome the
adhesion in the contact area, A in the Equation (28). Then, the relationship can

5 = Frrctron force = Ar: = .5. (28)
F Any 0'

I!

state:

 

y

where Fn is the sealing force F,, a, is the compressive yield stress, and r is the

shear stress.

46

Clearly, the shear stress and the compressive yield stress are directly
related to [.13. Equation (28) is very useful to describe how the material properties
of the liner materials influence the static coefficient of friction. In fact, the coated
paper pulp liner is stiffer than the PE foam liner so its compressive yield stress
should be higher than the compressive yield stress of the PE foam liner as a
result of lower static coefficient of friction. The slip-stick characteristics also are
considered as a factor causing high static coefficient of friction in the PE foam
liner because these characteristics happen in most polymers when the test is
conducted at low sliding speed. The next consideration on p. is the effect of
different polymers coated on the paper pulp liner. The very thin film coating on
the facing surface of the paper pulp liner, even though they are different kinds of
polymers, showed only small differences within the set of liners (8-84, 8-86,
8-87). It can be concluded that the paper pulp which functions as a backing
material in the paper pulp liners is the most important effect in the static
coefficient of friction at the liner interface.

The methods of attaching the liner to the inside of the closure are also
interesting as to their effect on the static coefficient of friction. There are two
attachment methods: glued, and non-glued. The closures made by both
methods can be found in general products including in food and pharmaceutical
products. The advantages of these methods regarding the effective seals are not
clearly known yet. The experiment began to determine the static coefficient of
friction of the non-glued treatments to use in the predictive models. The static

coefficient of friction of the non-glued type is not the coefficient at the interface

47

between the liner and the finish but actually it is the coefficient of friction between
the liner and the inside panel of the closure. The observation on the actual
applications of closures either the PE foam liner or the coated paper pulp liners,
which are attached by both methods, indicated that the static coefficient of friction
of the non-glued type is not useful. When the removal torque was applied on the
closures with the non-glued liners, it showed that the non-glued liners slide on
the finish of the container following the removal direction. It means that in
practical applications the static coefficient of friction between the liner and the
finish of the container should be applied for the non-glued type rather than using
the value deduced from the contact between the liner and the inside panel of the
closure. Therefore, the coefficients of friction at the liner interface of the non-
glued types (8-82, 8-84, 8-87, C-C2) shown in Table 6 are not practicable to
use in the predictive models. The values of the glued types made from the same
material are applied in the models instead.

The measurement of the static coefficient of friction is dependent on the
specific test conditions and configurations. The TLRD method is based on the
practical situations when the closure is applied on the container. Thus, it is
considered an appropriate method for determining the static coefficient of friction
at the thread interface and at the liner interface.

3. The predictive model

All 8 systems of the 28mm diameter and 2 systems of 38 mm diameter

shown in Table 3 were used to evaluate the predictive models (Equation (17),

(18)) and the “f factor” (Equation (27)) respectively. The measured results from

48

Table 4 were used to calculate the theoretical ratio of the removal torque, T’ to
the application torque, T. As discussed in Chapter 2, the models do not
completely represent the actual closure-container system under the torque
because the relaxation factor is not incorporated in the models. Thus, the
predictive model for the removal torque is supposed to overestimate. To get a
better picture, the predicted removal, T’ is then calculated using the measured
application torque, AT and the data needed from Table 4 and compared with the
measured instantaneous removal torque (ISRT), and the measured immediate
removal torque (lRT)) as shown in Table 7.

Table 7 Comparison of the Predicted Removal Torque, T’ and the Measured
Removal Torque, ISRT, and lRT

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Treatment Instantaneous removal (10 sec) Immediate removal (15 min)
AT (TIP) ISRT (TIP) T’ (TIP) AT (TIP) lRT (TIP) T’ (TIP)
8-81 13.84 6.60 12.23 13.96 6.36 12.34
8-82 14.08 11.16 12.48 14.16 9.28 12.55
8-83 14.18 10.60 12.57 14.04 9.02 12.45
8-84 14.10 11.22 10.57 14.10 8.46 10.57
8-85 14.08 12.80 10.56 13.92 8.98 10.44
8-86 14.14 9.76 10.44 14.02 8.66 10.36
8-87 14.14 12.74 10.74 13.88 9.72 10.54
8-88 14.08 11.46 10.69 13.96 9.88 10.60
C-C1 19.30 12.24 16.90 19.10 9.14 16.72
C-C2 18.94 16.28 16.13 19.26 12.96 16.40

 

Note: AT, ISRT and lRT i 4%, Ti 26%

49

 

 

 

Closure-container system

 

C-C2, PE foam
C-CI, PE foam

    
 

    
 

' ’ r ~' ”””'»’"?-T-'" "’T55?."62‘3‘F’f-‘77’?’3)::.I.."‘-}‘s.,:,v.t*€a “9:111"

   

 

 

888, Paper pulp - '

 

887, Paper pulp

33°, PaW'PU'P —_
9'95, P°°°' PU'P _=’—

884, Paper pulp
8-83, PE foam _
8-82, PE foam

 

 

D ISRT

 

. Predicted RT

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
    

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 17 Comparison of lRT and T’

50

3'3" PEf°°m —— 'AT
0 5 10 15 20 25
Torque, 11P
Figure 16 Comparison of ISRT and T’
002, PE roam ‘
c-c1, PE foam I ._ , .
e °°° PWW'P __
0
’9} 3'3" P°°°'°“'° #—
: 8-86, Paper pulp It
5
g 8-85, Paper pulp
g 8-84, Paper pulp- ... my DIRT
3 ..
- 8-8 PEfoa
o 3 m —_ .Predicted RT
3'32 PE '°°'" _—
.AT
8 3" PE “’3'“ _—
20 25
Torque, TIP15
t2 4

 

Generally, the instantaneous removal torque, ISRT is not useful for the
practical applications because the measured torque at this period (within 10 sec)
is not stable so the immediate removal torque, lRT (15 min) is the standard
measurement. However, this comparison is intended to illustrate the effect of
relaxation behavior of the closure-container system. As shown in Table 7, the
removal torque decreases over time after application to 10 sec (ISRT) and 15
min (lRT). The effect of relaxation behavior especially from the liner materials
largely affects the removal torque obtained. In Figure 16, the random behavior of
ISRT could be noticed because the relaxation is not complete with in 10 seconds.
In general, relaxation occurs in a closure-container system because the liner has
been loaded past its yield point and will creep and flow to get out from the
excessive load. Figure 17 depicts that the predicted removal torque, T’ of all
treatments tested is overestimated by 12% to 94% the measured value to be
expected. The wide range of overestimation was due to the different relaxation
behavior of liner materials.

To quantitatively evaluate the performance of the predictive models, the
theoretical ratio between T’ to T was calculated to compare with the measured
ratios ISRT to AT and lRT to AT. In addition, the “f factor" or the sealing force
ratio of each treatment was also calculated and compared to the above ratios in
Table 8 and 9. The theoretical ratio (T’IT) is based on the rigid body concept so
theoretically it should be close to the measured ratio (ISRT/AT) which is
measured within 10 sec after application. However, Table 8 shows that it

deviated about —0.16 to +0.40 from the measured ratio. This reveals that

51

relaxation takes place as soon as the application torque is done. The theoretical
ratio was an overestimation for the PE foam liner but an underestimation in the
coated paper pulp liners. So it means that the relaxation in the PE foam liner
occurred faster than the coated paper pulp liner. The relationship between the
removal torque and the application torque is well described by comparing the
ratio. For example, treatment 8-81: PE foam liner having the ratio of ISRT/RT of
0.48 means if the closure is applied with 10 TIP, the instantaneous removal
torque of 4.8 TIP will be obtained. In other words, the efficiency of transferring
from AT to ISRT is only 48%. Clearly understanding the interpretation of the ratio
is necessary because it indicates the enormous effect of the stress relaxation on
the removal torque. The measured ratios in Tables 8 and 9 of glued liner
treatments (8-81, 8-86, C-C1) show interesting results. These treatments have
lower measured ratio than non-glued liner treatments which have the same liner
material. This could be the result of the glued liner. When the closure is applied,
the friction forces at the liner interface are developed. One face of the liner is
glued on the inside panel of the closure which does not allow the liner to move.

It is like two faces of the liner are fixed and when moved by the twisting force; the
sheer stress of the liner itself is then simultaneously produced, along with the
compression, which results in creating the wrinkles on the liner surface. The
friction forces at the liner interface will decrease drastically and cause the lower
removal torque. The comparison made on the ratio of the immediate removal
torque to the application torque (lRT/AT) in Table 9 also shows similar results;

the theoretical ratio was overestimated in all treatments. This is different from

52

the ratio of ISRT/AT in Table 8 because during instantaneous removal torque,
the relaxation is just beginning so is not complete yet, and the liner materials
react in the relaxation differently. Subsequently, this finding suggests that more
work is needed to refine the predictive models.

Table 8 Comparison of TN and ISRT/AT, and the “f factor" or sealing force ratio

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Treatment Liner system T’IT ISRT/AT “f factor”
8-81 PE foam, glued 0.88 0.48 0.54
8-82 PE foam, non-glued 0.89 0.79 0.89
8—83 PE foam, non-glued 0.89 0.75 0.84
8-84 PISF, non-glued 0.75 0.80 1 .06
8-85 PISF, non-glued 0.75 0.91 1.21
8-86 PIRVTLF, glued 0.74 0.69 0.94
8-87 PIRVTLF, non-glued 0.76 0.90 1.19
8-88 PIRVTLF, non-glued 0.76 0.81 1.07
C-C1 PE foam, glued 0.88 0.63 0.72
C-CZ PE foam, non-glued 0.85 0.86 1.01

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Note: T’IT i 17%, ISRT/AT i 8%, the”f factor" or sealing force ratio :t 29%

Table 9 Comparison of T’lT and lRT/AT, and the “f factor” or sealing force ratio

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Treatment Liner system T’IT lRT/AT “f factor”
8-81 PE foam, glued 0.88 0.46 0.52
8-82 PE foam, non-glued 0.89 0.66 0.74
8-83 PE foam, non—glued 0.89 0.64 0.72
8-84 PISF, non—glued 0.75 0.60 0.80
8-85 PISF, non-glued 0.75 0.65 0.86
8-86 PIRVTLF, glued 0.74 0.62 0.84

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

53

Table 9 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

8-87 PIRVTLF, non-glued 0.76 0.70 0.92
8-88 PIRVTLF, non-glued 0.76 0.71 0.93
C-C1 PE foam, glued 0.88 0.48 0.55
C-C2 PE foam, non-glued 0.85 0.67 0.79

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Note: T’fl' i 17%, lRT/AT :t 8%, the “f factor” or sealing force ratio :l: 25%

The “f factor” or the sealing force ratio which indicates the capability of the
liner to maintain the sealing force is shown in Tables 8 and 9. The “f factor” is a
better indicator than using the measured ratio RT to AT to determine the
effectiveness of the liner. Table 8 shows that some treatments had the “f factor”
or sealing force ratio more than 1, this is due to the compound error introduced
by the measuring devices (125%). The “f factor” represents the efficiency of the
liner in holding the sealing force, whereas the measured ratio portrays the
efficiency in changing the application torque to the removal torque. The following
example will show the justification of a good liner using the “f factor”. The
comparison between treatment 8-82 and 8-86 in Table 9 says that treatment 8-
86 is poorer than treatment 8-82 if using the measured ratio lRT/AT; however,
the “f factor" indicates that treatment 8-86 is a better liner because it can hold the
sealing force 10% more than what 8-82 does when applied for 15 min. The “f
factor" shown in Figure 18 when closure is applied for 10 sec and 15 min
indicates that it changes over time. One interesting application of this factor as a
function of time is using it to show the decay rate of the sealing force ratio over

time. So the selection of liner can be reasonably made from the results in order

54

to meet the desired removal torque at a certain time. Figure 17 suggests that the
coated paper pulp liners retain the sealing force after 15 min application better
than the PE foam liner. This retention is the result of the fact that the
compressive yield stress of the coated paper pulp liners is higher than
compressive yield stress of the PE foam liner and so it will impede the stress
relaxation more than will PE foam. Consequently, the sealing force of the coated

paper pulp liners after application is higher than the PE foam liner.

 

 

foactor -10 sec
.ffactor -15 min

0.8 ,

f-factor

0.6

0.4

0.2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Q \Q \Q \Q \Q to to .9 ,e ,e
0 0 éQO éQo «>00 «>00 Q/K°% co” ‘00
%Q QQQ f»? 'b‘Q 'vQ \~ ‘1,

 

 

 

Figure 18 Comparison of the “f factor” 10 sec and 15 min after Application

Even though the results from the predictive model of the removal torque

are an overestimation, the predictive model is still useful because the sealing

55

force during removal can be calculated by this equation. By determining the ratio
of the sealing force during removal to the sealing force during application, the “f
factor" or the sealing force ratio is obtained. The “f factor” can assist in the
selection of the proper liner for the effective sealing from the interpretation

previously described.

56

5. CONCLUSIONS

The TLRD method utilizing the static equilibrium approach was developed
to determine the static coefficient of friction at the thread interface and at the liner
interface. This method was validated under various experimental conditions and
gave acceptable results. The concept of this method is simple and works well in
directly measuring the static coefficient of friction under the practical conditions
where the closure and the container are in contact. The static coefficient of
friction is an important piece of information for the development of the predictive
model.

The present predictive model does not fully describe the closure-container
system since it does not account for the viscoelastic properties and the function
of time. Much work remains to improve the accuracy of predicted results and to
make the model more realistic. However, it is still useful in calculating the
sealing force during removal which is proposed in this research. The sealing
force is a better indicator than the removal torque in determining how good is the
seal.

The liner is the most important factor in contribution to the removal torque.
The spring-dashpot model well describes the liner material behavior under
compression. The “f factor” or sealing force ratio deduced from the damping and
spring effect in the liner is an essential indicator for determining how good the
liner retains the sealing force. The application of the “f factor” shows that the
paper pulp liner provides better retention of the sealing force than the PE foam

liner after application for 15 min. These results might contradict current belief

57

and practice, but they seem to be valid. The closure-container system thus
functions through the interaction of many material properties including the static
coefficient of friction, the liner, and other characteristics of threaded closure.
Many interesting issues have been found during this research. Future
researches should be conducted to compare the use of the removal torque and
the sealing force as the indicator for the mechanical seal of the closure-container
system. The effects of different thread profiles and geometry of the closure-
container system on the mechanical seal also need to be investigated because
they are generally present in practical applications. In addition, there are only a
few published studies about the characteristics of the liner materials. This area
should be scrutinized; especially the mechanical properties of the liner materials

as these affect the mechanical seal of the closure-container system.

58

APPENDIX

59

Table 10 Raw Data of the Static Coefficient of Friction at the Thread Interface

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8-81 contact m 25.75 degree
n= 0.514 in T=1.0755 E= 0.9790
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 1 CW 28 mm White
Fv, g Fv, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb Ilcw
400 0.88 6.16 0.01 0.05 0.16
600 1.32 9.16 0.02 0.08 0.16
800 1.76 13.16 0.03 0.12 0.16
1000 2.21 14.66 0.03 0.13 0.15
1200 2.65 18.66 0.04 0.17 0.16
1400 3.09 21.16 0.05 0.19 0.15
1600 3.53 24.66 0.05 0.22 0.16
1800 3.97 28.56 0.06 0.25 0.16
2000 4.41 30.16 0.07 0.27 0.15
Avg 0.16
Sd(n-1) 0.004
n 9
8-81 contact ang 25.75 degree
rt= 0.514 in T=1.0755 E= 0.9790
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 1 CCW 28 mm White
F,, g Fv, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pom
400 0.88 12.16 0.03 0.11 0.17
600 1.32 18.16 0.04 0.16 0.17
800 1.76 24.16 0.05 0.22 0.17
1000 2.21 32.16 0.07 0.29 0.18
1200 2.65 39.16 0.09 0.35 0.18
1400 3.09 44.16 0.10 0.39 0.17
1600 3.53 48.16 0.11 0.43 0.16
1800 3.97 50.16 0.11 0.45 0.15
2000 4.41 55.66 0.12 0.50 0.15
Avg 0.17
Sd(n-1) 0.012
n 9

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

60

 

 

Table 10 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8-81 contact ang 25.75 degree
rt: 0.514 in T=1.0755 E= 0.9790
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 2 CW 28 mm White
F... g F,, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm,
400 0.88 8.16 0.02 0.07 0.19
600 1.32 11.66 0.03 0.10 0.19
800 1.76 15.16 0.03 0.14 0.18
1000 2.21 19.16 0.04 0.17 0.18
1200 2.65 22.66 0.05 0.20 0.18
1400 3.09 25.16 0.06 0.22 0.18
1600 3.53 27.16 0.06 0.24 0.17
1800 3.97 30.66 0.07 0.27 0.17
2000 4.41 34.16 0.08 0.30 0.17
Avg 0.18
Sd(n-1) 0.009
n 9
8-81 contact ang 25.75 degree
rt= 0.514 in T=1.0755 E= 0.9790
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 2 CCW 28 mm White
Fv, g Fv, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm,
400 0.88 16.16 0.04 0.14 0.24
600 1.32 22.16 0.05 0.20 0.21
800 1.76 30.16 0.07 0.27 0.22
1000 2.21 35.16 0.08 0.31 0.20
1200 2.65 41.66 0.09 0.37 0.20
1400 3.09 49.16 0.11 0.44 0.20
1600 3.53 53.16 0.12 0.47 0.19
1800 3.97 41.16 0.09 0.37 0.11
2000 4.41 68.16 0.15 0.61 0.19
Avg 0.20
Sd(n-1) 0.034
n 9

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

61

 

Table 10 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8-81 contact ang 25.75 degree
rt= 0.514 in T=1.0755 E= 0.9790
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 3 CW 28 mm White
Fv, g Fv, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb new
400 0.88 8.66 0.02 0.08 0.20
600 1.32 12.16 0.03 0.11 0.19
800 1.76 16.16 0.04 0.14 0.19
1000 2.21 19.16 0.04 0.17 0.18
1200 2.65 23.16 0.05 0.21 0.18
1400 3.09 25.16 0.06 0.22 0.18
1600 3.53 27.66 0.06 0.25 0.17
1800 3.97 30.16 0.07 0.27 0.17
2000 4.41 35.16 0.08 0.31 0.17
Avg 0.18
Sd(n—1) 0.012
n 9
8-81 contact an 25.75 degree
r.= 0.514 in T=1.0755 E= 0.9790
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 3 CCW 28 mm White
Fv, g Fv, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb no“,
400 0.88 15.16 0.03 0.14 0.22
600 1.32 21.16 0.05 0.19 0.20
800 1.76 26.16 0.06 0.23 0.18
1000 2.21 32.16 0.07 0.29 0.18
1200 2.65 38.16 0.08 0.34 0.18
1400 3.09 43.16 0.10 0.39 0.17
1600 3.53 49.66 0.11 0.44 0.17
1800 3.97 58.16 0.13 0.52 0.18
2000 4.41 64.66 0.14 0.58 0.18
Avg 0.18
Sd(n-1) 0.016
n 9

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

62

 

 

Table 10 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8-81 contact ang 25.75 degree
rt= 0.514 in T=1.0755 E= 0.9790
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 4 CW 28 mm White
Fv, g Fv, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb new
400 0.88 8.66 0.02 0.08 0.20
600 1.32 12.16 0.03 0.11 0.19
800 1.76 16.16 0.04 0.14 0.19
1000 2.21 19.16 0.04 0.17 0.18
1200 2.65 23.16 0.05 0.21 0.18
1400 3.09 26.16 0.06 0.23 0.18
1600 3.53 30.66 0.07 0.27 0.18
1800 3.97 34.16 0.08 0.30 0.18
2000 4.41 39.16 0.09 0.35 0.19
Avg 0.19
Sd(n-1) 0.007
n 9
8-81 contact ang 25.75 degree
rt: 0.514 in T=1.0755 E= 0.9790
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 4 CCW 28 mm White
F... g Fv, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb p.00”
400 0.88 14.66 0.03 0.13 0.21
600 1.32 20.16 0.04 0.18 0.19
800 1.76 25.16 0.06 0.22 0.17
1000 2.21 31.16 0.07 0.28 0.17
1200 2.65 36.16 0.08 0.32 0.17
1400 3.09 41.66 0.09 0.37 0.16
1600 3.53 48.16 0.11 0.43 0.16
1800 3.97 53.66 0.12 0.48 0.16
2000 4.41 61.16 0.13 0.55 0.17
Avg 0.17
Sd(n-1) 0.016
n 9

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

63

Table 10 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8-81 contact ang 25.75 deglee
rt: 0.514 in T=1.0755 E= 0.9790
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 5 CW 28 mm White
F,,, g F,, lb F, g F, lb T, in-Ib pm
400 0.88 8.66 0.02 0.08 0.20
600 1.32 12.66 0.03 0.11 0.20
800 1.76 16.16 0.04 0.14 0.19
1000 2.21 19.66 0.04 0.18 0.19
1200 2.65 23.16 0.05 0.21 0.18
1400 3.09 26.16 0.06 0.23 0.18
1600 3.53 30.16 0.07 0.27 0.18
1800 3.97 34.16 0.08 0.30 0.18
2000 4.41 37.16 0.08 0.33 0.18
Avg 0.19
Sd(n-1) 0.008
n 9
8-81 contact ang 25.75 degree
rt= 0.514 in T=1.0755 E= 0.9790
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 5 CCW 28 mm White
Fv, g Fv, lb F, g F, lb T, in-Ib pom
400 0.88 14.16 0.03 0.13 0.20
600 1.32 20.66 0.05 0.18 0.19
800 1.76 26.16 0.06 0.23 0.18
1000 2.21 32.16 0.07 0.29 0.18
1200 2.65 38.16 0.08 0.34 0.18
1400 3.09 43.66 0.10 0.39 0.17
1600 3.53 49.16 0.11 0.44 0.17
1800 3.97 56.16 0.12 0.50 0.17
2000 4.41 62.16 0.14 0.55 0.17
Avg 0.18
Sd(n-1) 0.011
n 9

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

64

 

 

Table 10 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8-82 contact ang 42.25 dggree
rt: 0.514 in T=1.0755 E= 0.9790
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 1 CW 28 mm White
F,, g F,, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb Hm
400 0.88 10.16 0.02 0.09 0.19
600 1.32 12.16 0.03 0.11 0.16
800 1.76 17.16 0.04 0.15 0.16
1000 2.21 24.66 0.05 0.22 0.18
1200 2.65 22.66 0.05 0.20 0.15
1400 3.09 29.16 0.06 0.26 0.16
1600 3.53 33.66 0.07 0.30 0.16
1800 3.97 35.16 0.08 0.31 0.15
2000 4.41 47.66 0.11 0.43 0.18
Avg 0.17
Sd(n-1) 0.014
n 9
8—82 contact ang 42.25 degree
rt= 0.514 in T=1.0755 E= 0.9790
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 1 CCW 28 mm White
F,, g Fv, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm
400 0.88 13.66 0.03 0.12 0.16
600 1.32 19.16 0.04 0.17 0.15
800 1.76 29.66 0.07 0.26 0.18
1000 2.21 35.16 0.08 0.31 0.16
1200 2.65 42.66 0.09 0.38 0.17
1400 3.09 56.17 0.12 0.50 0.19
1600 3.53 60.66 0.13 0.54 0.18
1800 3.97 66.66 0.15 0.59 0.17
2000 4.41 77.16 0.17 0.69 0.18
Avg 0.17
Sd(n-1) 0.014
n 9

 

 

65

 

 

Table 10 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8-82 contact ang 42.25 degree
r,= 0.514 in T=1.0755 E= 0.9790
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 2 CW 28 mm White
F,, g Fv, lb F, g F, lb T, in-Ib pm
400 0.88 11.16 0.02 0.10 0.20
600 1.32 13.16 0.03 0.12 0.17
800 1.76 12.66 0.03 0.11 0.13
1000 2.21 21.66 0.05 0.19 0.17
1200 2.65 23.16 0.05 0.21 0.15
1400 3.09 27.16 0.06 0.24 0.15
1600 3.53 35.16 0.08 0.31 0.17
1800 3.97 43.66 0.10 0.39 0.18
2000 4.41 55.16 0.12 0.49 0.20
Avg 0.17
Sd(n-1) 0.023
n 9
8-82 contact ang 42.25 degree
rt= 0.514 in T=1.0755 E= 0.9790
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 2 CCW 28 mm White
Fv, g Fv, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb new,
400 0.88 16.16 0.04 0.14 0.19
600 1.32 21.16 0.05 0.19 0.16
800 1.76 24.66 0.05 0.22 0.14
1000 2.21 41 .66 0.09 0.37 0.20
1200 2.65 38.16 0.08 0.34 0.15
1400 3.09 53.16 0.12 0.47 0.18
1600 3.53 59.66 0.13 0.53 0.18
1800 3.97 63.16 0.14 0.56 0.16
2000 4.41 78.66 0.17 0.70 0.19
Avg 0.17
Sd(n-1) 0.021
n 9

 

66

 

 

Table 10 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8-82 contact ang 42.25 degee
rt= 0.514 in T=1.0755 E= 0.9790
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 3 CW 28 mm White
Fv, g Fv, lb F, g F, lb T, in-Ib new
400 0.88 10.66 0.02 0.10 0.20
600 1.32 14.66 0.03 0.13 0.18
800 1.76 19.16 0.04 0.17 0.18
1000 2.21 22.66 0.05 0.20 0.17
1200 2.65 22.16 0.05 0.20 0.15
1400 3.09 32.66 0.07 0.29 0.18
1600 3.53 35.16 0.08 0.31 0.17
1800 3.97 36.66 0.08 0.33 0.16
2000 4.41 46.66 0.10 0.42 0.18
Avg 0.17
Sd(n-1) 0.014
n 9
8-82 contact ang 42.25 degree
rt= 0.514 in T=1.0755 E= 0.9790
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 3 CCW 28 mm White
Fv, g Fv, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb How
400 0.88 16.66 0.04 0.15 0.20
600 1.32 25.16 0.06 0.22 0.20
800 1.76 28.16 0.06 0.25 0.16
1000 2.21 37.66 0.08 0.34 0.18
1200 2.65 41.66 0.09 0.37 0.16
1400 3.09 48.66 0.11 0.43 0.16
1600 3.53 59.66 0.13 0.53 0.18
1800 3.97 62.66 0.14 0.56 0.16
2000 4.41 80.66 0.18 0.72 0.19
Avg 0.18
Sd(n-1) 0.017
n 9

 

67

 

 

Table 10 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8-82 contact ang 42.25 degree
rt: 0.514 in T=1.0755 E= 0.9790
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 4 CW 28 mm White
F,, g Fv, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pcw
400 0.88 11.16 0.02 0.10 0.20
600 1.32 10.66 0.02 0.10 0.14
800 1.76 18.16 0.04 0.16 0.17
1000 2.21 20.16 0.04 0.18 0.16
1200 2.65 25.16 0.06 0.22 0.16
1400 3.09 29.16 0.06 0.26 0.16
1600 3.53 36.16 0.08 0.32 0.17
1800 3.97 38.66 0.09 0.35 0.16
2000 4.41 44.66 0.10 0.40 0.17
Avg 0.17
Sd(n-1) 0.016
n 9
8-82 contact ang 42.25 degLee
r.= 0.514 in T=1.0755 E= 0.9790
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 4 CCW 28 mm White
Fv, g Fv, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm
400 0.88 16.66 0.04 0.15 0.20
600 1.32 25.16 0.06 0.22 0.20
800 1.76 28.16 0.06 0.25 0.16
1000 2.21 37.66 0.08 0.34 0.18
1200 2.65 41.66 0.09 0.37 0.16
1400 3.09 48.66 0.11 0.43 0.16
1600 3.53 59.66 0.13 0.53 0.18
1800 3.97 62.66 0.14 0.56 0.16
2000 4.41 80.66 0.18 0.72 0.19
Avg 0.18
Sd(n-1) 0.017
n 9

 

68

 

 

Table 10 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8-82 contact ang 42.25 degree
r¢= 0.514 in T=1.0755 E= 0.9790
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 5 CW 28 mm White
Fv, g F,, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb new
400 0.88 9.66 0.02 0.09 0.18
600 1.32 11.16 0.02 0.10 0.15
800 1.76 21 .66 0.05 0.19 0.20
1000 2.21 23.16 0.05 0.21 0.17
1200 2.65 26.66 0.06 0.24 0.17
1400 3.09 27.66 0.06 0.25 0.15
1600 3.53 39.66 0.09 0.35 0.18
1800 3.97 39.66 0.09 0.35 0.17
2000 4.41 44.66 0.10 0.40 0.17
Avg 0.17
Sd(n—1) 0.015
n 9
8-82 contact ang 42.25 degree
r.= 0.514 in T=1.0755 E= 0.9790
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 5 CCW 28 mm White
Fv, g F.,, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm
400 0.88 14.66 0.03 0.13 0.17
600 1.32 20.66 0.05 0.18 0.16
800 1.76 25.16 0.06 0.22 0.14
1000 2.21 34.16 0.08 0.30 0.16
1200 2.65 46.16 0.10 0.41 0.18
1400 3.09 54.66 0.12 0.49 0.19
1600 3.53 65.16 0.14 0.58 0.20
1800 3.97 70.66 0.16 0.63 0.19
2000 4.41 77.66 0.17 0.69 0.19
Avg 0.17
Sd(n-1) 0.017
n 9

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

69

 

 

Table 10 (cont'd)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8-84 contact ang 44.25 degree
rt= 0.514 in T=1.0755 E= 0.9790
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 1 CW 28 mm Black
Fv, g F,, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb llcw
400 0.88 11.66 0.03 0.10 0.20
600 1.32 18.66 0.04 0.17 0.22
800 1.76 22.16 0.05 0.20 0.20
1000 2.21 20.66 0.05 0.18 0.15
1200 2.65 28.16 0.06 0.25 0.17
1400 3.09 27.66 0.06 0.25 0.15
1600 3.53 33.66 0.07 0.30 0.16
1800 3.97 39.16 0.09 0.35 0.16
2000 4.41 48.16 0.11 0.43 0.17
fig 0.18
Sd(n-1) 0.024
n 9
8-84 contact an 44.25 degree
rt= 0.514 in T=1.0755 E= 0.9790
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 1 CCW 28 mm Black
Fv, g Fv, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm
400 0.88 14.66 0.03 0.13 0.17
600 1.32 21.16 0.05 0.19 0.16
800 1.76 27.66 0.06 0.25 0.16
1000 2.21 36.16 0.08 0.32 0.16
1200 2.65 44.16 0.10 0.39 0.17
1400 3.09 49.66 0.11 0.44 0.16
1600 3.53 62.66 0.14 0.56 0.18
1800 3.97 68.66 0.15 0.61 0.18
2000 4.41 73.16 0.16 0.65 0.17
Avg 0.17
Sd(n-1) 0.008
n 9

 

70

 

 

Table 10 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8-84 contact ang 44.25 de49ree
r.= 0.514 in T=1.0755 E= 0.9790
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 2 CW 28 mm Black
F,, g Fv, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pew
400 0.88 10.16 0.02 0.09 0.18
600 1.32 13.16 0.03 0.12 0.16
800 1.76 17.16 0.04 0.15 0.16
1000 2.21 21.16 0.05 0.19 0.16
1200 2.65 25.16 0.06 0.22 0.16
1400 3.09 29.16 0.06 0.26 0.16
1600 3.53 33.16 0.07 0.30 0.16
1800 3.97 39.16 0.09 0.35 0.16
2000 4.41 47.16 0.10 0.42 0.17
Ang 0.16
Sd(n-1) 0.009
n 9
8-84 contact ang 44.25 degiee
rt: 0.514 in T=1.0755 E= 0.9790
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 2 CCW 28 mm Black
F,, g Fv, lb F, g F, lb T, in-Ib pm
400 0.88 12.66 0.03 0.11 0.14
600 1.32 24.16 0.05 0.22 0.19
800 1.76 27.66 0.06 0.25 0.16
1000 2.21 34.66 0.08 0.31 0.16
1200 2.65 45.66 0.10 0.41 0.17
1400 3.09 56.16 0.12 0.50 0.19
1600 3.53 59.16 0.13 0.53 0.17
1800 3.97 66.16 0.15 0.59 0.17
2000 4.41 81.16 0.18 0.72 0.19
Avg 0.17
Sd(n-1) 0.017
n ~ 9

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

71

 

 

Table 10 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8-84 contact fl 44.25 degree
rt= 0.514 in T=1.0755 E= 0.9790
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 3 CW 28 mm Black
Fv, g Fv, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm
400 0.88 13.16 0.03 0.12 0.23
600 1.32 16.16 0.04 0.14 0.19
800 1.76 19.16 0.04 0.17 0.17
1000 2.21 24.16 0.05 0.22 0.18
1200 2.65 30.66 0.07 0.27 0.18
1400 3.09 31.16 0.07 0.28 0.16
1600 3.53 32.66 0.07 0.29 0.15
1800 3.97 39.16 0.09 0.35 0.16
2000 4.41 47.16 0.10 0.42 0.17
Avg 0.18
Sd(n-1) 0.021
n 9
8-84 contact ang 44.25 degree
rt= 0.514 in T=1.0755 E= 0.9790
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 3 CCW 28 mm Black
F,,, g Fv, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pom
400 0.88 15.66 0.03 0.14 0.18
600 1.32 24.16 0.05 0.22 0.19
800 1.76 31.16 0.07 0.28 0.18
1000 2.21 36.16 0.08 0.32 0.16
1200 2.65 43.16 0.10 0.39 0.16
1400 3.09 60.16 0.13 0.54 0.20
1600 3.53 59.16 0.13 0.53 0.17
1800 3.97 65.66 0.14 0.59 0.17
2000 4.41 78.16 0.17 0.70 0.18
Avg 0.18
Sd(n-1) 0.013
n 9

 

72

 

 

Table 10 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8-84 contact ang 44.25 degree
rt= 0.514 in T=1.0755 E= 0.9790
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 4 CW 28 mm Black
Fv, g Fv, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb new
400 0.88 7.66 0.02 0.07 0.15
600 1.32 11.66 0.03 0.10 0.15
800 1.76 19.66 0.04 0.18 0.18
1000 2.21 23.66 0.05 0.21 0.17
1200 2.65 27.66 0.06 0.25 0.17
1400 3.09 30.66 0.07 0.27 0.16
1600 3.53 36.66 0.08 0.33 0.17
1800 3.97 38.16 0.08 0.34 0.16
2000 4.41 47.66 0.11 0.43 0.17
Ag 0.16
Sd(n-1) 0.011
n 9
8-84 contact ang 44.25 degree
rt= 0.514 in T=1.0755 E= 0.9790
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 4 CCW 28 mm Black
H. g Fv, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm
400 0.88 17.66 0.04 0.16 0.21
600 1.32 21.16 0.05 0.19 0.16
800 1.76 26.66 0.06 0.24 0.15
1000 2.21 35.66 0.08 0.32 0.16
1200 2.65 41.66 0.09 0.37 0.16
1400 3.09 56.66 0.12 0.51 0.19
1600 3.53 60.66 0.13 0.54 0.17
1800 3.97 67.66 0.15 0.60 0.17
2000 4.41 78.66 0.17 0.70 0.18
Avg 0.17
Sd(n-1) 0.018
n 9

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

73

 

 

Table 10 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8-84 contact ang 44.25 degree
rt= 0.514 in T=1.0755 E= 0.9790
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 5 CW 28 mm Black
F,, g Fv, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb Ilcw
400 0.88 11.16 0.02 0.10 0.20
600 1.32 12.16 0.03 0.11 0.15
800 1.76 18.66 0.04 0.17 0.17
1000 2.21 25.16 0.06 0.22 0.18
1200 2.65 23.66 0.05 0.21 0.15
1400 3.09 31.66 0.07 0.28 0.17
1600 3.53 33.66 0.07 0.30 0.16
1800 3.97 41.66 0.09 0.37 0.17
2000 4.41 46.16 0.10 0.41 0.17
Avg 0.17
Sd(n-1) 0.015
n 9
8-85 contact ang 44.25 degree
rt: 0.514 in T=1.0755 E= 0.9790
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 5 CCW 28 mm Black
F,, g F,, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm
400 0.88 17.66 0.04 0.16 0.21
600 1.32 19.16 0.04 0.17 0.14
800 1.76 30.16 0.07 0.27 0.17
1000 2.21 33.16 0.07 0.30 0.15
1200 2.65 45.16 0.10 0.40 0.17
1400 3.09 51.66 0.11 0.46 0.17
1600 3.53 60.66 0.13 0.54 0.17
1800 3.97 66.66 0.15 0.59 0.17
2000 4.41 78.66 0.17 0.70 0.18
Avg 0.17
Sd(n-1) 0.019
n 9

 

74

 

 

Table 10 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8-86 contact ang 20 (Legree
rt: 0.514 in T=1.0755 E= 0.9790
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 1 CW 28 mm Black
Fv. g Fv. lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pew
400 0.88 6.66 0.01 0.06 0.17
600 1.32 11.66 0.03 0.10 0.19
800 1.76 15.16 0.03 0.14 0.19
1000 2.21 22.66 0.05 0.20 0.22
1200 2.65 20.16 0.04 0.18 0.17
1400 3.09 27.16 0.06 0.24 0.19
1600 3.53 25.16 0.06 0.22 0.17
1800 3.97 30.16 0.07 0.27 0.17
2000 4.41 34.66 0.08 0.31 0.18
Avg 0.18
Sd(n-1) 0.016
n 9
8-86 contact ang 20 degree
rt= 0.514 in T=1.0755 E= 0.9790
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 1 CCW 28 mm Black
Fv, g F,, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm
400 0.88 15.16 0.03 0.14 0.23
600 1.32 20.66 0.05 0.18 0.20
800 1.76 25.16 0.06 0.22 0.18
1000 2.21 31.66 0.07 0.28 0.18
1200 2.65 39.66 0.09 0.35 0.19
1400 3.09 44.16 0.10 0.39 0.18
1600 3.53 48.16 0.11 0.43 0.17
1800 3.97 50.16 0.11 0.45 0.16
2000 4.41 55.66 0.12 0.50 0.16
Avg 0.18
Sd(n-1) 0.023
n 9

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

75

 

 

Table 10 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8-86 contact an 20 degree
rt: 0.514 in T=1.0755 E= 0.9790
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 2 CW 28 mm Black
Fv, g F,, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm
400 0.88 5.16 0.01 0.05 0.14
600 1.32 10.66 0.02 0.10 0.18
800 1.76 14.16 0.03 0.13 0.18
1000 2.21 18.16 0.04 0.16 0.18
1200 2.65 21.16 0.05 0.19 0.18
1400 3.09 22.66 0.05 0.20 0.17
1600 3.53 30.16 0.07 0.27 0.19
1800 3.97 32.16 0.07 0.29 0.18
2000 4.41 35.16 0.08 0.31 0.18
Avg 0.18
Sd(n-1) 0.013
n 9
8-86 contact ang 20 degree
rt= 0.514 in T=1.0755 E= 0.9790
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 2 CCW 28 mm Black
Fv, g Fv, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm
400 0.88 16.16 0.04 0.14 0.25
600 1.32 22.16 0.05 0.20 0.22
800 1.76 30.16 0.07 0.27 0.23
1000 2.21 35.16 0.08 0.31 0.21
1200 2.65 41 .66 0.09 0.37 0.21
1400 3.09 49.16 0.11 0.44 0.21
1600 3.53 53.16 0.12 0.47 0.19
1800 3.97 41.16 0.09 0.37 0.12
2000 4.41 68.16 0.15 0.61 0.20
Avg 0.20
Sd(n-1) 0.035
n 9

 

76

 

 

Table 10 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8-86 contact ang 20 degree
rt= 0.514 in T=1.0755 E= 0.9790
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 3 CW 28 mm Black
F,, g Fv, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pcw
400 0.88 7.16 0.02 0.06 0.18
600 1.32 10.16 0.02 0.09 0.18
800 1.76 14.66 0.03 0.13 0.19
1000 2.21 20.66 0.05 0.18 0.20
1200 2.65 25.66 0.06 0.23 0.21
1400 3.09 20.66 0.05 0.18 0.16
1600 3.53 26.16 0.06 0.23 0.17
1800 3.97 28.16 0.06 0.25 0.17
2000 4.41 31.66 0.07 0.28 0.17
Avg 0.18
Sd(n-1) 0.017
n 9
8-86 contact ang 20 degree
rt: 0.514 in T=1.0755 E= 0.9790
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 3 CCW 28 mm Black
Fv, g F,, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm
400 0.88 15.16 0.03 0.14 0.23
600 1.32 21.16 0.05 0.19 0.21
800 1.76 26.16 0.06 0.23 0.19
1000 2.21 32.16 0.07 0.29 0.19
1200 2.65 38.16 0.08 0.34 0.18
1400 3.09 43.16 0.10 0.39 0.18
1600 3.53 49.66 0.11 0.44 0.18
1800 3.97 58.16 0.13 0.52 0.19
2000 4.41 64.66 0.14 0.58 0.19
Avg 0.19
Sd(n-1) 0.016
n 9

 

77

 

 

Table 10 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8-86 contact ang 20 degree
rt= 0.514 in T=1.0755 E= 0.9790
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 4 CW 28 mm Black
Fv, g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-Ib pm,
400 0.88 9.66 0.02 0.09 0.23
600 1.32 12.66 0.03 0.11 0.21
800 1.76 16.66 0.04 0.15 0.20
1000 2.21 16.66 0.04 0.15 0.17
1200 2.65 23.66 0.05 0.21 0.20
1400 3.09 22.16 0.05 0.20 0.17
1600 3.53 26.16 0.06 0.23 0.17
1800 3.97 27.66 0.06 0.25 0.16
2000 4.41 31.66 0.07 0.28 0.17
Avg 0.19
Sd(n-1) 0.023
n 9
8-86 contact an 20 degge
rt: 0.514 in T=1.0755 E= 0.9790
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 4 CCW 28 mm Black
F,, g Fv, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm
400 0.88 14.66 0.03 0.13 0.22
600 1.32 20.16 0.04 0.18 0.20
800 1.76 25.16 0.06 0.22 0.18
1000 2.21 31.16 0.07 0.28 0.18
1200 2.65 36.16 0.08 0.32 0.17
1400 3.09 41.66 0.09 0.37 0.17
1600 3.53 48.16 0.11 0.43 0.17
1800 3.97 53.66 0.12 0.48 0.17
2000 4.41 61.16 0.13 0.55 0.18
Avg 0.18
Sd(n-1) 0.016
n 9

 

78

 

 

Table 10 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8-86 contact an 20 degree
rt= 0.514 in T=1.0755 E= 0.9790
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 5 CW 28 mm Black
Fv, g Fv, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm
400 0.88 5.16 0.01 0.05 0.14
600 1.32 9.16 0.02 0.08 0.16
800 1.76 10.16 0.02 0.09 0.14
1000 2.21 19.16 0.04 0.17 0.19
1200 2.65 20.66 0.05 0.18 0.18
1400 3.09 23.66 0.05 0.21 0.17
1600 3.53 26.66 0.06 0.24 0.17
1800 3.97 31.16 0.07 0.28 0.18
2000 4.41 37.66 0.08 0.34 0.19
Alg 0.17
Sd(n-1) 0.017
n 9
8-86 contact ang 20 cljgree
r.= 0.514 in T=1.0755 E= 0.9790
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 5 CCW 28 mm Black
Fv, g Fv, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm
400 0.88 14.16 0.03 0.13 0.21
600 1.32 20.66 0.05 0.18 0.20
800 1.76 26.16 0.06 0.23 0.19
1000 2.21 32.16 0.07 0.29 0.19
1200 2.65 38.16 0.08 0.34 0.18
1400 3.09 43.66 0.10 0.39 0.18
1600 3.53 49.16 0.11 0.44 0.18
1800 3.97 56.16 0.12 0.50 0.18
2000 4.41 62.16 0.14 0.55 0.18
Avg 0.19
Sd(n-1) 0.012
n 9

 

79

 

 

Table 10 (cont'd)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

C-C1 contact an 41.5 degree
I}: 0.7059 in T=1.4630 E= 1.3605
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 1 CW 38 mm White
F,, g Fv, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb new
400 0.88 8.16 0.02 0.07 0.12
600 1.32 12.16 0.03 0.11 0.12
800 1.76 14.66 0.03 0.13 0.11
1000 2.21 17.66 0.04 0.16 0.10
1200 2.65 20.16 0.04 0.18 0.10
1400 3.09 23.16 0.05 0.21 0.10
1600 3.53 26.16 0.06 0.23 0.10
1800 3.97 29.66 0.07 0.26 0.10
2000 4.41 32.66 0.07 0.29 0.10
Avg 0.10
Sd(n-1) 0.007
n 9
C-C1 contact ang 41.5 d ree
r.= 0.7059 in T=1.4630 E= 1.3605
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 1 CCW 38 mm White
F... g F,, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm
400 0.88 14.16 0.03 0.13 0.12
600 1.32 19.16 0.04 0.17 0.11
800 1.76 26.16 0.06 0.23 0.11
1000 2.21 33.16 0.07 0.30 0.11
1200 2.65 35.66 0.08 0.32 0.10
1400 3.09 44.16 0.10 0.39 0.11
1600 3.53 53.66 0.12 0.48 0.12
1800 3.97 60.66 0.13 0.54 0.12
2000 4.41 67.16 0.15 0.60 0.12
Agg 0.11
Sd(n-1) 0.007
n 9

 

80

 

 

Table 10 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

C-C1 contact ang 41.5 degiee
rt= 0.7059 in T=1.4630 E= 1.3605
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 2 CW 38 mm White
F,, g F,, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb new
400 0.88 7.66 0.02 0.07 0.11
600 1.32 13.66 0.03 0.12 0.13
800 1.76 16.16 0.04 0.14 0.12
1000 2.21 16.16 0.04 0.14 0.10
1200 2.65 23.66 0.05 0.21 0.11
1400 3.09 27.66 0.06 0.25 0.11
1600 3.53 29.66 0.07 0.26 0.11
1800 3.97 32.66 0.07 0.29 0.11
2000 4.41 32.66 0.07 0.29 0.10
Avg 0.11
Sd(n-1) 0.009
n 9
C-C1 contact an 41.5 degree
rt: 0.7059 in T=1.4630 E= 1.3605
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 2 CCW 38 mm White
F,, g Fv, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm
400 0.88 14.66 0.03 0.13 0.13
600 1.32 24.16 0.05 0.22 0.14
800 1.76 23.16 0.05 0.21 0.10
1000 2.21 38.66 0.09 0.35 0.14
1200 2.65 37.66 0.08 0.34 0.11
1400 3.09 42.66 0.09 0.38 0.10
1600 3.53 51.66 0.11 0.46 0.11
1800 3.97 65.66 0.14 0.59 0.13
2000 4.41 69.66 0.15 0.62 0.12
Ai 0.12
Sd(n-1) 0.016
n 9

 

81

 

 

Table 10 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

C-C1 contact ang 41.5 degree
rt= 0.7059 in T=1.4630 E= 1.3605
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 3 CW 38 mm White
Fv, g Fv, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm
400 0.88 5.66 0.01 0.05 0.09
600 1.32 14.16 0.03 0.13 0.13
800 1.76 14.66 0.03 0.13 0.11
1000 2.21 19.66 0.04 0.18 0.11
1200 2.65 19.66 0.04 0.18 0.10
1400 3.09 31.16 0.07 0.28 0.12
1600 3.53 25.16 0.06 0.22 0.10
1800 3.97 31.66 0.07 0.28 0.10
2000 4.41 33.16 0.07 0.30 0.10
Avg 0.11
Sd(n-1) 0.013
n 9
C-C1 contact ang 41.5 degree
rt= 0.7059 in T=1.4630 E= 1.3605
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 3 CCW 38 mm White
F,, g F,,, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm
400 0.88 18.16 0.04 0.16 0.17
600 1.32 22.16 0.05 0.20 0.13
800 1.76 29.66 0.07 0.26 0.13
1000 2.21 31 .66 0.07 0.28 0.11
1200 2.65 34.66 0.08 0.31 0.10
1400 3.09 43.66 0.10 0.39 0.11
1600 3.53 56.66 0.12 0.51 0.12
1800 3.97 63.66 0.14 0.57 0.12
2000 4.41 65.66 0.14 0.59 0.11
Avg 0.12
Sd(n-1) 0.020
n 9

 

 

82

 

 

Table 10 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

C-C1 contact ang 41.5 degree
rt= 0.7059 in T=1.4630 E= 1.3605
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 4 CW 38 mm White
F,, g F,, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb new
400 0.88 8.16 0.02 0.07 0.12
600 1.32 11.66 0.03 0.10 0.11
800 1.76 16.66 0.04 0.15 0.12
1000 2.21 20.66 0.05 0.18 0.12
1200 2.65 15.66 0.03 0.14 0.08
1400 3.09 25.66 0.06 0.23 0.11
1600 3.53 28.66 0.06 0.26 0.11
1800 3.97 32.66 0.07 0.29 0.11
2000 4.41 34.16 0.08 0.30 0.10
Avg 0.11
Sd(n-1) 0.010
n 9
C-C1 contact ang 41.5 degLee
rt= 0.7059 in T=1.4630 E= 1.3605
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 4 CCW 38 mm White
F.., g F,, lb F, g F, lb T, in-Ib pm
400 0.88 17.16 0.04 0.15 0.15
600 1.32 19.66 0.04 0.18 0.11
800 1.76 23.66 0.05 0.21 0.10
1000 2.21 32.66 0.07 0.29 0.11
1200 2.65 39.66 0.09 0.35 0.11
1400 3.09 45.66 0.10 0.41 0.11
1600 3.53 50.16 0.11 0.45 0.11
1800 3.97 58.16 0.13 0.52 0.11
2000 4.41 66.66 0.15 0.59 0.11
Avg 0.11
Sd(n-1) 0.016
n 9

 

83

 

 

Table 10 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

C-C1 contact ang 41.5 degree
rt= 0.7059 in T=1.4630 E= 1.3605
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 5 CW 38 mm White
Fv, g F,, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb new
400 0.88 10.16 0.02 0.09 0.14
600 1.32 8.66 0.02 0.08 0.09
800 1.76 16.66 0.04 0.15 0.12
1000 2.21 17.66 0.04 0.16 0.10
1200 2.65 20.66 0.05 0.18 0.10
1400 3.09 24.16 0.05 0.22 0.10
1600 3.53 26.66 0.06 0.24 0.10
1800 3.97 32.16 0.07 0.29 0.11
2000 4.41 36.66 0.08 0.33 0.11
Avg 0.11
Sd(n-1) 0.013
n 9
C-C1 contact egg 41.5 dggree
rt= 0.7059 in T=1.4630 E= 1.3605
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 5 CCW 38 mm White
Fv, g F,, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm
400 0.88 16.16 0.04 0.14 0.14
600 1.32 21.66 0.05 0.19 0.13
800 1.76 21.66 0.05 0.19 0.09
1000 2.21 30.66 0.07 0.27 0.10
1200 2.65 37.66 0.08 0.34 0.11
1400 3.09 43.66 0.10 0.39 0.11
1600 3.53 56.66 0.12 0.51 0.12
1800 3.97 62.16 0.14 0.55 0.12
2000 4.41 71.66 0.16 0.64 0.12
AVL 0.12
Sd(n-1) 0.017
n 9

 

84

 

 

Table 10 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

C-C2 contact ang 39.75 degee
rt= 0.7059 in T=1.4630 E= 1.3605
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 1 CW 38 mm White
Fv, g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb new
400 0.88 8.66 0.02 0.08 0.12
600 1.32 10.66 0.02 0.10 0.11
800 1.76 14.16 0.03 0.13 0.11
1000 2.21 17.16 0.04 0.15 0.10
1200 2.65 20.16 0.04 0.18 0.10
1400 3.09 23.16 0.05 0.21 0.10
1600 3.53 27.16 0.06 0.24 0.10
1800 3.97 30.16 0.07 0.27 0.10
2000 4.41 32.66 0.07 0.29 0.10
Avg 0.11
Sd(n-1) 0.007
n 9
C-CZ contact ang 39.75 degree
n= 0.7059 in T=1.4630 E= 1.3605
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 1 CCW 38 mm White
Fv, g F,, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm,
400 0.88 13.16 0.03 0.12 0.12
600 1.32 18.16 0.04 0.16 0.10
800 1.76 26.66 0.06 0.24 0.12
1000 2.21 33.66 0.07 0.30 0.12
1200 2.65 39.16 0.09 0.35 0.11
1400 3.09 47.16 0.10 0.42 0.12
1600 3.53 48.16 0.11 0.43 0.10
1800 3.97 55.16 0.12 0.49 0.11
2000 4.41 72.16 0.16 0.64 0.13
Avg 0.11
Sd(n-1) 0.009
n 9

 

85

 

 

Table 10 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

C-C2 contact ang 39.75 degree
rt: 0.7059 in T=1.4630 E= 1.3605
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 2 CW 38 mm White
F,, g F,, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm,
400 0.88 9.66 0.02 0.09 0.14
600 1.32 10.16 0.02 0.09 0.10
800 1.76 15.66 0.03 0.14 0.12
1000 2.21 20.16 0.04 0.18 0.12
1200 2.65 17.66 0.04 0.16 0.09
1400 3.09 20.66 0.05 0.18 0.09
1600 3.53 25.66 0.06 0.23 0.10
1800 3.97 30.66 0.07 0.27 0.10
2000 4.41 27.16 0.06 0.24 0.09
Avg 0.11
Sd(n-1) 0.015
n 9
C-CZ contact ang 39.75 degree
rt= 0.7059 in T=1.4630 E= 1.3605
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 2 CCW 38 mm White
Fv, g F,, lb F, g F, lb T, in-Ib pm
400 0.88 13.66 0.03 0.12 0.12
600 1.32 20.66 0.05 0.18 0.12
800 1.76 31.66 0.07 0.28 0.14
1000 2.21 31 .66 0.07 0.28 0.11
1200 2.65 41.16 0.09 0.37 0.12
1400 3.09 48.66 0.11 0.43 0.12
1600 3.53 53.16 0.12 0.47 0.12
1800 3.97 55.66 0.12 0.50 0.11
2000 4.41 74.66 0.16 0.67 0.13
Avg 0.12
Sd(n-1) 0.012
n 9

 

86

 

 

Table 10 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

C-C2 contact ang 39.75 digree
rt= 0.7059 in T=1.4630 E= 1.3605
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 3 CW 38 mm White
Fv, 9 Fe, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm
400 0.88 10.16 0.02 0.09 0.14
600 1.32 11.66 0.03 0.10 0.12
800 1.76 15.66 0.03 0.14 0.12
1000 2.21 18.16 0.04 0.16 0.11
1200 2.65 18.16 0.04 0.16 0.10
1400 3.09 19.16 0.04 0.17 0.09
1600 3.53 29.66 0.07 0.26 0.11
1800 3.97 30.66 0.07 0.27 0.10
2000 4.41 33.66 0.07 0.30 0.10
Avg 0.11
Sd(n-1) 0.015
n 9
C-CZ contact ang 39.75 degee
rt= 0.7059 in T=1.4630 E= 1.3605
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 3 CCW 38 mm White
Fv, g F,, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb It,“
400 0.88 15.16 0.03 0.14 0.14
600 1.32 16.16 0.04 0.14 0.09
800 1.76 26.16 0.06 0.23 0.11
1000 2.21 32.16 0.07 0.29 0.11
1200 2.65 36.16 0.08 0.32 0.10
1400 3.09 51.66 0.11 0.46 0.13
1600 3.53 50.66 0.11 0.45 0.11
1800 3.97 58.66 0.13 0.52 0.11
2000 4.41 70.66 0.16 0.63 0.13
Avg 0.12
Sd(n-1) 0.015
n 9

 

87

 

 

Table 10 (cont'd)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

C-C2 contact ang 39.75 degree
r.= 0.7059 in T=1.4630 E= 1.3605
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 4 CW 38 mm White
F,, g F,, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pcw
400 0.88 8.66 0.02 0.08 0.12
600 1.32 10.66 0.02 0.10 0.11
800 1.76 18.66 0.04 0.17 0.13
1000 2.21 20.66 0.05 0.18 0.12
1200 2.65 20.16 0.04 0.18 0.10
1400 3.09 26.66 0.06 0.24 0.11
1600 3.53 28.16 0.06 0.25 0.11
1800 3.97 28.66 0.06 0.26 0.10
2000 4.41 32.66 0.07 0.29 0.10
Avg 0.11
Sd(n-I) 0.011
n 9
C-CZ contact ang 39.75 degree
rt= 0.7059 in T=1.4630 E= 1.3605
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 4 CCW 38 mm White
F,, g F.,, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm
400 0.88 14.66 0.03 0.13 0.13
600 1.32 20.16 0.04 0.18 0.12
800 1.76 25.66 0.06 0.23 0.11
1000 2.21 34.66 0.08 0.31 0.12
1200 2.65 44.16 0.10 0.39 0.13
1400 3.09 43.16 0.10 0.39 0.11
1600 3.53 50.16 0.11 0.45 0.11
1800 3.97 50.66 0.11 0.45 0.09
2000 4.41 73.66 0.16 0.66 0.13
Avg 0.12
Sd(n-1) 0.013
n 9

 

88

 

 

Table 10 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

C-CZ contact ang 39.75 degree
rt= 0.7059 in T=1.4630 E= 1.3605
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 5 CW 38 mm White
Fv, g F,, lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm
400 0.88 10.16 0.02 0.09 0.14
600 1.32 10.66 0.02 0.10 0.11
800 1.76 18.66 0.04 0.17 0.13
1000 2.21 18.66 0.04 0.17 0.11
1200 2.65 22.66 0.05 0.20 0.11
1400 3.09 29.66 0.07 0.26 0.12
1600 3.53 28.16 0.06 0.25 0.11
1800 3.97 33.66 0.07 0.30 0.11
2000 4.41 37.16 0.08 0.33 0.11
Avg 0.12
Sd(n-1) 0.012
n 9
C-CZ contact ang 39.75 degree
rt: 0.7059 in T=1.4630 E= 1.3605
p= 0.167 in (1 inl6 thrd)
d= 4.048 in
Run 5 CCW 38 mm White
F,, g F,, lb F, g F, lb T, in-Ib pm
400 0.88 13.16 0.03 0.12 0.12
600 1.32 20.16 0.04 0.18 0.12
800 1.76 30.66 0.07 0.27 0.14
1000 2.21 39.66 0.09 0.35 0.14
1200 2.65 46.66 0.10 0.42 0.14
1400 3.09 45.66 0.10 0.41 0.11
1600 3.53 53.16 0.12 0.47 0.12
1800 3.97 54.16 0.12 0.48 0.10
2000 4.41 72.66 0.16 0.65 0.13
Avg 0.12
Sd(n-1) 0.014
n 9

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

89

 

 

Table 11 Raw Data of the Static Coefficient of Friction at the Liner Interface

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8-81 E, in 0.979
I, in 0.838
r,, in 0.45425
d, in 4.048
Run 1 CW 28 mm White PE foam glued
Fv, g F,. lb F,g F, lb T, in-lb How
150 03311.66 0.026 0.10 0.69
200 0.441616 0.036 0.14 0.72
300 0.66 23.16 0.051 0.21 0.69
400 0.88 33.16 0.073 0.30 0.74
600 1.32 46.16 0.102 0.41 0.69
800 1.76 68.16 0.150 0.61 0.76
Alg 0.71
Sd(n-1) 0.03
n 6
8-81 E, in 0.979
I, in 0.838
r,, in 0.45425
d, in 4.048
Run1 CCW 28 mm White PE foam glued
Fv, g Fv. lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb new,
150 03311.16 0.025 0.10 0.66
200 0.441516 0.033 0.14 0.68
300 0.66 22.16 0.049 0.20 0.66
400 0.88 31.16 0.069 0.28 0.69
600 1.32 43.16 0.095 0.39 0.64
800 1.76 63.16 0.139 0.56 0.70
Avg_ 0.67
Sd(n-1) 0.02
n 6

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

90

 

 

Table 11 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8-81 E, in 0.979
I, in 0.838
r,, in 0.45425
d, in 4.048
Run 2 CW 28 mm White PE foam glued
Fv, g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb new
150 0.33 11.66 0.026 0.10 0.69
200 0.44 16.16 0.036 0.14 0.72
300 0.66 23.16 0.051 0.21 0.69
400 0.88 33.16 0.073 0.30 0.74
600 1.32 46.16 0.102 0.41 0.69
800 1.76 68.16 0.150 0.61 0.76
Avg 0.71
Sd(n-1) 0.03
n 6
8-81 E, in 0.979
I, in 0.838
r_.,, in 0.45425
d, in 4.048
Run 2 CCW 28 mm White PE foam glued
Fv, g Fv. lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm
150 0.33 15.16 0.033 0.14 0.90
200 0.44 20.16 0.044 0.18 0.90
300 0.66 28.16 0.062 0.25 0.84
400 0.88 40.16 0.089 0.36 0.89
600 1.32 48.16 0.106 0.43 0.72
800 1.76 74.16 0.164 0.66 0.83
Av 0.85
Sd(n-1) 0.07
n 6

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

91

 

 

Table 11 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8-81 E, in 0.979
I, in 0.838
r,, in 0.45425
d, in 4.048
Run 3 CW 28 mm White PE foam glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pa...
150 0.33 14.16 0.031 0.13 0.84
200 0.44 15.66 0.035 0.14 0.70
300 0.66 25.16 0.055 0.22 0.75
400 0.88 40.16 0.089 0.36 0.89
600 1.32 44.16 0.097 0.39 0.66
800 1.76 70.16 0.155 0.63 0.78
Avg 0.77
Sd(n-1) 0.09
n 6
8-81 E, in 0.979
I, in 0.838
r... in 0.45425
d, in 4.048
Run 3 CCW 28 mm White PE foam glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm...
150 0.33 14.16 0.031 0.13 0.84
200 0.44 17.66 0.039 0.16 0.79
300 0.66 25.66 0.057 0.23 0.76
400 0.88 34.16 0.075 0.30 0.76
600 1.32 46.66 0.103 0.42 0.69
800 1.76 73.66 0.162 0.66 0.82
Avg 0.78
Sd(n-1) 0.05
n 6

 

92

 

 

Table 11 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8-81 E, in 0.979
I, in 0.838
r3, in 0.45425
d, in 4.048
Run 4 CW 28 mm White PE foam glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb In...
150 0.33 12.66 0.028 0.11 0.75
200 0.44 14.66 0.032 0.13 0.65
300 0.66 25.66 0.057 0.23 0.76
400 0.88 34.66 0.076 0.31 0.77
600 1.32 47.16 0.104 0.42 0.70
800 1.76 65.16 0.144 0.58 0.73
ALS 0.73
Sd(n-1) 0.04
n 6
8-81 E, in 0.979
I, in 0.838
r,, in 0.45425
d, in 4.048
Run 4 CCW 28 mm White PE foam glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm...
150 0.33 12.66 0.028 0.11 0.75
200 0.44 19.16 0.042 0.17 0.85
300 0.66 23.66 0.052 0.21 0.70
400 0.88 38.16 0.084 0.34 0.85
600 1.32 47.16 0.104 0.42 0.70
800 1.76 74.66 0.165 0.67 0.83
Avg 0.78
Sd(n-1) 0.07
n 6

 

 

 

 

93

Table 11 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8-81 E, in 0.979
I, in 0.838
r,, in 0.45425
d, in 4.048
Run 5 CW 28 mm White PE foam glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pg...
150 0.33 11.66 0.026 0.10 0.69
200 0.44 20.16 0.044 0.18 0.90
300 0.66 23.66 0.052 0.21 0.70
400 0.88 37.66 0.083 0.34 0.84
600 1.32 48.66 0.107 0.43 0.72
800 1.76 66.66 0.147 0.59 0.74
Avg 0.77
Sd(n-1) 0.08
n 6
8-81 E, in 0.979
I, in 0.838
rs, in 0.45425
d, in 4.048
Run 5 CCW 28 mm White PE foam glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm
150 0.33 12.66 0.028 0.11 0.75
200 0.44 17.16 0.038 0.15 0.76
300 0.66 23.66 0.052 0.21 0.70
400 0.88 28.66 0.063 0.26 0.64
600 1.32 42.66 0.094 0.38 0.63
800 1.76 72.66 0.160 0.65 0.81
A19 0.72
Sd(n-1) 0.07
n 6

 

 

 

 

94

 

Table 11 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8-82 E, in 0.979
I, in 0.838
rs, in 0.45425
d, in 4.048
Run1 CW 28 mm White PE foam Non-glued
F..,g F.,.lb F,g F, lb T, in-lb p...
150 0.33 7.16 0.016 0.06 0.43
200 04410.16 0.022 0.09 0.45
300 0.661516 0.033 0.14 0.45
400 0.88 22.16 0.049 0.20 0.49
600 1.32 33.16 0.073 0.30 0.49
800 1.76 45.66 0.101 0.41 0.51
Avg 0.47
Sd(n-1) 0.03
n 6
8-82 E, in 0.979
I, in 0.838
rs, in 0.45425
d, in 4.048
Run1 CCW 28 mm White PE foam Nomlued
F..,g F...lb F,g F, lb T, in-lb pm...
150 0.33 7.16 0.016 0.06 0.43
200 0.441016 0.022 0.09 0.45
300 0.661616 0.036 0.14 0.48
400 0.88 23.16 0.051 0.21 0.52
600 1.32 33.16 0.073 0.30 0.49
800 1.76 46.66 0.103 0.42 0.52
[EL 0.48
Sd(n-1) 0.04
n 6

 

95

 

Table 11 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8-82 E, in 0.979
I, in 0.838
r,, in 0.45425
d, in 4.048
Run 2 CW 28 mm White PE foam Non-glued
F..,g F...lb F,g F, lb T, in-lb pm,
150 0.33 9.16 0.020 0.08 0.54
200 0.441216 0.027 0.11 0.54
300 06617.16 0.038 0.15 0.51
400 0.88 23.16 0.051 0.21 0.52
600 1.32 33.16 0.073 0.30 0.49
800 1.76 46.16 0.102 0.41 0.51
Avg 0.52
Sd(n-1) 0.02
n 6
8-82 E, in 0.979
I, in 0.838
r,, in 0.45425
d, in 4.048
Run 2 CCW 28 mm White PE foam Non-glued
F..,g F... lb F,g F, lb T, in-lb pm...
150 0.33 9.66 0.021 0.09 0.57
200 04413.16 0.029 0.12 0.59
300 0.661816 0.040 0.16 0.54
400 0.88 24.16 0.053 0.22 0.54
600 1.32 35.16 0.078 0.31 0.52
800 1.76 47.16 0.104 0.42 0.53
Avg 0.55
Sd(n-1) 0.03
n 6

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

96

 

Table 11 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8-82 E, in 0.979
I, in 0.838
r,, in 0.45425
d, in 4.048
Run 3 CW 28 mm White PE foam Non-glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-Ib no...
150 0.33 9.16 0.020 0.08 0.54
200 0.44 10.16 0.022 0.09 0.45
300 0.66 17.16 0.038 0.15 0.51
400 0.88 23.16 0.051 0.21 0.52
600 1.32 33.16 0.073 0.30 0.49
800 1.76 46.16 0.102 0.41 0.51
Avg 0.50
Sd(n-1) 0.03
n 6
8-82 E, in 0.979
I, in 0.838
r,, in 0.45425
d, in 4.048
Run 3 CCW 28 mm White PE foam Non-glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pom
150 0.33 7.56 0.017 0.07 0.45
200 0.44 10.66 0.024 0.10 0.47
300 0.66 17.16 0.038 0.15 0.51
400 0.88 22.66 0.050 0.20 0.50
600 1.32 33.16 0.073 0.30 0.49
800 1.76 44.66 0.098 0.40 0.50
Agg 0.49
Sd(n-1) 0.02
n 6

 

97

 

Table 11 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8-82 E, in 0.979
I, in 0.838
rs, in 0.45425
d, in 4.048
Run 4 CW 28 mm White PE foam Non-glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm
150 0.33 7.38 0.016 0.07 0.44
200 0.44 11.66 0.026 0.10 0.52
300 0.66 17.16 0.038 0.15 0.51
400 0.88 23.66 0.052 0.21 0.53
600 1.32 32.66 0.072 0.29 0.49
800 1.76 47.16 0.104 0.42 0.53
Pig 0.50
Sd(n-1) 0.03
n 6
8-82 E, in 0.979
I, in 0.838
r,, in 0.45425
d, in 4.048
Run 4 CCW 28 mm White PE foam Non-glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb poo...
150 0.33 8.16 0.018 0.07 0.48
200 0.44 10.16 0.022 0.09 0.45
300 0.66 16.16 0.036 0.14 0.48
400 0.88 23.66 0.052 0.21 0.53
600 1.32 33.16 0.073 0.30 0.49
800 1.76 46.16 0.102 0.41 0.51
Avg 0.49
Sd(n-1) 0.03
n 6

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

98

 

Table 11 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8—82 E, in 0.979
I, in 0.838
r,, in 0.45425
d, in 4.048
Run5 CW 28 mm White PE foam Non-glued
F..,g F...lb F,g F, lb T, in-lb pg...
150 0.33 9.66 0.021 0.09 0.57
200 0.441016 0.022 0.09 0.45
300 06617.16 0.038 0.15 0.51
400 0.88 21.66 0.048 0.19 0.48
600 1.32 32.66 0.072 0.29 0.49
800 1.764566 0.101 0.41 0.51
Avg 0.50
Sd(n-1) 0.04
n 6
8-82 E, in 0.979
I, in 0.838
r,, in 0.45425
d, in 4.048
Run5 CCW 28 mm White PE foam Non-glued
ng F...lb F,g F, lb T, in-Ib llacw
150 0.33 8.16 0.018 0.07 0.48
200 04411.66 0.026 0.10 0.52
300 06617.16 0.038 0.15 0.51
400 0.88 21.16 0.047 0.19 0.47
600 1.32 34.16 0.075 0.30 0.51
800 1.76 47.16 0.104 0.42 0.53
Avg 0.50
Sd(n-1) 0.02
n 6

 

 

 

99

Table 11 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8-84 E, in 0.979 rs, in 0.45425
l, in 0.838 d, in 4.048
Run 1 CW 28 mm Black P/SF Non-glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pg...
600 1.32 11.16 0.025 0.10 0.17
800 1.76 15.16 0.033 0.14 0.17
1000 2.21 18.66 0.041 0.17 0.17
1200 2.65 21.16 0.047 0.19 0.16
1400 3.09 23.16 0.051 0.21 0.15
Avg 0.16
Sd(n-1) 0.01
n 5
8-84 E, in 0.979 rs, in 0.45425
I, in 0.838 d, in 4.048
Run1 CCW 28 mm Black P/SF Non-glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm...
600 1.32 10.66 0.024 0.10 0.16
800 1.76 13.66 0.030 0.12 0.15
1000 2.21 17.16 0.038 0.15 0.15
1200 2.65 20.16 0.044 0.18 0.15
1400 3.09 22.66 0.050 0.20 0.14
Avg 0.15
Sd(n-1) 0.01
n 5
8-84 E, in 0.979 rs, in 0.45425
I, in 0.838 d, in 4.048
Run 2 CW 28 mm Black P/SF Non-glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-Ib “C...
600 1.32 10.16 0.022 0.09 0.15
800 1.76 14.66 0.032 0.13 0.16
1000 2.21 20.16 0.044 0.18 0.18
1200 2.65 23.16 0.051 0.21 0.17
1400 3.09 27.16 0.060 0.24 0.17
Avg 0.17
Sd(n-1) 0.01
n 5

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

100

 

 

 

Table 11 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8-84 E, in 0.979 TS, in 0.45425
l, in 0.838 d, in 4.048
Run 2 CCW 28 mm Black P/SF Non—glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm
600 1.32 10.16 0.022 0.09 0.15
800 1.76 14.66 0.032 0.13 0.16
1000 2.21 19.66 0.043 0.18 0.18
1200 2.65 23.16 0.051 0.21 0.17
1400 3.09 28.66 0.063 0.26 0.18
Avg 0.17
Sd(n—1) 0.01
n 5
8-84 E, in 0.979 r,, in 0.45425
l, in 0.838 d, in 4.048
Run 3 CW 28 mm Black P/SF Non—glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pg...
600 1.32 10.16 0.022 0.09 0.15
800 1.76 15.16 0.033 0.14 0.17
1000 2.21 19.66 0.043 0.18 0.18
1200 2.65 21.16 0.047 0.19 0.16
1400 3.09 29.66 0.065 0.26 0.19
Avg 0.17
Sd(n-1) 0.01
n 5
8-84 E, in 0.979 rs, in 0.45425
I, in 0.838 d, in 4.048
Run 3 CCW 28 mm Black P/SF Non-glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm...
600 1.32 10.66 0.024 0.10 0.16
800 1.76 14.66 0.032 0.13 0.16
1000 2.21 17.16 0.038 0.15 0.15
1200 2.65 18.16 0.040 0.16 0.13
1400 3.09 22.16 0.049 0.20 0.14
Avg 0.15
Sd(n-1) 0.01
n 5

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

101

 

Table 11 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8-84 E, in 0.979 rs, in 0.45425
I, in 0.838 d, in 4.048
Run 4 CW 28 mm Black P/SF Non-glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pg...
600 1.32 9.66 0.021 0.09 0.14
800 1.76 13.16 0.029 0.12 0.15
1000 2.21 20.16 0.044 0.18 0.18
1200 2.65 23.66 0.052 0.21 0.18
1400 3.09 21.66 0.048 0.19 0.14
Avg 0.16
Sd(n-1) 0.02
n 5
8-84 E, in 0.979 rs, in 0.45425
l, in 0.838 d, in 4.048
Run 4 CCW 28 mm Black P/SF Non-glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm...
600 1.32 10.16 0.022 0.09 0.15
800 1.76 14.66 0.032 0.13 0.16
1000 2.21 19.16 0.042 0.17 0.17
1200 2.65 22.66 0.050 0.20 0.17
1400 3.09 24.66 0.054 0.22 0.16
Avg 0.16
Sd(n-1) 0.01
n 5
8-84 E, in 0.979 rs, in 0.45425
I, in 0.838 d, in 4.048
Run 5 CW 28 mm Black P/SF Non-glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pg...
600 1.32 10.66 0.024 0.10 0.16
800 1.76 14.66 0.032 0.13 0.16
1000 2.21 17.66 0.039 0.16 0.16
1200 2.65 21.66 0.048 0.19 0.16
1400 3.09 28.66 0.063 0.26 0.18
Avg 0.16
Sd(n-1) 0.01
n 5

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

102

 

Table 11 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8-84 E, in 0.979 r,, in 0.45425
l, in 0.838 d, in 4.048
Run 5 CCW 28 mm Black P/SF Non-glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-Ib pee...
600 1.32 10.66 0.024 0.10 0.16
800 1.76 14.16 0.031 0.13 0.16
1000 2.21 19.16 0.042 0.17 0.17
1200 2.65 19.16 0.042 0.17 0.14
1400 3.09 32.16 0.071 0.29 0.20
Avg 0.17
Sd(n-1) 0.02
n 5
8-86 E, in 0.979 r.., in 0.45425
l, in 0.838 d, in 4.048
Run1 CW 28 mm Black PIRVTLF glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm,
600 1.32 12.16 0.027 0.11 0.18
800 1.76 15.66 0.035 0.14 0.17
1000 2.21 20.16 0.044 0.18 0.18
1200 2.65 23.16 0.051 0.21 0.17
1400 3.09 27.66 0.061 0.25 0.18
fig 0.18
Sd(n-1) 0.004
n 5
8-86 E, in 0.979 rs, in 0.45425
I, in 0.838 d, in 4.048
Run 1 CCW 28 mm Black PIRVTLF glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm...
600 1.32 11.66 0.026 0.10 0.17
800 1.76 16.16 0.036 0.14 0.18
1000 2.21 20.66 0.046 0.18 0.18
1200 2.65 23.16 0.051 0.21 0.17
1400 3.09 26.66 0.059 0.24 0.17
Avg 0.18
Sd(n-I) 0.01
n 5

 

 

103

 

 

 

 

Table 11 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8-86 E, in 0.979 r,, in 0.45425
l, in 0.838 d, in 4.048
Run 2 CW 28 mm Black PIRVTLF glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pg...
600 1.32 13.16 0.029 0.12 0.20
800 1.76 18.66 0.041 0.17 0.21
1000 2.21 22.16 0.049 0.20 0.20
1200 2.65 25.16 0.055 0.22 0.19
1400 3.09 30.16 0.067 0.27 0.19
Avg 0.20
Sd(n-1) 0.01
n 5
8-86 E, in 0.979 r,, in 0.45425
I, in 0.838 d, in 4.048
Run 2 CCW 28 mm Black PIRVTLF glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-Ib pm
600 1.32 14.16 0.031 0.13 0.21
800 1.76 18.66 0.041 0.17 0.21
1000 2.21 23.16 0.051 0.21 0.21
1200 2.65 25.66 0.057 0.23 0.19
1400 3.09 30.66 0.068 0.27 0.20
Avg 0.20
Sd(n-1) 0.01
n 5
8-86 E, in 0.979 rs, in 0.45425
l, in 0.838 d, in 4.048
Run 3 CW 28 mm Black PIRVTLF glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb us...
600 1.32 12.16 0.027 0.11 0.18
800 1.76 15.66 0.035 0.14 0.17
1000 2.21 21.66 0.048 0.19 0.19
1200 2.65 24.16 0.053 0.22 0.18
1400 3.09 28.16 0.062 0.25 0.18
Avg 0.18
Sd(n-1) 0.01
n 5

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

104

 

 

Table 11 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8-86 E, in 0.979 rs, in 0.45425
l, in 0.838 d, in 4.048
Run 3 CCW 28 mm Black PIRVTLF glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm
600 1.32 10.66 0.024 0.10 0.16
800 1.76 15.66 0.035 0.14 0.17
1000 2.21 21.16 0.047 0.19 0.19
1200 2.65 26.16 0.058 0.23 0.19
1400 3.09 26.16 0.058 0.23 0.17
Avg 0.18
Sd(n-1) 0.01
n 5
8-86 E, in 0.979 r,, in 0.45425
l, in 0.838 d, in 4.048
Run 4 CW 28 mm Black PIRVTLF glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-Ib pg...
600 1.32 10.66 0.024 0.10 0.16
800 1.76 16.66 0.037 0.15 0.19
1000 2.21 21.16 0.047 0.19 0.19
1200 2.65 26.16 0.058 0.23 0.19
1400 3.09 27.66 0.061 0.25 0.18
Avg 0.18
Sd(n-1) 0.01
n 5
8-86 E, In 0.979 r.., in 0.45425
l, in 0.838 d, in 4.048
Run 4 CCW 28 mm Black PIRVTLF glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm...
600 1.32 10.66 0.024 0.10 0.16
800 1.76 15.66 0.035 0.14 0.17
1000 2.21 18.16 0.040 0.16 0.16
1200 2.65 24.16 0.053 0.22 0.18
1400 3.09 27.16 0.060 0.24 0.17
Agvg 0.17
Sd(n-1) 0.01
n 5

 

 

 

 

 

 

105

 

 

Table 11 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8-86 E, in 0.979 r,, in 0.45425
l, in 0.838 d, in 4.048
Run 5 CW 28 mm Black PIRVTLF glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-Ib ac...
600 1.32 10.16 0.022 0.09 0.15
800 1.76 14.16 0.031 0.13 0.16
1000 2.21 23.66 0.052 0.21 0.21
1200 2.65 22.66 0.050 0.20 0.17
1400 3.09 25.16 0.055 0.22 0.16
Avg 0.17
Sd(n-1) 0.02
n 5
8-86 E, in 0.979 r,, in 0.45425
l, in 0.838 d, in 4.048
Run 5 CCW 28 mm Black PIRVTLF Glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pom
600 1.32 11.16 0.025 0.10 0.17
800 1.76 17.16 0.038 0.15 0.19
1000 2.21 22.66 0.050 0.20 0.20
1200 2.65 19.66 0.043 0.18 0.15
1400 3.09 29.16 0.064 0.26 0.19
Avg 0.18
Sd(n-1) 0.02
n 5
8-87 E, in 0.979 rs, in 0.45425
l, in 0.838 d, in 4.048
Run 1 CW 28 mm White PIRVTLF Non-glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb no...
600 1.32 12.16 0.027 0.11 0.18
800 1.76 17.16 0.038 0.15 0.19
1000 2.21 23.16 0.051 0.21 0.21
1200 2.65 27.16 0.060 0.24 0.20
1400 3.09 30.16 0.067 0.27 0.19
Avg 0.19
Sd(n-1) 0.01
n 5

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

106

 

 

 

Table 11 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8-87 E, in 0.979 r,, in 0.45425
l, in 0.838 d, in 4.048
Run 1 CCW 28 mm White PIRVTLF Non—glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb poo...
600 1.32 11.16 0.025 0.10 0.17
800 1.76 16.16 0.036 0.14 0.18
1000 2.21 21.16 0.047 0.19 0.19
1200 2.65 26.16 0.058 0.23 0.19
1400 3.09 30.16 0.067 0.27 0.19
Avg 0.18
Sd(n-1) 0.01
n 5
8-87 E, in 0.979 rs, in 0.45425
I, in 0.838 d, in 4.048
Run 2 CW 28 mm White PIRVTLF Non-glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pew
600 1.32 10.66 0.024 0.10 0.16
800 1.76 15.16 0.033 0.14 0.17
1000 2.21 19.16 0.042 0.17 0.17
1200 2.65 22.66 0.050 0.20 0.17
1400 3.09 26.66 0.059 0.24 0.17
Avg 0.17
Sd(n-1) 0.01
n 5
8-87 E, in 0.979 rs, in 0.45425
l, in 0.838 d, in 4.048
Run 2 CCW 28 mm White PIRVTLF Non-glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb poo...
600 1.32 10.16 0.022 0.09 0.15
800 1.76 14.66 0.032 0.13 0.16
1000 2.21 18.66 0.041 0.17 0.17
1200 2.65 22.16 0.049 0.20 0.16
1400 3.09 26.16 0.058 0.23 0.17
Avg 0.16
Sd(n-1) 0.01
n 5

 

107

 

Table 11 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8-87 E, in 0.979 rs, in 0.45425
l, in 0.838 d, in 4.048
Run 3 CW 28 mm White PIRVTLF Non-glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pg...
600 1.32 13.16 0.029 0.12 0.20
800 1.76 16.66 0.037 0.15 0.19
1000 2.21 19.66 0.043 0.18 0.18
1200 2.65 23.66 0.052 0.21 0.18
1400 3.09 27.66 0.061 0.25 0.18
Avg 0.18
Sd(n-1) 0.01
n 5
8-87 E, in 0.979 rs, in 0.45425
l, in 0.838 d, in 4.048
Run 3 CCW 28 mm White PIRVTLF Non-glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm
600 1.32 12.16 0.027 0.11 0.18
800 1.76 20.66 0.046 0.18 0.23
1000 2.21 21.66 0.048 0.19 0.19
1200 2.65 25.16 0.055 0.22 0.19
1400 3.09 26.66 0.059 0.24 0.17
Avg 0.19
Sd(n-1) 0.02
n 5
8-87 E, in 0.979 r3, in 0.45425
I, in 0.838 d, in 4.048
Run 4 CW 28 mm White PIRVTLF Non-glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm
600 1.32 11.66 0.026 0.10 0.17
800 1.76 17.66 0.039 0.16 0.20
1000 2.21 19.16 0.042 0.17 0.17
1200 2.65 24.16 0.053 0.22 0.18
1400 3.09 30.16 0.067 0.27 0.19
Avg 0.18
Sd(n-1) 0.01
n 5

 

 

108

 

 

Table 11 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8-87 E, in 0.979 T... in 0.45425
l, in 0.838 d, in 4.048
Run 4 CCW 28 mm White PIRVTLF Non-glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm
600 1.32 10.66 0.024 0.10 0.16
800 1.76 14.66 0.032 0.13 0.16
1000 2.21 22.66 0.050 0.20 0.20
1200 2.65 25.66 0.057 0.23 0.19
1400 3.09 29.66 0.065 0.26 0.19
Agg 0.18
Sd(n-1) 0.02
n 5
8-87 E, in 0.979 rs, in 0.45425
l, in 0.838 d, in 4.048
Run 5 CW 28 mm White PIRVTLF Non-glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pg...
600 1.32 13.16 0.029 0.12 0.20
800 1.76 14.16 0.031 0.13 0.16
1000 2.21 20.16 0.044 0.18 0.18
1200 2.65 23.16 0.051 0.21 0.17
1400 3.09 32.66 0.072 0.29 0.21
Avg 0.18
Sd(n-1) 0.02
n 5
8-87 E, in 0.979 rs, in 0.45425
I, in 0.838 d, in 4.048
Run 5 CCW 28 mm White PIRVTLF Non-glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-Ib pm...
600 1.32 10.16 0.022 0.09 0.15
800 1.76 16.16 0.036 0.14 0.18
1000 2.21 20.66 0.046 0.18 0.18
1200 2.65 26.16 0.058 0.23 0.19
1400 3.09 30.66 0.068 0.27 0.20
Avg 0.18
Sd(n-I) 0.02
n 5

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

109

 

 

 

Table 11 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

C-C1 E, in 1.3605 r,, in 0.64538
l, in 1.221 d, in 4.048
Run 1 CW 38 mm White PE foam glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pg...
200 0.44 13.66 0.030 0.12 0.43
300 0.66 19.66 0.043 0.18 0.41
400 0.88 24.66 0.054 0.22 0.39
600 1.32 41.16 0.091 0.37 0.43
800 1.76 52.66 0.116 0.47 0.41
Avg 0.41
Sd(n-1) 0.02
n 5
C-C1 E, in 1.3605 r... in 0.64538
l, in 1.221 d, in 4.048
Run 1 CCW 38 mm White PE foam glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm
200 0.44 14.66 0.032 0.13 0.46
300 0.66 21.16 0.047 0.19 0.44
400 0.88 27.16 0.060 0.24 0.43
600 1.32 45.16 0.100 0.40 0.47
800 1.76 60.16 0.133 0.54 0.47
Avg 0.45
Sd(n-1) 0.02
n 5
C-C1 E, in 1.3605 r,, in 0.64538
I, in 1.221 d, in 4.048
Run 2 CW 38 mm White PE foam glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb new
200 0.44 15.66 0.035 0.14 0.49
300 0.66 22.66 0.050 0.20 0.47
400 0.88 31.16 0.069 0.28 0.49
600 1.32 48.66 0.107 0.43 0.51
800 1.76 62.16 0.137 0.55 0.49
Avg 0.49
Sd(n-1) 0.01
n 5

 

 

 

 

110

 

 

Table 11 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

C-C1 E, in 1.3605 rs, in 0.64538
l, in 1.221 d, in 4.048
Run 2 CCW 38 mm White PE foam glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm...
200 0.44 18.16 0.040 0.16 0.57
300 0.66 26.16 0.058 0.23 0.55
400 0.88 33.16 0.073 0.30 0.52
600 1.32 52.16 0.115 0.47 0.55
800 1.76 66.16 0.146 0.59 0.52
Avg 0.54
Sd(n-1) 0.02
n 5
C-C1 E, in 1.3605 rs, in 0.64538
I, in 1.221 d, in 4.048
Run 3 CW 38 mm White PE foam glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm...
200 0.44 18.16 0.040 0.16 0.57
300 0.66 19.16 0.042 0.17 0.40
400 0.88 30.16 0.067 0.27 0.47
600 1.32 46.66 0.103 0.42 0.49
800 1.76 65.16 0.144 0.58 0.51
Avg 0.49
Sd(n-1) 0.06
n 5
C-C1 E, in 1.3605 rs, in 0.64538
l, in 1.221 d, in 4.048
Run 3 CCW 38 mm White PE foam glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm
200 0.44 18.66 0.041 0.17 0.59
300 0.66 21.16 0.047 0.19 0.44
400 0.88 31.66 0.070 0.28 0.50
600 1.32 51.16 0.113 0.46 0.53
800 1.76 63.66 0.140 0.57 0.50
Avg 0.51
Sd(n-1) 0.05
n 5

 

 

 

 

111

 

Table 11 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

C-C1 E, in 1.3605 r,, in 0.64538
l, in 1.221 d, in 4.048
Run 4 CW 38 mm White PE foam glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pa...
200 0.44 14.16 0.031 0.13 0.44
300 0.66 22.66 0.050 0.20 0.47
400 0.88 27.66 0.061 0.25 0.43
600 1.32 43.16 0.095 0.39 0.45
800 1.76 54.66 0.121 0.49 0.43
Agg 0.45
Sd(n—1) 0.02
n 5
C-C1 E, in 1.3605 rs, in 0.64538
I, in 1.221 d, in 4.048
Run 4 CCW 38 mm White PE foam glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-Ib pm...
200 0.44 14.66 0.032 0.13 0.46
300 0.66 17.16 0.038 0.15 0.36
400 0.88 26.16 0.058 0.23 0.41
600 1.32 44.66 0.098 0.40 0.47
800 1.76 70.16 0.155 0.63 0.55
Avg 0.45
Sd(n—1) 0.07
n 5
C-C1 E, in 1.3605 rs, in 0.64538
I, in 1.221 d, in 4.048
Run 5 CW 38 mm White PE foam Glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb It“,
200 0.44 17.16 0.038 0.15 0.54
300 0.66 19.16 0.042 0.17 0.40
400 0.88 29.66 0.065 0.26 0.47
600 1.32 38.66 0.085 0.35 0.40
800 1.76 57.16 0.126 0.51 0.45
Avg 0.45
Sd(n-1) 0.06
N 5

 

 

 

 

112

 

[I ~....

Table 11 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

C-C1 E, in 1.3605 rs, in 0.64538
I, in 1.221 d, in 4.048
Run 5 CCW 38 mm White PE foam Glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm
200 0.44 16.66 0.037 0.15 0.52
300 0.66 20.16 0.044 0.18 0.42
400 0.88 24.66 0.054 0.22 0.39
600 1.32 49.16 0.108 0.44 0.51
800 1.76 66.16 0.146 0.59 0.52
Avg 0.47
Sd(n—1) 0.06
N 5
C-CZ E, in 1.3605 r,, in 0.64538
I, in 1.221 d, in 4.048
Run 1 CW 38 mm White PE foam Norfllued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb p6...
300 0.66 9.66 0.021 0.09 0.20
400 0.88 12.16 0.027 0.11 0.19
600 1.32 20.16 0.044 0.18 0.21
800 1.76 46.16 0.102 0.41 0.36
1000 2.21 61.16 0.135 0.55 0.38
A3 0.27
Sd(n-1) 0.09
N 5
C-C2 E, in 1.3605 rs, in 0.64538
I, in 1.221 d, in 4.048
Run 1 CCW 38 mm White PE foam Non-glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm...
300 0.66 12.66 0.028 0.11 0.26
400 0.88 19.16 0.042 0.17 0.30
600 1.32 26.16 0.058 0.23 0.27
800 1.76 46.16 0.102 0.41 0.36
1000 2.21 61.16 0.135 0.55 0.38
Avg 0.32
Sd(n-1) 0.05
N 5

 

 

 

 

113

 

Table 11 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

C-CZ E, in 1.3605 r,, in 0.64538
l, in 1.221 d, in 4.048
LRun 2 CW 38 mm White PE foam Non-glued
I F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pg...
300 0.66 18.16 0.040 0.16 0.38
400 0.88 26.16 0.058 0.23 0.41
600 1.32 38.16 0.084 0.34 0.40
800 1.76 48.16 0.106 0.43 0.38
1000 2.21 61.16 0.135 0.55 0.38
Avg 0.39
Sd(n-1) 0.01
n 5
C-CZ E, in 1.3605 rs, in 0.64538
I, in 1.221 d, in 4.048
Run 2 CCW 38 mm White PE foam Non-glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-Ib aw...
300 0.66 17.16 0.038 0.15 0.36
400 0.88 26.16 0.058 0.23 0.41
600 1.32 40.16 0.089 0.36 0.42
800 1.76 50.16 0.111 0.45 0.39
1000 2.21 62.16 0.137 0.55 0.39
Avgg 0.39
Sd(n-1) 0.02
n 5
C-C2 E, in 1.3605 rs, in 0.64538
l, in 1.221 d, in 4.048
Run 3 CW 38 mm White PE foam Non—glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb p.“
300 0.66 15.16 0.033 0.14 0.32
400 0.88 25.16 0.055 0.22 0.39
600 1.32 36.66 0.081 0.33 0.38
800 1.76 49.16 0.108 0.44 0.39
1000 2.21 61.66 0.136 0.55 0.39
Avg 0.37
Sd(n-1) 0.03
n 5

 

 

 

 

114

 

Table 11 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

C-C2 E, in 1.3605 r,, in 0.64538
I, in 1.221 d, in 4.048
Run 3 CCW 38 mm White PE foam Non-glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm...
300 0.66 16.16 0.036 0.14 0.34
400 0.88 23.16 0.051 0.21 0.36
600 1.32 40.16 0.089 0.36 0.42
800 1.76 46.66 0.103 0.42 0.37
1000 2.21 61.66 0.136 0.55 0.39
Avg 0.37
Sd(n-1) 0.03
n 5
C-CZ E, in 1.3605 rs, in 0.64538
l, in 1.221 d, in 4.048
Run 4 CW 38 mm White PE foam Non-glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pg...
300 0.66 15.66 0.035 0.14 0.33
400 0.88 24.16 0.053 0.22 0.38
600 1.32 38.16 0.084 0.34 0.40
800 1.76 46.16 0.102 0.41 0.36
1000 2.21 61.16 0.135 0.55 0.38
Avg 0.37
Sd(n-1) 0.03
n 5
C-C2 E, in 1.3605 rs, in 0.64538
l, in 1.221 d, in 4.048
Run 4 CCW 38 mm White PE foam Non-glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pm
300 0.66 18.66 0.041 0.17 0.39
400 0.88 21.66 0.048 0.19 0.34
600 1.32 39.66 0.087 0.35 0.41
800 1.76 46.16 0.102 0.41 0.36
1000 2.21 61.66 0.136 0.55 0.39
Avg 0.38
Sd(n-1) 0.03
n 5

 

 

 

 

115

 

 

Table 11 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

C-C2 E, in 1.3605 rs, in 0.64538
l, in 1.221 d, in 4.048
Run 5 CW 38 mm White PE foam Non-glued
F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb pew

300 0.66 17.66 0.039 0.16 0.37

400 0.88 24.16 0.053 0.22 0.38

600 1.32 39.66 0.087 0.35 0.41

800 1.76 48.16 0.106 0.43 0.38

1000 2.21 61.16 0.135 0.55 0.38

Avg 0.38

Sd(n-1) 0.02

n 5
C-C2 E, in 1.3605 rs, in 0.64538
I, in 1.221 d, in 4.048
Run 5 CCW 38 mm White PE foam Non-glued

F.., g F... lb F, g F, lb T, in-lb poo...

300 0.66 18.66 0.041 0.17 0.39

400 0.88 23.16 0.051 0.21 0.36

600 1.32 32.66 0.072 0.29 0.34

800 1.76 49.16 0.108 0.44 0.39

1000 2.21 60.16 0.133 0.54 0.38

Avg 0.37

Sd(n-1) 0.02

n 5

 

116

 

Table 12 Raw Data of the Measured Application Torque and Instantaneous
Removal Torque

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8-81 8-82 8-83
Rep AT ISRT Rep AT ISRT Rep AT ISRT
1 13.9 7.1 1 14 12.1 1 14.1 10.6
2 13.9 6.3 2 14.6 11 2 14.4 11.1
3 13.7 7.7 3 14.1 10 3 14.2 10.6
4 13.8 6.5 4 13.9 10.9 4 14.7 10
5 13.9 5.4 5 13.8 11.8 5 13.5 10.7
Avg 13.84 6.6 avg 14.08 11.16 avg 14.18 10.6
Sd 0.09 0.87 sd 0.31 0.83 sd 0.44 0.39
ISRT/AT 0.4769 ISRT/A 0.7926 ISRT/A 0.7475
T T
8-84 8-85 8-86
Rep AT ISRT Rep AT ISRT Rep AT ISRT
1 14 10.8 1 14 13.6 1 13.9 9.7
2 13.8 11.3 2 14 13.4 2 14.3 8.8
3 14.4 11.3 3 14 12.6 3 14.1 10
4 13.9 11.6 4 14.2 11.8 4 14.1 10.7
5 14.4 11.1 5 14.2 12.6 5 14.3 9.6
Avg 14.1 11.22 avg 14.08 12.8 avg 14.14 9.76
so 0.28 0.29 sd 0.11 0.72 sdT 0.17 0.69 .
ISRT/AT 0.7957 ISRT/A 0.9091 ISRT/A 0.6902
T T
8-87 8-88
Rep AT ISRT Rep AT ISRT
1 14.2 12.4 1 14.2 12.8
2 14.3 12.9 2 14 11
3 14 13 3 14 12.4
4 14 12.6 4 14.2 10.7
5 14.2 12.8 5 14 10.4
Avg 14.14 12.74 avg 14.08 11.46
Sd 0.13 0.24 sd 0.11 1.07
ISRT/A 0.9010 ISRT/A 0.8139
T T

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

117

 

Table 12 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

C-C1 C-CZ
Rep AT ISRT Rep AT ISRT
1 19.2 10.5 1 18.8 16.3
2 19.4 13.1 2 18.9 16.6
3 19.7 13.1 3 18.9 16.3
4 19.2 14.4 4 18.9 16
5 19 10.1 5 19.2 16.2
Avg 19.3 12.24 avg 18.94 16.28
Sd 0.26 1.85 sd 0.15 0.22
ISRT/AT 0.6342 ISRT/A 0.8596
T

 

 

118

 

 

Table 13 Raw Data of the Measured Application Torque and Immediate Removal
Torque

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8-81 8-82 8-83
Rep AT lRT Rep AT lRT Rep AT lRT
1 14 5.7 1 14.1 10.1 1 13.8 9.2
2 14 5.8 2 14 9.2 2 13.9 8.7
3 13.8 6.3 3 14.6 9.2 3 13.9 9.1
4 14 7.5 4 13.9 8.7 4 14.4 8.9
5 14 6.5 5 14.2 9.2 5 14.2 9.2
_av_g 13.96 6.36 avgg 14.16 9.28 avg 14.04 9.02
sd 0.09 0.72 sd 0.27 0.51 sd 0.25 0.22
lRT/AT 0.4556 lRT/AT 0.6554 lRT/AT 0.6425
8-84 8-85 8-86 k 0.7387
Rep AT lRT Rep AT lRT Rep AT lRT
1 14 9.3 1 14.1 9.3 1 13.8 9.5
2 14.1 8.1 2 13.9 8 2 14.2 8.4
3 14.2 8 3 13.9 9.5 3 13.8 8.4
4 14.2 8.2 4 13.9 9 4 14.3 8.1
5 14 8.7 5 13.8 9.1 5 14 8.9
avg 14.1 8.46 avg 13.92 8.98 avg 14.02 8.66
E 0.10 0.54 sd 0.11 0.58 sd 0.23 0.55
lRT/AT 0.6000 lRT/AT 0.6451 lRT/AT 0.6177
8-87 8-88
Rep AT lRT Rep AT lRT
1 13.9 10.2 1 13.8 10.5
2 13.7 9.2 2 13.8 10.2
3 13.8 10 3 14 10.7
4 14.1 8.6 4 13.9 8.6
5 13.9 10.6 5 14.3 9.4
a_vg 13.88 9.72 avg 13.96 9.88
sd 0.15 0.81 sd 0.21 0.87
lRT/AT 0.7003 lRT/AT 0.7077

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

119

Table 13 (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

C-C1 C-CZ
Rep AT lRT Rep AT lRT
1 19.4 8.6 1 19.3 12.2
2 19 9.1 2 19.4 13
3 19.4 9.9 3 18.6 12.9
4 18.9 9.1 4 19.7 13.5
5 18.8 9 5 19.3 13.2
2‘19 19.1 9.14 avg 19.26 12.96
sd 0.28 0.47 sd 0.40 0.48
lRT/AT 0.4785 lRT/AT 0.6729

 

120

 

Table 14 The Predicted Removal Torque, T Calculated Using AT from Table 12

 

Rep

B-B1

B-BZ

B-BS

B-B4

B-B5

B-B6

B-B7

B-BB

C-C1

C-C2

 

A

12.29

12.41

12.23

10.50

10.57

10.19

10.55

10.48

16.99

16.44

 

12.29

12.94

12.32

10.57

10.42

10.49

10.40

10.48

16.64

16.52

 

12.11

12.50

12.32

10.65

10.42

10.19

10.48

10.63

16.99

15.84

 

4

12.20

12.32

12.76

10.65

10.42

10.56

10.70

10.55

16.55

16.78

 

12.29

12.23

12.59

10.50

10.35

10.34

10.55

10.86

16.46

16.44

 

Avg

12.23

12.48

12.45

10.57

10.44

10.36

10.54

10.60

16.72

16.40

 

Sd

 

 

0.08

 

0.28

 

0.22

 

0.07

 

0.08

 

0.17

 

0.11

 

0.16

 

0.25

 

0.34

 

 

 

Note: T’ :L- 26%

Table 15

The Predicted Removal Torque, T’ Calculated Using AT from Table 13

 

Rep

B-B1

B-BZ

B-B3

B-B4

B-B5

B-B6

B-B7

B-B8

C-C1

C-CZ

 

12.37

12.50

12.50

10.50

10.50

10.27

10.78

10.78

16.81

16.01

 

12.37

12.41

12.76

10.35

10.50

10.56

10.86

10.63

16.99

16.10

 

12.20

12.94

12.59

10.80

10.50

10.42

10.63

10.63

17.25

16.10

 

12.37

12.32

13.03

10.42

10.65

10.42

10.63

10.78

16.81

16.10

 

5

12.37

12.59

11.97

10.80

10.65

10.56

10.78

10.63

16.64

16.35

 

Avg

12.34

12.55

12.57

10.57

10.56

10.44

10.74

10.69

16.90

16.13

 

Sd

 

 

0.08

 

0.24

 

0.39

 

0.21

 

0.08

 

0.12

 

0.10

 

0.08

 

0.23

 

0.13

 

 

Note: T’ i 26%

121

II:

Table 16 k.‘ and kr for Equations (18) and (19)

Note: ka and kr j: 26%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Treatment kal kr
8-81 0.48 0.42
8-82 0.49 0.44
8-83 0.49 0.44
8-84 0.22 0.17
8-85 0.22 0.17
8-86 0.21 0.16
8-87 0.23 0.18
8-88 0.23 0.18
C-C1 0.44 0.38
C-C2 0.37 0.31

 

 

 

122

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

123

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. A Tekni-Plex Co. What is Tri-Seal?. [Online] Available http://www.tri-seal.com.
December 2, 1999.

2. Birley, Arthur W., Haworth, Barry, and Batchelor, Jim, Physics of Plastics,
Hanser Publisher.

3. Closure Manufacturers Association, Clogure Guides. Washington DC. 1993.

4. Crawford, Brian, Choosing the Right Closure Lin_§£, Reprinted from Food &
Drug Packaging.

5. Hanlon, Joseph F., Handbook of Package Engineering, Second Edition,
Technomic publication, Lancaster PA, 1984.

6. McCarthy, Robert V., Performance of FLastic Screw ThreaAAfichment. MS.
Thesis, Franklin and Marshall College, Lancaster, Pennsylvania, 1956.

7. Nielsen, Lawrence E. and Landel, Robert F., Mechanical Properties of
Polymer and Composites, Second Edition, Marcel Dekker, Inc., 1994.

8. Rearick, Paul W., Difference i_n Torque Mea_surements Taken by Manual and
bv Automatic Cap Torque Equipment. MS. Thesis, School of Packaging,
Michigan State University, 1995.

 

9. Soroka, Walter, Fundamentals of Packaging Technology, Institute of
Packaging Professionals, Hemdon, Virginia, 1995.

10. Soutas-Little, Robert W. and lnman, Daniel J., Eggineering Mecharnics
Statics, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 1999.

 

124