Experimental Mechanics

, Volume 50, Issue 6, pp 745–751 | Cite as

A Simplified Treatise of the Scott Bond Testing Method

  • P. IsakssonEmail author
  • P. Gradin
  • S. Östlund


The Scott bond test method has been used extensively in the paper industry over the years as a means to assess the bond strength of paper. The method has been a subject of some controversy lately since it does not always correlate to the sensitivity of the material to fracture by delamination. To gain some further insight into which parameters govern the fracture process in a Scott bond test a simplified approach has been chosen in order to formulate an analytical mathematical/mechanical model of the test. The model is dynamic in the sense that inertia effects are included. The material model utilised is a simple cohesive theory that assumes a linear behaviour between stress and crack opening when the material has started to degrade. This choice of material model makes the mathematical model very nonlinear. In fact, a system of three coupled nonlinear second order partial differential equations have to be solved and adjusted to the correct initial conditions. The material parameters needed for the model are the elastic modulus in the thickness direction, the transverse shear (elastic) modulus, the tensile strength (in the thickness direction) and the fracture work (per unit area) for a delamination crack. To investigate the ability of the model, a Scott bond testing apparatus have been equipped with a piezoelectric load sensor. The load cell was mounted on the apparatus’ pendulum so that the load acting on the sample holder could be recorded during the whole impact stage. This was done for a number of different initial velocities of the pendulum and it is found that the model gives a fair prediction of the contact load.


Scott bond testing Internal bond strength Delamination Cohesive zone model 



Dr. Mikael Nygårds and Mr. Staffan Nyström are acknowledged for valuable contributions. The result presented here has earlier been presented at the 2007 International Paper Physics Conference.


  1. 1.
    Wink WA, Van Eperen RH (1967) Evaluation of Z-directional tensile strength. Tappi J 50(8):393–400Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Van Liew GP (1975) The Z-direction deformation of paper. Tappi J 57(11):121–124Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Girlanda O, Fellers C (2006) Evaluation of the tensile stress-strain properties in the thickness direction of paper materials. In: Girlanda O (2006) Delamination of paperboard related to offset printing. Dissertation 2006:32, Karlstad University, SwedenGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lundh A, Fellers C (2004) A method for determination of delamination toughness in different positions in the thickness direction of paperboard. Nordic Pulp Pap Res J 19(2):224–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Schultz-Eklund O, Fellers C, Olofsson G (1987) Z-toughness. A new method for the determination of the delamination resistance of paper. Proceedings of the 1987 International Paper Physics Conference, Mont-Rolland, Quebec, Canada, 189–191Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nygårds M, Fellers C, Östlund S (2006) Measuring out-of-plane shear properties of paperboard. Progress in Paper Physics Conference, October 1–5, Miami University, Oxford, Ohio USAGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Waterhouse JF (1991) The failure envelope of paper when subjected to combined out-of-plane stress. Proceedings of the 1991 International Paper Physics Conference, Kailua Kona, Hawaii, USA, 629–639Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Stenberg N, Fellers C, Östlund S (2001) Measuring the stress-strain properties of paperboard in the thickness direction. J Pulp Pap Sci 27(6):213–221Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    T 569 pm-00 (2000) Internal bond strength (Scott type), TAPPI.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Niskanen K (1998) Paper Physics. Finnish Paper Engineers’ Association and TAPPI, Helsinki, FinlandGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Stenberg N, Fellers C, Östlund S (2001) Plasticity in the thickness direction of paperboard under combined shear and normal loading. J Eng Mater Technol 123:184–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hillerborg A, Modéer M, Petersson PE (1976) Analysis of crack formation and crack growth in concrete by means of fracture mechanics and finite elements. Cem Concr Res 6:773–781CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Matlab (2007) Version 7.4. The MathWorks Inc., Natick, MA, USAGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society for Experimental Mechanics 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Solid MechanicsMid Sweden UniversitySundsvallSweden
  2. 2.Department of Solid Mechanics, KTHRoyal Institute of TechnologyStockholmSweden

Personalised recommendations