We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.
Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.
Table I. Coating Thickness as a Factor Affecting Film Curl
(Striping composition #105; Film, Eastman Type 5302, triacetate) Emulsion coating Base coating
Doctor blade setting
Thickness of dry coat Curl
Doctor blade setting
Thickness of dry coat
Curl
0.003 in. 0.006 in. 0 . 009 in.
0.0001 in. <3° 0.0005 in. <3° 0.0008 in. 37°
0.003 in. 0.006 in. 0.009 in.
0.0003 in. 0.0009 in. 0.001 2 in.
33° 110° >300°
Table II. Humidity Condition Prior to Coating as a Factor Affecting Film Curl
(Striping composition #105; Film, Eastman Type 5302, triacetate) Emulsion coating Base coating
Doctor
Thickness
Doctor
Thickness
Relative
blade
of
blade
of
.umidity
setting
dry coat
Curl
setting
dry coat
Curl
20%
0.008 in.
0.0007 in.
33°
0.008 in.
0.0013 in.
180°
52%
0 . 008 in.
0.0007 in.
31°
0 . 008 in.
0.001 2 in.
110°
65%
0 . 008 in.
0 . 0008 in.
46°
0 . 008 in.
0.001 2 in.
117°
97%
0 . 008 in.
0.001 2 in.
118°
0 . 008 in.
0.0013 in.
>300°
jh or low-moisture content tend to
rl most severely (particularly when
se-side coated). Moderate moisture
ntent in the range corresponding to
uilibrium with perhaps 40 to 60%
iative humidity seems to be optimum.
ic data also indicate that composition
;05 would be unsuitable for use on
llse because of excessive curl, and that
<nerent compositions would have to be
"ed with a view towards minimizing
Jrl.
The effects of differences in the type
• film upon curl produced are shown
i Table III. The fact that the tri
;|etate film showed the most curl (i.e.
th composition #105) was quite un
pected since this material is, in general,
most solvent-resistant of the film-base
aterials. With composition #125,
fwever, our current base composition,
|e effects are quite different. In any
se differences found in the behavior
\ different film-base materials were not
very large, being, in fact, almost within experimental error.
Film Embrittlement
The test method employed here was that described in ASA Z38.3.2-1945. The first number of the pairs given (Table IV) represents the number of folds required to produce the first definite break in the film; the second number represents the folds required to completely divide the film into two parts. Each figure is the average of four determinations. The reproducibility of individual determinations is rather poor. The data indicate that whereas in some cases, the application of a magnetic sound track tended to slightly embrittle the film, the effect was small. Film which would initially conform to the ASA requirements for flexibility of "Film for Permanent Records" would usually still do so after striping and hot calendering. Incidentally, the data
Kaspin, Roberts, Robbins and Powers: Magnetic Striping
473