Stamp Community Family of Web Sites
Thousands of stamps, consistently graded, competitively priced and hundreds of in-depth blog posts to read
Stamp Community Forum
 
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

Welcome Guest! Need help? Got a question? Inherit some stamps?
Our stamp forum is completely free! Register Now!

Cutting Out Stamps And "Centering" Issues

Previous Page | Next Page    
 
To participate in the forum you must log in or register.
Author Previous TopicReplies: 46 / Views: 1,796Next Topic
Page: of 4
Valued Member
United States
62 Posts
Posted 11/27/2021   3:25 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Letterpress to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
By the way, can anyone comment on why stamp perforations are different from the perforation we see on other paper artifacts? Stamps have much larger perfs than say a notepad with perforation, legal pads, coupons, detachable reply cards, checkbooks, etc. In all those cases, we see much finer and cleaner perforation, with clean borders after separation.

Stamps stand out from all those examples, with massive holes and greater potential for messy whiskers and chads after separation. Why are stamps different? Are there countries with finely perforated stamps?

A good compromise for me might be to use a straight angle or rule when tearing off rows of stamps. I have a decent Starrett.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
Learn More...
7470 Posts
Posted 11/27/2021   3:52 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add rogdcam to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply

Quote:
A good compromise for me might be to use a straight angle or rule when tearing off rows of stamps. I have a decent Starrett.


Knock yourself out. Just be aware that most stamps will separate at the thinnest part of the perforation web (teeth AFTER separation) because it has the thinnest and thus weakest cross section. Pinning down a multiple with a ruler or other straightedge while tearing the uncaptured portion away seems like an unnecessary recipe for disaster.

Don't overthink it.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
Learn More...
7470 Posts
Posted 11/27/2021   3:57 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add rogdcam to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply

Quote:
Stamps have much larger perfs than say a notepad with perforation, legal pads, coupons, detachable reply cards, checkbooks, etc.


And yet they are probably all different from manufacturer to manufacturer given that it depends upon the design/engineering and the machinery used.

Stamp perforations have been tested through the years to get the job done without damaging the stamps. There is no point in having a perforation rate of 20 if it is unnecessary or does not work. It means more and finer pins that have to withstand a lot of use and abuse. On the other hand early US perf 10 stamps tended to end up with corners missing and so the perforation rate was changed.

Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
7771 Posts
Posted 11/27/2021   4:30 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Petert4522 to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
It seems to me that someone is trying to re-invent the wheel?


Peter
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
Learn More...
7470 Posts
Posted 11/27/2021   4:55 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add rogdcam to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply

Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
3594 Posts
Posted 11/27/2021   11:40 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add jogil to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Most postage stamp printers used pin hole perforating for perforating postage stamps consisting of either perforating bars with pins and holes on stroke perforators or perforating wheels with pins and holes on rotary perforators. The following are basic examples of these two different perforators:

Rosback stroke perforator (U.S. Kiusalas 12-67=11.75)

Rosback rotary perforator (U.S. Kiusalas 12.5-63=12.50)
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Edited by jogil - 11/27/2021 11:46 pm
Pillar Of The Community
United Kingdom
820 Posts
Posted 11/28/2021   05:39 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Ringo to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
I would also say that with coupons, cheque books and so on, you want the join to hold while the product is being used, handled etc and not to accidentally start coming apart.

Stamps, by contrast, were traditionally only intended to be handled over the counter as whole sheets and tearing them apart cleanly and without the tear line wandering into an adjacent stamp was the only real consideration when it came to the perfs. So "easy tear" vs "difficult tear" would be my theory.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Valued Member
United States
62 Posts
Posted 12/04/2021   10:37 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Letterpress to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Rogdcam, good point on the mechanics of the tearing process.

Ringo, I'm not sure I follow how the easiness of the tear or neatness would lead them to have huge perforations. Are huge perfs easier to tear than finer perfs? Are they neater after tearing? It seems like fine perfs like you see in notepads and legal pads are neater and easier.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United Kingdom
820 Posts
Posted 12/05/2021   10:19 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Ringo to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Well. I'm speculating. Haven't done any actual testing or anything, but in general, the bigger the hole, the less material holding the two pieces together. Must be a weaker join, and so separate easier, no?

Incidentally I have many times torn a cheque from a cheque book and had the tear wander into the paper of the cheque itself.

It's possible there are better modern machines, which coud produce mechnically better perfs than the ones we are used to. But the ones we are used to are part of what makes a stamp recognisable as a stamp - hence, self adhesives, never co-joined, are die-cut with teeth and "perfs" around the edges, which are totally unnecessary from a functional point of view. It's probably for that reason that they have never been updated on conventional sheets.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United Kingdom
6127 Posts
Posted 12/05/2021   10:33 am  Show Profile Check GeoffHa's eBay Listings Bookmark this reply Add GeoffHa to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
I think it's the opposite. The large number of perforations on, say, 1d reds, gave a better tear than the small numbef on nineteenth century US - there's less paper to tear through once you've perforated it to death.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Valued Member
United States
62 Posts
Posted 12/05/2021   3:33 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Letterpress to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Ringo, interesting. I figure the example with checkbooks is due to the lack of an opposite-of-perf side to brace. For some reason, I remember top-perforated notepads to tear less than checkbooks, even though they also lack an other side to brace against. Well, I guess they have a slightly easier-to-brace pad-bound section, whereas checkbooks are so frustrating because there's nothing to grab, and no way to crease the perf before tearing.

I think a lot of people crease stamp sheets and booklets before tearing them. I know USPS workers often do, but maybe it's not necessary.

There's probably some interesting physics around this topic, and what factors cause paper objects to tear outside of their perforation lines. I wonder if anyone has done formal research on it, either in academia or industry. It might be that longer paper objects are less likely to tear than smaller pieces, say notepad paper vs checks, but I'd only expect that to be true in a particular range of lengths, not infinitely. There's obviously going to be a contest of forces here with 1) the force pulling against the perforation line, 2) the angle of that force, 3) the perforation line's resistance to those forces at given angles, 4) the effects of creasing the perf on all that, 5) the force pulling at other points on the paper (which seems to ultimately lead to tears), at various angles, 6) the force bracing the other side of the perforation, 7) distances of each force application (the grips), and so on and so forth. It would be easy to avoid tears for all time if we had some kind of little guide derived from the physics.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
2809 Posts
Posted 12/05/2021   5:44 pm  Show Profile Check eyeonwall's eBay Listings Bookmark this reply Add eyeonwall to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
You tend to overthink everything. All other things being equal the weakest point would be at the mid point where the paper is narrowest, but all other things are never equal. It s paper. Made of wood fibers and binders. It is not uniform. There are longer and shorter fibers, narrower and wider fibers, more binder, less binder. There may or may not be a general direction the fibers lay in, but there will still be some variation. There can be foreign matter mixed in (big ones we see as inclusions) It will tear where it is weakest, not where you want it to (unless you cheat and tear it against a razor edge which will increase the likelihood of a "perfect" tear and then it doesn't look natural).
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Moderator
Learn More...
United States
10124 Posts
Posted 12/05/2021   5:55 pm  Show Profile Check 51studebaker's eBay Listings Bookmark this reply Add 51studebaker to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Depending on how curious you (and your wallet) might be...

Mechanical behavior of toilet paper perforation
https://www.proquest.com/openview/7...&cbl=5038271

Toilet Paper Perforation Efficiency
https://ojs.cnr.ncsu.edu/index.php/...n_Efficiency

Don
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
2809 Posts
Posted 12/05/2021   9:50 pm  Show Profile Check eyeonwall's eBay Listings Bookmark this reply Add eyeonwall to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Since you brought up TP, we have some where I work that insists on tearing in the long direction
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
Learn More...
7470 Posts
Posted 12/05/2021   10:08 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add rogdcam to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
To solve such problem, in three or four-ply toilet paper, a basis weight per ply of the toilet paper is 14.9 g/m2
or more and 16.2 g/m2 or less, an overall paper thickness
is 297 mm or more and 435 mm or less, a dry tensile
strength in a longitudinal direction is 451 cN/25 mm or
more and 1001 cN/25 mm or less, and a ratio of a wet
tensile strength in a horizontal direction to a dry tensile
strength in a horizontal direction is 0.09 or more
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Page: of 4 Previous TopicReplies: 46 / Views: 1,796Next Topic  
Previous Page | Next Page
 
To participate in the forum you must log in or register.


Go to Top of Page
Disclaimer: While a tremendous amount of effort goes into ensuring the accuracy of the information contained in this site, Stamp Community assumes no liability for errors. Copyright 2005 - 2022 Stamp Community Family - All rights reserved worldwide. Use of any images or content on this website without prior written permission of Stamp Community or the original lender is strictly prohibited.
Privacy Policy / Terms of Use    Advertise Here
Stamp Community Forum © 2007 - 2022 Stamp Community Forums
It took 0.22 seconds to lick this stamp. Powered By: Snitz Forums 2000 Version 3.4.05