Proceeding Articles

In my introduction to session 1, I made the point that most of the material presented in this session could be seen almost as a continuation of the corresponding part of the Oxford symposium in 1961. This continuity, which was very noticeable in other sessions also, is one of the assets and attractions of these symposia. There are people (and I have met several) who think that such a continuity signifies lack of ideas, a state of stagnation. They argue that we must be ‘with it’, that there must be something new, even topical, every time. I do not agree with this at all. On the contrary, if we let ourselves be dominated by the notion that there must be a frantic search for a new ‘in’ subject every time we plan a symposium, we are in danger of becoming organisers of yet another set of technical gatherings, useful, most likely, but not necessarily bearing the stamp of fundamental research.

The mechanical properties of paper was a main topic both at the 1961 Oxford meeting and the 1965 Cambridge meeting and, as a better understanding of paper’s strength properties will always be of great interest, it will certainly be included as a separate session in the programme of future symposia.

Professor Rånby opened the meeting with a concentrated review of the synthetic paper field. It was a reasonably well referenced review with a very useful classification scheme. Perhaps it is still premature to select synthetic pulp as the most promising approach to synthetic paper, but it is the chairman’s privilege to speculate in this way. The pollution problem, mentioned by the speaker, is mainly due to the pulp mills and is a problem chiefly in the Scandinavian countries. In other countries, paper and pulp mill pollution is less serious compared with sewage effluent. Also, the shortage in petroleum may well be ‘across the board’ and any cuts made could also affect the polymer industry. All in all, the review was a very valuable contribution and should stimulate considerable interest in the field. The subject of synthetic paper is wide open for fundamental research; from such research, much can also be learned about conventional paper and papermaking.

It became obvious at session 4 with its subject of barrier and absorption properties, the requirements for paper as a substrate, that we touched only the tip of an iceberg top. Very little is known about coating, although it has been carried out for 2,000 years.

In my introduction to the session on printability, I spoke of the complexity of this field. It is a subject that is difficult to come to grips with and, believe me, I find it difficult to organise an appraisal of where we are and what we should be doing in the future!

The emphasis in this session was on the largely subjective nature of the optical and tactile properties of paper. Remembering the theme of the conference, I regret that I cannot list a series of experimental discoveries which can be immediately used to improve the end product. I can list a number of impressions that I have received and that, I believe, will help manufacturers in their attempts to do so.

The reaction between paper and its environment is by definition the ecology of paper. This word was once understood only by biological scientists and scholars of Greek, but it is now on everybody’s lips, so session 7 should have proved immensely popular. Of course, we have largely confined our considerations to the response of paper to its environment or to imposed conditions of temperature, humidity and mechanical or chemical stress; we have not been too concerned today with the way in which the total environment, as it involves man, is affected by paper and by the technological processes that constitute papermaking-or more broadly, the pulp and paper industry. It is as well to note, however, the connection between paper’s response to and its effect on the environment, if only to ensure, as the sledgehammers of change swing ever faster, that we do not lose sight of the relevance of our discussions to the current pressing problems on the interface between the paper industry and the rest of society. Nor, we hope, will the relevance be lost on those responsible for sponsoring our attendance at the next symposium.

The qualities that characterise a great scientist are very elusive. Before I try to deal with them, I would like to clear the air by touching on two points. The first is the very real difference between fundamental and applied science, the first being knowledge oriented and the second project oriented. I want to emphasise right away how strongly I dissent from the view that the one is any way finer or more inspiring than the other.

It seems appropriate at the outset of an introduction to our week’s proceedings to spend a little time drawing attention to the particular characteristics of this series of meetings, the planning of which has now spanned 14 years.

This paper traces the evolution of the theoretical basis of automatic control. The subject is considered from the viewpoint of applications in the process industries, particularly those occurring in papermaking. The emphasis is put on the essential concepts, placing them in the general background of engineering systems analysis. An attempt is made to indicate the mainstream of theoretical developments and to review current practice and the future potential of control technology in the paper industry.