Studies into the effect of temperature on the impact of model particles in co-melt granulation

In co-melt granulation, collisions occur between the particles to be agglomerated and the binder material. Depending on the stage of granulation, the binder material can be in the solid or liquid phase. The outcome of these collisions controls the dynamics of the granulation process and the fundamental physics of the impacts are of interest. This paper examines the impact of glass beads (model particles) and solid Poly Ethylene Glycol (PEG) flakes on a substrate of PEG as the temperature of the PEG layer is increased from below its melting point to above it. While the layer is in the solid state, the result of the impact can be quantified by the coefficient of restitution. When the layer is in the liquid state, the impact can be quantified by the immersion behaviour. The results obtained show that the coefficient of restitution between either glass beads and PEG flakes and the PEG layer is strongly affected by temperatures. As the PEG layer approaches its melting point, the coefficient of restitution falls to zero. Once the temperature of the PEG layer exceeds the melting point, the impact is characterised by a transient maximum indentation and then rebound to an equilibrium position. These too are strongly dependent on temperature.

Bouyid v Belgium: The “minimum level of severity” and Human Dignity's Role in Article 3 ECHR

The Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights recently delivered an important judgment on Article 3 ECHR in the case of Bouyid v Belgium. In Bouyid, the Grand Chamber was called upon to consider whether slaps inflicted on a minor and an adult in police custody were in breach of Article 3 ECHR, which provides that ‘No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment’. Overruling the Chamber judgment in the case, the Grand Chamber ruled by 14 votes to 3 that there had been a substantive violation of Article 3 in that the applicants had been subjected to degrading treatment by members of the Belgian police; it found that there had been a breach of the investigative duty under Article 3 also. In this comment, I focus on the fundamental basis of disagreement between the majority of the Grand Chamber and those who found themselves in dissent, on the question of whether there had been a substantive breach of Article 3. The crux of the disagreement lay in the understanding and application of the test of ‘minimum level of severity’, which the ECtHR has established as decisive of whether a particular form of ill-treatment crosses the Article 3 threshold, seen also in light of Article 3’s absolute character, which makes it non-displaceable – that is, immune to trade-offs of the type applicable in relation to qualified rights such as privacy and freedom of expression. I consider the way the majority of the Grand Chamber unpacked and applied the concept of dignity – or ‘human dignity’ – towards finding a substantive breach of Article 3, and briefly distil some of the principles underpinning the understanding of human dignity emerging in the Court’s analysis.