1887
banner image
No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
Instrument techniques for rheometry
Rent:
Rent this article for
USD
10.1063/1.2085048
/content/aip/journal/rsi/76/10/10.1063/1.2085048
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aip/journal/rsi/76/10/10.1063/1.2085048

Figures

Image of FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.

A mean velocity profile generated from NMR imaging for carboxymethyl cellulose solution (see Ref. 26).

Image of FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.

Results deduced from the velocity profile shown in Fig. 1, along with measurements from the Haake Rotovisco RV20 viscometer using the same fluid (see Ref. 26).

Image of FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.

NMR velocity profiles for aqueous xantham gum solutions. The points represent the average of 50 measurements in the radial vicinity, and the error bars represent the standard deviation of these 50 points (see Ref. 27). (a) 1% xantham gum with , (b) 0.2% xantham gum with , and (c) 1% guar gum with .

Image of FIG. 4.
FIG. 4.

Plot of vs (see Ref. 27). (a) 1% aqueous xantham gum. The line corresponds to Eq. (7). (b) 0.2% aqueous xantham gum. The line corresponds to . (c) 1.0% aqueous guar gum. The dashed line corresponds to and the dotted line corresponds to .

Image of FIG. 5.
FIG. 5.

A schematic diagram illustrating the measurement principle of the UPD technique (see Ref. 31).

Image of FIG. 6.
FIG. 6.

A measured velocity profile of glycerine water solution using UPD mapping (see Ref. 31).

Image of FIG. 7.
FIG. 7.

The viscosity data measured using the GUPD technique and a commercial rheometer, respectively (see Ref. 31).

Image of FIG. 8.
FIG. 8.

A possible velocity profile from a complex liquid in a tubular flow (see Ref. 30).

Image of FIG. 9.
FIG. 9.

The velocity profiles of a mayonnaise sample determined by a UPD viscometer sensor at different flow rates (a, b, and c) (see Ref. 30).

Image of FIG. 10.
FIG. 10.

Concentration dependence of the viscosity of diluted honey samples measured using a Couette viscometer and an ultrasonic spectrometry at (see Ref. 36).

Image of FIG. 11.
FIG. 11.

Schematic model for the breakage of gel structure in aqueous hyaluronan solution (see Ref. 38). (a) Solution at rest, shear rate of for intermolecular hydrogen bonds between chains. (b) Shear rate of for disruption of hydrogen bonds between larger aggregates. (c) Shear rate of for breakage of many intermolecular hydrogen bonds.

Image of FIG. 12.
FIG. 12.

A schematic diagram of the mass-detecting capillary viscometer (see Ref. 39).

Image of FIG. 13.
FIG. 13.

The mass variation of the collected fluid as a function of time (see Ref. 40).

Image of FIG. 14.
FIG. 14.

The flow curves of soymilk at room temperature obtained with a MDCV and rotating viscometer (see Ref. 40).

Image of FIG. 15.
FIG. 15.

A schematic diagram of the scanning dual-capillary-tube viscometer (see Ref. 42).

Image of FIG. 16.
FIG. 16.

The viscosity measurement for mineral oil at with a scanning dual-capillary-tube viscometer (SDCV) and a rotating viscometer (RV) (see Ref. 42).

Image of FIG. 17.
FIG. 17.

The deep-channel surface viscometer (see Ref. 61).

Image of FIG. 18.
FIG. 18.

Basic model of the deep-channel surface viscometer (see Ref. 61).

Image of FIG. 19.
FIG. 19.

Deep-channel surface viscometer data for 2% aqueous carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC)-air interface (see Ref. 61).

Image of FIG. 20.
FIG. 20.

Deep-channel surface viscometer data for the 0.02% carbopol-air interface (see Ref. 61).

Image of FIG. 21.
FIG. 21.

Deep-channel surface viscometer data for the 2% carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC)-benzene interface (see Ref. 61).

Image of FIG. 22.
FIG. 22.

Schematic of transparent annular channel geometry (see Ref. 63).

Image of FIG. 23.
FIG. 23.

Azimuthal velocity profiles at the interface driven with for as indicated; the broken lines are measurements using digital particle imaging velocimetry (DPIV) and the solid lines are computed (see Ref. 63).

Image of FIG. 24.
FIG. 24.

The biconical bob interfacial viscometer (see Ref. 48).

Image of FIG. 25.
FIG. 25.

Schematic diagram of the experimental setup for a biconical bob interfacial viscometer (see Ref. 48).

Image of FIG. 26.
FIG. 26.

Interfacial viscoelastic parameters for the interface of 0.05% PVA in water, in contact with oil phase (see Ref. 57).

Image of FIG. 27.
FIG. 27.

Surface loss modulus as a function of frequency with surfactant concentration as a parameter (gelatin-surfactant solutions at ) (see Ref. 63).

Image of FIG. 28.
FIG. 28.

Steady-state interfacial shear viscosity of sorbitan tristearate films (air/water interface) at different surfactant concentrations (see Ref. 54).

Image of FIG. 29.
FIG. 29.

General layout of the modified rotational rheometer (MRR): (1) top fixture coupled to torque transducer, (2) bottom fixture driving plate, (3) rollers, (4) clamp, (5) high-temperature bath, (6) spring, (7) main arm, and (8) sample (see Ref. 76).

Image of FIG. 30.
FIG. 30.

Transient uniaxial extensional viscosity results for a low-density polyethylene (IUPAC-X) at shown on each line (see Ref. 76). Open symbols, MRR; solid lines, RME; and dashed lines, fiber windup.

Image of FIG. 31.
FIG. 31.

Schematic of Rheometrics RFX extensional rheometer (see Ref. 81).

Image of FIG. 32.
FIG. 32.

The apparent extensional viscosity for a Newtonian fluid at three different gaps to diameter ratios. At each ratio, the data are comprised of measurements made using three different jet sizes (see Ref. 81).

Image of FIG. 33.
FIG. 33.

The effect on the extensional flow curves of 5.8% solutions of polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP) on the addition of sodium dodeclsulphate (SDS) and glycerol (see Ref. 81).

Image of FIG. 34.
FIG. 34.

(a) Section of the transducer head (see Ref. 84). (b) Schematic of sample deformation: (above) the resulting stress distribution in compression and (below) the resulting stress distribution in shear. The arrows indicate the relative motion of the plates (see Ref. 84).

Image of FIG. 35.
FIG. 35.

Compressive stress vs strain for chloroprene foam with (a) and (b) (see Ref. 84).

Image of FIG. 36.
FIG. 36.

Comparison between a triaxial rheometer (squares) and a conventional parallel disk rheometer (circles). The resulting initial shear modulus, , is indicated (see Ref. 84).

Image of FIG. 37.
FIG. 37.

(a) Schematic of the high-temperature and high-pressure (HTHP) viscometer (see Ref. 109). (b) Schematic of the cup-spindle assembly (see Ref. 109).

Image of FIG. 38.
FIG. 38.

Viscosity of a petroleum oil sample with Physica’s MCR under different pressure levels (see Ref. 110).

Image of FIG. 39.
FIG. 39.

Diagram of a magnetically levitated sphere rheometer (see Ref. 112).

Tables

Generic image for table
Table I.

Summary of the different modifications approaches to conventional techniques.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/aip/journal/rsi/76/10/10.1063/1.2085048
2005-10-25
2014-04-19
Loading

Full text loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: Instrument techniques for rheometry
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aip/journal/rsi/76/10/10.1063/1.2085048
10.1063/1.2085048
SEARCH_EXPAND_ITEM