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.
Experimental investigation and phenomenological modeling of the viscosity-shear rate of bimodal high solid content latex
Rent:
Rent this article for
USD
10.1122/1.2391069
/content/sor/journal/jor2/51/1/10.1122/1.2391069
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/sor/journal/jor2/51/1/10.1122/1.2391069

Figures

Image of FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.

Variation of the relative zero shear viscosity vs volume fractions: Monomodals and ; solid lines: the curves according to the Krieger–Dougherty equation using the data of Table I.

Image of FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.

Variation of the relaxation time vs volume fractions for monomodals and . The solid line is the curve according to the Krieger–Dougherty equation.

Image of FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.

Variation of the relative high shear viscosity vs volume fractions of monomodal and latices. The solid lines are the curves according to the Krieger–Dougherty equation.

Image of FIG. 4.
FIG. 4.

Variation of the inverse of critical shear rate for shear thickening behavior vs volume fraction of monomodal and latices. The solid lines are the curves according to the Krieger–Dougherty equation.

Image of FIG. 5.
FIG. 5.

Variation of the shear viscosity vs shear rate for monomodal latices. The different values of (%) are presented in the curves. The lines are the curves according to the Yasuda–Carreau model with and . (a) Latex with particle diameter of , (41.1%, 42.7%, and 44.9%). (b) Latex with particle diameter of , (49.4%, 52.1%, and 49.4%).

Image of FIG. 6.
FIG. 6.

Sensitivity of the parameter on the predicted viscosity. (a) latice with (solid line) and (dotted line). (b) latice with (solid line) and (dotted line).

Image of FIG. 7.
FIG. 7.

Variation of the relative characteristic parameters (, , , ) vs volume fractions of bimodals and latices. The solid lines are the curves according to the Krieger–Dougherty equation (see Table II), dashed lines: monomodals and latices: (a) , (b) , (c) , and (d) .

Image of FIG. 8.
FIG. 8.

Variation of the relative characteristic parameters (, , , ) versus volume fractions of bimodals and latices. The solid lines are the curves according to the Krieger–Dougherty equation (see Table II), (a) , (b) , (c) .

Image of FIG. 9.
FIG. 9.

Variation of the viscosity vs shear rate of bimodal latices. The lines are the curves according to our model: (a) latice (, 55.2%, and 60.5%). (b) latice (, 59.5%, and 63.1%).

Tables

Generic image for table
Generic image for table
TABLE I.

Experimental values for monomodal latices of the maximum volume fraction packing and intrinsic viscosity related to , , , and parameters. Note: From an analogic point of view, we proposed the following equations: and .

Generic image for table
TABLE II.

Predictions for bimodal latices of the maximum volume fraction packing and intrinsic viscosity related to , , , parameters of the Carreau–Yasuda law.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/sor/journal/jor2/51/1/10.1122/1.2391069
2007-01-01
2014-04-24
Loading

Full text loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: Experimental investigation and phenomenological modeling of the viscosity-shear rate of bimodal high solid content latex
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/sor/journal/jor2/51/1/10.1122/1.2391069
10.1122/1.2391069
SEARCH_EXPAND_ITEM