Comparison of Viscosity Measurements Using

the Falling Ball Method and the Viscometer

Macalisang, Christine Mae J. Department of Mining, Metallurgical and Materials
Department of Mining, Metallurgical and Materials Engineering University of the Philippines-Diliman
Engineering Quezon City, Philippines
University of the Philippines-Diliman
Quezon City, Philippines *Sy, Sellina M.
Department of Mining, Metallurgical and Materials
Sosa, Gideon Martin A. Engineering
University of the Philippines-Diliman
Quezon City, Philippines
smsy@up.edu.ph

I. Results and Discussion VI. The PHPA concentrations

used are 0.5% , 1%, 1.5%, 2%, and 2.5%
II. Acrylamide polymers are expressed in weight over volume
known for their applications in polymer percentage. To calculate the amount
flooding and in polymer and polymer-gel necessary, each concentration is multiplied
conformance improvement treatments. Due with 250ml. For example, 0.5% 250ml=
to economic costs and large availability 1.25g of PHPA and this is repeated for the
coupled with favorable chemical succeeding concentrations. The masses of
characteristics, these polymers are widely PHPA are .125g, 2.5g, 3.75g, 5g, and 6.25g
used. Hydrolyzed polyacrylamide on the respectively. Each solutions
other hand is a better viscosifier in low VII.
salinity brines and can be utilized in sand VIII. density is computed for by first
reservoirs as well due to its tendency to calibrating the pycnometer with water.
adsorb less on surfaces. PHPA is water- The mass of water is divided by its
soluble and best used for polymer water kg
flooding and oil field polymer gel treatments density at 23 , 997.583 m
3
(PetroWiki 2015).
III.
IV. Partially hydrolyzed , to obtain the volume of water. After
polyacrylamide (PHPA) is a polymer used which the mass of solutions is divided
for capturing solids from drilling oil and gas. by the volume of water, resulting to the
It is used as a drilling fluid, non-toxic, following densities of PHPA below:
inflammable, and non-corrosive but does not
react with contaminants. PHPA is formed by
dissolving acrylamide in an aqueous
solution then reacting it with a base to form
a some carboxylate groups. PHPA has a high
molecular weight and prevents shale
hydration through its anionic or cationic
adhesion. In low concentrations they act as
flocculants promoting clumping of particles
while in higher concentrations the solids are
contained within the polymer, preventing
direct interaction of particles (CHINAFLOC
2016).
V.
IX. XVII.

density of PHPA velocity vs. density

1010.00 1005.27
1002.45
1002.02 0.300
1001.28
1000.00 0.200
990.00986.46 f(x) = - 0.01x + 5.58
0.100
desnsity (kg/m^3) velocity (m/s) R = 0.17
980.00 0.000
970.00 1000.00
5.0000000000000001E-3 980.00 1020.00
PHPA concentration (%w/v) density (kg/m^3)

X. Figure 1. Density of PHPA at different XVIII. Figure 3. velocity vs. density at initial temperature
concentrations 23.
XI. XIX.
XII. For the falling ball
method, the velocities of each pellet per
concentration was also calculated using velocity vs density (60C)
distance travelled
v= at 23 0.300
time
f(x) = - 0.01x + 12.31
0.200
and 60 . For concentrations other R = 0.67
velocity (m/s) 0.100
than 1% the velocities decrease from an 0.000
increase in temperature. Velocity generally 1000.00
decreased at a higher temperature due to the 980.00 1020.00
notion that the fluid is less viscous thus
requiring less time for the pellet to travel. density kg/m^3
XIII.
XX. Figure 4. velocity vs. density at elevated
velocities at 23C and 60C XXI.
temperature 60.

0.600 XXII. Both graphs seem to have no linear

relationship but the increase in
0.400 elevated temperature has a better R2 value. The
velocity slope of the equation at 23 is equal to
velocity (m/s)
0.200
velocity 2

0.000 9 2 g , derived from the
R
5.0000000000000001E-3 n
PHPA concentration (%w/v) working equation:

4 3
XIV. Figure 2. velocities of the falling ball at 23 and XXIII.
R ( o ) g=6 Rv
60.
3
XV.
(1)
XVI. Plotting the velocity as a
XXIV.
function of density for the two temperatures
XXV. where: = Density of the falling ball
results into the following graphs.
XXVI. o = Density of the fluid
XXVII. g = Gravitational Constant
XXVIII.
XXIX. When values are substituted, an
experimental viscosity value of 0.4264
cP for pure water can be calculated.
Comparing this to the theoretical
viscosity of 0.9321 cP at the same
temperature, there is 54.25% error.
XXX.
XXXI. Another method of
determining viscosity was through using a
rotational viscometer. It measures the
viscosity of the fluid through the force that
is required for rotating an object in a fluid.
Therefore, the torque value is a function of
the viscosity of the fluid. Its basic parts are
the motor and the spindle which is driven by
the motor. Rotation of the magnetic rotor is
at constant speed. The one that drives the
rotor is the viscous forces in the fluid. The
viscosity of the fluid is the measure of the
resistance of the rotating spindle.
XXXII.
XXXIII. Viscosities at 23 and
60 for both methods are compared in the
graph below. The viscosity of the falling ball
method is determined by manipulating
4 2
R ( o ) g
equation 1 into = 3 . At
6v
XXXV. Figure 5. Viscosities at 23 and 60 for falling
ball and viscometer method.
XXXVI.
XXXVII.
Still using the first method, the viscosity
was also measure at an elevated
temperature of 60 in the graph below.
For polymers, as temperature increases
viscosity decreases but the behavior
may vary depending on the polymer.
There is not enough literature to verify
if the increase in viscosity of PHPA is
directly proportional to the increase in
temperature as obtained experimentally.
The temperature dependence of the
shear viscosity can be modeled based
on restrictions and certain parameters.
XXXVIII.
viscosities at 23C and 60C
40000.0
30000.0
60C
20000.0
viscosity (cP) 23C
10000.0
0.0
5.0000000000000001E-3
PHPA concentration (%w/v)

2.5% PHPA concentration the viscosity

value between the two methods is vastly XXXIX. Figure 6. viscosities at different temperatures.
different. Except for 1% PHPA XL. For concentrations other than 1%
concentration, the falling ball method gives PHPA, viscosity values increased as
larger values. response to increase in temperature.
XXXIV. XLI.

XLII. Conclusion and Recommendations

Comparison of viscosities
XLIII. Viscosities of falling ball method have
15000.0 been compared with viscometer method
and the large deviations are due to
10000.0 viscometer possible sources of error such as
viscosity (cP) inaccurate estimates of time, weighing
5000.0 falling ball
of empty and filled pycnometers, and
0.0 maintaining the temperature of the
water bath. The accuracy of the falling
5.0000000000000001E-3
ball method can be improved on by
PHPA concentration (%w/v) minimizing mentioned sources of error.

XLIV.
 XLV. References
XLVI. CHINAFLOC. June 11, 2016.
http://www.chinafloc.com/Partially-
hydrolyzed-polyacrylamide-used-in-drilling-
fluids_1442.html (accessed February 21,
2017).
XLVII. PetroWiki. June 9, 2015.
http://petrowiki.org/Polymers_for_conforma
nce_improvement (accessed February 21,
2017).
XLVIII. Walker, Roger. SImetric.co.uk. February 28,
2015.
https://www.simetric.co.uk/si_water.htm
(accessed February 7, 2017).
XLIX. Unique Drilling Fluids, INC. Technical
and Division.
http://www.uniquedrillingfluids.com/fil
es/49928907.pdf (accessed February 21,
2017).
L. Scoffin, Katriona. 2013. Viscometers:
The Science of Measuring Fluid Flow.
(August)
http://www.labcompare.com/10-
Featured-Articles/143121-Viscometers-
The-Science-of-Measuring-Fluid-Flow/
(accessed February 21, 2017).
LI.
LII. Appendix

LIII. Fa LIV. LV. LVI. LVII. LVIII. LIX. LX. LXI. LXII.
lli
n
g
B
al
l
M
et
h
o
d
LXIII. co LXIV. he LXV. ti LXVI.
LXVII. LXVIII. LXIX. m LXX.
nc ig m ra pe ma a ma
e ht e s
nt ( (s) s
ra m (
ti m p
o ) y
n LXXII. LXXIII.LXXIV. LXXV. c
in @ in @ n
o
+
H
2
O
)
LXXXI. LXXXII.LXXXIII.
LXXXIV.
LXXXV.LXXXVI.LXXXVII.
LXXXVIII.
LXXXIX. XC.
0.50% 1 1 0. 1. 3. 1. 27. 52.717 52.
7
XCI. XCII. XCIII. XCIV. XCV.
1 1 0. 0.

CI. CII. CIII. CIV. CV.

1 1 1. 1.

CXI. 1 CXII. CXIII. CXIV. CXV. CXVI. CXVII. CXVIII. CXIX. 4 CXX.
% 1 2 1. 0. 2. 1. 22. 7 47.
.
CXXI. CXXII. CXXIII.CXXIV. CXXV. 5
1 2 0. 0. 3
CXXXI. CXXXII.CXXXIII.
CXXXIV.
CXXXV. 5
1 1 0. 0. 4

CXLI. 1. CXLII. CXLIII.CXLIV. CXLV. CXLVI. CXLVII. CXLVIII. CXLIX. CL.

5 1 1 1. 3. 3. 1. 20. 45.925 46.
0 9
%
CLI. CLII. CLIII. CLIV. CLV.
1 1 2. 3.

CLXI. CLXII. CLXIII.CLXIV. CLXV.

1 1 1. 3.

CLXXI. CLXXII.CLXXIII.
CLXXIV.
CLXXV.CLXXVI.CLXXVII.
CLXXVIII.
CLXXIX. CLXXX.
2% 1 1 2. 3. 3. 1. 21. 46.043 46.
2
CLXXXI. CLXXXII.
CLXXXIII.
CLXXXIV.
CLXXXV.
1 1 2. 5.

CXCI. CXCII. CXCIII.CXCIV. CXCV.

1 1 3 5.

CCI. 2. CCII. CCIII. CCIV. CCV. CCVI. CCVII. CCVIII. CCIX. 4 CCX.
5 2 2 9. 1 3. 1. 23. 8 48.
0 .
% 0
CCXI. CCXII. CCXIII.CCXIV. CCXV. 7
2 2 1 1 4
8
CCXXI. CCXXII.CCXXIII.
CCXXIV.CCXXV.
2 2 7. 1

CCXXXI.

CCXXXII.
Viscom
e
t
e
r
m
e
t
h
o
d CCXXXIII.CCXXXIV.CCXXXV.CCXXXVI.CCXXXVII.
CCXXXVIII.
spindle
n
u
m
b CCXXXIX.CCXL. CCXLI. CCXLII. CCXLIII.
e con trial torq trial torq
r
CCXLV. CCXLVIII.
0.50 CCXLVI. 608
CCXLVII. CCXLIX.
CCXLIV. 651
50. 47.
63 CCLII.
CCLI. 599 CCLIV.
557
CCLVIII. CCLX. CCLXI.
CCLVII. 120 CCLIX. 100 16.
CCLVI. 6 1% 20
4 CCLXIV. CCLXV. CCLXVI. CCLXVII.
CCLXIII. 119 19. 100 16.

CCLXIX. CCLXX. CCLXXI. CCLXXII. CCLXXIII.

CCLXVIII. 1.50 995 16. 114 19.
64
CCLXXVI. CCLXXVIII.
CCLXXV. 304 270
CCLXXVII. CCLXXIX.
CCLXXIV. 2%
50. 44.
64 CCLXXXII. CCLXXXIV.
CCLXXXI. 306 262

CCLXXXVII.
CCLXXXVIII. CCXC.
2.50 308 279
CCXCI.
CCLXXXVI. CCLXXXIX.
46.
64 CCXCIV. 55 CCXCVI.
CCXCIII. 309 271

CCXCVIII.

CCXCIX.

CCC.

CCCI.