You are on page 1of 9

Page 1 of 9

Katie Love
Group 2
BSEN 3310
12 September 2017

Rheological Properties of Several Fluids


Abstract
In this report, experimental data on test fluid shear stress, apparent viscosity, shear rate,
and temperature is reported and interpreted. Viscosity is a fluids internal resistance to flow under
stress. Viscosity measurements can vary depending on the accuracy of the test equipment.
Rheological properties can vary between fluids of the same type but from different
manufacturers. This lab report will address changes in rheological parameters of fluids measured
by different laboratory equipment, and at different temperatures. Rheological properties will be
estimated through laboratory testing and analysis of data through use of trendlines to model
rheological equations.
Introduction
Rheology is the study of the properties and deformation of fluids. Archimedes first
proposed the concept of the ideal fluid. Pascal stated that the pressure in a fluid is the same in
every direction in 1663. In 1687 Newton defined the resistance of an ideal fluid as proportional
to the velocity by which the fluids components are being displaced (Doraiswamy, n.d.). Bingham
suggested in 1922 that certain fluids have a yield stress after which their flow rate becomes
proportional to the stress. Herschel and Bulkley proposed an equation showing viscosity to be
dependent upon shear rate in 1926 (Bulkley and Herschel, 1926). Rheology as a field was
developing long before The Society of Rheology was effectively founded in 1929 (Doraiswamy,
n.d.). Viscosity is the measure of a fluids internal resistance to motion. Rate of deformation or
shear rate is equivalent to the velocity gradient of a fluid under shear stress. Shear stress is the
stress applied to a fluid that contributes to its deformation. The relationship between shear stress,
shear rate, and viscosity for Newtonian fluids (Boncinelli et. al, 1987) can be described using the
following equation

= () (1)

Where is shear stress, is viscosity, (du/dy) is shear rate, and n =1. The following equation
applies to the motion of non-Newtonian fluids

= () + 0 (2)
Page 2 of 9

Where is shear stress, K is instantaneous viscosity, (du/dy) is shear rate; n will be greater than 1
for dilatant fluids, and less than 1 for pseudoplastic fluids. 0 is yield stress, and will be not be
used in this equation further because none of the test fluids in this report have a yield stress.
Non-Newtonian fluids do not have a constant ratio between shear stress and shear rate
(Boncinelli et. al, 1987) so viscosity values change depending on the other rheological
parameters.
R-squared values are a statistical measure of how well the collected data is explained by
the model equation. R-squared values will be taken into consideration when estimating
rheological parameters from model equations. R-squared is calculated by subtracting the residual
sum of squares divided by the total sum of squares from 1. Data in this report is sourced from
experiments conducted by Group 2, Group 3, and from data obtained from Dr. Fasina.
Objectives
This lab report will examine the rheological properties of various fluids. Plots of shear
stress and shear rate will be used to determine if a fluid is Newtonian, pseudoplastic, or dilatant. I
will examine the rheological properties of sunflower oil at different temperatures. Using these
data, I will predict the viscosity of sunflower oil at a given temperature. Experimental data for
two test fluids from a Brooksfield viscometer will be compared to data of the same test fluids
from a Bohlin rheometer. This report will compare the viscosities of three brands of dish soap,
while considering the possible relationship between soap viscosity and dish washing efficacy.
Rheological parameters of the collected and given data will be estimated using the trendline
function of Microsoft Excel.
Materials and Methods
Data from the Bohlin rheometer was provided by Dr. Fasina. Brooksfield viscometer test
data for the salad dressing was collected by the members of group 2: Hayley Anderson, Matthew
Ballard, Adam Behr, Robert Darden, Katie Love, Conner Pope, and Tucker Watson. Correct data
on the dish soap was obtained from group 3, due to errors in the experimental data collected for
the dish soap of group 2, and will be referenced in this report accordingly.
Lab procedures were conducted using a Brooksfield digital (LVDV-E) viscometer with a
set of cylindrical spindles of different diameters. 500 mL of each test fluid were placed in a
beaker. Group 2 and 3 used PalmOlive dish soap and salad dressing as the test fluids in this
experiment. Once the chosen spindle was threaded into the viscometer head, the head and spindle
were lowered into the center of the test fluid container until the fluid reached the depth groove on
the spindle arm. Speed (rpm) and spindle number were selected using the display on the head.
Group 2 took two readings for each spindle and speed combination. We recorded data from 5
different spindle/speed combinations for each test fluid. We made sure to stir the test fluid lightly
between each reading. We did not record readings less than 10% of the viscometers range. If the
viscometer displays %EEEE, the viscosity reading is out of the viscometers range. When this
occurred, Group 2 switched to a smaller diameter spindle. When replicating this experiment
make sure to turn off the viscometer motor before removing a spindle or adjusting the head
Page 3 of 9

height. The Brooksfield viscometer displayed apparent viscosity readings in centipoise, which
were later converted to Pascal-seconds.
Several graphing techniques were used to analyze the rheological data. By

plotting shear stress data () on the y axis of a graph and shear rate () on the x axis and using
Excel to fit a trendline to the data, the linear trendline equation slope was interpreted as the
apparent viscosity () of the fluid for Newtonian fluids (Equation 1). The trendline equation y-
intercept was set to zero. For non-Newtonian fluids, the power equation fit was used, and the K
represented the instantaneous slope (viscosity) at the given shear rate. The exponential
component (n) of the trendline power equation is analogous to the variable n in equation 2 and
was later used to decide if a fluid was pseudoplastic or dilatant.
Results and Discussion
Results
In this section, linear trendlines follow the form = , where y is shear stress (), m is
viscosity (), and x is shear rate (du/dy). This form is equivalent to equation 1. Non-linear or
power trendlines follow the form = where y is shear stress (), b is apparent viscosity (K),
x is shear rate (du/dy), and d is equivalent to the n value in equation 2. This form is equivalent to
equation 2.

250.00
Salad Dressing
y = 26.28x0.2147 54% Starch water
R = 0.9883
200.00
SHEAR STRESS (PASCAL)

PalmOlive PalmOlive
y = 0.579x
150.00 R = 1
Salad Dressing
54% starch water
100.00 y = 0.0039x1.9426
R = 0.9618 Power (54% Starch
water)
50.00 Linear (PalmOlive)

0.00 Power (Salad Dressing)


0 .0 0 5 0 .0 0 1 0 0 .0 01 5 0 .0 02 0 0 .0 02 5 0 .0 0
SHEAR RATE (1/S)
Page 4 of 9

Figure 1. Shear stress versus shear rate graph for salad dressing, dish soap, and 54%
starch-water mixture.
Figure 1 shows shear stress versus shear rate for 3 fluids at 25 C. The PalmOlive dish
soap test fluid data yielded a visibly linear distribution, so the applied trendline was set to be
linear with a y-intercept of 0. The 54% starch-water mixture distribution was distinctly non-
linear, so the power trendline was applied to the data. The salad dressing plot yielded a non-
linear distribution, therefore the power trendline was fitted to the data. The R-squared values for
each trendline were all greater than 0.95 (Figure 1).

18.000
5C 20C

16.000 35C 50C

65C 80C
14.000
95C Linear (5C)
SHEAR STRESS (PASCAL)

Linear (20C) Linear (35C)


12.000
Linear (50C) Linear (65C)

10.000 Linear (80C) Linear (95C)

8.000
5 C 65 C
y = 0.155x y = 0.0169x
R = 0.9998 R = 1
6.000 20 C
80 C
y = 0.0755x
y = 0.012x
4.000 R = 1
R = 0.9999
35 C
y = 0.0412x 95 C
2.000
R = 1 y = 0.0088x
R = 0.9999
0.000 50 C
0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00 120.00 y = 0.025x
R = 1
SHEAR RATE (1/S)
Figure 2. Shear stress versus shear rate graph of sunflower oil at several temperatures
with trendlines for each data set.
Page 5 of 9

0.25
Sunflower
0.2 Oil
VISCOSITY (PASCAL*S)

0.15 Power
(Sunflower
0.1 Oil)

0.05 y = 0.9945x-0.974
R = 0.9368
0
0 20 40 60 80 100
TEMPERATURE (C)

Figure 3. Plot of viscosity of sunflower oil as a function of temperature.


Figure 2 shows shear stress vs. shear rate for sunflower oil at 5, 20, 35, 50, 65, 80, and 95
degrees Celsius. Each trendline for every temperature was linear and had the y-intercept set to 0.
The slope of the trendline is analogous to the viscosity of the sunflower oil at that temperature
(Equation 2). The R-squared values of the trendlines for graph 2 were all greater than 0.95.
Figure 3 is a plot of sunflower oil viscosity as a function of temperature. The data was visibly
non-linear, so I chose a power trendline. The R-squared value for the trendline was 0.9368
(Figure 3).
Page 6 of 9

80
Bohlin Salad
70 Dressing
Brooksfield Salad
60 Dressing
SHEAR STRESS (PASCAL)

Power (Bohlin
50 Salad Dressing)

40 Bohlin
y = 26.28x0.2147
30 R = 0.9883
20 Brooksfield
y = 0.2717x0.1767
10 R = 0.9826
0
0 20 40 60 80
SHEAR RATE (1/S)
Figure 4. Plot of shear stress versus shear rate data for salad dressing taken from a Bohlin
rheometer and a Brooksfield viscometer.
50

45 Bohlin PalmOlive
40
SHEAR STRESS (PASCAL)

35 Brooksfield
30 PalmOlive
25
Bohlin
20
y = 0.579x
15 R = 1
10
Brooksfield
5 y = 0.5515x
0 R = 0.7967
0 20 40 60 80
SHEAR RATE (1/S)
Figure 5. Shear stress versus shear rate plot for PalmOlive dish soap taken from a Bohlin
rheometer and Brooksfield viscometer.
Page 7 of 9

Figure 5 compares the shear stress versus shear rate data for dish soap from the Bohlin
rheometer and the Brooksfield viscometer. Both sets of shear stress versus shear rate data
followed an approximate linear distribution. The slope (viscosity) of the Bohlin data was 0.579,
while the slope of the Brooksfield data was 0.5515(Figure 5). The R-squared value of the Bohlin
data was 1, while the R-squared value of the Brooksfield data was 0.7967(Figure 5). Figure 4
compares Bohlin and Brooksfield data for shear stress and shear rate of salad dressing. The
power trendline for the data sets each had an R-squared value greater than 0.95, but the viscosity
coefficients were markedly different (Figure 4). Data for the dish soap was collected by group 3
on the Brooksfield viscometer using the same procedure as stated in the methods section of this
report.

80.00
y = 0.6755x
70.00
R = 0.9997
SHEAR STRESS (PASCAL)

60.00
Gain
50.00
Pricefirst
40.00 y = 0.579x
R = 1 PalmOlive
30.00
Linear (Gain)
20.00
Linear (Pricefirst)
y = 0.2197x
10.00 Linear (PalmOlive)
R = 1
0.00
0 .0 0 2 0 .0 0 4 0 .0 0 6 0 .0 0 8 0 .0 0 1 0 0 .0 01 2 0 .0 0
SHEAR RATE (1/S)

Figure 6. Shear stress versus shear rate plot for different dish soap brands with linear
trendlines and R-squared values.
The shear stress versus shear strain data for three different dish soap brands were plotted
on the same chart in Figure 6. All data sets fit a linear trendline with a y-intercept of 0. Gain had
a viscosity of 0.6755, PalmOlive had a viscosity of 0.579, and PriceFirst had a viscosity of
0.2197. All trendlines had an R-squared value of approximately 1.
Discussion
The trendline equation of salad dressing is = 0.0039 0.2147 (Figure 1). Non-Newtonian
fluids with a n-value of less than 1 are said to be pseudoplastic or shear-thinning (Equation 2).
Therefore, from the trendline equation of the salad dressing stress versus strain data, one can
conclude that the salad dressing is pseudoplastic. The trendline of the PalmOlive dish soap is
linear with an R-squared value of 1, indicating that the dish soap is a Newtonian fluid (Figure 1).
Page 8 of 9

The 54% starch-water mixture has a power trendline equation with an n-value of greater than 1,
indicating that the mixture is dilatant (Figure 1).
From Figure 3, the viscosity of sunflower oil decreases as temperature increases. As oil is
heated, its viscosity decreases (Cochran et. al, 1987). All trendlines in Figure 2 have an R-
squared value close to 1. Additionally, the sunflower oil is a Newtonian fluid due to the linear
distribution of its data (Figure 2).
The data from the Bohlin and Brooksfield equipment are remarkably different. The
trendline equations for PalmOlive soap for Bohlin and Brooksfield are similar, but the
Brooksfield trendline R-squared value is 0.7967 (Figure 5). This indicates that the trendline
equation is not a good fit for the Brooksfield data. The viscosity values given by the PalmOlive
trendline equations are similar (0.579 and 0.5515) (Figure 5) compared to the gap in viscosity
values for the salad dressing trendlines (26.28 and 0.2717) (Figure 4). The R-squared values of
the trendlines for salad dressing are both greater than 0.95, but the equations have significantly
different viscosity values (Figure 4). This may be due to error. It is difficult to see the
Brooksfield data on both Figure 4 and Figure 5, and I suspect this is due to temperature
differences during testing.
Gain dish soap has the highest viscosity at 0.6755. PriceFirst has the lowest viscosity,
0.2197 (Figure 6). All trendlines in figure 6 have an R-squared value close to 1, so I am
confident in the trendline equations accuracy as a model equation for shear stress. On
dishwashing efficiency, a more viscous soap would be economical. Dish detergents are soap
molecules mixed in liquid water used to emulsify oils in food to enable them to be rinsed off
with tap water. A dish soap with higher viscosity would have a lower percentage of water in the
bottle, requiring less soap to be used to wash dishes and therefore being more efficient. Note that
the soap viscosity should not be so high as to make the soap impractical to wash dishes with, or
semi-solid.
Conclusion
Rheology is relatively new field of science, although it has a long history. Shear stress,
shear rate, and viscosity can be related to each other through linear equations (Newtonian fluids)
and non-linear equations (non-Newtonian fluids). These equations can then be used to explain
data distribution of shear stress versus shear rate data for a test fluid. It is vital to check the R-
squared values of these trendline equations to see if they are of a sufficient fit to the data.
Trendlines with R-squared values of less than 0.95 do not accurately explain collected data, and
should not be used to estimate rheological parameters. Rheological parameters can be estimated
through experimental analysis of fluids by a rheometer or viscometer if care is taken to make
data as accurate as possible. Ensuring fluids are of some standard temperature is vital to accurate
measurement of rheological parameters.
Page 9 of 9

References
Boncinelli, P., Catalano, P., & Cini, E. (1987). Olive paste rheological analysis. N.p.:
Transactions of the ASABE. Retrieved from https://elibrary-asabe-
org.spot.lib.auburn.edu/azdez.asp?search=1&JID=3&AID=42574&v=56&i=1&CID=t2013&T=
2&urlRedirect=
Cochran, D. L., Threadgill, E. D., & Law, S. E. (1987). Physical Properties of Three Oils
and Oil-Insecticide Formulations Used in Agriculture (Transactions of the ASAE ed., Vol. 30,
pp. 1338-1342). Retrieved from
https://elibrary.asabe.org/abstract.asp?aid=30567&t=2&redir=&redirType
Doraiswamy, D. (n.d.). The Origins of Rheology: A Short Historical Excursion (pp. 1-9).
Wilmington, DE: DuPont iTechnologies, Experimental Station. Retrieved from
http://www.rheology.org/sor/publications/rheology_b/jan02/origin_of_rheology.pdf
Herschel, W. H., & Bulkley, R. (1926). Konsistenzmessungen von gummi-benzollosunge
(Kolloid-Z ed., pp. 39-291)