2015
DOI: 10.1007/s00397-015-0847-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The effect of premature wall yield on creep testing of strongly flocculated suspensions

Abstract: Measuring yielding in cohesive suspensions is often hampered by slip at measurement surfaces. This paper presents creep data for strongly-flocculated suspensions obtained using vane-in-cup tools with differing cup-to-vane diameter ratios. The three suspensions were titania and alumina aggregated at their isoelectric points and polymer-flocculated alumina.The aim was to find the diameter ratio where slip or premature yielding at the cup wall had no effect on the transient behaviour. The large diameter ratio res… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
33
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 29 publications
(33 citation statements)
references
References 48 publications
0
33
0
Order By: Relevance
“…A quantitative description of the motion of a sediment at a wall is quite difficult [71][72][73][74][75][76], and there are still many open questions. The following problems may be of relevance, but are beyond the scope of the present investigation: resuspension of particles [77,78] and related processes [79]; shear-induced migration of particles in concentrated suspensions [73][74][75]; not a sharp interface [80] and shear-induced corrugation of interfaces [81]; wall slip (depending on surface properties and particle material) [82][83][84][85][86][87][88][89]; stick-slip events [90]. For the present investigation, it is only of importance how the motion of the sediment affects the bulk flow, as this is what controls the settling time and the concentration in the suspension during the settling process.…”
Section: Iib: Sediment Moves Along the Wallmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A quantitative description of the motion of a sediment at a wall is quite difficult [71][72][73][74][75][76], and there are still many open questions. The following problems may be of relevance, but are beyond the scope of the present investigation: resuspension of particles [77,78] and related processes [79]; shear-induced migration of particles in concentrated suspensions [73][74][75]; not a sharp interface [80] and shear-induced corrugation of interfaces [81]; wall slip (depending on surface properties and particle material) [82][83][84][85][86][87][88][89]; stick-slip events [90]. For the present investigation, it is only of importance how the motion of the sediment affects the bulk flow, as this is what controls the settling time and the concentration in the suspension during the settling process.…”
Section: Iib: Sediment Moves Along the Wallmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The authors have reported that two different equations for converting vane speed to shear rate need to be used depending on the existing scenarios [13]. Stickland and co-workers at the University of Melbourne [24] concluded that a diameter ratio of three of the tube to the vane was sufficient in practice to eliminate the wall effect.…”
Section: Froth Rheogramsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…All measurements were carried out at 25°C by varying the shear rate from 1 s -1 to 200 s -1 logarithmically during 150 s. The usual recommendation for a vane-in-cup ratio to neglect wall effect is 3:1 [16]. The vane-in-cup used in the experiments had a ratio of 1.3:1.…”
Section: Rheometer Set-upmentioning
confidence: 99%