Advertisement

Materials and Structures

, Volume 46, Issue 1–2, pp 289–311 | Cite as

Extension of the Reiner–Riwlin equation to determine modified Bingham parameters measured in coaxial cylinders rheometers

  • Dimitri FeysEmail author
  • Jon E. Wallevik
  • Ammar Yahia
  • Kamal H. Khayat
  • Olafur H. Wallevik
Original Article

Abstract

The determination of the exact rheological properties, in fundamental units, of cementitious materials has become gradually a necessary step in the domain of concrete science. Several types of rheometers and their corresponding transformation equations are described in the literature. In this paper, the Reiner–Riwlin transformation equation, valid for coaxial cylinders rheometers, is developed for the modified Bingham model, which is an extension of the Bingham model with a second order term in the shear rate. The established transformation is shown to be compatible with the Reiner–Riwlin equation for the Bingham and Herschel–Bulkley models. Its validation is further proven by means of numerical simulations applied on experimental data. The yield stress values for the three rheological models (applied on the same experimental data) are compared with the yield stress calculated by means of slump flow values. Results showed that the modified Bingham model results in the most stable yield stress values, which are independent of the non-linear behaviour.

Keywords

Rheology Modified Bingham Yield stress Shear-thickening Coaxial cylinders rheometer 

List of symbols

A

Area (m2)

C

Second order term of second order curve in T-N graph: modified Bingham model (Nm s2)

c

Second order term: modified Bingham model (Pa s2)

G

Intercept of curve in T-N graph with T-axis (Nm)

g

Gravitational acceleration (m/s2)

H

Inclination of straight line in T-N graph: Bingham model (Nm s)

H

First order term of second order curve in T-N graph: modified Bingham model (Nm s)

h

Height of the inner cylinder submerged in concrete in coaxial cylinders rheometer (m)

I

Unit dyadic

K

Consistency factor: Herschel–Bulkley model (Pa sn)

N

Rotational velocity measured in coaxial cylinders rheometer (rps)

n

Consistency index (power); Herschel–Bulkley model (−)

n

Unit normal vector

p

Pressure (Pa)

R

Spread radius of slump flow (m)

Ri

Inner cylinder radius of coaxial cylinders rheometer (m)

Ro

Outer cylinder radius of coaxial cylinders rheometer (m)

Rp

Theoretical plug radius (m)

Rs

Min(R p, R o) = Boundary between sheared and unsheared material (m)

r

Radial coordinate (m)

r

Vector location (m)

S

Deviator stress tensor (Pa)

T

Torque measured in coaxial cylinders rheometer (Nm)

T

Extra stress tensor (Pa)

t

Time (s)

U

Velocity vector (m/s)

V

Volume of slump flow sample (m3)

\( \dot{\gamma } \)

Shear rate (s−1)

δ

Regularization parameter for yield stress in numerical simulations (s−1)

\( {\dot{\varvec{\varepsilon }}} \)

Rate of deformation tensor (s−1)

η

Apparent viscosity (Pa s)

μ

Linear term: modified Bingham model (Pa s)

μp

Plastic viscosity: Bingham model (Pa s)

ρ

Density (kg/m3)

\( {\varvec{\sigma}} \)

(total) Stress tensor (Pa)

τ

Shear stress (Pa)

τ0

Yield stress (Pa)

Ωo

Angular velocity at outer radius (rad/s)

ω(r)

Angular velocity at radius r (rad/s)

IIs

Second invariant of deviator stress tensor (Pa2)

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the Belgian Building Research Institute (BBRI) and the Katholic University Leuven (KULeuven) for the use of their ConTec Viscometer 5.

References

  1. 1.
    Wallevik OH (2003) Rheology, a scientific approach to develop self-compacting concrete. Proc 3rd Int. RILEM Symp SCC, Reykjavik, pp 23–31Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wallevik JE (2003) Rheology of particle suspensions: fresh concrete, mortar and cement paste with various types of lignosulfonates. Ph-D dissertation, Department of Structural Engineering, The Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim. www.diva-portal.org
  3. 3.
    Roussel N, Geiker MR, Dufour F, Thrane LN, Szabo P (2007) Computational modeling of concrete flow: general overview. Cem Concr Res 37:1298–1307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Thrane LN (2007) Form filling with self-compacting concrete. PhD dissertation, Danish Technological Institute. Technical University of Denmark, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Assaad J, Khayat KH (2004) Assessment of thixotropy of self-consolidating concrete and concrete-equivalent-mortar: effect of binder composition and content. ACI Mater J 101–5:400–408Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Roussel N, Cussigh F (2008) Distinct-layer casting of SCC: the mechanical consequences of thixotropy. Cem Conc Res 38:624–632CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jolin M, Burns D, Bissonnette B, Gagnon F, Bolduc L-S (2009) Understanding the Pumpability of Concrete. Proc. of the 11th Conf. on Shotcrete for Underground Support, DavosGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Feys D, De Schutter G, Verhoeven R, Khayat KH (2010) Similarities and differences of pumping conventional and self-consolidating concrete. Proc 6th Int RILEM Symp 4th North-American Conf SCC, Vol. I, Montreal, pp 153–162Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kaplan D (2001) Pumping of concretes. PhD dissertation (in French), Laboratoire Central des Ponts et Chaussées, ParisGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Geiker MR, Brandl M, Thrane LN, Bager DH, Wallevik OH (2002) The effect of measuring procedure on the apparent rheological properties of self-compacting concrete. Cem Concr Res 32:1791–1795CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ferraris CF and Martys NS (2012) Concrete rheometers. In: Roussel N (ed) Understanding the rheology of concrete. Woodhead Publishing, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    De Larrard F, Hu C, Sedran T, Szitkar JC, Joly M, Claux F, Derkx F (1997) A new rheometer for soft to fluid fresh concrete. ACI Mater J 94–3:234–243Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tattersall GH, Banfill PFG (1983) The rheology of fresh concrete. Pitman, LondonGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cyr M, Legrand C, Mouret M (2000) Study of the shear thickening effect of superplasticizers on the rheological behaviour of cement pastes containing or not mineral additives. Cem Concr Res 30:1477–1483CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    de Larrard F, Ferraris CF, Sedran T (1998) Fresh concrete: a Herschel–Bulkley material. Mater Struct 31:494–498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Feys D, Verhoeven R, De Schutter G (2008) Fresh self compacting concrete: a shear thickening material. Cem Concr Res 38:920–929CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Feys D, Verhoeven R, De Schutter G (2009) Why is fresh self-compacting concrete shear thickening? Cem Concr Res 39:510–523CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Heirman G, Vandewalle L, Van Gemert D, Wallevik OH (2008) Integration approach of the Couette inverse problem of powder type self-compacting concrete in a wide-gap concentric cylinder rheometer. J Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech 150:93–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Heirman G (2011) Modelling and quantification of the effect of mineral additions on the rheology of fresh powder type self-compacting concrete. PhD dissertation, KULeuven, LeuvenGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Yahia A (2011) Shear-thickening behavior of high-performance cement grouts — Influencing mix-design parameters. Cem Concr Res 41:230–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Yahia A, Khayat KH (2001) Analytical models for estimating yield stress of high-performance pseudoplastic grout. Cem Concr Res 31:731–738CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Macosko CW (1994) Rheology Principles, measurements and applications. Wiley-VCH, New-YorkGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Reiner M (1949) Deformation and flow. An elementary introduction to theoretical rheology. H.K. Lewis & Co, Limited, Great BritainGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Feys D, Verhoeven R, De Schutter G (2007) Evaluation of time independent rheological models applicable to fresh Self-Compacting Concrete. Appl Rheol 17–5:56244Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Feys D, Heirman G, De Schutter G, Verhoeven R, Vandewalle L, Van Gemert D (2007) Comparison of two concrete rheometers for shear thickening behaviour of SCC. Proc 5th Int RILEM Symp SCC, Ghent, pp 365–370Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Yeow YL, Ko WC, Tang PPP (2000) Solving the inverse problem of Couette viscometry by Tikhonov regularization. J Rheol 44–6:1335–1351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ancey C (2005) Solving the Couette inverse problem using a wavelet-vaguelette decomposition. J Rheol 49–2:441–460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Estellé P, Lanos C, Perrot A (2008) Processing the Couette viscometry data using a Bingham approximation in shear rate calculation. J Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech 154:31–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Malvern LE (1969) Introduction to the mechanics of continuous medium. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Edwards CH Jr, Penney DE (1986) Calculus and analytical geometry, 2nd edn. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Wallevik JE (2001) Rheological measurements on a high yield value bingham fluid with low agitation. In: Friis A, Mason SL (eds) Annual Transactions of the Nordic Rheology Society, vol. 9. ISBN 87-988486-0-7Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Heirman G, Van Gemert D, Vandewalle L, Toorman E, Wallevik JE, Wallevik OH (2009) Influence of Plug Flow when Testing Shear Thickening Powder Type Self-Compacting Concrete in a Wide-Gap Concentric Cylinder Rheometer, Proc. 3rd Intern. RILEM Symp on the Rheology of Cement Suspensions such as Fresh Concrete, Reykjavik (Eds. Wallevik OH, Kubens S, Oesterheld S), 283–290Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Wallevik JE (2008) Minimizing end-effects in the coaxial cylinders viscometer: viscoplastic flow inside the ConTec BML viscometer 3. J Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech 155:116–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Feys D (2009) Interactions between rheological Properties and Pumping of Self-Compacting Concrete, Ph-D dissertation, Ghent University, GhentGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Yan J, James AE (1997) The yield surface of viscoelastic and plastic fluids in a vane viscometer. J Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech 70:237–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Keentok M, Milthorpe JF, O’Donovan E (1985) On the shearing zone around rotating vanes in plastic liquids: theory and experiment. J Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech 17:23–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Barnes HA, Nguyen QD (2001) Rotating vane rheometry: a review. J Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech 98:1–14zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Oldroyd JG (1947) A rational formulation of the equations of plastic flow for a Bingham solid. Proc Camb Philos Soc 43:100–105MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Oldroyd JG (1947) Two-dimensional plastic flow of a Bingham solid. Proc Camb Philos Soc 43:383–395MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Beverly CR, Tanner RI (1992) Numerical analysis of three-dimensional bingham plastic flow. J Non-Newton Fluid Mech 42:85–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Langtangen HP (1999) Computational partial differential equations, numerical methods and diffpack programming. Lecture Notes in Computational Science and Engineering, Springer, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Barnes HA, Hutton JF, Walters K (1989) An introduction to rheology. Elsevier Science, AmsterdamzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Bercovier M, Engelman M (1980) A finite element method for incompressible non-Newtonian flows. J Comput Phys 36:313–326MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Taylor AJ, Wilson SDR (1997) Conduit flow of an incompressible, yield-stress fluid. J Rheol 41–1:93–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Burgos GR, Alexandrou AN, Entov V (1999) On the determination of yield surfaces in Herschel–Bulkley fluids. J Rheol 43–3:463–483CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Mase GE (1970) Schaums outline series: theory and problems of continuum mechanics. McGraw-Hill Inc., New YorkGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Versteeg HK, Malalasekera W (2007) An introduction to computational fluid dynamics: the finite volume method, 2nd edn. Pearson Education Limited, EnglandGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Irgens F (2008) Continuum mechanics. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Roussel N, Coussot P (2005) “Fifty-cent rheometer” for yield stress measurements: from slump to spreading flow. J Rheol 49:705–718CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© RILEM 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dimitri Feys
    • 1
    Email author
  • Jon E. Wallevik
    • 2
  • Ammar Yahia
    • 1
  • Kamal H. Khayat
    • 1
    • 3
  • Olafur H. Wallevik
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Concrete Research Division, Department of Civil EngineeringUniversité de SherbrookeSherbrookeCanada
  2. 2.ICI Rheocenter, Innovation Center IcelandReykjavik UniversityReykjavikIceland
  3. 3.Department of Civil, Architectural and Environmental EngineeringMissouri University of Science and TechnologyRollaUSA

Personalised recommendations