Tunneling and Underground Construction 2014
DOI: 10.1061/9780784413449.043
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Interpretation of Viscometer Test Results for Polymer Support Fluids

Abstract: Polymer support fluids have been successfully used for the construction of bored piles (drilled shafts) and diaphragm walls for many years and yet there is currently little guidance on the interpretation of their rheological properties from viscometer test results. In particular, there is confusion about the choice of an appropriate rheological model for this type of fluid. The use of oilfield units by some has also added to the confusion. To promote the use of SI units, this paper summarizes conversion factor… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
0
6
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…A non-linear behavior is observed for all samples. Samples containing 2% w/v obtained after 24 h of reaction show a clear Bingham behavior[ 34 ]. Results also show a decrease of the equivalent viscosity by increasing the alginate concentration for samples obtained after 24 h of reaction, while no trend was observed for samples obtained after 8 h of reaction.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A non-linear behavior is observed for all samples. Samples containing 2% w/v obtained after 24 h of reaction show a clear Bingham behavior[ 34 ]. Results also show a decrease of the equivalent viscosity by increasing the alginate concentration for samples obtained after 24 h of reaction, while no trend was observed for samples obtained after 8 h of reaction.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Time taken for rotation (s), temperature (Fahrenheit) and rate of rotation (RPM) were set. Following that, shear stress and viscosity values for different RPM settings of 600 RPM, 300 RPM, 3 RPM (after 10 s of rest) and 3 RPM (After 10 min of rest) were taken (Lam and Jefferis 2014). From those values, the following calculations in Table 2 were made:…”
Section: Viscometer Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A more accurate method would be to plot a rheogram with a shear rate and shear stress as was used by Ho et al [37] and Srivatsa et al [38] despite the fact that Ho et al [37] used a more advanced rheometer instead of FANN ® viscometer. Although some calculations are needed, the rheogram of shear stress vs shear rate can be plotted by converting the FANN ® viscometer reading into shear stress and shear rate as explained by Lam and Je eris [39]. Rheological properties behaviour can then be explained by interpreting the curve in the rheogram.…”
Section: Rheological Testmentioning
confidence: 99%