Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Investigating the transient response of a shear thickening fluid using the split Hopkinson pressure bar technique

  • Original Contribution
  • Published:
Rheologica Acta Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The split Hopkinson pressure bar (SHPB) technique is implemented to evaluate the transient response of a colloidal suspension exhibiting shear thickening at strain rates and timescales never before explored in a laboratory instrument. These suspensions are shown to exhibit a discontinuous transition from fluid-like (shear thinning) to solid-like (shear thickening) behavior when evaluated using rotational rheometry. The effect of loading rate on this transition time is studied for a particle volume fraction of 0.54 using the SHPB technique. It is shown that the time required for transition to occur decreases logarithmically with loading rate. From these results, we conclude that transition is not triggered by a characteristic shear rate, but rather a critical shear strain is required. Results from SHPB experiments performed up to Peclet numbers of order 107 are presented and discussed for 0.50, 0.52, and 0.54 particle volume fraction suspensions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Åhrström B, Lindqvist S, Höglund E, Sundin K (2002) Modified split Hopkinson pressure bar method for determination of the dilatation–pressure relationship of lubricants used in elastohydrodynamic lubrication. Proc Inst Mech Eng, Part J J Eng Tribol 216(J2):63–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnes HA (1989) Shear-thickening (“dilatancy”) in suspensions of Nonaggregating solid particles dispersed in Newtonian liquids. J Rheol 33(2):329–366

    Article  CAS  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Bender JW, Wagner NJ (1995) Optical measurement of the contributions of colloidal forces to the rheology of concentrated suspensions. J Colloid Interface Sci 172:171–184

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bender JW, Wagner NJ (1996) Reversible shear thickening in monodisperse and bidisperse colloidal dispersions. J Rheol 40(5):899–916

    Article  CAS  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Boersma WH, Laven J, Stein HN (1990) Shear thickening (dilatancy) in concentrated dispersions. AIChE J 36(3):321–332

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Brady JF, Bossis G (1988) Stokesian dynamics. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 20:111–157

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Clyens S, Evans C, Johnson K (1982) Measurement of the viscosity of supercooled liquids at high shear rates with a Hopkinson torsion bar. Proc R Soc Lond A 381:195–214

    Article  CAS  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Coussot P, Wagner NJ (2009) The future of suspension rheophysics: comments on the 2008 workshop. Rheol Acta 48(8):827–829

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • D’Haene P, Mewis J, Fuller GG (1993) Scattering dichroism measurements of flow-induced structure of a shear thickening suspension. J Colloid Interface Sci 156:350–358

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Decker MJ, Halbach CJ, Nam CH, Wagner NJ, Wetzel ED (2007) Stab resistance of shear thickening fluid (STF)-treated fabrics. Compos Sci Technol 67:565–578

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer C, Braun SA, Bourban P-E, Michaud V, Plummer CJG, Månson J-AE (2006) Dynamic properties of sandwich structures with integrated shear-thickening fluids. Smart Mater Struct 15:1467–1475. doi:10.1088/0964-1726/15/5/036

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Gama BA (2004) Split Hopkinson pressure bar technique: experiments, analyses and applications. Dissertation, University of Delaware

  • Gama BA, Lopatnikov SL, Gillespie JW Jr (2004) Hopkinson bar experimental technique: a critical review. Appl Mech Rev 57(4):223–250

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grey GT III (2000) Classic split-Hopkinson pressure bar testing. In: ASM handbook 8 mechanical testing and evaluation, pp 488–496

  • Helber R, Doncker F, Bung R (1990) Vibration attenuation by passive stiffness switching mounts. J Sound Vib 138(1):47–57

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Hiemenz PC, Rajagopalan R (1997) Principles of colloid and surface chemistry, 3rd edn. Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman RL (1972) Discontinuous and dilatant viscosity behavior in concentrated suspensions. I. Observation of a flow instability. Trans Soc Rheol 16(1):155–173

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman RL (1974) Discontinuous and dilatant viscosity behavior in concentrated suspensions. II. Theory and experimental tests. J Colloid Interface Sci 46(3):491–506

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hoglund E, Larsson R (1997) Modeling non-steady EHL with focus on lubricant density. Elastohydrodynamics 32:511–521

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kaffashi B, O’Brien VT, Mackay ME, Underwood SM (1997) Elastic-like and viscous-like components of the shear viscosity for nearly hard sphere, Brownian suspensions. J Colloid Interface Sci 187:22–28

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kalman DP, Wagner NJ (2009) Microstructure of shear-thickening concentrated suspensions determined by flow-USANS. Rheol Acta 48(8):897–908

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kenner VH (1980) The fluid Hopkinson bar. Exp Mech 20(7):226–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolsky H (1949) An investigation of the mechanical properties of materials at very high rates of loading. Proc Phys Soc 62(II-B):676–700

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuzma D (1967) Fluid inertia effects in squeeze films. Appl Sci Res 18:15–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larson RG (1999) The structure and rheology of complex fluids. Oxford University Press, Inc., New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Laun HM, Bung R, Schmidt F (1991) Rheology of extremely shear thickening polymer dispersions (passively viscosity switching fluids). J Rheol 35(6):999–1034

    Article  CAS  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Laun HM, Bung R, Hess S, Loose W, Hess O, Hahn K, Hädicke E, Hingmann R, Schimdt F, Linder P (1992) Rheological and small angle neutron scattering investigation of shear-induced particle structures of concentrated polymer dispersions submitted to plane Poiseuille and Couette flow. J Rheol 36(4):743–787

    Article  CAS  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Lee YS, Wagner NJ (2003) Dynamic properties of shear thickening colloidal suspensions. Rheol Acta 42:199–208. doi:10.1007/s00397-002-0290-7

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lee YS, Wetzel ED, Wagner NJ (2003) The ballistic impact characteristics of Kevlar woven fabrics impregnated with a colloidal shear thickening fluid. J Mater Sci 38:2825–2833

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Li Z, Lambros J (1999) Determination of the dynamic response of brittle composites by the use of the split Hopkinson pressure bar. Compos Sci Technol 59:1097–1107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lim AS, Gama BA, Gillespie JW Jr (2008a) Implementing the split-Hopkinson pressure bar technique for shear thickening fluid evaluation. In: Proceedings of the society of rheology, Monterey, CA

    Google Scholar 

  • Lim AS, Lopatnikov SL, Gillespie JW Jr (2008b) Implementing the split-Hopkinson pressure bar technique for viscous fluid evaluation. In: Proceedings of the society for experimental mechanics, Orlando, FL

    Google Scholar 

  • Lim AS, Lopatnikov SL, Gillespie JW Jr (2009) Development of the split-Hopkinson pressure bar technique for viscous fluid characterization. Polym Test 28:891–900. doi:10.1016/j.polymertesting.2009.08.002

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lynch CT (ed) (1980) CRC Handbook of materials science, vol 1. CRC Press, Cleveland

    Google Scholar 

  • Maranzano BJ, Wagner NJ (2001a) The effects of interparticle interactions and particle size on reversible shear thickening: hard-sphere colloidal dispersions. J Rheol 45(5):1205–1222

    Article  CAS  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Maranzano BJ, Wagner NJ (2001b) The effects of particle-size on reversible shear thickening of concentrated colloidal dispersions. J Chem Phys 114(23):10514–10527

    Article  CAS  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Maranzano BJ, Wagner NJ (2002) Flow-small angle neutron scattering measurements of colloidal dispersion microstructure evolution through the shear thickening transition. J Chem Phys 117(22):10291–10302. doi:10.1063/1.1519253

    Article  CAS  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • O’Brien VT, Mackay ME (2000) Stress components and shear thickening of concentrated hard sphere suspensions. Langmuir 16:7931–7938. doi:10.1021/la000050h

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ogawa K (2003) Dynamic behavior of viscous fluid at high rate of shear using through bar method. J Phys IV France 110:435–440

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ravichandran G, Subhash G (1994) Evaluation of ceramic specimen geometries used in split Hopkinson pressure bar. DYMAT J I:193–210

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinovitch SN, Hayes WC, McMahon TA (1995) Energy-shunting hip padding system attenuates femoral impact force in a simulated fall. J Biochem Eng 117:409–413

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sasahara K, Sakurai M, Nitta K (1998) Volume and compressibility changes for short poly(ethylene glycol)-water system at various temperatures. Colloid Polym Sci 276(7):643–647

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tan VBC, Tay TE, Teo WK (2005) Strengthening fabric armour with silica colloidal suspensions. Int J Solids Struct 42:1561–1576

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vermant J, Solomon MJ (2005) Flow-induced structure in colloidal suspensions. J Phys Condens Matter 17:R187–R216. doi:10.1088/0953-8984/17/4/R02

    Article  CAS  ADS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge Eric D. Wetzel, Ph.D. (Army Research Laboratory), Bazle A. Gama, Ph.D., Joseph M. Deitzel, Ph.D. (University of Delaware Center for Composite Materials), David M. Stepp (Army Research Office), Caroline H. Nam, Ph.D., and Dennis Kalman (University of Delaware Department of Chemical Engineering) for their helpful discussions and contributions to this research. Nick Waite (University of Delaware Department of Electrical Engineering) has also contributed greatly to the development of the current SHPB experimental setup.

Research was sponsored by the US Army Research Office and US Army Research Laboratory and was accomplished under Cooperative Agreement Number #W911NF-05-2-0006. The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as representing the official policies, either expressed or implied, of the Army Research Office, Army Research Laboratory, or the US Government. The US Government is authorized to reproduce and distribute reprints for Government purposes notwithstanding any copyright notation hereon.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Composite Materials, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, University of Delaware, Newark, DE, 19716, USA

    Amanda S. Lim & John W. Gillespie Jr.

  2. Center for Composite Materials, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Delaware, Newark, DE, 19716, USA

    Sergey L. Lopatnikov & John W. Gillespie Jr.

  3. Center for Composite Materials, Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Delaware, Newark, DE, 19716, USA

    Norman J. Wagner

Authors
  1. Amanda S. Lim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sergey L. Lopatnikov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Norman J. Wagner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. John W. Gillespie Jr.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to John W. Gillespie Jr..

Appendix

Appendix

Examining the results for the lower concentration suspensions (ϕ = 0.50 and 0.52, Figs. 17 and 18), it is observed that these materials experience a weaker loading transition as compared to the more concentrated suspension. However, nonlinear behavior similar to the 0.54 volume fraction suspension is still evident. In Figs. 17 and 18, it can be noted that there is less stiffness in the post-transition material as the highest stresses achieved are generally lower for comparable strain rates.

Fig. 17
figure 17

Compressive strain at the onset of thickening vs. maximum compressive strain rate for the 54 vol.% STF

Full size image
Fig. 18
figure 18

Compressive stress at the onset of thickening vs. maximum compressive strain rate for the 54 vol.% STF

Full size image

Due to this lack of discontinuous behavior on the stress–strain rate plot, determining the transition time, as well as the strain at the onset of transition, is very difficult for the case of the 0.50 volume fraction silica suspension. In the case of the 0.52 silica suspension, it is possible to identify the strain at the onset of transition by analyzing the acceleration behavior during loading as seen in Fig. 10. While a decrease in acceleration does not typically occur for this volume fraction, a comparison of the strain at the point of inflection in the acceleration vs. time plot for these experiments has shown that strain at the onset of transition corresponds well with that for the 0.54 silica suspension.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lim, A.S., Lopatnikov, S.L., Wagner, N.J. et al. Investigating the transient response of a shear thickening fluid using the split Hopkinson pressure bar technique. Rheol Acta 49, 879–890 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00397-010-0463-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00397-010-0463-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation