Next Article in Journal
Consolidation of Fir Wood by Poly(vinyl butyral-co-vinyl alcohol-co-vinyl acetate) Treatment: Study of Surface and Mechanical Characteristics
Next Article in Special Issue
Study on Viscoelastic Properties of Asphalt Mixtures Incorporating SBS Polymer and Basalt Fiber under Freeze–Thaw Cycles
Previous Article in Journal
Relationship between the Ionization Degree and the Inter-Polymeric Aggregation of the Poly(maleic acid-alt-octadecene) Salts Regarding Time
Previous Article in Special Issue
Impact of Spacer Nature and Counter Ions on Rheological Behavior of Novel Polymer-Cationic Gemini Surfactant Systems at High Temperature
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Deformation Properties of Concentrated Metal-in-Polymer Suspensions under Superimposed Compression and Shear

by
Alexander Ya. Malkin
*,
Valery G. Kulichikhin
,
Anton V. Mityukov
and
Sergey V. Kotomin
Institute of Petrochemical Synthesis, Russian Academy of Sciences, 119919 Moscow, Russia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Polymers 2020, 12(5), 1038; https://doi.org/10.3390/polym12051038
Submission received: 10 April 2020 / Revised: 27 April 2020 / Accepted: 30 April 2020 / Published: 2 May 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Polymer Rheology: Fundamentals and Applications)

Abstract

:
Concentrated metal-in-polymer suspensions (55 vol.% and 60 vol.%) of aluminum powder dispersed in low molecular weight polyethylene glycol) demonstrate elastoplastic properties under compression and shear. The rheological behavior of concentrated suspensions was studied in a rotational rheometer with uniaxial compression (squeezing), as well as shearing superimposed on compression. At a high metal concentration, the elasticity of the material strongly increases under strain, compared with the plasticity. The elastic compression modulus increases with the growth of normal stress. Changes in the shear modulus depend on both normal and shear stresses. At a low compression force, the shear modulus is only slightly dependent on the shear stress. However, high compression stress leads to a decrease in the shear modulus by several orders with the growth of the shear stress. The decrease in the modulus seems to be rather unusual for compacted matter. This phenomenon could be explained by the rearrangement of the specific organization of the suspension under compression, leading to the creation of inhomogeneous structures and their displacement at flow, accompanied by wall slip. The obtained set of rheological characteristics of highly loaded metal-in-polymer suspensions is the basis for understanding the behavior of such systems in the powder injection molding process.

Graphical Abstract

1. Introduction

Suspensions are permanent and important objects for rheological studies. A diverse range of suspensions can be seen in nature, applied to various fields for technical and everyday use, and as a subject of scientific interest for exploring the fundamental relationships between the structure and properties of the matter. This is a topic of numerous research papers and comprehensive reviews, covering various aspects of the rheology of non-Brownian suspensions, including rather concentrated compositions [1,2].
In our previous study, we considered the rheological properties of similar suspensions covering the whole concentration range in shearing [3].
The previous rheology analysis of concentrated suspensions showed concentrations close to 50–55% to be the intermediate range corresponding to the transition from materials which can flow (liquids) to materials which cannot flow (solids), though the latter can demonstrate irreversible deformations. The concentration range between 55% and 65% is especially important for several applications of concentrated suspensions because a manufacturer desires to have as high a concentration of a solid component as possible, while maintaining the material integrity and plasticity.
Here, it is worth mentioning that the term “plasticity” is frequently used in the rheological literature with two different meanings. The study of complex, multi-component media such as many colloid liquids, emulsions, suspensions, filled polymer melts, etc., has shown the existence of a transition from elastic deformation in a solid-like state to irreversible deformations of flow happening at some threshold of stress, which corresponds to the breakup of the rigid or soft material structure [4]. In this case, the term “plasticity” means the possibility of flow, i.e., the unlimited growth of deformations while the constant stress acts. However, another case is possible. A solid body is elastic, but at some levels of stress, part of its deformation becomes irreversible, yet restricted by the limited level dependent on stress. So, deformations exhibit limited growth at applied levels of stress (opposite to flow) and these ultimately irreversible (“plastic”) deformations correspond to the given stress. The second type of plasticity is observed in highly concentrated suspensions and only this definition of plasticity will be considered below.
There is an issue concerning the behavior of concentrated suspensions under various geometries of deformation. A traditional method of testing concentrated suspensions is uniaxial compression, where a sample is placed between two parallel plates and compressed so the material undergoes squeezing. The flow dynamics of a Newtonian liquid in this geometry, as well as for viscoplastic liquids, meet the classical von Mises condition of the solid-to-liquid transition, (e.g., as considered by Sherwood and Durban [5] and Adams et al. [6]). A similar approach was proposed by Roussel and Lanos [7]. Indeed, using the von Mises criterion is a rather standard approach when dealing with solid-to-plastic transitions. However, there are two limitations. First, this approach is related to linear elastic materials. Second, as mentioned above, the flow is usually meant to occur under plasticity. In this work, we are faced with a more general rheological case—the non-linear behavior of materials under study and limited irreversible deformations. There is increasing interest, not just in engineering materials, but also for multi-component suspensions that have various areas of application, including materials, compositions for the modern technology of power molding, etc.
The principal interest in formulating the basic equations and in analyzing the experimental results consists of understanding the conditions of the appearance of wall slip. General discussions concerning causes and consequences of wall slip were provided by Malkin and Patlazhan [8] and considered by Cloitre and Bonnecaze [9], and He at al. [10] directly related this to highly concentrated suspensions, which are the focus of the current study.
A special field for analyzing the rheology of moderately concentrated suspensions is high shear rates, which leads to an increase in the viscosity up to the loss of fluidity (jamming) or the jump-like mechanical glass transition (continuous or discontinuous shear thickening) [11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19]. However, when discussing these concentrated suspensions, it is assumed that a medium retains its integrity in all cases.
A rather interesting phenomenon observed in experiments with concentrated dispersions is the formation of separate clusters, which can be treated as relatively regular mesoscopic domains [20,21]. Such structure elements move relative to each other as a whole. In these conditions, the deformation becomes macro-inhomogeneous and localized and this results in shear banding, which has also been observed in the squeezing flow of entangled polymer melts [22]. Similarly, large-scale structure anisotropy in the deformation of concentrated gels has been observed [23]. The inevitable appearance of structure anisotropy in the deformation of granular media was proven by Alonso Marroquín et al. [24] and the heterogeneous deformation in concentrated suspensions was also described by Kawabata et al. [25]. Such heterogeneity of the deformations is evidently inherent for all multicomponent materials, including not only rigid but also soft matter, e.g., concentrated emulsions [26]. Computer modeling confirmed that structure anisotropy is the result of squeezing flow [27].
Inhomogeneity in the deformation of concentrated suspensions is analogous to the displacement of granular media [28,29]. Therefore, the following general conclusion concerning the mechanism of deformation of any multi-component materials should be accepted: ‘Shear localization is a generic feature of flows in yield stress fluids and soft glassy materials’ [30]. It is then necessary to agree with the next maxim: ‘A complex fluid exhibits unexpected heterogeneous flow’ [31]. This fact makes it difficult to study the rheological properties of concentrated suspensions but does not preclude the need for a quantitative study of the squeezing of highly concentrated suspensions.
The important component of the rheological properties of different fluids is the elasticity or elastic recoil, superimposed on their irreversible deformations. A lot of fundamental studies on the elasticity of polymer melts and solutions have been published from the early days of rheology. It is necessary to mention the classical works of Weissenberg, including the famous Weissenberg effect. In addition, later publications demonstrated elasticity in shear and elongation [32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39] and generalized it in the classical monograph of Lodge [40]. However, all these works belong to the field of polymer rheology and it is difficult to find studies on suspension elasticity. Meanwhile, elastic deformations are rather important for estimating the technological properties of concentrated suspension and that is why they will be considered within this study.
Thus, in studying the rheological behavior of concentrated non-colloidal suspensions, it is of interest to elucidate how squeezing affects the development of elastic and plastic shear deformations in concentrated suspensions. This work is an attempt to clear up these questions for the 55 and 60 vol.% concentrations of suspensions, which are of the general rheological interest, as was discussed above, as well as of great technological interest, in particular for the powder injection molding (PIM) of feedstocks.

2. Materials and Methods

The main materials of this study were 55% and 60% suspensions of aluminum (Al) powder dispersed in the low molecular weight polyethylene glycol (PEG) with a viscosity of 0.11 Pa*s at 25 °C. The average size of Al particles was 24 mkm and its density was 2700 kg m−3. Suspensions were prepared by mechanically mixing Al powder with PEG. All operations were done manually due to the high viscosity of the mixture.
A microphotograph of a sample of the typical 60% suspension is shown in Figure 1. Particle distribution is seen to be generally homogeneous.
All rheological experiments were performed on a RS-600 (Thermo Haake, Karlsruhe, Germany) rheometer at 25 ± 1 °C. Two versions of operating units were used: a plate–plate pair with smooth surfaces, with the radius R = 20 mm (the lower plate was made of steel and the disposable upper plate was made of Al) and a plate–plate pair with rough surfaces. The gap between plates was 2 mm and the area of contact was 1.26 × 10−3 m2.
The shear experiments were carried out at the given shear stress mode in the range of 1000–7000 Pa. Then, the development of shear deformation over time followed. The main task of these experiments was to clear up the role of compression on the rheological behavior of concentrated suspensions at shear.
The compression (squeezing) experiments were carried out with the same initial distance between plates. The measured value was the gap between plates after applying a normal force, which varied in the range corresponding to the normal stresses, σE, from 4–25 kPa.
The stationary degree of compression was reached very fast and its value was a function of the applied stress. No further squeezing (flow) after reaching this stationary degree of compression took place. Then, the applied force was reduced to the minimal value of 8 Pa and the elastic recoil was measured. The difference between the initial gap and the gap after elastic recoil is a fraction of irreversible (plastic) deformation.
In addition to the rheological behavior under pure compression, we examined the behavior of compressed samples (maintaining a constant normal force) under shearing. The duration of shear loading was 120 s. The same time regime was used for elastic recoil in shearing. The latter allowed us to calculate the shear elastic modulus.

3. Results and Discussion

Let us consider the deformation under the compression of concentrated suspensions and changes in compression and shear modulus. The total deformation of the materials under compression ε , consisting of elastic ε e and plastic parts is shown in Figure 2.
The plastic deformation under compression is much higher than the elastic one, although the elasticity increases in the transition from 55% to 60% suspension, thus the plasticity is suppressed. This is evident from the analysis of Figure 3, where the dependence of the ratio of elastic to plastic strain under squeezing force is plotted, reflecting the transition from the viscoelastic to the elastoplastic rheological state. As shown in our previous paper [3], 50% is the threshold concentration for the transition from viscoplastic to elastoplastic behavior for the composition under study.
This transition is reflected in the value of the elastic modulus under compression (Figure 4). The non-linear behavior (changes in the modulus) of the material is supposed to be related to the influence of compression on the suspension structure. Indeed, under normal compression, the rigid particles get closer to each other and the polymer layers between them become thinner. Therefore, the material structure changes and this might lead to the rise of an effective compression modulus.
In contrast, the behavior of the shear modulus under compression appears quite different. The results of measuring the shear modulus G for a sample that is simultaneously loaded by the normal force are shown in Figure 5, demonstrating the dependencies of the elastic modulus at different shear stresses G ( σ E ) on the compression stress, σ . As seen, the apparent shear modulus decreases with increasing normal stresses.
It is worth noting that the real shear stress should be estimated while taking into account the action of normal force, which also contributes to the shear stress in the tangential direction. As known, the maximal value of the shear stress related to the normal stress is σ max = σ E / 2 . The corrected total value of the shear modulus Gcor is
G c o r = σ + σ E / 2 γ e
where γ e is the elastic shear deformation.
The results of this correction are shown in Figure 6. The characteristics of the dependencies in Figure 5 and Figure 6 are similar.
One can see some differences in the behavior of the 55% and 60% suspensions. Indeed, the G values in the former case (to a certain degree) reach a plateau, while in the latter case, they continuously grow. This can be explained by the higher plasticity of the 55% suspensions, where limited possibilities for particle displacement remain. Close packing in the 60% suspensions creates a much more rigid structure, approaching the limit of the closest arrangement. Then suspension deformation can take place via the compression of the structure as a whole.
To compare the data obtained under shear and compression, let us consider the classical relationship between the Young’s modulus E and the shear modulus G for solid homogenous materials. The classical theory for solid polymers provides the following relationship [41]:
E = 2 ( 1 + μ ) G
where μ is the Poisson coefficient, which cannot exceed 0.5 for polymers.
According to our experimental results, at the limit of low stress E 5 * 10 5 P a (Figure 4), while G 1 * 10 3 P a and G 4 * 10 4 P a for 55% and 60% suspensions, respectively (Figure 6). Therefore, linear Equation (2) does not work for both suspensions. It may, however, be more reasonable to suppose that the measured elastic modulus is actually close to the modulus of the volume (compression) deformations B. If one considers not the Young modulus, E, but the modulus of compressibility (or the modulus of hydrostatic compression, B), then the relationship between B and G in the linear theory of elasticity is expressed as [41]:
B = 2 ( 1 + μ ) 3 ( 1 2 μ ) G
If it is considered that μ 0.45 for the 55% suspension, then the ratio B / G 10 correlates well with the experimental data for this material. The value of the Poisson coefficient is even higher and closer to 0.5 for the more plastic 60% suspension, which explains the higher value of the B/G ratio for this object.
A rather interesting effect of a sharp decrease (up to several decimal orders) in the shear modulus as a function of the shear stress at the pressure growth (Figure 7 reconstructed from Figure 6) has already been mentioned above. This does not happen at low compression, where the shear modulus only slightly depends on the shear stress. This effect is definitely related to the rearrangement of the spatial distribution of hard particles under compression. The phenomenon of the particle boundary mobility was considered by O’Brien and Foiles [42], who related its origin to temperature. The stress-driven mobility leading to the specific rearrangement of the space particle distribution should be a stronger factor.
The noticeable decrease in the shear modulus with shear stress growth (at a constant normal pressure) is a rather interesting phenomenon. To the best of our knowledge, this effect has not been described anywhere before. The decrease in the modulus seems quite unusual for dense suspensions. This effect can possibly be understood if it is assumed that the pressure leads to a heterogeneous mode of deformation, as was observed in numerous previous studies [28,29,30,31]. Thus, we may explain such a phenomenon by the rupture of weak cohesive bonds with the subsequent spurt of rather large blocks containing solid particles.
The experimental data show that the common peculiarity of the highly concentrated suspension is the superposition of elastic and plastic deformations. The latter is understood as irreversible (but is restricted in opposition to the flow) displacement under the imposition of constant stress. The restriction of deformations does not allow for following (irreversible deformations) and this is equivalent to local jamming. The latter is a well-known effect of highly concentrated suspensions [43,44,45].
The experimental data presented in this work, characterize the rheological behavior of highly concentrated suspensions. The general rheological equation for concentrated suspensions can be written as:
D = D e l ( σ E , σ ) + D p l ( σ E , σ )
where D is the tensor of total deformation, Del and Dpl are its elastic and plastic components, respectively, and both depend on the normal σ E and shear σ component of the stress tensor.
The form of these dependences depends on the concrete material.

4. Conclusions

Concentrated suspensions with solid phase contents of 55 and 60 vol.% are elastoplastic media that possess dominating plasticity. The latter is understood as the ability to undergo irreversible deformation under shearing and compression, which (in opposition to flow) is limited, and the value depends on the stress. Compression does not lead to squeezing flow, but does promote limited plastic deformations due to the local jamming. The shear modulus of compressed samples increases with the growth of normal stress. The comparison of shear and elastic moduli measured, respectively, in shearing and uniaxial compression showed that the elastic modulus is closer to the bulk modulus than the Young’s modulus.

Author Contributions

Supervision and preparing the paper, A.Y.M.; research organization, V.G.K.; experimental, A.V.M.; providing samples, S.V.K. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was undertaken according to Grant No.17-79-30108 of the Russian Science Foundation.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Guazzelli, É.; Pouliquen, O. Rheology of dense granular suspensions. J. Fluid. Mech. 2018, 852. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  2. Tanner, R.I. Review: Rheology of noncolloidal suspensions with non-Newtonian matrices. J. Rheol. 2019, 63, 705–717. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Malkin, A.Y.; Mityukov, A.V.; Kotomin, S.V.; Shabeko, A.A.; Kulichikhin, V.G. Elasticity and plasticity of highly concentrated noncolloidal suspensions under shear. J. Rheol. 2020, 64, 469–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Malkin, A.; Kulichikhin, V.; Ilyin, S. A modern look on yield stress fluids. Rheol. Acta 2017, 56, 177–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Sherwood, J.D.; Durban, D. Squeeze flow of a power-law viscoplastic solid. J. Non Newton. Fluid Mech. 1996, 62, 35–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Adams, M.J.; Aydin, İ.; Briscoe, B.J.; Sinha, S.K. A finite element analysis of the squeeze flow of an elasto-viscoplastic paste material. J. Non Newton. Fluid Mech. 1997, 71, 41–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Roussel, N.; Lanos, C. Plastic Fluid Flow Parameters Identification Using a Simple Squeezing Test. Appl. Rheol. 2003, 13, 132–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Malkin, A.Y.; Patlazhan, S.A. Wall slip for complex liquids—Phenomenon and its causes. Adv. Colloid Interf. Sci. 2018, 257, 42–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Cloitre, M.; Bonnecaze, R.T. A review on wall slip in high solid dispersions. Rheol. Acta 2017, 56, 283–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. He, J.; Lee, S.S.; Kalyon, D.M. Shear viscosity and wall slip behavior of dense suspensions of polydisperse particles. J. Rheol. 2018, 63, 19–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Wagner, N.J.; Brady, J.F. Shear thickening in colloidal dispersions. Phys. Today 2009, 62, 27–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  12. Cwalina, C.D.; Wagner, N.J. Material properties of the shear-thickened state in concentrated near hard-sphere colloidal dispersions. J. Rheol. 2014, 58, 949–967. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Seto, R.; Mari, R.; Morris, J.F.; Denn, M.M. Discontinuous Shear Thickening of Frictional Hard-Sphere Suspensions. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2013, 111, 218301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  14. Mutch, K.J.; Laurati, M.; Amann, C.P.; Fuchs, M.; Egelhaaf, S.U. Time-dependent flow in arrested states—Transient behaviour. Eur. Phys. J. Spec. Top. 2013, 222, 2803–2817. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  15. Brown, E.; Jaeger, H.M. Dynamic Jamming Point for Shear Thickening Suspensions. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2009, 103, 086001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  16. Denn, M.M.; Morris, J.F. Rheology of Non-Brownian Suspensions. Annu. Rev. Chem. Biomol. Eng. 2014, 5, 203–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Malkin, A.Y.; Kulichikhin, V.G. Shear thickening and dynamic glass transition of concentrated suspensions. State of the problem. Colloid J. 2016, 78, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Hsiao, L.C.; Jamali, S.; Glynos, E.; Green, P.F.; Larson, R.G.; Solomon, M.J. Rheological State Diagrams for Rough Colloids in Shear Flow. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2017, 119, 158001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Singh, A.; Mari, R.; Denn, M.M.; Morris, J.F. A constitutive model for simple shear of dense frictional suspensions. J. Rheol. 2018, 62, 457–468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Zmievski, V.; Grmela, M.; Bousmina, M.; Dagréou, S. Nonlinear microstructure and rheology of semidilute colloidal suspensions of structureless particles. Phys. Rev. E 2005, 71, 051503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Boromand, A.; Jamali, S.; Grove, B.; Maia, J.M. A generalized frictional and hydrodynamic model of the dynamics and structure of dense colloidal suspensions. J. Rheol. 2018, 62, 905–918. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Li, X.; Wang, S.-Q. Strain localization during squeeze of an entangled polymer melt under constant force. J. Rheol. 2018, 62, 491–499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Varga, Z.; Swan, J.W. Large scale anisotropies in sheared colloidal gels. J. Rheol. 2018, 62, 405–418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Alonso-Marroquín, F.; Luding, S.; Herrmann, H.J.; Vardoulakis, I. Role of anisotropy in the elastoplastic response of a polygonal packing. Phys. Rev. E 2005, 71, 051304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  25. Kawabata, H.; Nishiura, D.; Sakaguchi, H.; Tatsumi, Y. Self-organized domain microstructures in a plate-like particle suspension subjected to rapid simple shear. Rheol. Acta 2013, 52, 1–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Montesi, A.; Peña, A.A.; Pasquali, M. Vorticity Alignment and Negative Normal Stresses in Sheared Attractive Emulsions. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2004, 92, 058303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  27. Sommer, D.E.; Favaloro, A.J.; Pipes, R.B. Coupling anisotropic viscosity and fiber orientation in applications to squeeze flow. J. Rheol. 2018, 62, 669–679. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. De Cagny, H.; Fall, A.; Denn, M.M.; Bonn, D. Local rheology of suspensions and dry granular materials. J. Rheol. 2015, 59, 957–969. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Fall, A.; Ovarlez, G.; Hautemayou, D.; Mézière, C.; Roux, J.-N.; Chevoir, F. Dry granular flows: Rheological measurements of the μ(I)-rheology. J. Rheol. 2015, 59, 1065–1080. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Møller, P.C.F.; Rodts, S.; Michels, M.A.J.; Bonn, D. Shear banding and yield stress in soft glassy materials. Phys. Rev. E 2008, 77, 041507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  31. Miller, J. A complex fluid exhibits unexpected heterogeneous flow. Phys. Today 2010, 63, 18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Laun, H.M.; Münstedt, H. Elongational behaviour of a low density polyethylene melt. Rheol. Acta 1978, 17, 415–425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Laun, H.M. Prediction of Elastic Strains of Polymer Melts in Shear and Elongation. J. Rheol. 1986, 30, 459–501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Khan, S.A.; Prud’homme, R.K.; Larson, R.G. Comparison of the rheology of polymer melts in shear, and biaxial and uniaxial extensions. Rheol. Acta 1987, 26, 144–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Gabriel, C.; Münstedt, H. Creep recovery behavior of metallocene linear low-density polyethylenes. Rheol. Acta 1999, 38, 393–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Wolff, F.; Resch, J.A.; Kaschta, J.; Münstedt, H. Comparison of viscous and elastic properties of polyolefin melts in shear and elongation. Rheol. Acta 2009, 49, 95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Patham, B.; Jayaraman, K. Creep recovery of random ethylene-octene copolymer melts with varying comonomer content. J. Rheol. 2005, 49, 989–999. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Resch, J.A.; Stadler, F.J.; Kaschta, J.; Münstedt, H. Temperature Dependence of the Linear Steady-State Shear Compliance of Linear and Long-Chain Branched Polyethylenes. Macromolecules 2009, 42, 5676–5683. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Rolón-Garrido, V.H.; Resch, J.A.; Wolff, F.; Kaschta, J.; Münstedt, H.; Wagner, M.H. Prediction of steady-state viscous and elastic properties of polyolefin melts in shear and elongation. Rheol. Acta 2011, 50, 645–653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Lodge, A.S. Elastic Liquids; Academic Press: New York, NY, USA, 1964. [Google Scholar]
  41. Malkin, A.Y.; Isayev, A. Rheology: Conceptions, Methods, and Applications; ChemTec Publishing: Toronto, ON, Canada, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  42. O’Brien, C.J.; Foiles, S.M. Exploration of the mechanisms of temperature-dependent grain boundary mobility: Search for the common origin of ultrafast grain boundary motion. J. Mater. Sci. 2016, 51, 6607–6623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Fall, A.; Bertrand, F.; Hautemayou, D.; Mezière, C.; Moucheront, P.; Lemaître, A.; Ovarlez, G. Macroscopic Discontinuous Shear Thickening versus Local Shear Jamming in Cornstarch. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2015, 114, 098301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Saw, S.; Grob, M.; Zippelius, A.; Heussinger, C. Unsteady flow, clusters, and bands in a model shear-thickening fluid. Phys. Rev. E 2020, 101, 012602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  45. Rathee, V.; Blair, D.L.; Urbach, J.S. Localized transient jamming in discontinuous shear thickening. J. Rheol. 2020, 64, 299–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Figure 1. Microphotograph of a 60% suspension (scanning electron microscope JSM-6510 LV, JEOL, Japan).
Figure 1. Microphotograph of a 60% suspension (scanning electron microscope JSM-6510 LV, JEOL, Japan).
Polymers 12 01038 g001
Figure 2. Total deformation ε (black marks) and its elastic part εe (red marks) observed under compression for 55% (a) and 60% (b) suspensions.
Figure 2. Total deformation ε (black marks) and its elastic part εe (red marks) observed under compression for 55% (a) and 60% (b) suspensions.
Polymers 12 01038 g002
Figure 3. Relationship between elastic ε e and plastic ε p l components of the total deformation during compression.
Figure 3. Relationship between elastic ε e and plastic ε p l components of the total deformation during compression.
Polymers 12 01038 g003
Figure 4. Elastic compression modulus vs. normal stress.
Figure 4. Elastic compression modulus vs. normal stress.
Polymers 12 01038 g004
Figure 5. Shear modulus as a function of compression stress for 55% (a) and 60% (b) suspensions. Figures at the curves are the compression stresses.
Figure 5. Shear modulus as a function of compression stress for 55% (a) and 60% (b) suspensions. Figures at the curves are the compression stresses.
Polymers 12 01038 g005
Figure 6. Corrected values of the shear modulus as a function of compression stress for 55% (a) and 60% (b) suspensions. Figures at the curves are the compression stresses.
Figure 6. Corrected values of the shear modulus as a function of compression stress for 55% (a) and 60% (b) suspensions. Figures at the curves are the compression stresses.
Polymers 12 01038 g006
Figure 7. Shear modulus as function of shear stress at different compression stresses for 55% (a) and 60% (b) suspensions. Figures at the curves are the compression stresses.
Figure 7. Shear modulus as function of shear stress at different compression stresses for 55% (a) and 60% (b) suspensions. Figures at the curves are the compression stresses.
Polymers 12 01038 g007

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Malkin, A.Y.; Kulichikhin, V.G.; Mityukov, A.V.; Kotomin, S.V. Deformation Properties of Concentrated Metal-in-Polymer Suspensions under Superimposed Compression and Shear. Polymers 2020, 12, 1038. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym12051038

AMA Style

Malkin AY, Kulichikhin VG, Mityukov AV, Kotomin SV. Deformation Properties of Concentrated Metal-in-Polymer Suspensions under Superimposed Compression and Shear. Polymers. 2020; 12(5):1038. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym12051038

Chicago/Turabian Style

Malkin, Alexander Ya., Valery G. Kulichikhin, Anton V. Mityukov, and Sergey V. Kotomin. 2020. "Deformation Properties of Concentrated Metal-in-Polymer Suspensions under Superimposed Compression and Shear" Polymers 12, no. 5: 1038. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym12051038

APA Style

Malkin, A. Y., Kulichikhin, V. G., Mityukov, A. V., & Kotomin, S. V. (2020). Deformation Properties of Concentrated Metal-in-Polymer Suspensions under Superimposed Compression and Shear. Polymers, 12(5), 1038. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym12051038

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop