## Correction of Wall Adhesion Effects in the Centrifugal Compression of Strong Colloidal Gels

Richard Buscall 1,2,* and Daniel R Lester 3,4

- 1 MSACT Research &amp; Consulting, 34 Maritime Court, Haven Road, Exeter, EX2 8GP, UK.

2 Particulate Fluids Processing Centre, Dept of Chemical &amp; Biomolecular Engineering, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia. 3 CSIRO Mathematics, Informatics &amp; Statistics, Graham Rd, Highett VIC 3190, Australia.

- 4 School of Civil, Environmental &amp; Chemical Engineering, Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology, Melbourne, VIC 3001, Australia.

*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed at r.buscall@physics.org.

## Abstract

Several methods for measuring the compressive strength of strong particulate gels are available, including the centrifuge method, whereby the strength as a function of volumefraction is obtained parametrically from the dependence of equilibrium sediment height upon acceleration. The analysis used conventionally due to Buscall &amp; White (1987) ignores the possibility that the particulate network might adhere to the walls of the centrifuge tube, even though many types of cohesive particulate gel can be expected to. The neglect of adhesion is justifiable when the ratio of the shear to compressive strength is small, which it can be for many systems away from the gel-point, but never very near it. The errors arising from neglect of adhesion are investigated theoretically and quantified by synthesising equilibrium sediment height versus acceleration data for various degrees of adhesion and then analysing them in the conventional manner. Approximate correction factors suggested by dimensionless analysis are then tested. The errors introduced by certain other approximations made routinely in order to render the data-inversion practicable are analysed too.  For example, it shown that the error introduced by treating the acceleration vector as approximately one-dimensional is minuscule for typical centrifuge dimensions, whereas making this assumption renders the data inversion tractable.

## Introduction

Aggregated colloidal particles form compressible sediments and filter-cakes, hence the compressive strength of the particulate phase is an important property of such systems, which are sometimes called attractive or cohesive particulate gels these days. Strongly cohesive particulate gels, by which is meant systems where the interparticle attraction is strong enough to arrest activated processes such as coarsening, creep and delayed collapse, show selflimiting sedimentation and filtration, whereby the application of a given acceleration or load will lead to the formation of a stable sediment or filter-cake with a stable density profile. The scaled well-depth -U min / k T B , and hence the activation energy for particle escape and diffusion, can be very large for strongly-flocculated and coagulated colloidal particles. Hence it is found that sediments of low volume-fraction can be stable for years or even decades, as reflected by the exponential dependence of the KramersÕ time upon well-depth. Under such circumstances it is meaningful to speak of equilibrium sediment heights and filter cakes thicknesses and to attempt to calculate the curve of compressive strength as a function particulate volume-fraction ( φ ) from curves of equilibrium filter-cake thickness (or sediment thickness) versus load (or centrifugal acceleration).

Several methods have been used to measure the compressive strength as a function of density. The most direct in concept is pressure-filtration, whereby the equilibrium filter cake volume is measured for a series of applied pressure in carefully-controlled and instrumented pressurefilters [1-8]. The analysis of this test is trivial, or at least it is provided that the possibility of adhesion of the particulate network to the side-walls of the filter can be neglected, as it can be provided that 4 h τ w PD &lt;&lt; 1 , where τ w is the adhesive shear strength, P the compressive strength, and h and D are the thickness and diameter of the cake respectively [9]. τ w is taken to be  the yield stress in shear at the wall and hence it can be determined independently in principle by using, say, a suitable rheometer, fitted with smooth tools made of similar material to that the walls of the filter. Alternatively, one might simply use the true yield stress of the suspension as an upper bound estimate of the adhesive strength, since it has been found in practice that whereas τ y &gt; τ w, it is generally of similar order, with values of τ w/ τ y in the range 0.2 to 0.6 being typical of coagulated systems [8,10-13]. Another option perhaps would be to use several different filter diameters and extrapolate the results to infinite diameter, although this might not be too convenient in practice, since it requires a set of pressure filtration cells and a rather large amount of sample overall. The other three methods commonly used rely on sedimentation-equilibrium in one way or another:

- (i) Measure the equilibrium sediment height in a series of batch settling columns of increasing initial sediment height under normal gravity [1,8,14-16].
- (ii) Measure the equilibrium height likewise in a laboratory centrifuge fitted with either a swing-out (preferably) or a horizontal rotor for a series of accelerations [1,8, 10, 16-22].
- (iii) Determine the concentration versus depth profile in a tall equilibrium sediment; tall so that there is significant compression towards the bottom [8,23-29,31,32].

The principle behind each of these methods is that the unbuoyed self-weight,

$$w ( h ) = \Delta \rho g \int _ { h } ^ { h _ { \text{eq} } } \phi ( z ) d z \,, \, \text{at any height $h$ in a sediment of total equilibrium height $h_{\text{eq}$ is}$$

balanced by the compressive strength P ( φ { h }), where Δρ is the suspension inter-phase density difference, g gravitational or centrifugal acceleration, φ (h) the local volume-. This assumption only holds exactly in the absence of adhesion, where the approximate 1D force balance [9,35]

$$\frac { d P } { d z } = \Delta \rho g \phi - \frac { 4 \tau _ { _ { w } } } { D } \,,$$

shows wall adhesion effects can only be neglected when

$$\frac { 4 \tau _ { w } [ \phi ( 0 ) ] } { D \Delta \rho g \phi ( 0 ) } < < 1$$

Methods (i) and (ii) are very similar in basis, clearly: the prime reason for distinguishing between them is that adhesion affects them differently as the magnitude of the acceleration g is very different between centrifugation and batch settling. A secondary reason is that whereas the raw data in case (i) of h eq versus h 0 can be inverted exactly to obtain P ( φ ) when adhesion is negligible, one of the corresponding pair of equations used to invert centrifuge data, that for the pressure, is now approximate. The approximation used prior to this work introduced an systematic error of ca. 5% or thereabouts, typically [18]. It is however possible to do better and render the data inversion for the centrifuge method significantly more accurate, as will be shown later in the paper.

Like pressure filtration, method (iii), concentration-profiling, is fairly direct in the absence of adhesion since integration of the concentration profile gives the pressure at any height z above the base of the column, such that,

$$\Delta \rho g \int _ { z } ^ { h _ { z q } } \phi ( z ^ { \prime } ) d z ^ { \prime } \rightarrow P ( \phi [ z ] ) \,.$$

It has however been shown recently [27,28] that the method is rather sensitive to any adhesion to the walls of the tube, to the point where, by using two or more columns of different diameter [27], it is possible to invert the data and determine both the compressive and the shear strength functions fairly accurately.This method is too computationally intensive to be used routinely, however a simple correction method has been recently developed [35] based upon an approximate 1D force balance, assuming the functional form of Py ( φ ) is known.. The essential problem with the profiling method is that the errors coming from any adhesion accumulate up the φ ( z ) profile [27], as per equation (2). This can be shown clearly by consideration of (2), where the shear yield strength τ w increases nonlinearly with φ , whilst the denominator of (2) increases linearly. Hence for any tall column of modest diameter, then increasing solids volume fraction with bed depth will eventually lead to the violation of (2) and divergence of the predicted compressive yield strength somewhere down the column. Thus, the apparent or uncorrected compressive strength can appear to diverge well below the jamming limit (sometimes called point-J) when adhesion is significant in this sense [27]. The basic problem with the profiling method then is, that in order to determine P ( φ ) over a significant range of concentration, the column needs to be tall in order to obtain significant compression near the bottom. This however means working at large 4 heq / D which just amplifies errors coming from adhesion. Method (i), whereby the sediment is compressed more and more by increasing h 0 must can suffer significantly from this problem as gravitational acceleration g in (2) is relatively small, order 10 [m/s ]. Conversely, method (ii), 2 centrifugation, involves much larger acceleration, where g= ω 2 R, can be varied over the range 10 -10  [m s 2 6 -2 ], or more, depending upon the centrifuge. Here ω is the angular rotation rate and R distance from the axis of rotation to the bottom of the centrifuge tube. Furthermore, whilst increasing initial height h0 is required in sedimentation to achieve greater compressive stress in batch settling, greater pressures in centrifugation are achieved by increasing the rotation rate ω , and hence acceleration g . Hence any errors coming from the neglect of adhesion now decrease going up the P ( φ ) curve, simply because the sediment is shrinking and hence the area in contact with the wall reduces.  The same is true for pressure-filtration.  The other significant advantage of the centrifuge method is its large dynamic range, since four or

even five decades of acceleration and thus strength can be covered given a suitable centrifuge or set of centrifuges. Its main disadvantage is that it can be difficult to get close to the gelpoint since control of speed becomes a problem at very low speeds. It is likewise difficult to get close to the gel-point with pressure-filtration method because of the problem of applying and controlling small pressures.

A word needs to be said about adhesion versus cohesion perhaps. There are at least a dozen different types of interparticle attraction, or mechanisms of flocculation, known (e.g Van der Waals, depletion, liquid-bridging, incipient flocculation, charge-patch, bridging, and so on [30]). Many of these are indiscriminate inasmuch that they can produce an attraction between particles and any bounding surface too, even if the strength of attraction might depend upon the nature of the material in some cases (cf. Van der Waals), if not others (e.g. depletion). The Derjaguin approximation [30] suggests that the particle-wall force should be ca. twice the particle-particle force for spheres, everything else being equal. This could be taken to imply that the adhesive shear strength could perhaps be higher than the bulk shear strength, everything else being equal, although this has never been observed in experimentally to the best of our knowledge [8,10-13]. The two can be measured rheometrically by determining the shear yield stress twice, first using smooth shearing surfaces and then again with suitably roughened tools. An alternative is to use a vane tool and two smooth outer cylinders, one to give a narrow gap, such that yield occurs prematurely at the outer wall, and the second to give a wide gap such that yield then occurs at the vane [13]. Such data as there is in the literature is typical, supposing that the limited published data is

suggests that reasonably representative [8,10-13]. 0.2 ≤ τ w τ y ≤ 0.7

## Constitutive relationships and modelling

Quantitative constituitive relationship were needed in order to generate synthetic sedimentation-equilibrium data. More specifically, the continuum model described in detail by Lester et al. [27] requires the compressive yield stress and wall shear functions P y ( φ ) and τ w ( φ ) as input. Following Lester et al. [27], the functional form used for P y ( φ ) is

$$P ( \phi ) = k \left [ \left ( \frac { \phi } { \phi _ { g } } \right ) ^ { n } - 1 \right ] ; \ \phi > \phi _ { g }$$

This form captures the experimentally-observed rapid increase in compressive strength at solids concentrations above gel-point, along with the progression towards power-law behaviour seen typically at higher concentrations. The power-law index n has been found to be ca. 4 typically for electrolyte-flocculated systems [8,10, 16-22,35 ] and somewhat higher for (e.g.) strongly polymer-flocculated calcium carbonate, as used in [27]. Numerical data was thus generated for both n = 4 and n = 5.

Again, following Lester et al. [27] and guided by experimental data [11], it was assumed that τ w ( φ ) ≤τ y ( φ ) = γ c G ( φ ) and, in turn, that the linear shear modulus G ( φ ) = 5/3 K ( φ ) = 5/3 d P ( φ )/dln φ . It should be emphasised that here γ c is merely a parameter: it is not the true shear strain,  rather it is an apparent critical strain defined by γ c ≡τ w / G . The reason for doing so is that it is commonly found that the yield stress and modulus have similar, and in some cases identical concentration dependencies [8,10-12,19-21], meaning that the apparent yield strain, so defined, varies only weakly with volume-fraction at worst, making it a convenient parameter.  Hence in the simulations, the amount of wall adhesion can be varied conveniently by changing the value of the apparent critical shear strain γ c , defined as above, The latter has been found to vary widely in practice from one material to another. For electrolyte aggregated systems values from 0.00005 to 0.025 have been reported [8,10-12,1921] with, 0.0001 to 0.002 being more typical perhaps. Apparent critical strains of ca. 0.02 have been reported for strongly polymer flocculated suspensions and a value of ~ 0.01 has been found enough to give strong wall effects in gravity-settling even in quite large diameter tubes [27]. From considerations of the nature of colloidal inter-particle forces the critical strain might be expected to vary inversely with particle size but only weakly if at all with volume-fraction.  Published data are reasonably consistent with these notions, so far as the data go [8,10,11,21]. The functional forms used for the compressive strength combine to cause the ratio of the two, τ w ( φ ) / Py ( φ ) to decay rapidly from unity at the gel-point to an asymptotic value of 5 3 γ c at high volume-fraction, as shown in fig.1. The rate of decrease is such that the ratio of shear to compressive stress is approximately constant over most of the range, which is what is seen experimentally. On the other hand the ratio has to approach unity at the gel-point from theoretical considerations and, furthermore, the expected wall-adhesive effects have been observed experimentally near the gel-point [27,28].  Indeed, the constitutive forms used here were used to fit experimental data for CaCO3 flocculated using three different polymeric flocculants in [27].

To generate synthetic data for analysis, sedimentation curves were generated using the functional form (4) for (apparent) critical strains γ c of 0.0002, 0.002 and 0.02. The gel-point

and starting volume-fraction was taken to be 0.1, the initial column height h 0 was 0.075m and the tube diameter was 0.01m in most of the runs, latter dimensions being fairly typical of centrifuge testing.

Fig.	
  1 Input	
  material	
  functions:	
  compressive	
  strength	
  and	
  wall	
  stress,	
  the	
  latter	
  for	
  three values	
  of	
  the	
  apparent	
  critical	
  shear	
  strain.	
  The	
  ratio	
  of	
  wall	
  stress	
  to	
  compressive	
  is	
  plotted for	
  the	
  largest	
  strain.

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0450v2-figure-01b410b7-b16b-44d3-bf24-28f6da459215.jpg)

Fig. 2 Schematic	
  illustration	
  of	
  the	
  geometry	
  of	
  the	
  centrifuge	
  test.

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0450v2-figure-546674b8-0b96-44ab-b883-39ccdad94b4f.jpg)

In any real centrifuge the acceleration g = ω 2 r varies with radial distance away from the axis of rotation and hence also varies down the column of suspension. It is useful to define maximum and mean values of the magnitude of the acceleration thus, (cf. Fig. 2) ,

$$g _ { \max } = \omega ^ { 2 } R ; \ \overline { g } = \omega ^ { 2 } ( R - h _ { e q } / 2 ) \,,$$

where the spatial mean represents the acceleration per unit mass for a perfectly incompressible suspension, whereas the maximum acceleration does so in the opposite limit of zero rigidity.

As we seek a simple robust means of data inversion, in most of this work the effect of wall adhesion will be explored in the uniform g limit, since effects of spatially-varying acceleration are typically negligible. In the case of uniform g and negligible wall adhesion effects, the equilibrium curve of h versus g can be inverted exactly using the simple formulae [18],

$$P _ { y } ( \phi _ { b } ) = \Delta \rho g h _ { 0 } \phi _ { 0 } ; \quad \phi _ { b } = \frac { h _ { 0 } \phi _ { 0 } } { h _ { e q } + d h _ { e q } / d \ln g }$$

It can be seen that in this case the compressive strength then depends parametrically only upon g plus three known constants, which means that any errors coming from the neglect of wall adhesion can only affect the apparent concentration at the tube bottom φ b .

In the case of radially varying g the data can only be inverted approximately even when adhesion is absent or ignored [18]. The approximation suggested by Buscall &amp; White [18] which has been used by most workers to date reads,

$$P ( \phi _ { b } ) = \Delta \rho \overline { g } \phi _ { 0 } h _ { 0 }$$

$$\begin{array} { c } \mu \times \tau _ { b } \nu \quad - r \circ \tau _ { 0 } \cdot \tau \\ \\ \phi _ { b } = \frac { \phi _ { 0 } h _ { 0 } \left [ 1 - \frac { 1 } { 2 R } \left ( h _ { e q } + \frac { d h _ { e q } } { d \ln g _ { \max } } \right ) \right ] } { \left [ \left ( h _ { e q } + \frac { d h _ { e q } } { d \ln g _ { \max } } \right ) \left ( ( 1 - \frac { h _ { e q } } { R } \right ) + \frac { h _ { e q } ^ { 2 } } { 2 R } \right ] } \end{array}$$

This approximation was derived by acknowledging the radial increase of g down the tube axis, but by supposing otherwise that the g vector field within the tube is parallel to the column walls, and equal in magnitude at any height h .  This Òparallel-gÓ approximation, valid for D/2 π R &lt;&lt;1, simplifies the analysis of the test very considerably by rendering the analysis 1dimensional. D /2 π R is of order 0.01 in a typical benchtop centrifuge and the error introduced by the use of the parallel-g approximation is be expected from the geometry to be of order 1cos( D R / ) ~ ( D R / ) . It will be shown later via a direct comparison of simulated data for parallel 2 and true vector g , that the error is indeed negligible to all intents and purposes for small ( D /2 π R ). Furthermore, if both D/ 2 π R &lt;&lt; 1 and h/R &lt;&lt; 1, then the acceleration can be regarded as both parallel and approximately uniform (as per eqn 5), and the validity of this approximation for small but finite ( D /2 π R ) will be tested also.

The numerical calculations required to generate synthetic sedimentation-equilibrium curves in , can be executed efficiently via plasticity theory, centrifugation, i.e. although the usual problems associated with spurious slip-lines are encountered [27]. Rather, it is preferable to resolve the deviatoric stresses below the yield stress by incorporating solidlike viscoelasticity sub-yield. For materials brittle in shear (small critical strain) and for the purposes of calculating sedimentation equilibrium, the results are insensitive to the precise behaviour sub-yield and so small-strain linear elasticity suffices to regularize solutions given by plasticity theory, as has been discussed elsewhere [27]. The reader is referred to ref. [27] for details of the method employed to simulate equilibrium sedimentation curves. The values of the various constants and variables used are shown in table 1 below. ( Py ( φ ), τ w ( φ )) → ( h eq , g )

Table 1: Values of key quantities used in the simulations

| quantity   | value   |
|------------|---------|
| φ g 	
  =	
   φ 0            | 0.10    |
| k          | 5	
  Pa         |
| n          | 4,	
  5         |
| Δρ         | 2000	
  kg	
  m -­-3         |
| D          | 5,	
  10,	
  15	
  mm         |
| h 0        | 0.075m  |
| R          | 0.175m  |

## True radial versus parallel versus uniform acceleration.

Simulated equilibrium height versus acceleration curves calculated for true vectorial g and constant, parallel g are plotted in fig. 2 for D/ 2 π R = 0.009 (D=10mm) and h/R ~ 1/3 and a power-law index n= 4.0. It can be seen that even for h/R as large as 1/3, the radial variation of acceleration makes little difference to the predicted equilibrium curve, provided that the heights from the vector simulation are plotted against the mean magnitude of the acceleration and not its maximum value. This implies that for h R ≤ 1 3 the simpler eqn (6) can be used to invert real centrifuge data rather than (7), even though both are equally easy to use. The main difficulty in the application of either of these equations to experimental data is the calculation of the slope d heq /dln g which needs to be evaluated as accurately as possible. Fortunately, empirical observations suggest that h eq as a function of ln(g) has only weak curvature (arising from power-law behaviour of Py ( φ )), facilitating 1 st order piece-wise fitting for the purpose of smoothing and differentiation. Since uniform g and true vector g differ only slightly, then parallel g and true vector g must differ by an even smaller amount, as shown in Fig. 3. The error introduced by the parallel-g approximation is negligible, in spite of previous criticisms regarding its use [33,34]. It is clear from the simulated data though that the parallel-g assumption is an accurate approximation for real laboratory centrifuges.

Fig. 3 Synthesised	
  equilibrium	
  height	
  versus	
  acceleration	
  data	
  for	
  constant g	
  equal	
  in magnitude	
  to	
  the	
  mean	
  acceleration ω 2 (R-­-h/2) compared	
  with	
  centrifugal	
  acceleration	
  for n= 4, D= 15mm and h eq /R &lt; 1/3 .

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0450v2-figure-04179622-b9f1-4369-9312-1486cfeae7c3.jpg)

Fig. 4 Synthesised	
  equilibrium	
  height	
  versus	
  acceleration	
  data	
  for	
  vector	
  centrifugal g compared	
  with	
  the	
  parallel-­g for	
  15mm	
  internal	
  dia.	
  Tubes	
  and n =	
  4.	
  The	
  figures	
  in	
  brackets show	
  the	
  fractional	
  error	
  of	
  the	
  parallel-­-g	
  approximation	
  at	
  each	
  end	
  of	
  the	
  curve.

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0450v2-figure-5be656bb-7cf1-4c18-9f09-fd80852e1c1e.jpg)

## Effect of adhesion

A set of synthetic equilibrium height data for both n =5 and n= 4 is shown in fig. 5. Whilst the effect of increasing the critical strain from 0.0002 to 0.002 is barely discernible, that of going from 0.002 to 0.02 is more significant. For the model suspensions used here the corresponding yield stress ratio, , decreases rapidly from ca. unity at the gelpoint toward the asymptotic value of 5/3 at high concentrations. A small stress ratio does not necessarily equate to a small effect though since wall effects are amplified by a geometric factor of 4 h eq /D [9, 27]. τ w ( φ ) / Py ( φ ) γ c

The synthetic data were inverted using (6), and some sample output is plotted in fig. 6.  The large initial error introduced by neglect or ignorance of adhesion decreases rapidly with increasing volume-fraction. This decrease has two components, the first of which is the decrease of the ratio 4 τ w( φ (0))/D Δρ φ g (0) with increasing g, the second of which come  from s the constitutive behaviour where the wall-adhesion to compressive strength ratio decreasing rapidly with volume-fraction.  This behaviour is consistent with various experiments [11, loc. Cit.] and consistent too with the notion that

Fig. 5 Synthesised	
  equilibrium	
  height	
  versus	
  acceleration	
  data	
  for	
  constant g ,	
  10mm internal	
  diameter	
  tubes,	
  two	
  values	
  of	
  the	
  power-­-law	
  index	
  and	
  for	
  three	
  different	
  levels	
  of wall	
  adhesion	
  as	
  parameterised	
  by	
  the	
  critical	
  shear	
  strain.	
  The	
  effect	
  of	
  adhesion	
  is	
  just discernible	
  at	
  0.002	
  and	
  significant	
  at	
  0.02.	
  The	
  result	
  for	
  zero	
  shear	
  strain	
  (not	
  shown)	
  is indistinguishable	
  from	
  the	
  curve	
  for	
  0.0002.	
  The	
  inset	
  semi-­-log	
  plot	
  illustrates	
  the	
  slow change	
  in	
  the	
  gradient	
  term	
  used	
  in	
  eqns	
  (7)	
  or	
  (6).

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0450v2-figure-b07cadf1-d941-4bec-aabe-f6b243ab6096.jpg)

cohesive particulate networks are short in shear but exhibit ratchet poroelastic and strainhardening in compression [11,31,32,36,37]. Similar results for n = 4 are shown in fig. 6. The same pattern can be seen, large errors due neglect of adhesion for a critical strain of 0.02 near the gel-point, but with convergence on the correct result at high concentration.

Since rheological characterisation will often involve determination of the either or both of the adhesive or true shear yield stresses, it is pertinent to ask whether the results of applying eqns (2) or (3) be corrected, using a set of shear yield stress data measured separately using some sort of rheometer.  An overall momentum balance on the sediment of the type first described by Michaels and Bolger [9] motivates the testing of corrections of the form,

$$P _ { c o r r. } ( \phi ) = P _ { a p p } ( \phi ) - 4 \tau _ { _ { w } } ( \phi ) \frac { h _ { 0 } } { D } f ( h _ { e q } )$$

wherein f(h eq)	
  represents	
  an	
  approximate	
  or	
  average	
  way	
  of	
  accounting	
  for	
  the	
  effect	
  of the	
  consolidation	
  of	
  the	
  sediment	
  on	
  the	
  total	
  adhesion.	
  	
  Thus,	
  the	
  following	
  simple forms	
  are	
  suggested	
  as	
  likely	
  over-­-corrections,

Fig. 6 Apparent	
  compressive	
  strength	
  for	
  critical	
  adhesive	
  shear	
  strain	
  =	
  0.02	
  obtained	
  by applying	
  eqns	
  3	
  to	
  the	
  data	
  in	
  fig.	
  5	
  (points)	
  compared	
  with	
  the	
  true	
  curve	
  (heavy	
  line).	
  Also shown	
  are	
  the	
  results	
  of	
  applying	
  the	
  suggested	
  under	
  and	
  over	
  corrections f 1 to f 4 to	
  the points.	
  Guessed	
  corrections	
  of	
  this	
  type	
  cause	
  the	
  result	
  to	
  become	
  negative	
  below	
  ca.	
  1.3 times	
  the	
  gel-­-point.	
  Below	
  that	
  only	
  iteration	
  of	
  the	
  data	
  via	
  retrodiction	
  and	
  correction	
  will do.

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0450v2-figure-b91c88cd-a32f-4535-bab3-3b27d52e3ada.jpg)

$$f _ { 1 } ( h _ { e q } ) = \frac { h _ { e q } } { h _ { 0 } } \quad \text{or}, \ f _ { 2 } ( h _ { e q } ) = \frac { \phi _ { 0 } } { \phi } \$$

whereas	
  the	
  following	
  pair	
  are	
  likely	
  to	
  be	
  under-­-corrections

$$f _ { 3 } ( h _ { e q } ) = \left ( \frac { h _ { e q } } { h _ { 0 } } \right ) ^ { 2 } \quad \text{or}, \ f _ { 4 } ( h _ { e q } ) = \left ( \frac { \phi _ { 0 } } { \phi } \right ) ^ { 2 } \ \.$$

These candidate upper and lower bound corrections applied to the data for critical strain of 0.02 are compared with the true curve in figs. 6 and 7. The corrected curves bracket the true curve except near the gel-point where no simple correction term is ever going to eliminate the errors coming from unacknowledged or unknown adhesion, since it contributes hugely near the gel-point. The difficult region looks to be where iteration may be required order to recover the true curve, either that or go to wider tubes, the discriminator though is the φ / φ g ≤ 1.3

Fig. 7 As	
  for	
  fig.	
  6	
  but	
  for	
  a	
  power-­-law	
  index	
  of n =	
  4.	
  	
  Reducing	
  the	
  power-­-law	
  from	
  5	
  to	
  4 reduces	
  the	
  errors	
  coming	
  from	
  adhesion	
  a	
  little,	
  but	
  otherwise	
  the	
  picture	
  is	
  much	
  the	
  same.

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0450v2-figure-8fcf919c-b9c4-4ec2-a585-1edee46485cd.jpg)

factor . If the latter is significantly less than unity, then the lower-bound correction f 4 4 τ W h 0 Py , app. D

should be good, as the errors are then always fractional.

Fig. 8 Data	
  of	
  Zhou	
  et	
  al.	
  (replotted	
  from	
  ref.	
  10,	
  see	
  also	
  ref.	
  8,	
  fig.	
  3)	
  and	
  corrected according	
  to	
  eqn	
  6	
  with	
  corrections f 1 and f 3 from	
  eqns	
  9	
  and	
  10	
  using	
  the	
  fit (shown)	
  to	
  the	
  shear	
  data.

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0450v2-figure-3ea36601-8e9a-4f6b-abf9-27b591b3883e.jpg)

A data set taken from the literature is re-plotted in fig. 8, together with the lower-bound corrections calculated from the shear yield stress data shown. The latter were measured using a cruciform cross-sectioned vane and hence they are true yield stress values, and hence overestimates of the adhesive or wall stress needed, which, in [8] is estimated as being ca. 30% of the true value for this material from a comparison of rheometric data taken from the literature [10, 21, 23]. This almost certainly means that the corrections are systematically too large, not that it would seem to matter too much in this case as they rather small anyway, since the yield stress ratio is &gt; 10.

What if one does not have a means of generating independent shear-stress data? Or does not wish to undertake the workload (the centrifuge generates the complete curve, whereas for the shear rheometry one needs a whole series of samples spanning the concentration range and to be sure that the structure is preparation or history independent). It is fairly obvious that an alternative would be to use several values of column height and tube diameter and extrapolate each point on the sedimentation curve to . It should be possible in principle to determine both strength functions by this means too, although the analysis could be rather tedious perhaps. The real problem with this method though is that one can only realistically vary by a factor of about 5 even in the most accommodating of centrifuges whereas a decade or more would probably be needed to extract reliable values for the shear strength. On h 0 / D → 0 h 0 / D

the other hand, varying by just two or three can and has been used to confirm that adhesion is negligible for various materials, including coagulated latex [16-20]. h 0 / D

The simulated effect of diameter is illustrated in fig. 9 for the most adhesive case studied here, i.e. critical strain = 0.02 and for three different values of tube diameter at fixed h 0 = 0.075m. The tube diameters were 5, 10, 15mm, but also shown is the datum for infinite diameter at each acceleration. The effect of diameter decreases with increasing acceleration as expected and for the two higher accelerations, and hence well away from the gel-point, the extrapolation to 1/ D = 0 is sensibly linear, whereas at g =5 it is curved away from the abscissa somewhat, implying that the use of three narrow centrifuge tubes might not be quite good enough for the most adhesive cases near the gel-point. It is always possible though to augment centrifuge data with gravity-settling data of course, where it is much easier to cover a wide a range of , unless perhaps the amount of material available is very limited for some reason. h 0 / D

Fig. 9 Simulated	
  height	
  data	
  for	
  a	
  critical	
  strain	
  of	
  0.02	
  	
  for	
  three	
  tube	
  diameters.

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0450v2-figure-9e937e04-d7bd-4d91-907f-409ea822224d.jpg)

Fig. 10 Extrapolation	
  of	
  simulated	
  height	
  data	
  for	
  a	
  critical	
  strain	
  of	
  0.02	
  to	
  infinite	
  tube diameter	
  for	
  three	
  accelerations	
  measured	
  in	
  units	
  of	
  normal	
  gravity	
  g.	
  Here	
  the	
  points	
  for infinite D are	
  known.	
  At	
  the	
  lowest	
  g,	
  near	
  the	
  gel-­-point	
  the	
  plot	
  is	
  slightly	
  convex	
  to	
  the abscissa	
  implying	
  that	
  several	
  tube	
  diameters	
  would	
  be	
  needed	
  in	
  practice	
  for	
  a	
  good extrapolation.

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0450v2-figure-0a2628da-ab25-4d2d-9b0b-e863dfccb5f6.jpg)

## Concluding remarks

The approximate equations used conventionally for estimating the compressive strength curve for cohesive particulate gels from raw centrifuge data ignore the possibility of adhesion to the walls and furthermore are based on the assumption that the acceleration vector field inside the tube is everywhere parallel to the tube axis. The validity of these two assumptions has been explored and tested using simulated test data, as have some simple corrections for adhesion suggested by dimensional analysis. Corrections to the Òparallel gÓ assumption are not needed as this approximation turns out produce negligible error.

Adhesion was parameterised in terms of a critical shear strain for shear yielding at the wall. This was done simply for convenience because the ratio of the shear yield stress to compressive strength itself is expected in practice to decrease rapidly with increasing volumefraction near the gel-point, before becoming more or less constant, whereas the critical shear strain has been found to be at worst only weakly concentration-dependent. Critical shear strains are known to vary from one material to another and with particle size, hence critical

strains of 0, 0.0002, 0.002 and 0.02 were used in order to cover the range reported in the literature, where values of &lt;&lt; 0.01 have been reported for many electrolyte coagulated or flocculated suspensions, including polystyrene latex and a range of minerals, whereas values of order 0.02 have been reported for one electrolyte flocculated mineral system [27]. Aside from that study, critical strain values of order 0.01 or more have only been reported for mineral suspensions strongly-flocculated using high polymers and for water-treatment sludges. A particular form for the dependence of the shear and compressive strength on volume-fraction had to be assumed and this again was motivated by published experimental data. The dependence of the resulting adhesive to compressive strength ratio on volumefraction and critical strain on volume-fraction and critical strain is plotted in Fig 1 in order to illustrate the parameter space covered. Small strength ratios alone do not necessarily mean a negligible effect of adhesion in the centrifuge since the relative effect of adhesion is given by the ratio 4 τ w( φ (0))/D Δρ φ g (0), hence experimental parameters such as g and D play a significant role.

The simulations herein suggest that adhesion can be usually neglected in centrifuge testing for volume-fractions well above the gel-point, by which is meant &gt; 3 φ g , and otherwise where the apparent critical shear strain  &lt;&lt; 0.01. Otherwise, the following tactics might be considered:

- 1. The adhesive shear strength could be measured independently in a rheometer fitted with appropriate tools and a correction applied using (6) or (7)and (8). The simple corrections suggested here will always fail very near the gel-point though.
- 2. Make measurements using several different values of the ratio of initial height h 0 to tube diameter D and extrapolate to h 0 / D. This method may or may not be practicable, depending upon the design of the centrifuge. The range of h 0 / D covered should be at least three-fold and preferably five-fold, as should the number of points, although it rather depends upon the strength of the effect. Fewer points would needed to demonstrate that adhesion is insignificant, where it is, than would be needed to perform a good extrapolation, where it is not.
- 3. Complement the centrifuge data with data from gravity-settling for a set of column chosen so as to vary h 0 / D by a factor of at least five and better ten, with h 0 and D each varied by at least three. One could also complement centrifuge data with that coming from an instrumented pressure-filter, in principle, since the construction of these is usually such that h 0 / D is small, except that pressure-filtration does not

normally work near the gel-point because of the difficulty in applying the necessary small pressures. This method has however been used to validate and complement the centrifuge method at higher volume-fraction [8, 10, 21, 23].

The centrifuge method has been used recently to examine the effect of temperature on the stability of incipiently flocculated polystyrene latices [36], but without taking the possibility of adhesion into account. It has been used also to measure the compressibility of microgels, albeit using inclined rather than horizontal or swing-out rotors which adds complication to the analysis. Wall shear-stresses were ignored, which could well be reasonable for microgels in good solvents, perhaps [37].

## References

- 1. Grace H P, Chemical Engineering Progress, 47 (1953) 303-318.
- 2. Callaghan I C and Ottewill R H, J.Chem. Soc. Faraday Disc., 57 (1974) 110- 118.
- 3. Meeten G H, Chem. Eng. Sci., 48 (1993) 2391-2398.
- 4. Sherwood J D and Meeten G H, J. Petrol. Sci. &amp; Eng., 18 (1997) 73-81.
- 5. Miller K T, Melant R M and Zukoski C F, J. Am Ceram. Soc., 79 (1996) 25452556.
- 6. Green M D, Eberl M, Landman K L and White L R, AIChE J., 42 (1996) 23082318.
- 7. Green M D, Landman K A, de Kretser R G and Boger D V, Ind. Eng. Chem. Research, 37    (1998) 4152-4156.
- 8.  R. G. de Kretser, D. V. Boger and P. J. Scales, Rheology Rev. BSR (2003), pp 125 -165.
- 9. A. S. Michaels and J. C. Bolger, Ind. Eng. Chem. Fundamentals 1, 211 (1962).
- 10. Zhou Z, Scales P J and Boger D V, Chem. Eng. Sci., 56 (2001) 2901-2920;
- 11. R. Buscall,  arXiv:0903.0970v1 [cond-mat.soft] (2009).
- 12. A. L. Tindley, The effect of electrolytes on the properties of titanium dioxide dispersions, Ph.D. thesis, University of Leeds, Engineering Faculty (2007).
- 13. Stickland, A.D., Kumar, A., Kusuma, T., Scales, P.J., Tindley, A., Biggs, S., &amp; Buscall, R., The Effect of Vane-in-Cup Gap Width on Creep Testing of StronglyFlocculated Suspensions, (submitted to Rheol. Acta, July 2014). http://arxiv:1408.0069.
- 14. K. Been &amp; G.C. Stills, Self-weight consolidation of soft soils, Geotechnique, 1981, 31, 519-535.
- 15. Tiller F M and Khatib Z, J. Colloid Int. Sci. 100 (1984) 55-67.

- 16. Buscall R, Colloids &amp; Surfaces, 5, 269 (1982).
- 17. Buscall R, Stewart R F and Sutton D, Filt. Sep., 21 (1984) 183-188.
- 18. Buscall R and White L R, J. Chem. Soc. Faraday Trans. I, 83 (1987) 873-891.
- 19. R. Buscall, I. J. McGowan, P. D. A. Mills, R. F. Stewart, D. Sutton, L. R. White, and G. E. Yates, Journal of Non-Newtonian Fluid Mechanics 24, 183 (1987).
- 20. R. Buscall, P. D. A. Mills, J. W. Goodwin, and D. W. Lawson, Journal of the Chemical Society: Faraday Transactions I84, 4249 (1988).
- 21. Channell G M and Zukoski C F, AIChE J, 43 (1997) 1700-1708.
- 21. Green M D and Boger D V, Ind. Eng. Chem. Research, 36 (1997) 4984-4992.
- 23. Channell G M, Miller K T and Zukoski C F, AIChE J., 46 (2000) 72-78.
- 24. Auzerais F M, Jackson R, Russel W B and Murphy W F, J Fluid Mech, 211 (1990) 613-639.
- 26. Bergstrom L, J. Chem. Soc. Faraday Trans., 88 (1992) 3201-211.
- 26. Sherwood J D, Meeten G H, Farrow C A and Alderman N J, J. Chem. Soc. Faraday Transactions, 87 (1991) 611-618.
- 27.Lester, D.R., Buscall, R., A.D. Stickland, P. J. Scales, Wall Adhesion and Constitutive Modelling of Strong Colloidal Gels, J. Rheol., 58(5):1247Ð1276, (2014)..
- 28. The role of solid friction in the sedimentation of strongly attractive colloidal gels, Jean-Michel Condre, Christian Ligoure and Luca Cipelletti J. Stat. Mech. (2007) P02010 doi: 10.1088/1742-5468/2007/02/P02010.
- 29. S. Manley, J.M. Skotheim, L. Mahadevan, D.A. Weitz, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 218302 (2005).
- 30. ÒColloidal DispersionsÓ, W. B. Russel, D. A. Saville and W. R. Schowalter, Cambridge University Press (1989).
- 31. C. Kim, Y. Lui, A. Kuhnle, S. Hess, S. Viereck, T. Danner, L. Mahadevan and D. A. Weitz., Phys. Rev. Lett., 2007, 99, 028303.
- 32 J.J. LiŽtor-Santos , C. Kim, P.J. Lu, A. Fern‡ndez-Nieves, and D.A. Weitz, Eur. Phys. J. E 28, 159 (2009)
- 33. R. Burger, F. Concha, Settling velocities of particulate systems: 12. Batch centrifugation of flocculated suspensions, Internat. J. Mineral Process. 63 (2001) 115Ð 145.
- 34. Berres, S., R. Burger &amp; R. Garces, Drying Technology, 28: 858Ð870, 2010.
- 35. D.R. Lester, R. Buscall, Correction of Wall Adhesion Effects in Batch Settling of Strong Colloidal Gels, (submitted, JNNFM, September 2014). http://arxiv.org/abs/1408.0450.
- 36. Yow, H. N., and S. Biggs, Probing the stability of sterically-stabilized polystyrene particles by centrifugal sedimentation, Soft Matter, 2013, 9 , 10031-10041.
- 37. Nordstrom, K. N. , E. Verneuil, W. G. Ellenbroek, T. C. Lubensky, J. P. Gollub,

and D. J. Durian,  Phys. Rev. E 82 , 041403 (2010).

Note: One of us is sometimes asked what ÔMSACTÕ in ÔMSACT Research &amp; ConsultingÕ. It is short for ÔMud, Sludge and Custard TamedÕ, although this is more of an ambition than an claim.
Richard Buscall Daniel R. Lester
Correction of Wall Adhesion Effects in the Centrifugal Compression of Strong Colloidal Gels
Several methods for measuring the compressive strength of strong particulate
gels are available, including the centrifuge method, whereby the strength as a
function of volume-fraction is obtained parametrically from the dependence of
equilibrium sediment height upon acceleration. The analysis used conventionally
due to Buscall & White (1987) ignores the possibility that the particulate
network might adhere to the walls of the centrifuge tube, even though many
types of cohesive particulate gel can be expected to. The neglect of adhesion
is justifiable when the ratio of the shear to compressive strength is small,
which it can be for many systems away from the gel-point, but never very near
it. The errors arising from neglect of adhesion are investigated theoretically
and quantified by synthesising equilibrium sediment height versus acceleration
data for various degrees of adhesion and then analysing them in the
conventional manner. Approximate correction factors suggested by dimensionless
analysis are then tested. The errors introduced by certain other approximations
made routinely in order to render the data-inversion practicable are analysed
too. For example, it shown that the error introduced by treating the
acceleration vector as approximately one-dimensional is minuscule for typical
centrifuge dimensions, whereas making this assumption renders the data
inversion tractable.