Rheometers: not just for rheology any more
Transcription
Rheometers: not just for rheology any more
Rheometers: not just for rheology any more Looking beyond rheology Gavin Braithwaite Cambridge Polymer Group, 56 Roland Street, Suite 310 Boston, MA 02129 Cambridge Polymer Group, Inc. Testing, Consultation, and Instrumentation for Polymeric Materials 7-17 Presentation (10/1/2010) Rheology • Modern shear rheometers exceptionally robust tools – Wide torque and strain range • Many orders of magnitude – Robust control systems with wide dynamic range – Well understood flow-fields – Industry accepted instrumentation and models • Other geometries – Capillary – Vane – Extensional • Simplifying flows aids characterization TA Users meeting 2012 2 Cambridge Polymer Group Quantitative characterization • Simplifying flow-fields aids analysis – Shear flows • • • • • • Viscosity Shear thinning/thickening Elasticity Temporal evolution Relaxation times Yield stress – Pipe flow • Extensional properties • Melts – Extensional rheometers • Breakup times • Relaxation times – Reduce flow-fields and deformations to tractable situations TA Users meeting 2012 3 Cambridge Polymer Group “Psycho-rheology” • Where analytical rheology doesn’t provide the complete answer – Rheology invaluable as a method for reliably analyzing and ranking materials – Consumer perception arises from the overall response of the material • “psycho-rheology” • Real-world usage is rarely one deformation – “performance” based tests often useful in linking “real world” experience with fluid properties – Tests that inherently use multiple relevant deformations can sometimes provide better insight in to consumer perception – Almost certainly non-linear – Less “transferable” TA Users meeting 2012 4 Cambridge Polymer Group Case studies 1. Food products – Differentiating milk products 2. Consumer healthcare – Tactile feel of personal care fluids 3. Cardiovascular applications – Implantation of catheters TA Users meeting 2012 5 Cambridge Polymer Group Case 1: Food products • Perception of food “feel” is driven by all senses – Partially sight and smell but substantially taste and “feel” – Consumer test panels are costly and time consuming • • • • • • Intensive training required Subjective Can have difficulty describing differences Outcomes can be ambiguous Need big sample group Rheology provides tools – rapid and cost effective screening TA Users meeting 2012 6 Cambridge Polymer Group Milk rheology • Bovine milk similar composition, with breed variations – Fat • Holstein/Friesian - 3.6wt%, Jersey - 5.2 wt% – Proteins • 3.4-3.9 wt% – Lactose • ~5 wt% • Proteins act to stabilize fat globules – Strongly influence feel and behavior – Agglomeration and separation important – Other solids impact shear viscosity • • Normally considered Newtonian Motivation: Replacement of fats and sugars – Desirable for health reasons – Need to preserve consumer perception TA Users meeting 2012 7 Cambridge Polymer Group Experimental • AR-G2 cone-and-plate – 60 mm 1º SS cone, 25 ºC – Stepped shear 0.1-1000 s-1 • Milk (fresh) – – – – • • • Whole (~4% fat) Skimmed (2% fat) Skimmed (1% fat) Non-fat (0.5 wt% fat) Starch solutions Sugar solutions Proprietary food additives – Consumer testing indicates best alternative TA Users meeting 2012 8 Cambridge Polymer Group Microalgal flour • Microalgal biomass contains nutritionproviding materials – – – – – carotenoids dietary fiber tocotrienols and tocopherols varying lipid compositions low levels of saturated lipids TA Users meeting 2012 9 Cambridge Polymer Group Milk Error bars SD for three runs 0.1 whole milk (G2) 2% fat (G2) 1% skimmed (G2) Shear viscosity [Pa.s] non-fat (G2) Fat wt% down 0.01 0.001 0.1 TA Users meeting 2012 1 10 Shear rate [s-1] 10 100 1000 Cambridge Polymer Group Impact of composition • • Milk normally considered “newtonian” Stabilized fat globules – Deformable spheres – Hydrodynamic interactions dominate • Einstein/Taylor/Schowalter etc – Spheres in Newtonian solution – Packing fraction depends on proteins and sugars (~10%) – Not mono-disperse – Globules prone to cluster • C.W. Macosko Rheology: Principles, Measurements, and Applications, VCH Publishers Inc., New York, 1994. Shear rate 5 s-1 10 s-1 0.1 s-1 Critical response for mouth-feel – Shear thinning with zero-shear plateau – Fat provides viscosity – Fat % does not change behavior Fat volume fraction Kyazze, G. and Starov, V., Viscosity of Milk: Influence of Cluster Formation. Colloid Journal 66(3),316-321 (2004) TA Users meeting 2012 11 Cambridge Polymer Group Reducing fat Alginate flour Algal Flour whole milk 2% fat 1% skimmed non-fat 1% starch 2% starch 3% starch 5% starch Shear Viscosity [Pa.s] 10.000 1.000 0.100 0.010 0.001 0.1 1.0 10.0 100.0 1000.0 -1 Shear rate [s ] TA Users meeting 2012 12 Cambridge Polymer Group Conclusions • Consumer testing implies – Algal flour closest to milk response – Shear rheology indicates starch is the best • Complex fluids can yield deceptively simple responses – Milk (stabilized fat globules) • Shear thinning • Shear rate response controlled by fat content plus proteins and sugars – Choosing “dominant” deformation does not always allow replacement of ingredients • Milk “feel” expected to be dominated by shear viscosity • Corn syrup, algal flour and starch all provide reasonable rheological responses • But rheology does not provide separation between systems – So where is the difference? • Wrong deformation? TA Users meeting 2012 13 Cambridge Polymer Group Case 2: Consumer Products • Consumer products represent a massive market in US – Emulsions, emollients, moisturizers and personal lubricants • Perception of efficacy influenced by “feel” and “look” of system – Complex interplay of • • • • • • Viscosity Yield stress Absorption Wetting Elasticity Loading TA Users meeting 2012 14 Cambridge Polymer Group Personal Lubricants Firmness 90 80 Wetness 70 Thickness Aqueous Silicone Emulsion 60 50 40 1 30 2 20 4 10 Spreadability Residue Thickness 0 5 6 8 9 10 Runniness Slipperiness Stickiness TA Users meeting 2012 15 Cambridge Polymer Group Consumer ranking (selected) 9 Aqueous Silicone Emulsion 8 7 6 1 5 2 4 4 5 6 3 8 9 2 10 1 TA Users meeting 2012 16 Average Spreadability Runniness Stickiness Thickness Firmness 0 Cambridge Polymer Group Small Amplitude Oscillatory Shear 1000 1000 Aqueous Silicone Emulsion 100.0 100.0 1 10.00 9 4 1 4 9 2 5 6 10 1.000 0.1000 0.01000 0.1000 1.000 TA Users meeting 2012 10.00 Ang. frequency (rad/s) 17 100.0 1.000 G'' [Pa] G' [Pa] 10.00 0.1000 0.01000 1000 Cambridge Polymer Group Yield Stress 1000 100.0 9 1 Aqueous Silicone Emulsion 4 1 4 9 2 5 6 10 Viscosity [Pa.s] 10.00 1.000 0.1000 0.01000 1.000E-3 0.01000 0.1000 TA Users meeting 2012 1.000 10.00 Shear stress [Pa] 18 100.0 1000 Cambridge Polymer Group Capillary Breakup • Sample Thermo Haake CaBER Laser micrometer Diameter [mm] 10 1 1 9 9 4 4 1 4 9 2 5 6 10 0.1 0.01 0 TA Users meeting 2012 2 4 Time [s] 19 6 8 10 Cambridge Polymer Group Observations • High ranking materials appear to have – – – – • High low-shear viscosity and low high-shear viscosity High shear viscosity seems to be more important Elasticity less important Extensional properties appear related What is missing? – “slipperiness” (lubricity) • Related to shear viscosity and surface chemistry • “Thin” film with gap governed by shear properties • Coefficient of Friction – “stickiness” (tack) • Related to elasticity and adhesion • Large contact area, dependent on pull speed and fluid properties • Tack test TA Users meeting 2012 20 Cambridge Polymer Group Lubricity TA Users meeting 2012 21 Cambridge Polymer Group CoF on a rheometer Spring Annulus Surface 1 Kavehpour and McKinley “Tribo-rheometry: from gap-dependent rheology to tribology” Tribology Letters (2004) 17(2) 327-335 TA Users meeting 2012 22 Cambridge Polymer Group Coefficient of Friction Coefficient of Friction [] • CoF fixture on AR-G2. Controlled normal stress (82 kPa) and rotation rate 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 Hydrogel 0.0 -0.1 0.1 1 4 9 2 5 1, 4, 9 8 6 1 10 100 Coefficient of Friction [] Velocity [rad/s] 1.2 10 water 9 1 1.0 4 0.8 1 9 0.6 2 4 0.4 0.2 5 8 Neoprene 6 0.0 0.1 TA Users meeting 2012 1 Velocity [rad/s] 23 10 100 10 Cambridge Polymer Group Comparisons • CoF fixture on AR-G2. Controlled normal stress (82 kPa) and rotation rate (0.3 rad/s) 0.7 Hydrogel Neoprene Coefficient of Friction [] 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 1 4 TA Users meeting 2012 9 2 5 8 24 6 10 water Cambridge Polymer Group Tackiness • Combination of accurate vertical position and normal force allow tack to be measured on a conventional rheometer – AR-G2 has a “fast sampling” mode that allows 250 Hz – Squeeze/pull-off allows tack-like test using parallel plates Velocity Normal force TA Users meeting 2012 25 Cambridge Polymer Group Tackiness • 4 cm parallel plate loaded to fixed gap and pulled at 500 micron/s 0 300 600 900 1200 1500 1 9 -5 1800 4 2100 9 2 5 2400 8 6 10 4 0.5 1 -10 0 Force [N] Force [N] 1 -0.5 300 600 900 -1 -1.5 -15 -2 -2.5 -20 TA Users meeting 2012 Position (relative to bottom plate) [mm] Position (relative to bottom plate) [mm] 26 Cambridge Polymer Group Work of Adhesion 0.006 Work of adhesion [J] 0.005 0.004 0.003 0.002 0.001 0 1 4 9 2 5 8 6 10 Sample TA Users meeting 2012 27 Cambridge Polymer Group Conclusions Correlation between physical and sensory measures Intimate Health products, (p<0.05) Firmness Thickness Residue Slipperiness Stickiness Runniness Spreadability Controllability Wetness Cooling Shear Viscosity Oscillatory Viscosity Lubricity Extensional Viscosity Adhesion TA Users meeting 2012 28 Cambridge Polymer Group Case 3: Implantation of catheters • • • • • Cardiovascular catheters are used for access, surgery and drug delivery Usually inserted through the femoral artery and then guided to their destination Device is “steered” through the arteries along tortuous pathways and around sharp corners Guidewire is used to direct catheter Surgical feel of device influenced by – Coating friction on walls – Level of wetting/lubrication – Varying contact area due to bends TA Users meeting 2012 29 Cambridge Polymer Group Testing of catheters • Surgical feel of the device controlled by – – – – – • Physiological fluids present Absorption of species Wettability of the coating Intrinsic coefficient of friction Bending elasticity of the composite catheter ASTM F2394: Expandable Vascular Stents – Tortuous path for testing of catheter insertion and rotation TA Users meeting 2012 30 Cambridge Polymer Group Friction and lubricity of catheters • Effective friction a function of pull-force and displacement – AR1000 provides accurate measures of both • Testing through “friction pad” decouples tortuosity • Testing through fixture allows effect of tortuosity to be determined Direct measure of friction between guidewire and model surface Friction Pad Mode 1 AR1000 Measure of friction between guidewire and catheter in tortuous contour Catheter guidewire Mode 2 TA Users meeting 2012 31 Cambridge Polymer Group Mode 1: Friction pad 2.5 2 Pull force [N] Start-up 1.5 Client Competitor Analysis 1 Competitor Client 0.5 0 0 10 TA Users meeting 2012 20 30 Time [s] 32 40 50 60 Cambridge Polymer Group Mode 2: pull-force in catheter (dry) 1.4 1.2 Dry: Competitor (straight) Competitor (tortuous) Client (straight) Client (tortuous) 1.2 0.8 p < 0.003 1 Pull force [N] Pull force [N] 1 0.6 0.4 0.8 0.6 p < 0.001 Straight 0.4 0.2 0.2 0 Client Competitor Client Competitor 0 0 5 TA Users meeting 2012 10 15 20 Time [s] 33 25 30 35 40 Cambridge Polymer Group Mode 2: pull-force in catheter (wet) 0.45 Dry: 0.4 0.35 0.3 p < 0.001 0.07 0.06 p < 0.001 Straight 0.05 Pull force [N] Pull force [N] 0.08 Competitor (straight) Competitor (tortuous) Client (straight) Client (tortuous) 0.25 0.2 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.15 0 Client 0.1 Competitor Client Competitor 0.05 0 0 10 TA Users meeting 2012 20 30 Time [s] 34 40 50 60 Cambridge Polymer Group Conclusions • • • In a crowded market place surgeon impressions drive sales Reducing “impressions” to quantitative numbers allows direct competitive comparisons Using conventional rheological techniques and instruments in unconventional manners allows differentiation of materials in physiologically relevant conditions – Test structure that is familiar to users – Numbers that are easily correlated TA Users meeting 2012 35 Cambridge Polymer Group Lessons and comments • • Understanding the rheology of fluids critical for understanding consumer perception and use But mode of use can be just as important – Usage rarely simple shear – Perception is therefore governed by response to variety of deformations • • • • • • • Simple shear Compression Extension Pipe-flow etc Collating data in more relevant configurations can provide useful correlations with field data Superb force and position control of a conventional rheometer still useful Sometimes the tests need to be modified to help act as consumer screening tests TA Users meeting 2012 36 Cambridge Polymer Group Thank you Cambridge Polymer Group is a contract research laboratory specializing in polymers and their applications. We provide outsourced research and development, consultation and failure analysis as well as routine analytical testing and custom test and instrumentation design. Cambridge Polymer Group, Inc. 56 Roland St., Suite 310 Boston, MA 02129 (617) 629-4400 http://www.campoly.com [email protected] TA Users meeting 2012 37 Cambridge Polymer Group