Polymethylmethacrylate spheres viscosity

C. Parkinson et al. (17) considered the effect of particle size distribution on viscosity. They studied suspensions of polymethylmethacrylate) spheres in Nujol with diameters of 0.1, 0.6, 1.0 and 4.0 microns with different volume fractions and with different particle size combinations to determine the influence of size-distribution on the viscosity. Each particle size gave a certain contribution to the final viscosity based on the volume fraction and the hydrodynamic coefficient obtained from the empirical equation for that particle size. The contributions were expressed in the same form as in Mooney s model, and the viscosity was calculated from the product of each term, n... 

Phan, et al. (50) and Meeker, et al. (51) report low-shear viscosities of polymethylmethacrylate spheres in decalin and decalin tetraUn, the latter being an index-matching fluid. Their measurements of y(< ), which were confined to ( < , appear as Figure 10.4. Distinct stretched-exponential and power-law regimes are clearly visible, the transition concentration being found near 0.41 < < 0.43 and... 

Figure 10.5 Low shear viscosity of (a) (O) 56 and (o) 94 and (b) (o) 153 and (O) 230 nm diameter silica spheres in cyclohexane, with rj from tables in van der Werff and de Kruif(52), (c) 78 nm radius silica spheres in cyclohexane, r]r as tabulated by de Kruif, et al. 53), and (d) polymethylmethacrylate spheres in decalin, based on findings of Poon, etal. 54). Lines represent Eqs. 10.9 and 10.10. In (a) and (b), solid and dashed lines refer to the smaller and larger spheres.

Figure 10.6 Viscosity of surface-coated 301 nm radius polymethylmethacrylate spheres, showing accurate fits in the solutionlike and meltlike regimes, based on measurements of Segre, etal. 16).

---