J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech.
98 (2001) 114
Review
Rotating vane rheometry a review
Howard Anthony Barnes a, , Quoc Dzuy Nguyen b
a
Unilever Research Port Sunlight, Port Sunlight, Bebington, Wirral, Merseyside CH63 3JW, UK
b
Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia
Received 30 October 2000; received in revised form 19 December 2000
Abstract
The use of rotating vane geometries for the measurement of the flow properties of very non-Newtonian liquids has
become increasingly popular over the last 20 years. Originally, these geometries were used to measure the apparent
yield stresses of inorganic dispersions, but have more recently been used to measure other rheological parameters
also. These include the low-strain modulus and the steady-state flow-curves of structured liquids. The particular
advantages of the vane geometry are its simplicity of fabrication, ease of cleaning and more than anything else,
its elimination of serious wall-slip effects. The development of the vane technique and the theory to go with it,
together with its use in various areas are described, where these areas include inorganic colloidal dispersions, foods,
bioengineering fermentation broths, etc. 2001 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Vane; Shear thinning; Yield stress
1. Introduction
The vane geometry, in its various forms has grown in popularity as a simple but effective means
of measuring the properties of non-Newtonian fluids that would otherwise display large slip effects at
smooth walls. It also offers a way of introducing the testing element a thin-bladed vane- into a structured
liquid with the minimum amount of disturbance to the sample, making it very suitable for materials such
as clay suspensions, muds and other gelled liquids. With the introduction of an outer wall sometimes
roughened or otherwise suitably modified, the vane geometry is also very useful as a general means of
measuring the viscosity of difficult liquids, especially when combined with the latest controlled-stress
rheometers.
Corresponding author. Tel.: +44-151-641-3529; fax: +44-151-641-1829.
E-mail address: [Link]@[Link] (H.A. Barnes).
0377-0257/01/$ see front matter 2001 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 3 7 7 - 0 2 5 7 ( 0 1 ) 0 0 0 9 5 - 7
H.A. Barnes, Q.D. Nguyen / J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 98 (2001) 114
2. History
One of the earliest uses of the vane geometry may be traced back to 1936 when Russel employed a
small glass vane to study the coagulation of sodium clay gels [1]. His primary reason for using the vane
geometry instead of the cylinder of a Schwedoff-Hatschek viscometer for shearing the suspension was to
eliminate the possibility of slipping. Then a vane geometry has been available for the Haake viscometer
(Gebrueder Haake, Karlsruhe, Germany) since 1955 as a variant of their solid cylindrical SV rotor, see
Fig. 1. It is known as the star-shaped FL rotor, where the FL nomenclature derives from the German
word flgel which can be translated as wings or vanes. This six-bladed vane was, according to the
company, introduced to overcome slip problems and to measure yield stress. A very old manual for the
original Rotovisco 1 (RV1) viscometer recommends the use of the vane for coarse, disperse systems; if
slippage is expected with smooth rotors and for very thixotropic fluids. The latest manual for the RV1
model states that yield points are determined from the peaks of a shear-stress/time curve, when start-up
experiments are performed (see later discussion on precise definition of yield-stress in this situation).
Also from Fig. 1, we see, from a practical point of view, how much easier it is to fabricate a vane to
prevent slipping, compared with the carefully ribbed cylinder shown next to it, which is another means of
eliminating the slip problem. Certain Brookfield laboratory and on-line viscometers have also embodied
vane-like geometries for many years, especially for the measurement of paper pulp and paint.
However, over the last 20 years, the vane geometry has been taken up more enthusiastically than ever
before. Its renaissance started in Australia in the early 1980s when one of us (QDN) was a research student
of David Bogers at the Chemical Engineering Department at Monash University in Melbourne, trying to
measure the flow properties of a red-mud (bauxite waste) filter-cake produced by the Alcoa company
of Australia. Since a mud filter-cake looks like a piece of wet clay, it was thought that there must be
Fig. 1. Haake viscometer SV geometries, showing the six-bladed vane (SV2FL), and the corresponding serrated (SV2P) and
smooth (SV2) cylinders.
H.A. Barnes, Q.D. Nguyen / J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 98 (2001) 114
some existing techniques in soil mechanics for determining strength. A colleague working in the area
of civil engineering directed attention to several such methods, which included the vane, the penetrating
cone, compression and shear cells, etc., which were all used to determine the shear strength of soil. All
these were tried, but it was found that the vane method was the simplest to use and most applicable in a
rheological context [2].
The use of the vane was developed further in Australia by Nguyen and Boger [3,4], especially for the
practical measurement of the yield stress of concentrated suspensions, with Keentok [5] concerned with
the theoretical aspects. Its use soon spread to other areas, especially for what we might call structured
liquids, i.e. drilling muds, cements and certain food systems see below for a more extensive listing.
Indeed, for many, the vane has now become the universal geometry of choice for yield-stress (i.e. very
shear-thinning liquids) fluids, being easy to manufacture to reasonable tolerances, and simple to clean,
see for instance [6].
3. Theory and technique development
A logical though not an historical progression in the use of the vane is first for the measurement of
the modulus of a structured liquid or the viscosity of a Newtonian liquid, then to measure yield stress
and finally steady-state flow-curves. We will review the development of theory and practice in that
order.
3.1. The modulus of linear elastic solids and the viscosity of Newtonian liquids
Sherwood and Meeten [7] used complex variable techniques to calculate the torque M on an infinitely
long two-bladed vane. They then computed the torque on a series of N-bladed vanes of finite length by
means of boundary-integral techniques, first as a function of linear elastic modulus of a linear elastic solid
it was immersed in, and then since the mathematical formulation is very similar the torque due to
(Newtonian) viscosity in creeping flow in an infinite expanse of (Newtonian) liquid. They also predicted
the effect of the ends of the vane on the torque. We may summarise their results as follows for relatively
long blades (l/a > 3) where l is the blade length and a the radius of the circumscribing circle formed by
the ends of the blades)
_
M = A l + B,
_
(1)
_
where M is the M/2 a3 and l is the l/a. A and B are constants depending on the number of blades,
as shown below
N
Value of A
Value of B
2
3
4
6
8
1
1.33
1.51
1.66
1.75
0.66
1.00
1.2
1.56
1.71
H.A. Barnes, Q.D. Nguyen / J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 98 (2001) 114
Fig. 2. Sherwood
and Meetens [7] computed values of B, the end-correction parameter, compared with the empirical expression
B = 2.75 3/ N .
They give the value of A as A = 2 2/N. An infinite number of blades equates to a solid cylinder, and
_
of course gives the expected result that M = 2 l for rotation of a solid cylinder in an unbounded fluid.
With regard to B, Sherwood and Meeten then stated
that it is a function of N, but got no further. However,
it can be shown that the function B = 2.75 3/ N gives quite a good fit to the data for their computed
results over the range of two to four, six and eight-blades, see Fig. 2.
These formulae indicate that for a four-bladed vane, A equals 1.5, and B equals 1.25. If we use a short
vane with say with a value of l/a of 2, then the geometric constant would be 4.25. If we had assumed that
we were dealing with a cylinder with no end effect, then we would have an equivalent value of 4, thus,
giving an error of just less than 6% if we had used the long cylinder formula instead. Indeed if we were
to use a vane geometry with an l/a ratio of 1.88, we would have no error at all if we assumed that the
vane was a cylinder with no end effect!
Their predictions worked very well when tested against experimental results for a Newtonian liquid
and a range of vanes covered by the theory, giving results to within a few percent of the measured values,
see also [8]. Of course the same theory would work for the response of a vane in an elastic solid, with the
rotation (in radians) replacing the rotation rate (in rad/s) and the shear modulus replacing the viscosity,
if we make the reasonable assumption that the Poissons ratio is equal to 1/2.
The shear elasticity and yield strain were measured by Alderman, Meeten and Sherwood [9] for bentonite suspensions, which compared favourably with the values obtained with those using porous cylinders
and a thin disc. Apart from the eight-bladed vane, the two to four and six-bladed versions gave sensibly
the same values for the modulus, and these agreed well with measurements using concentric cylinders
[9]. The problems they encountered with the eight-bladed vane were attributed to the blade thickness, the
effect of which is of course accentuated. We have not considered the effect of blade thickness elsewhere,
since usually it does not present a problem, apart from theoretical calculations, where an infinitely thin
blade produces a singularity in the calculations. This can be overcome numerically to some extent, but
the introduction of a finite though modest thickness will also tend to elevate the problem.
3.2. Use of the vane geometry to measure yield stress
One problem that makes this area very difficult is the precise definition of yield stress (that is accepting,
for the sake of argument that there is such an entity as yield stress, see [10,11]). In some cases, it appears
H.A. Barnes, Q.D. Nguyen / J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 98 (2001) 114
to be taken as the departure from linearity of the stress response in a plastic solid as the strain is increased,
while in other cases it is taken as the cessation of flow in a structured liquid as the stress is decreased.
Others take it as the maximum stress between these two, obviously, real materials will respond to the
application of different stress or strain histories in different ways, and diverse results could ensue. This
is certainly true if different geometries with different stress and strain histories are used, see Nguyen and
Boger [4,13]. However, this point is outside the scope of this paper, but for a comprehensive discussion
of the definition of yield stress and measurement of this property see the reviews by Barnes [11,12] and
Nguyen and Boger [13], see also Yoshimura et al. [14].
We will simply assume that a yield stress, however defined can be measured, and we are only
interested in how this value can be measured using a vane-like geometry.
With the vane method, the usual simple formula employed for calculating the yield stress is derived
on the basis that the yield stress acts uniformly on the side and ends of an equivalent fluid cylinder
formed when a vane is rotated [3,5]. The total torque on the sides of an equivalent cylinder is 20 la2
and 4 0 a 3 /3 on its ends. The yield stress would then be given by
M
0 =
2 a 3
2
l
+
a 3
1
(2)
Out of interest, if we compare Eq. (2) for a yield-stress fluid with Sherwood and Meetens corresponding
theory for a Newtonian liquid (Eq. (1)), we see that for a four-bladed vane the value 2/3, i.e. 0.66, is
replaced by 1.2/1.51, i.e. 0.8. Thus, the Newtonian liquid has, as we might expect, a slightly larger
end correction. Also the equivalent pre-multiplier is different, so Sherwood and Meetens theory gives a
value 1.51 times smaller, since the flow-lines dip into the space between the vanes, and make the effective
diameter smaller.
However, Keentok [5] also suggested that the diameter of the sheared surface could be up to 5% greater
than that determined by the circumscribed circle defined by the blade tips. This, he claimed, was measured
photographically for some grease samples and found to be approximately correct. He and others [15]
later used computer simulations of a four-bladed vane rotating in a Bingham liquid and showed that the
effective sheared radius was 2.5% greater than the vane radius, which they claimed agreed well with
experimental data on two viscoelastic automotive greases. They also used a photographic method to
show that the sheared shape was approximately circular. If this increase in the equivalent radius of the
sheared cylinder is true, then it can make up to 10% difference to the final value of the yield stress. In
this context, Yan and James [16] investigated the behaviour of Herschel-Bulkley, Bingham and Casson
fluids in a four-blade vane geometry using the FIDAP finite-element program. They found that for these
model liquids, the fluid between the vanes was trapped within a circular cylinder, and that the shear
stress was evenly distributed over the surface of the cylinder, with the cylinder exactly defined by the
vane tips. This means that the simplifying assumption that the vane behaves like a solid cylinder without
slip is indeed valid. This finding is of course contrary to that of Keentok [5,15], but Yan and James used
a more refined mesh in their computations, and they questioned Keentoks photographic experiment,
noting that little description was given. Barnes and Carnali [17], see below, found the same coincidence
between the sheared surface and the circle formed by the vane tips in their study of very shear-thinning
liquids.
We, therefore, conclude that one can simply calculate the yield stress using a vane on the basis of an
equivalent solid cylinder defined by the circumscribing circle formed by the tips of the blades. This is in
H.A. Barnes, Q.D. Nguyen / J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 98 (2001) 114
fact in agreement with the much earlier work of Cadling and Odenstad who used the vane for measuring
the shear strength of soils [18]. Furthermore, this feature of the vane geometry highlights its advantage,
compared to other methods, as a quick single-point determination of the yield stress.
Another characteristic of the vane method is that the vane is used simply as an attachment, which can be
made to fit an existing rheometer. Yield-stress measurement by means of the vane is often conducted at a
constant and usually low rotational rate using a rate-controlled instrument. Liddell et al. [19] pointed out
that the driving mechanism used in such instruments for running the vane could have a significant effect
on the result. By comparing the behaviour of measuring systems with stiff and weak springs, they showed
that the real build-up of strain in a structured liquid is slower if the vane is driven through/against a weak
spring which then takes up most of the imposed strain, and that this gave a better measure of a yield stress,
since any viscous component present is minimised. The particular example they cited is a Weissenberg
rheogoniometer with a spring of stiffness 1.1 N m/rad and a Haake viscometer spring some 300 times
more compliant at 0.003 N m/rad, with the latter offering the better measurement. To give comparable
results, the Weissenberg rheogoniometer had to be driven much slower. Their ideal response from a
slow-running Haake 0.2 rpm is a linear increase in stress, with a clear break from linearity, either
followed by a maximum value and a fall-off to a lower steady value, or else a break from linearity and a
levelling off of stress to a constant value, see Fig. 3. The Weissenberg gave a non-linear stress build-up
indicating quite a lot of creep flow, . . . , occurring well below the yield stress. In general, it is good
practice to establish the suitable range for rotational rate of the vane where the maximum shear stress is
essentially constant [3,9]. The maximum operating speed, which normally corresponds to a rapid increase
in the stress overshoot with increasing rotational rate [9], is reasonably high for fluids having high yield
stresses [3]. For low-yield-stress fluids, errors are thus expected even if the vane is operated at the lowest
speed available in the rheometer since the maximum stress may contain some contribution due to the
viscous component if the vane speed is not sufficiently low. This has led to a suggestion that the vane
method is most suitable for measuring yield stress values greater than ca. 10 Pa [9,13]. The alternative
procedure is to operate the vane in the constant-stress mode as demonstrated by Yoshimura et al. [14] and
James et al. [29]. In this way, the vane method becomes basically a creep test with the added advantage
of no wall slip.
Fig. 3. The typical start-up response of a range of hypothetical yield-stress materials when measured using a slowly rotating
vane, showing the various definitions of yield stress appropriate to a solid yielding at non-linearity, through to a liquid-like
equilibrium response, with an intermediate maximum stress also possible as a definition.
H.A. Barnes, Q.D. Nguyen / J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 98 (2001) 114
3.3. The use of the vane geometry to measure non-Newtonian flow-curves
Barnes and Carnali [17] concluded that for a very shear-thinning, power-law liquid (power-law index <
0.5), the vane sheared the liquid outside a circular cylinder prescribed by the blade tips, and that little or
no shearing took place within this cylinder. From their numerical simulation, they also found, as expected,
that the stream-lines around the vane for a Newtonian liquid were not circular, but dipped into the space
between the vanes. They only became circular when the power-law index of the power-law model used
was less than about 0.5.
Their experimental end effect on a vane with a equal to 4.25 mm and a range of lengths was only
2 mm for a non-Newtonian liquid. For their experimental length of 48 mm, this meant that the end effect
could be ignored. They used a gap of 1 mm only. Using Sherwood and Meetens Newtonian end-correction
calculation for an infinite gap, we would expect an end correction of around 2.88 mm. The results compare
well with Meeten and Sherwoods measured results for the modulus of a bentonite suspension [20].
Barnes and Carnali also showed that the stress distribution in the sheared liquid in the gap peaked
sharply in the immediate vicinity of the vane tips (as was also shown in the calculations of Keentok et al.
[15]) but was constant in all other parts of the gap, see above, and in fact this constant stress accounted
for the vast majority of the measured torque, with the local peaks accounting for very little. In their
experimental section, they showed that for a 4.2% dispersion of Veegum PRO clay suspension and a
5.5% CMC solution, the use of the vane as compared to the equivalent concentric cylinder gave the same
result in the Newtonian region at very low stresses, but that at higher stresses, the vane reduced the amount
of slip. However, as we shall see below, the outer smooth cup could still cause some slip, and in fact
their results still showed some strange effects.
Lastly, Barnes and co-workers [21] later used the vane geometry to measure the flow properties of very
shear-thinning non-Newtonian liquid products in the home and personal care area, as well as examples
in the food and bio-processing areas. They improved the simple vane geometry by the addition of a
slender gauze basket inserted inside an outer cylinder (see Fig. 4), which eliminates slip there also. With
this modification, the flow curves obtained for various shear-thinning liquids were found to exhibit the
expected smooth continuous, but precipitous, drop from a high value of viscosity to a much lower value,
with no breaks in the curve, see for instance Fig. 5. They also showed that even with the vane, but without
the basket, a break in the curve indicating wall slip could still be seen, albeit at a higher stress [16].
One obvious limitation to the use of the vane geometry is for low-viscosity liquids, where inertial effects
become important, and simple concentric flow-lines becomes distorted in some way, even to the extent
of vortices forming behind the blades for low-viscosity liquids (although this has not been established
unequivocally). The extra dissipation of energy associated with these flow distortions means that the
indicated viscosity would be too high. Many structured liquids drop from a very high viscosity at low
shear stress to quite a low viscosity at higher stress, but often this means that we are in this forbidden range.
Fig. 6 shows the typical situation for two low-viscosity Newtonian silicone oils measured at relatively
high rotation rates. More work needs to be done to properly understand and characterise this limitation,
so that areas where serious artefacts are introduced can be avoided.
4. General applications
The vane has become a standard way of measuring the yield stress of food systems, see [22] for a
collection of useful references in this area. Steffe [22] claims that overall, the vane method has much to
H.A. Barnes, Q.D. Nguyen / J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 98 (2001) 114
Fig. 4. The vane-and-basket geometry.
offer the food engineer in need of a yield stress measurement: the technique involves a simple theory that
produces quick, reproducible results using equipment that is inexpensive and durable.
The vane has been advocated widely by the food technology groups in the USA headed by Steffe and
Daubert, see [23,24]. Indeed, there have been efforts to make the vane method a national standard for
measurement of the yield stress of food (US National Research Committee NC-136) [25].
Fig. 5. The flow curves for three concentrations of Carbopol 940 dispersions in water measured using the vane-and-basket
geometry.
H.A. Barnes, Q.D. Nguyen / J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 98 (2001) 114
Fig. 6. The normalised viscosity (measured over actual), m /, vs. the quotient of rotation rate and actual viscosity, w/, for two
silicone oils of viscosities 0.0125 Pa s (crosses) and 0.047 Pa s (triangles), respectively, measured in a small, four-bladed vane
geometry with the vane height, l = 20 mm, vane radius, a = 5 mm and an outer cylinder diameter of 12.84 mm.
5. Specific applications studied using the vane geometry
There are five general areas where the vane geometry has been frequently used to measure one or
another rheological properties. These areas are
inorganic colloidal dispersions,
liquid-like foods,
bioengineering systems (fermentation broths, etc.),
miscellaneous dispersions, and
foams, etc.
and various examples of these are given in Tables 15.
Table 1
Some uses of the vane geometry for inorganic colloidal dispersions, listed alphabetically
Worker(s) and reference
Type of dispersion
Comments
Alderman et al. [9]
Benna et al. [26]
Chang and Smith [27]
Franks et al. [28]
James et al. [29]
Leong [30]
Liddell et al. [31]
Lin et al. [32]
Pignon et al. [33]
Ramakrishnan et al. [34]
Yanez et al. [35]
Bentonite
Sodium bentonite
Nuclear waste slurries
Alumna suspensions
Illite suspensions
ZrO2
TiO2 pigment
Non-aqueous iron-oxide
Discotic clay
Ceramic powders
Alumnazirconia suspensions
Yield stress
Effect of pH on rheology
Rheological characterisation
Ion-specific yield stress
Yield stress
Depletion interaction
Yield stress
Rheological model
Yield stress
Effect of solids loading and pH
Effect of electrolyte on rheology
10
H.A. Barnes, Q.D. Nguyen / J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 98 (2001) 114
Table 2
Some uses of the vane geometry for food systems listed alphabetically
Worker(s) and reference
Type of food system
Comments
Briggs et al. [36]
Daubert et al. [37]
Dimonte et al. [38]
Geraghty and Butler [39]
Houska et al. [40]
Mleko and Foegeding [41]
Missaire et al. [42]
Pernell et al. [43]
Rao [44]
Rao and Steffe [45]
Truong and Daubert [46]
Tucker et al. [47]
Wilson et al. [48]
Yoo and Rao [49,50]
Zhang and Nguyen [51]
Frozen ice cream
Various spreads
Virgin yoghurt
Commercial yoghurt
Fruit pectin jam
Processed cheese analogue
Apple pulps
Various protein foams
Mustard
Various foods
Gellan gum gels
Modified starch suspensions
Molten chocolate
Tomato puree
Mayonnaise
Yield stress
Measure of food spreadability
Yield stress
Used with cup in bob geometry
Yield stress
Yield stress
Yield stress
Yield stress
Structural approach to rheology
Yield stress
Yield stress
Used with pulse shearometry
Yield stress and flow
Yield stress and viscosity
Thixotropy
Table 3
Some uses of the vane geometry for bioengineering systems listed alphabetically
Worker(s) and reference
Bioengineering system
Comments
Leongpoi and Allen [52]
Mohseni and Allen [53]
Mohseni et al. [54]
Pernell et al. [55]
Svihla et al. [56]
Truong and Daubert [46]
Fermentation broths, ketchup, Yoghurt, and pulp suspensions
Various fermentation broths
Various fermentation broths
Protein foams
Filamentous suspensions
Soybean protein
Yield stress
Yield stress
Yield stress
Yield stress
Vane as a mixer element
Yield stress
Table 4
Some uses of the vane geometry for various dispersions listed alphabetically
Worker(s) and reference
Type of dispersion
Comments
Austin et al. [57]
Haimoni and Hannant [58]
Iyer and Stanmore [59]
Leong et al. [60]
Nguyen and Boger [61]
Pinkerton and Norton [62]
Przewlocki [63]
Rajgelj [64]
Stanmore and Page [65]
Turian et al. [66]
Turian et al. [67]
Wardhaugh and Boger [68]
Wichmann and Riehl [69]
Wet-process sprayed mortars
Oil well cements
Dense fly-ash slurries
Brown coal slurries
Bauxite residue
Lavas from Mount Etna
Brickmaking clay
Fresh concrete mortars
Dense fly-ash slurries
Coalwater mixtures
Mineral slurries
Waxy crude-oil
Waterworks sludge
Rheological performance
Gel strength
Yield stress
Yield stress and thixotropy
Thixotropy
Newtonian above 1120 C
Shear strength
Effect of parameters
Shear failure
Yield stress
Settling and rheology
Yielding behaviour
Shear strength
H.A. Barnes, Q.D. Nguyen / J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 98 (2001) 114
11
Table 5
Some uses of the vane geometry for various materials listed alphabetically
Worker(s) and reference
Type of dispersion
Comments
Arola et al. [70]
Gardiner et al. [71]
Rosentrater et al. [72]
Zhang et al. [73]
Microfibrous cellulose
Aqueous foams in dry limit
Corn masa by-products
Reactive polyurethane foam
Vane results compared with velocity field from MRI
Yield stress
Yield stress
Modulus development
For a very good review of the use of the vane for measuring soil strength, see reference [74], which
contains 22 papers on all aspects of the use of the vane for soils and is well worth reading.
6. Conclusions
Vane geometries are now available as standard or special items for most rheometers or viscometers,
see Fig. 1 for example, but otherwise they are easy to fabricate, and their use adds significantly to the
repertoire of any general rheology laboratory. This is particularly true for the measurement of materials
where there is reason to believe that significant slip effects might be expected, see Barnes [75].
Acknowledgements
Thanks are due to Wolfgang Marquardt of the Haake viscometer company (Gebrueder Haake, Karlsruhe,
Germany) for information on the history of their vane geometry, and Mark Harris for help in collecting
the data for Fig. 6.
References
[1] J.L. Russel, Studies of thixotropic gelation. Part II. The coagulation of clay suspensions, Proc. Roy. Soc. London, Series A
154 (1936) 550560.
[2] Q.D. Nguyen, D.V. Boger, On the measurement of the yield stress of concentrated red mud suspensions, in: M. Keentok
(Ed.), Proceedings of the 2nd National Conference on Rheology, Australian Society of Rheology, University of Sydney,
Australia, 1981, pp. 1924.
[3] Q.D. Nguyen, D.V. Boger, Yield stress measurement for concentrated suspension, J. Rheology 27 (4) (1983) 335347.
[4] Q.D. Nguyen, D.V. Boger, Direct yield stress measurement with the vane method, J. Rheol. 29 (3) (1985) 335347.
[5] M. Keentok, The measurement of the yield stress of liquids, Rheol. Acta 21 (1982) 325332.
[6] J. Nijman, S. Chakrabarti, A rotational rheometer for material characterization by the rheologist and the non-rheologist,
Am. Lab. 29 (16) (1997) 17.
[7] J.D. Sherwood, G.H. Meeten, The use of the vane to measure the shear modulus of linear elastic solids, J. Non-Newtonian
Fluid Mech. 41 (1/2) (1991) 101118.
[8] C. Atkinson, J.D. Sherwood, The torque on a rotating N-bladed vane in a Newtonian fluid or linear elastic medium, Proc.
Royal Soc. London, Series A Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 438 (1992) 183196.
[9] N.J. Alderman, G.H. Meeten, J.D. Sherwood, Vane rheometry of bentonite gels, J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 39 (3)
(1991) 291310.
[10] H.A. Barnes, K. Walters, The yield stress myth? Rheol. Acta 24 (4) (1985) 323326.
12
H.A. Barnes, Q.D. Nguyen / J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 98 (2001) 114
[11] H.A. Barnes, The yield stress a review or everything flows? J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 81 (1999)
133178.
[12] H.A. Barnes, A brief history of the yield stress, Appl. Rheol. 9 (6) (1999) 262266.
[13] Q.D. Nguyen, D.V. Boger, Measuring the flow properties of yield stress fluids, Ann. Rev. Fluid Mech. 24 (1992) 4788.
[14] A.S. Yoshimura, K. Prudhomme, H.M. Princen, A.D. Kiss, A comparison of techniques for measuring yield stresses, J.
Rheol. 31 (8) (1987) 699710.
[15] M. Keentok, J.F. Milthorpe, E. ODonovan, On the shearing zone around rotating vanes in plastic liquids: theory and
experiment, J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 17 (1985) 2335.
[16] J. Yan, A.E. James, The yield surface of viscoelastic and plastic fluids in a vane viscometer, J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech.
70 (3) (1997) 237253.
[17] H.A. Barnes, J.O. Carnali, The vane-in-cup as a novel rheometer geometry for shear thinning and thixotropic materials, J.
Rheol. 34 (6) (1990) 841866.
[18] L. Cadling, S. Odenstad, Vane borer. An apparatus for determining the shear strength of clay soils directly in the ground,
Proc. Roy. Soc., Swed. Geotech. Inst. 2 (1950) 7.
[19] P.V. Liddell, R.J. Binnington, D.V. Boger, Yield stress measurements understanding the vane technique, in: Proceedings
of the 7th National Conference on Rheology, Australian Society of Rheology, Brisbane, 1994, pp. 131134.
[20] G.H. Meeten, J.D. Sherwood, Vane technique for shear-sensitive and wall-slipping fluids, in: P. Moldenaers, R. Keunings
(Eds.), Proceedings of the 11th International Congress on Rheology: Theoretical and Applied Rheology, Brussels, 1992,
Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1992, pp. 935937.
[21] H.A. Barnes, A Handbook of Elementary Rheology, The University of Wales Institute of Non-Newtonian Fluid Mechanics,
Aberystwyth, 2000, ISBN 0-9538032-0-1.
[22] J.F. Steffe, Rheological Methods in Food Process Engineering, Freeman Press, East Lancing, 1992.
[23] T.A. Glenn III, K.M. Keener, C.R. Daubert, A mixer viscometry approach to use vane tools as steady shear rheological
attachments, Appl. Rheol. 10 (2) (2000) 8089.
[24] C.R. Daubert, J.F. Steffe, in: Proceedings of the Institute of Food Technologists Annual Meeting 2000, Dallas Texas,
Session 70 (Rheology of Food and Biomaterials), Paper 7, History and recent applications of the vane method, Institute of
Food Technology, [Link]
[25] J.F. Steffe, C.R. Daubert, in: Proceedings of the Institute of Food Technologists Annual Meeting, Dallas Texas, 2000,
Session 2 (Standard Methods for Measurement of Physical Properties of Foods), Paper 2, The vane method: a standard
procedure for yield stress determination, Institute of Food Technology, [Link]
[26] M. Benna, N. Kbir-Ariguib, A. Magnin, F. Bergaya, Effect of pH on rheological properties of purified sodium bentonite
suspensions, J. Colloid Interface Sci. 218 (2) (1999) 442455.
[27] C.Y. Chang, P.A. Smith, Rheological characterization of nuclear waste slurries, Particulate Sci. Technol. 14 (2) (1996)
165180.
[28] G.V. Franks, S.B. Johnson, P.J. Scales, D.V. Boger DV, T.W. Healy, Ion-specific strength of attractive particle networks,
Langmuir 15 (13) (1999) 44114420.
[29] A.E. James, D.J.A. Williams, P.R. Williams, Direct measurement of static yield properties of cohesive suspensions, Rheol.
Acta 26 (1987) 437446.
[30] Y.K. Leong, Depletion interaction in colloidal suspensions: a comparison between theory and experiment, Colloids Surf.
A Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 118 (1/2) (1996) 107114.
[31] P.V. Liddell, D.V. Boger, Yield stress measurements with the vane, J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 63 (2/3) (1996) 235261.
[32] Y.S. Lin, T.J. Liu, N.J. Chu, A rheological model for iron-oxide suspensions, J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 42 (6) (1991) 17671772.
[33] F. Pignon, J.M. Piau, A. Magnin, A structure and pertinent length scale of a discotic clay gel, Phys. Rev. Lett. 76 (25) (1996)
48574860.
[34] V. Ramakrishnan, S.G. Malghan, Yield stress of alumnazirconia suspensions, J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 79 (10) (1996) 2567
2576.
[35] J.A. Yanez, T. Shikata, F.E. Lange, D.S. Pearson, Shear modulus and yield stress measurements of attractive alumna particle
networks in aqueous slurries, J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 79 (11) (1996) 29172924.
[36] J.L. Briggs, J.F. Steffe, Z. Ustunol, Vane method to evaluate the yield stress of frozen ice cream, J. Dairy Sci. 79 (4) (1996)
527531.
[37] C.R. Daubert, J.A. Tkachuk, V.D. Truong, Quantitative measurement of food spreadability using the vane method, J. Text.
Studies 29 (4) (1998) 427435.
H.A. Barnes, Q.D. Nguyen / J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 98 (2001) 114
13
[38] G. Dimonte, D. Nelson, S. Weaver, M. Schneider, E. Flower-Maudlin, R. Gore, J.R. Baumgardner, M.S. Sahota, Comparative
study of viscoelastic properties using virgin yoghurt, J. Rheol. 42 (4) (1998) 727742.
[39] R. Geraghty, F. Butler, Viscosity characterisation of a commercial yoghurt, J. Food Process Eng. 22 (1) (1999) 110.
[40] M. Houska, J. Ouhrabkova, D. Patkova, M. Ciganik, K. Kyhos, Rheological properties of fruit pectin jam, in: E. Windhaub, B.
Wolf (Eds.), Proceedings of the 1st International Symposium on Food Rheology and Structure, Vincentz Verlag, Hannover,
1997, pp. 359361.
[41] S. Mleko, E.A. Foegeding, Physical properties of rennet casein gels and processed cheese analogs containing whey proteins,
Milchwissenschaft-Milk Sci. Intl. 55 (2000) 513516.
[42] F. Missaire, C.G. Qiu, M.A. Rao, Yield stress of structured and unstructured food suspensions, J. Text. Studies 21 (4) (1990)
479490.
[43] C.W. Pernell, E.A. Foegeding, C.R. Daubert, Measurement of the yield stress of protein foams by vane rheometry, J. Food
Sci. 65 (1) (2000) 110114.
[44] M.A. Rao, The structural approach to rheology of plant food dispersions, Revista Espanola de Ciencia Y Tecnologia de
Alimentos 32 (1) (1992) 317.
[45] M.A. Rao, J.F. Steffe, Measuring yield stress of fluid foods, Food Tech. 51 (2) (1997) 5052.
[46] V.D. Truong, C.R. Daubert, Comparative study of large strain methods for assessing failure characteristics of selected food
gels, J. Text. Studies 31 (2000) 335353.
[47] G.S. Tucker, I.D. Roberts, P.R. Williams, An improved vane technique for the measurement of viscoelasticity and apparent
viscosity of modified starch systems, in: E. Windhaub, B. Wolf (Eds.), Proceedings of the 1st International Symposium on
Food Rheology and Structure, Vincentz Verlag, Hannover, 1997, pp. 228232.
[48] L.L. Wilson, R.A. Speers, M.A. Tung, Yield stresses in molten chocolates, J. Text. Studies 24 (3) (1993) 269286.
[49] B. Yoo, M.A. Rao, An effect of unimodal particle-size and pulp content on rheological properties of tomato puree, J. Text.
Studies 25 (4) (1994) 421436.
[50] B. Yoo, M.A. Rao, Yield stress and relative viscosity of tomato concentrates effect of total solids and finisher screen
size, J. Food Sci. 60 (4) (1995) 777.
[51] X.M. Zhang, Q.D. Nguyen, Movement of the yield boundary of time-dependent yield stress fluids in couette flow, in:
Proceedings of the 12th International Congress on Rheology, Quebec, Canada, 1996, Canadian Rheology Group, Chemical
Engineering Department, Laval University, p. 560.
[52] L. Leongpoi, D.G. Allen, Direct measurement of the yield stress of filamentous fermentation broths with the rotating vane
technique, Biotechnol. Bioeng. 40 (3) (1992) 403412.
[53] M. Mohseni, D.G. Allen, The effect of particle morphology and concentration on the directly measured yield stress in
filamentous suspensions, Biotechnol. Bioeng. 48 (3) (1995) 257265.
[54] M. Mohseni, H. Kautola, D.G. Allen, The viscoelastic nature of filamentous fermentation broths and its influence on the
directly measured yield stress, J. Ferment. Bioeng. 83 (3) (1997) 281286.
[55] C.W. Purnell, E.A. Foegeding, C.R. Daubert, Measurement of the yield stress of protein foams by vane rheometry, J. Food
Sci. 65 (2000) 110114.
[56] C.K. Svihla, S. N Dronawat, J.A. Donnelly, T.C. Rieth, T.R. Hanley, Measurement of the steady-state shear characteristics
of filamentous suspensions using turbine, vane, and helical impellers, Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 63 (5) (1997) 375385.
[57] S.A. Austin, P.J. Robins, C.I. Goodier, The rheological performance of wet-process sprayed mortars, Mag. Concrete Res.
51 (5) (1999) 341352.
[58] A. Haimoni, D.J. Hannant, Developments in the shear vane test to measure the gel strength of oil-well cement slurry, Adv.
Cement Res. 1 (4) (1988) 221.
[59] R.S. Iyer, B. Stanmore, The effect of water absorption and the role of fines on the yield stress of dense fly-ash slurries,
Cement Concrete Res. 29 (1999) 765767.
[60] Y.K. Leong, D.E. Creasy, D.V. Boger, Q.D. Nguyen, Rheology of brown coalwater suspensions, Rheol. Acta 26 (3) (1987)
291300.
[61] Q.D. Nguyen, D.V. Boger, Thixotropic behaviour of concentrated bauxite residue suspensions, Rheol. Acta 24 (1985)
427437.
[62] H. Pinkerton, G. Norton, Laboratory and field-measurements on lavas from Mount Etna, J. Volcanol. Geothermal Res.
68 (4) (1995) 307323.
[63] J. Przewlocki, Two-dimensional random field of mechanical soil properties, J. Geotech. Geoenv. Eng. 126 (2000) 373377.
14
H.A. Barnes, Q.D. Nguyen / J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 98 (2001) 114
[64] S. Rajgelj, Cohesion aspects in rheological behaviour of fresh concrete mortars, Materiaux et Construction 18 (104) (1985)
109114.
[65] B.R. Stanmore, D.W. Page, Yield stresses and sedimentation in dense fly-ash slurries, Powder Technol. 72 (2) (1992)
167175.
[66] R.M. Turian, M.K. Fakhreddine, K.S. Avramidis, D. Sung, Yield stress of coalwater mixtures, Fuel 72 (9) (1993) 1305
1315.
[67] R.M. Turian, T.W. Ma, F.L. Hsu, D. Sung, Characterization, settling, and rheology of concentrated fine particulate mineral
slurries, Powder Technol. 93 (3) (1997) 219233.
[68] L.T. Wardhaugh, D.V. Boger, The measurement and description of the yielding behavior of waxy crude-oil, J. Rheol. 35 (6)
(1991) 11211156.
[69] K. Wichmann, A. Riehl, Mechanical properties of waterwork sludge shear strength, Water Sci. Technol. 36 (11) (1997)
4350.
[70] D.F. Arola, R.L. Powell, G.A. Barrall, M.J. McCarthy, Point-wise observations for rheological characterization using nuclear
magnetic resonance imaging, J. Rheol. 43 (1) (1999) 930.
[71] B.S. Gardiner, B.Z. Dlugogorski, G.J. Jameson, Yield stress measurements of aqueous foams in the dry limit, J. Rheol.
42 (6) (1998) 14371450.
[72] K.A. Rosentrater, R.A. Flores, T.L. Richard, C.J. Bern, Physical and nutritional properties of corn masa by-product streams,
Appl. Eng. Agric. 15 (1999) 515523.
[73] X.D. Zhang, D.W. Giles, V.H. Barocas, K. Yasunaga, C.W. Macosko, Measurement of foam modulus via a vane rheometer,
J. Rheol. 42 (4) (1998) 871889.
[74] A.F. Richards (Ed.), Vane Shear Strength Testing in Soils: Field and Laboratory Studies, STP 1014, ASTM, Philadelphia,
1988.
[75] H.A. Barnes, A review of the slip (wall depletion) of polymer solutions, emulsions and particle suspensions in viscometers:
its cause, character and cure, J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 56 (1995) 221251.