Comparison of three rotational shear cell testers: Powder flowability and bulk density

• The measurements of three commercially available shear cells were compared.
• For the cases here, the shear cell type is generally statistically significant.
• For the cases here, the flow function is the ratio of packing to material properties.
• For the cases here, the initial consolidation stress is statistically significant.

Developed to aid in the design of hoppers and silos, the shear cell is now frequently used to rank the flowability of powders relative to one another. While standards, such as ASTM D6773 and D6128, exist for shear cell tests, there are still differences between commercially available shear cell testers, such as cell geometry and size. In this work, we used two materials, a free-flowing alumina and a cohesive alumina, to compare measurements from three commercially available rotational shear cells. Results were collected and compared for cohesion, unconfined yield stress, major principal stress, pre-shear stress, flow function coefficient, bulk density, effective angle of internal friction, and the angle of internal friction. ANOVA methods were used to determine the statistical significance and relative size of each of these effects. This work has found that while, as expected, the material type has the largest effect on the shear cell results, the consolidation at which the material was tested and the tester type are also statistically significant effects. These results indicate that care should be taken when comparing the results between different shear cells.

Figure optionsDownload as PowerPoint slide