| Literature DB >> 32389081 |
C M Ionescu1,2,3, I R Birs1,2,3, D Copot1,2,3, C I Muresan2, R Caponetto4.
Abstract
The paper proposes a mathematical framework for the use of fractional-order impedance models to capture fluid mechanics properties in frequency-domain experimental datasets. An overview of non-Newtonian (NN) fluid classification is given as to motivate the use of fractional-order models as natural solutions to capture fluid dynamics. Four classes of fluids are tested: oil, sugar, detergent and liquid soap. Three nonlinear identification methods are used to fit the model: nonlinear least squares, genetic algorithms and particle swarm optimization. The model identification results obtained from experimental datasets suggest the proposed model is useful to characterize various degree of viscoelasticity in NN fluids. The advantage of the proposed model is that it is compact, while capturing the fluid properties and can be identified in real-time for further use in prediction or control applications. This article is part of the theme issue 'Advanced materials modelling via fractional calculus: challenges and perspectives'.Entities:
Keywords: fractional-order impedance model; frequency response; genetic algorithm; non-Newtonian fluids; viscoelasticity
Year: 2020 PMID: 32389081 PMCID: PMC7287316 DOI: 10.1098/rsta.2019.0284
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci ISSN: 1364-503X Impact factor: 4.226
Figure 1.Schematic of unidirectional shearing flow.
Figure 2.Classification tree of non-Newtonian fluids.
Figure 3.Qualitative representation of the apparent viscosity behaviour for a shear-thinning fluid.
Figure 4.Qualitative viscosity curve for a shear-thickening fluid.
Figure 5.Qualitative shear stress-shear rate behaviour for thixotropic and rheopectic materials.
Figure 6.ModuLab XM measurement device with afferent instrumentation for experimental testing of various NN fluid impedance characteristics. The GUI data are a polar plot, with real and imaginary parts as a function of excited frequencies. (Online version in colour.)
Figure 7.Flowchart of typical implementation of the genetic algorithm.
Figure 8.Flowchart of typical implementation of PSO algorithm.
Upper and lower bounds for class NN1 (honey and glucose) and class NN2 (hand soap and shampoo) test samples.
| class | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NN1 | min | 0 | −1010 | 108 | −2 | 0 |
| max | 102 | −108 | 1010 | 0 | 2 | |
| NN2 | min | 0 | −105 | 103 | −2 | 0 |
| max | 102 | −103 | 105 | 0 | 2 |
Figure 9.Glucose: comparison between optimization algorithms. (Online version in colour.)
Figure 10.Honey: comparison between optimization algorithms. (Online version in colour.)
Figure 11.Hand soap: comparison between optimization algorithms. (Online version in colour.)
Figure 12.Shampoo: comparison between optimization algorithms. (Online version in colour.)
Identified model parameter values and normalized error.
| NMSE | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| glucose | GA | 0 | −5.35 × 109 | 3.91 × 109 | −0.96 | 0.91 | 4.32 × 10−5 |
| PSO | 0 | −7.19 × 109 | 5.84 × 109 | −0.95 | 0.92 | 4.46 × 10−5 | |
| LSQ | 0 | −7.19 × 109 | 5.84 × 109 | −0.95 | 0.92 | 4.28 × 10−5 | |
| honey | GA | 0 | −2.04 × 109 | 3.61 × 108 | −1.10 | 0.82 | 4.53 × 10−5 |
| PSO | 0 | −3.26 × 109 | 2.09 × 109 | −0.97 | 0.90 | 4.03 × 10−5 | |
| LSQ | 0 | −5.05 × 109 | 5.05 × 109 | −0.84 | 0.84 | 1.24 × 10−4 | |
| hand soap | GA | 33.2 | −1.67 × 104 | 1.48 × 105 | −0.89 | 0.89 | 2.22 × 10−5 |
| PSO | 32.5 | −1.01 × 104 | 1.37 × 105 | −0.89 | 0.89 | 2.16 × 10−5 | |
| LSQ | 32.8 | −1.30 × 104 | 2.66 × 105 | −0.89 | 0.89 | 2.22 × 10−5 | |
| shampoo | GA | 18.5 | −1.00 × 104 | 3.92 × 104 | −2.00 | 0.84 | 6.46 × 10−5 |
| PSO | 18.0 | −1.00 × 104 | 3.47 × 104 | −2.00 | 0.82 | 5.67 × 10−5 | |
| LSQ | 18.3 | −1.03 × 104 | 5.25 × 104 | −0.85 | 0.85 | 6.67 × 10−5 |
Identified model parameter values in engine oil as a function of temperature.
| temperature | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 22°C | 1.602 | −2.124 | 7.099 | −1.340 | 1.070 |
| 27°C | 1.073 | −3.041 | 6.584 | −1.005 | 1.004 |
| 46°C | 1.792 | −1.955 | 7.008 | −1.320 | 1.066 |
| 63°C | 1.347 | −2.152 | 8.099 | −1.304 | 1.084 |
Identified model parameter values in various food oils.
| oil type | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| avocado | 1.103 | −5.146 | 7.271 | −1.095 | 1.037 |
| corn | 4.543 | 3.422 | 2.934 | −1.583 | 0.995 |
| olive | 6.691 | −5.230 | 3.003 | −1.576 | 0.997 |
Identified model parameter values in household fluids.
| type | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| soft detergent | 2.671 | −0.510 | 0.521 | −0.818 | 0.827 |
| hand soap | 2.322 | −0.507 | 0.516 | −0.601 | 0.637 |
| shampoo | 3.514 | −0.564 | 0.504 | −0.628 | 0.651 |
| standard detergent | 4.415 | −0.508 | 0.500 | −0.755 | 0.787 |
Identified model parameter values in mimicked biotissue consistency.
| type | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| gelatin1 | 3.415 | −0.510 | 0.604 | −0.131 | 0.380 |
| gelatin2 | 3.221 | −0.486 | 0.501 | −0.142 | 0.493 |
| gelatin3 | 2.915 | −0.681 | 0.320 | −0.158 | 0.560 |
| gelatin4 | 2.704 | −0.690 | 0.310 | −0.163 | 0.602 |