Rheol Acta 34:534-543 (1995)

Steinkopff Verlag 1995

Philippe Coussot
St6phane Boyer

Received: 15 February 1995

Accepted: 23 August 1995

Dr. P. Coussot (~) S. Boyer

CEMAGREF
Division Protection contre les Erosions
B.P. 76
Dom/tine Universitaire
38402 St-Martin-d'H~res, France

Determination of yield stress fluid behaviour

from inclined plane test

Abstract The aim of this paper is

to determine precisely under which
conditions an inclined plane can be
used as a rheometer, which could
represent a practical and rapid technique for various types of industrial or natural viscoplastic
coarse suspensions. We first examine its efficiency and relevancy for
determining fluid yield stress in a
straight way by measuring the
deepest fluid layer able to stay on
the inclined plane. We have made
experiments with different materials
(clay-water suspensions) whose yield
stress ranged from 35 to 90 Pa, using 1 m long open rectangular
channels with a slope ranging from
10 to 30 and a width ranging from
5 to 25 cm. Our procedure involved
measuring the final fluid depth far
from edges a long time after the
end of the slow gravity-induced
emptying of a dam placed
upstream. The fluid yield stress was
also estimated independently by fitting a Herschel-Bulkley model to
simple shear rheometry data obtained within a relatively wide shear
rate range. A good agreement between inclined rectangular channel
tests and independent usual
rheometrical tests is obtained even

for aspect ratios (flow depth to

channel width ratio) as large as 1
when one assumes that, when the
fluid has stopped, the side and bottom wall shear stresses are equal to
the fluid yield stress. These results
prove the efficiency of the inclined
plane test for determining yield
stress when appropriate experimental precautions are taken for both
tests. In addition we examine the
possibility of determining the simple shear flow curve of a mud suspension from fluid depth, velocity
and discharge measurements of different steady flows in a wide open
channel (8 m long; 60 cm wide)
equipped with a recirculating
system. The results obtained from
inclined plane tests are in good
agreement with independent
rheometrical data (with torsional
geometries). However it is technically difficult to cover a wide shear
rate range from the inclined plane
technique since this requires a rather wide channel flow rate range.
Key words Yield stress fluid rheological behaviour - mud
suspensions - inclined plane rheometer

P. Coussot and S: Boyer

Determination of yieldstress fluid behaviour from inclinedplane test

Introduction

Yield stress determination from inclined plane test

Free surface flows of slurry, mud or debris mixtures are

often encountered in nature, but many industrial applications also involve free surface flows of yield stress fluids
(foodstuffs, paints, fresh concrete). So far research has
mainly concentrated on the problem of determining yield
stress fluid properties, theoretical developments of constitutive relationships, and experimental studies of mud
rheology. In the aim of improving protection against
debris flows (Johnson, 1970; Pierson, 1980) we recently
(Coussot, 1994) started to study the possibility of predicting free surface flow characteristics with the help of accurate theological data. Since this kind of work is
situated between rheology and hydraulics, it has received
relatively poor attention from each side. However, even if
it will probably not bring important fundamental discoveries, this appears essential from a practical point of view.
Here we focus on the determination of rheological
properties of non-Newtonian (yield stress) fluids from inclined plane tests. This problem has many practical implications. Geophysicists or geologists currently determine the yield stress of debris-water mixtures or volcanic
lavas from measurements of fluid deposit depths
(Johnson, 1970; Hulme, 1974; Pierson, 1980, 1986; Fink
and Zimbelman, 1986; Wadge and Lopes, 1991). Additionally, for industrial fluids containing coarse particles
which cannot be tested in usual rheometers, inclined
plane test could constitute a relatively simple, practical
rheometrical test.
In the following we shall focus successively on these
two aspects: yield stress determination from the fluid
depth at rest in an inclined plane and flow curve determination from channel flow tests at different discharges.
In each case, after a review of the theoretical aspects of
the problem, we shall compare experimental results using
a rectangular inclined channel with rheometrical data obtained from usual torsional rheometers. As model yield
stress fluids we used fine clay-water suspensions without
apparent thixotropic properties. The steady state simple
shear behaviour of these fluids for different solid fractions can be represented by a Herschel-Bulkley model
(Coussot and Piau, 1994a; Coussot, 1994), but this has
no particular effect on our comparison between results
from inclined plane and usual torsional rheometers. In
order to go further than previous studies on this subject,
we propose systematic measurements within wide shear
rate ranges taking into account all possible disturbing effects for both tests (edge effects, wall slip, crack, etc.). It
appears that, as soon as both tests are carried out carefully, they provide similar results.

About the yield stress

535

The determination of the yield stress of a given fluid obviously relies on the assumption that this fluid effectively
exhib.its a yield stress. The real existence of yield stress has
recently been the subject of numerous discussions
(Barnes and Walters, 1985; Hartnett and Hu, 1989;
Astarita, 1990; Schurz, 1992; Evans, 1992; De Kee and
Chan Man Fong, 1993; Spaans and Williams, 1995). In
particular the discussion concerned the question of
whether so-called viscoplastic fluids have a real yield
stress below which they can be considered as solids or
simply exhibit a very high viscosity at low shear stress
levels. For our part we shall not try to give a complete
answer to this problem. We shall simply consider that, for
such a fluid, there generally exists an abrupt change in
behaviour type around a given shear stress value (Coussot
et al., 1993) that we can call the yield stress. Below this
critical stress value the fluid is deformed in an essentially
elastic manner. Above this critical value the fluid flows.
If one applies a low shear stress level to a fluid and waits
indefinitely, he may be able to observe smaller and
smaller residual irreversible deformations. So we shall
add to our definition that we refer to yield stress which
may be observed during usual experiments which correspond to the conditions of practical applications. Additionally, the concept expressed above can be supported by
physical arguments since the yield stress could be related
to the minimum shear stress value necessary to break the
continuous network of interacting particles through all of
the fluid (M'Ewen and Pratt, 1957; Hunter, 1982;
Coussot et al., 1993; Coussot and Piau, 1994a).
The methods commonly carried out to measure fluid
yield stress have been reviewed by different authors (Keentok, 1982; Magnin and Piau, 1987, 1990; Coussot and
Piau, 1994b; Nguyen and Boger, 1983, 1992). From a
conceptual point of view three types of methods can be
distinguished (Nguyen and Bogel, 1992). The first one
determines the yield stress by extrapolation of experimental flow curves towards low shear rate values. The second
one consists in determining the critical shear stress related
to a change in behaviour from controlled shear stress experiments (Coussot et al., 1993). Theoretically these two
methods should give the same result as long as the fluid
behaviour is "regular". However, for peculiar fluids (for
example fluids exhibiting a minimum (Coussot et al.,
1993)) more or less large differences can be observed. The
third method estimates the residual shear stress after
relaxation, which is thought to be equal to the yield stress
(Keentok, 1982).
From a practical point of view, various other techniques have been proposed for the determination of fluid
yield stress (Nguyen and Boger, 1983, 1992) but the inclined plane method has been the subject of very few

536

Rheologica Acta, Vol. 34, No. 6 (1995)

Steinkopff Verlag 1995

studies (Uhlherr et al., 1984; De Kee et al., 1990). This is

relatively surprising since it is of a very wide practical interest. However this just reflects the relatively limited
theoretical knowledge in the field of free surface flows of
viscoplastic fluids (Paslay and Slibar, 1958; Howard,
1963; Johnson, 1970; Bird et al., 1982) even though some
recent works provided interesting developments (Liu and
Mei, 1989, 1994). The inclined plane test could nevertheless be used to determine fluid yield stress using very
cheap and simple measurements which additionally can
be done in the field. Various fields could be concerned by
this method: fresh concrete, debris flows, food industry.
Furthermore it should make it possible to measure the
yield stress of coarse suspensions without carrying out
special experiments with large-scale prototype rheometers
like those presented in (Phillips and Davies, 1991; Major
and Pierson, 1992; Coussot and Piau, 1995).

Discussion of the inclined plane measurement

procedure
Let us consider a uniform fluid depth lying at rest on an
inclined plane. There are, at first sight, two simple ways
of obtaining a situation for which the fluid depth corresponds to the critical one limiting rest and flow. The
first way involves placing a uniform fluid layer in the initially horizontal plane. Then, one progressively inclines
this plane up to the critical slope for which a flow is observed (Uhlherr et al., 1984). This technique enters the
range of rheological tests under controlled shear stress.
Unfortunately this method is rather difficult to use in
practice. Indeed for usual shear-thinning yield stress
fluids the flow velocity just above the critical slope is infinitely small and generally increases slowly when the
slope is increased within a significant range including the
critical one. Thus the determination of this critical slope
is delicate and would certainly lead to large experimental
errors: it is necessary to wait a very long time at each new
slope level before being sure that the critical slope has not
been reached.
The second way involves imposing approximately a
steady flow at a given slope and then progressively stopping the upstream supply. Then one has to wait for flow to
be completely stopped before measuring the final fluid
depth. This method is much easier to achieve in practice
since it requires only one test at a given slope. We can thus
expect to obtain more relevant results than with the previous one and we chose to use it systematically. Our detailed experimental procedure is presented later on.
Another related method consists in extrapolating flow
curve obtained from steady free surface flows (cf. Section
II) towards low shear rates (Uhlherr et al., 1984; De Kee
et al., 1990).

Theory
We wish now to present some simple theoretical calculations which can be done to describe the main features of
this kind of flow. We shall assume that our yield stress
fluids have a behaviour which can be well represented by
a Herschel-Bulkley model:
fJ = 0 ~ r < r c ;

~)0 ~ r = rc+Kf~ 1/m ,

(1)

where r is the shear stress magnitude, ?) the shear rate

magnitude, and re, K and m are positive parameters. In
order to establish an analytical formula describing the
transient flow considered earlier, we need to assume that
inertia effects are negligible. This is especially true when
the flow is relatively slow, i.e. when the flow depth is not
too far from the asymptotic depth corresponding to rest
state. Then we assume that, at each instant, far from the
edges, the fluid depth is uniform, and that the uniform
flow corresponding to the actual uniform fluid depth is
reached. Under these conditions, we can use the discharge
equation established for Herschel-Bulkley fluids (De Kee
et al., 1990; Coussot, 1994) when neglecting surface tension and edge effects:
Hb m _

G_2(G_I)(m+I)((m+I)G+I

(m+ 1)(m+2)
rc(h~

I/rn
~U/

with H b = --~ \ - -

and

G - p g h rc(sini) , (2)

where U is the mean flow velocity, h the fluid depth, g the

gravity, p the fluid density and i the channel slope. Then,
using (2) along the equilibrium of mass fluxes:
d(DLh)_
dt

ULh

(3)

where L and D are the channel width and length and t is

the time, we easily obtain the following equation giving
the non-dimensional fluid depth G as a function of the
non-dimensional time T:
dG _
dT

1
(l+m)(2+m)

with T =

(G_l)(i+m)(l+(l+m)G)

rc
p g (sin i ) D

t .

(4)

The asymptotic depth (h0) corresponding to rest state

is reached when G drops to 1, which gives us the wellknown result:
r c = p g h o (sin i) ,

(5)

P. Coussot and S. Boyer

Determination of yield stress fluid behaviour from inclined plane test
1,5

537

ferent mixtures are presented in Table 1. The uncertainty

on density measurements was approximately 1%.

(3
1,4

1,3 ,

Apparatus
1,2
1,1
1,0
100

........ ,
........

101

. . . .

102

103

10

......,

........

105

- -

106

10

Fig. 1 Evolution of the non-dimensional uniform fluid depth with

non-dimensional time after an upstream supply cut (starting from
the initial steady flow corresponding to G = 2)
which might have been obtained directly from momentum balance (Johnson, 1970). In our case we took m = 3
since it has always made it possible to fit correctly the
Eq. (1) on the data. Then the curve corresponding to the
Eq. (4) can be drawn (cf. Fig. 1) and we deduce that Tcorresponding to a depth exceeding the asymptotic depth by
respectively 1070 and 5% is respectively approximately
1000 and 9000. This means that, theoretically, in our
range of experiments, the corresponding time ranges
respectively from 23 to 213 min and from 3.5 to 32 h.
These ranges provide only orders of magnitude for the
real times since our experimental procedure does not correspond exactly to the theoretical analysis (initial conditions and boundary conditions).

We used a Haake (ROTOVISCO RV20) controlled rate

rheometer. The geometry was either parallel plates
(radius: 2.5 cm; gap: 3 mm) or a holed cone and plate
system (outer radius: 3 cm; inner diameter: 1.5 cm; cone
angle: 5.7). For more details about this geometry, see
Coussot and Piau (1994b).
As an inclined plane we used a 1-m-long channel
whose width could be varied between 5 and 25 cm and
whose slope could be varied between 10 and 30 . The bottom surface was plywood. It has been shown by Coussot
(1994) that wall slip is negligible for mud flows on this
surface type. Indeed this author compared successfully
the measured uniform flow depths with theoretical
predictions (based on rheometrical tests) and also observed no flow depth change when using surfaces with
different roughness.

Experimental procedure

Rheometry. The experimental procedure used to determine suspension flow curve and the precautions required
to avoid any significant influence of a perturbing effect
such as wall slip, fracture, settling, segregation, edge
evolution, etc., were described in depth in (Magnin and
Piau, 1987, 1990; Coussot et al., 1993; Coussot and Piau,
1994b). Here we shall only focus on the specific correcExperiments
tions making it possible to take into account the slight
hollow, also referred to as fracture in literature (Hutton,
Materials
1975) which forms at the peripheral free surface of the
fluid during tests (Coussot et al., 1993). The small materiWe tested two types of mud mixtures at different solid al parts above and below this hollow are hardly sheared.
concentrations. The first solid material was a natural clay, A short time after the beginning of a test this hollow is
kaoline (from Silice et Kaolin firm, Isbre, France), with a steady. Then it is possible to estimate its extent from
very fine grain size distribution (around i ~m). The sec- observations during the test and after separation of the
ond one was a natural fine material (Sinard clay) collected tools. For the parallel plate system we finally considered
in a clayey landslide near Grenoble (France). Its grain size that the effective mean sheared fluid diameter was 4.8 cm.
distribution is expanded between 0.1 and 40 gm. A given For the holed cone and plate system, the material could
volume of one of these materials was dried, then added slightly flow out of the tools and finally the mean sheared
to water and finally mixed by hand or by the recirculating fluid diameter was thought to correspond approximately
pump during about 25 rain. The characteristics of the dif- to the theoretical diameter (6 cm). We observed (using the

Table 1 Characteristics of
materials used for yield stress
determination from inclined
plane tests

Material

Kaolin-water mixture

(Number)

p (kg/m 3)
zc (Pa)
K (Pa.s 1/3)

1450
36.2
17.4

1478
51.3
23.3

1477
62.3
29.1

1492
79.5
38.7

1509
90.3
28.4

1424
36.2
11

1446
39.5
12.5

1484
68.1
22.6

Sinard clay-water mixture

538

Rheologica Acta, Vol. 34, No. 6 (1995)

Steinkopff Verlag 1995

system of marking of Coussot and Piau, 1994b) that the

fluid layer (about 2 mm deep) staying in the middle of the
tools (within the cone hole) was not sheared during our
tests and we neglected the influence of this part of the
sample in calculations.
Since we needed reliable rheometrical measurements
we first compared results obtained with the two different
geometries (cf. examples presented in Fig. 2). The largest
discrepancy between these results is 15%. We think this
corresponds to the global uncertainty on our rheometrical tests.
We fitted a Herschel-Bulkley model to flow curve data
in a same way as in Coussot and Piau (1994a). Yield
stress parameters obtained from parallel plates and holed
cone and plate experiments are approximately equal (cf.
Fig. 3). In the following we shall refer to parameters (see
Table 1) corresponding to parallel plate data. Here, since
we are dealing with (regular) non-thixotropic fluids (at
our scale of observation) and since we made tests at sufficiently low shear rate levels, this model yield stress is very
close to the true yield stress (Coussot and Piau, 1994a).
However, in view of the difference (cf. Fig. 3) between
yield stress determination from our two rheometrical tests
followed by model fitting, we think that the global uncertainty on rheometrical yield stress determination by this
technique is approximately 20%.

downstream edge of the channel. After the complete

opening of the bottom valve, the fluid went on flowing
along the channel. Then it fell down and/or flowed along
the downstream vertical channel edge. To avoid any influence by this latter flow, we regularly cleaned the mate100

HerscheI-Bulkley yield stress (Pa)

[] K o,n-watermix ur s

G)

/~
/

11. 80'

60'
O
O
"O
'~
"r

40'

20
4'0

20

6'0

8'0

1 00

Parallel plates

Fig. 3 Comparison of model yield stresses obtained from

rheometrical results using holed cone and plate and parallel plates

Incfined plane test: Our channel was equipped with a

damming system located upstream (see Fig. 4 a - b ) . This
system was initially filled with material. Then a bottom
valve (gate) was progressively opened so that the fluid
could slowly flow downstream (see Fig. 4a). The total
volume supplied was large enough for fluid to reach the

Flow start after

gate opening

Gate
Material

~Y
0

103

Kaolin-water mixture (1):

Parallel plates (Radius=2.5 cm; Gap:3 mm)
o Holed cone-plate (Radii: 3 and 1.5 cm; Angle: 5.7)
Sinard clay-water mixture (e):
[] Holed cone-plate
Parallel plates

-ff

_~-~71~,.~

102

0~

Final fluid position

after stoppage

Material
h

10 1
lo-2

Cleaning

HerscheI-Bulkley model
.

lo-1

lo 0

1o 1

02

Shear rate (l/s)

Fig. 2 Clay-water mixtures: simple shear flow curves obtained
from rheometrical tests with two geometry types and HerschelBulkley model fitting

Fig. 4 A - B Side views of the principle scheme of the inclined

plane apparatus used for yield stress determination. Fluid position
at two different stages of one test: (a) just after beginning the test;
(b) end of the test

P. Coussot and S. Boyer

Determination of yield stress fluid behaviour from inclined plane test
rial stopped there. We then waited a time long enough for
the fluid to appear completely stopped in the channel (see
Fig. 4b). Only the second part of the test, i.e. when the
fluid has reached the downstream edge, is thought to correspond to the flow type described earlier. During the first
part of the test which was much shorter than the second
one, the fluid depth was far from uniform. This flow type
has been studied by Liu and Mei (1989).
In general, the fluid appeared to flow slowly during a
time comprised between 15 and 40 rain. Then after the
last observed material downstream drop, no more visible
motion occurred during the next 2 h. This latter time was
the maximum duration before perturbing effects such as
draining was quite apparent at the free surface of the material and settling (estimated by rough density measurements on material taken at different depths) was significant. Then the asymptotic depth was measured before the
beginning of this second stage. The flow varied gradually
(cf. Coussot (1994)) along the channel, as in usual
hydraulics (Chow, 1959). So we measured the fluid depth
(h) far enough from the channel tips downstream and
upstream, for fluid depth to correspond to the uniform
depth. It was generally observed that this uniform fluid
depth was obtained at least as far as 20 cm from the tips.
In this zone the depth fluctuated slightly (less than 3%)
around a mean value. This depth was measured in the
middle part of the flow. Close to channel sides this depth
was slightly greater than in the middle (the depth increased by less than 15070 within one depth), but we did
not take this fact into account for calculations.
Results
The inclined plane test results were quite reproducible:
differences as low as 5% were recorded from one test to
another (identical). For the comparison of rheometrical
results with inclined plane results we chose the rheometrical yield stress as a reference. As a first approach, the inclined plane yield stress was calculated using Eq. (5) (infinitely wide inclined plane hypothesis). Then we plotted
Ar
the relative "error" - - found for yield stress when using
r
the inclined plane, as a function of the aspect ratio (fluid
depth to channel width) (see Fig. 5).

Discussion

Generalities
For each given aspect ratio the results were relatively
dispersed around a local mean value but the corresponding fluctuations are less than 25%. If the only source of
discrepancy between rheometrical and inclined plane
yield stresses was the channel side influence, each curve

14
A C
C

1~2

10
08
06
04

Mud suspensions: Yield stress m e a s u r e m e n t s

/infinitp.lv wide
wide. plane
[}lane hypothesis)
hvoothesis~
+
(infinitely

Material and channel slope:

[] (1) 10

(1) 15

&

(1) 20
(2)20
(2) 30

x
o
0

"

(3)10
(3) 20
(4) 15
(4) 30
(5) 250

02
00

539

(a) 15
~" (a) 20
" (b)15
(b) 20

(c) 15

(c) 20o

~
I

OUl
=

m~ []
kZ~O.+.

z~" ~ .

El

0-2

(a) 10

O
"

.O

x
0

O
,

10-1

Fig. 5 Clay-water suspensions: relative "error" on yield stress

determinations using inclined plane tests as a function of the channel aspect ratio with the infinitely wide channel hypothesis

corresponding to a given material should tend towards 0

when h/L tends to 0. In practice this is not the case. The
different curves obtained with a given material for different channel slopes are close to each other but they seem
to tend to values approximately comprised between - 1 0
and + 10?0. This tendency is not simply linked to fluid
yield stress but, for experiments with the same material,
the curve level tends to increase slightly with channel
slope (cf. Fig. 5). This could originate from a surface tension effect since there the "error" is all the larger as the
fluid depth is smaller. However, this tendency is irregular
and, in our opinion, hard to quantify. Furthermore, if the
value of mud surface tension coefficient (;t) is comparable to water's, say 0.1 N/m, the ratio of surface tension
to yield stress effects, approximately equal to 2/rcD, is
less than 3.10 .3 and thus surface tension should be
negligible. Also troublesome is that we observed that the
fluids seemed to stop completely after an order of magnitude of time equal to 30 min whereas the theory predicted
that they should flow during a few hours before the fluid
depth came very close to the asymptotic depth. The very
limited number of results which have been obtained in
literature (Uhlherr et al., 1984; De Kee et al., 1990) can
hardly help us understanding the trends of our more
systematic study.
These fluctuations and early stoppage could be due to
many effects:
- Error made when using the Herschel-Bulkley model
(fitted on rheometrical data in a limited shear rate
range) in order to predict very slow flows.
Side wall influence.
- Upper and lower edge effects.
Slight unapparent settling or draining from the beginning of the test.
-

540

Rheologica Acta, Vol. 34, No. 6 (1995)

Steinkopff Verlag 1995

However, except for side wall effects, the exact role of

these phenomena can hardly be determined. Thus we actually cannot determine the exact origin of the fluctuations of results around a mean value for different slopes
and of the early fluid stoppage, and what are their consequences on yield stress determination. Eventually the
range of validity of formula (4) remains unknown but the
most clearly observable trend remains the mean relative
error increase when the aspect ratio increases. Finally, in
the following we shall assume that, except for side wall effects, the perturbing effects globally impose fluctuations
of the relative error on yield stress around a mean value.

1,0
AT
T

Material

0,8

[]

slope:

(a) 10

[] (a)15 `=
(a)20 o

0,6

(b) 15

(c)15

(c) 20

(b)20

0,4

0,2
--A
m

0,0

A
_

-0,2
-0,4"
-0,6"
-0,8 -

Yield stress determination taking into account side wall

effects

and channel

Sinard-water

suspensions

-1,0

0-2

1 0 -1

L
Let us now consider that, when the fluid has stopped, the
wall shear stress is equal to the yield stress not only on the
channel bottom but also along the vertical sides. Then the
balance between gravity force and channel resistance
gives us"
(6)

p g h o (sin i)L = rc(L +2h0)

With the help of this formula we can now compute a new

estimated yield stress value (cf. Figs. 6 and 7). Then with
allowance to uncertainties on rheometrical and inclined
plane test measurements the agreement between rheometrical data and inclined plane test results is very good: the
relative error fluctuates around a mean value which is
close to 0 whatever the aspect ratio. This result is also in
agreement with the semi-empirical equation proposed for

1,0 "

A,~

Material

and channel

slope:

0,8'
0,6"
0,4
0,2'

A~

0,0

[]

(1) 10

(3) 10

(1) 15
(1)20
(2) 20

+
o

(3) 20
(4) 15
(4) 30

(2) 3 0

"

(5) 25

.~

[] ~

exo

-0,2

+
o x

Fig. 7 Sinard clay-water suspension: relative "error" on yield stress

determinations using inclined plane tests as a function of the channel aspect ratio taking into account edge effects

the mean wall shear stress (rp) for the flow of a mud suspension in a rectangular channel (Coussot, 1994):
Tp = re(1 + a ( H b ) -'9)

with
a = 1.93- 0.43 arctang I ( ~ )

20]

(7)

Indeed, when the fluid flow stops, Eq. (7) tells us that the
mean wall shear stress is equal to the fluid yield stress,
which can be written in the form of Eq. (6). For a
trapezoidal channel, an equation formally similar to (7)
was found (Coussot, 1994), which leads to the similar
result:

Finally it is likely that this result can be applied to channels of many cross-section forms for a sufficiently low
aspect ratio. However, Eq. (8) might not apply for channels with quite irregular cross-sections or with significant
ratio of roughness to flow depth.

-0,4'
-0,6'
-0,8 -

Kaolin-water

-1,0

suspensions

0-2

1 0 "1

h
L

Fig. 6 Kaolin-water suspensions: relative "error" on yield stress

determinations using inclined plane tests as a function of the channel aspect ratio taking into account edge effects

Fluid behaviour determined from inclined plane test

Theory
Because the wall shear rate corresponding to an inclined
plane flow varies with discharge, it appears theoretically

R Coussot and S. Boyer

Determination of yield stress fluid behaviour from inclined plane test

possible to determine the flow curve of a relatively simple

fluid from a series of channel flow tests (Coleman et al.,
1966). For a steady uniform flow on an infinitely wide inclined plane, neglecting edge and surface tension effects,
the discharge (q) by unit of width may be written as
follows:
h

541

be no minimum in flow curve (Coussot et al., 1993) and

the fluid must not be thixotropic.

Experiments

For these channel flow tests, we used a system composed

of a wide rectangular channel whose width was 60 cm and
o
o
whose length was 8 m. The material (kaolin-water mixwhere y is the current position perpendicularly above the ture) was recirculated by means of a diaphragm pump so
channel bottom (see Fig. 4). We shall now use the shear that a discharge of up to 91/s could be supplied to the
stress r at the position y as a new variable in (9). Since we upstream hopper at the top of the channel. We could
regulate the flow by changing the opening of the valve at
have:
the bottom of the upstream hopper. The material flowing
in
the channel arrived in the downstream hopper from
h-y
2-=Tp q
,
(10) which it was taken again by the pump. The experimental
h
procedure and measurement uncertainties with this
system have already been described by Coussot (1994).
Eq. (9) becomes:
Here we imposed different fluid discharges and measured
the corresponding uniform flow depths and surface
h2
q = r(-~prf('c)dv
(11) velocities. Rheometrical tests have been described earlier
in the present paper. The results are reported in Table 2.
We then computed the slope of curves giving the surface
wheref(r) is the shear rate corresponding to a shear stress velocity and the discharge as a function of flow depth at
r within the fluid. Deriving (11) and using the fact that different positions, which made it possible to draw f
rp is equal to pgh sin i, we obtain:
(of. Fig. 8).

q = ~ u(y)dy = ~ ( h - y ) u ' ( y ) d y ,

(9)

(12)
Discussion
A similar analysis can be carried out using the free surface velocity (Vs) instead of q (Astarita et al., 1964). We
have:
h du

Vs=~

0-~y

dy=

~h
--f(z)d~:,
0rp

There is a rather good agreement between rheometry and

the two measurement methods (using channel flow dis-

(3)
100

(Fluid A)

from which we deduce:

I~.

//i =f(~'P) "

(14)

--,
e}

+++

&~u-

lt+~
I~ + ~

(Fluid B

"

~
++
Using channel flow test results, either Eq. (12) or Eq. (14)
+
enables us to determine the functionffrom which one obtains the flow curve. Astarita et al. (1964) proposed a
emore complete analysis taking into account possible wall
t~
+ Rheometry
slip. In our case, since this effect appeared negligible for
Fluid behaviour from inclined plane tests:
mud suspension flows, we shall neglect it a priori
[] From flux measurements
(Coussot, 1994). This assumption will be validated a
From surface velocity measurements
10
........
,
........
,
........
,
.......
posteriori. May we finally note that, as for data analysis
1 0 -2
10-1
10 o
101
102
in terms of constitutive equation with a large gap coaxial
Shear
rate
(
l
/
s
)
cylinder rheometer (Coussot and Piau, 1995), all the
above calculations effectively make it possible to deduce
Fig. 8 Kaolin-water mixtures: comparison of flow curves obtained
the function f only if this function is unique: there must by rheometrical measurements and channel flow tests

542

Rheologica Acta, Vol. 34, No. 6 (1995)

Steinkopff Verlag 1995

Table 2 Material and flow characteristics for the flow curve determination from channel flow tests
Fluid A

Fluid B

p = 1465 kg/m 3
z c = 43.8 Pa
K = 18.6 Pa.s 1/3

p = 1430 kg/m 3
z c = 25.8 Pa
K = 11.6 Pa.s 1/3

Q (l/s)

h (cm)

Vs

(cm/s)

0.03
0.06
0.1
0.19
0.26
0.39
0.61
1.34
1.99
2.3
2.47
6
6.5
7.97
8.78

3.3
3.4
3.7
3.9
4.2
4.4
4.7
5.3
5.4
5.6
5.7
6.2
6.3
6.4
6.5

0.1
0.2
0.3
0.7
0.8
1.2
2.4
4.6
6.3
7.9
8.2
16.7
16.7
19.9
22.2

Q (I/s)

h (cm)

Vs

(cm/s)

0.02
0.04
0.07
0.15
0.28
0.32
0.41
0.7
0.83
1.14
2.57
4.51
6.47
8.07
8.2

2.2
2.5
2.6
2.8
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.5
3.7
3.6
4
4.1
4.3
4.6
4.4

0.2
0.3
0.5
1
1.9
2.1
3.3
8.2
5.4
5.8
13
26.2
28.2
31.4
49

charge or surface velocity) in our experimental shear rate

range. The m a x i m u m difference between the different
results corresponds to w h a t we could expect, considering
the various possible sources o f errors (either f r o m
r h e o m e t r y or channel flow tests). I n d e p e n d e n t l y there is
also a very g o o d agreement between results f r o m the two
channel flow testing m e t h o d s which demonstrates the
self-consistency o f the inclined plane tests. However it is
n o t possible so far to conclude that channel flow tests
give more relevant results in terms o f fluid behaviour
because some unvisible slight perturbing effects m a y have
occurred during these tests.

Conciusion
We have shown that there is a relatively g o o d correspondence between yield stress measurements f r o m inclined
plane and rheometrical tests if we take into a c c o u n t edge
effects and if we assume that the m e a n wall shear stress
is equal to the fluid yield stress. Even when m a k i n g tests
in well controlled conditions, uncertainty remains relatively large (25%) but, since this was obtained by comparing two types o f tests, we cannot decide which o f t h e m
gives the more realistic data, and thus the specific uncertainty on yield stress determination f r o m inclined plane
tests can hardly be determined. We emphasize that large
errors can be committed if one does not wait a long
e n o u g h time for flow to be completely stopped. This suggests that field estimations generally give results with
slightly larger errors since in this case it is hard to make
well-controlled measurements after the complete stoppage o f a u n i f o r m flow. At least our results suggest that
fluid yield stress might be estimated f r o m u n i f o r m
deposits in a relatively simple channel o f any cross-section by assuming that, at rest, the m e a n wall shear stress
is equal to the fluid yield stress. Finally the inclined channel test appears to be a very interesting way o f determining fluid yield stress.
It also appears possible to determine the flow curve o f
a fluid from steady u n i f o r m flows on an inclined plane.
Obviously this technique is n o t to be used systematically
since it is not easy to determine the flow curve in a wide
shear rate range and it is not relevant for thixotropic
fluids. However, when coarse particle settling is negligible, this might be an adequate m e t h o d for roughly determining the behaviour o f coarse materials (such as debris
flows) which c a n n o t be tested in usual rheometers. For a
complete validation o f these techniques further studies
with other material types are needed.

References
Astarita G (1990) "Letter to the editor: The
engineering reality of the yield stress". J
Rheol 34:275-277
Astarita G, Marrucci, Palumbo G (1964)
Non-Newtonian gravity flow along inclined plane surfaces. Ind Eng Chem
Fund 3:333- 339
Barnes HA, Wakers K (1985) The yield
stress myth?. Rheol Acta 24:323-326
Bird RB, Dal GC, Yarusso BJ (1982) The
rheology and flow of viscoplastic materials. Rev Chem Eng 1:1-70
Chow VT (1959) Open-channel hydraulics.
McGraw-Hill, Civil Engineering Series,
New York
Coleman BD, Markovitz H, Noll W (1966)
Viscometric flows of non-Newtonian
fluids. Springer Verlag, Berlin, p 130

Coussot P, Piau JM (1995) A large-scale

field coaxial cylinder rheometer for the
study of the theology of natural coarse
suspensions. J Rheol 39:105-124
Coussot P (1994) Steady, laminar, flow of
concentrated mud suspensions in open
channel. J Hydr Res 32:535-559
Coussot P, Piau JM (1994) (b) Simple shear
rheometry of concentrated dispersions
and suspensions. Les Cahiers de Rh6ologie, Groupe Fran~ais de Rh6ologie
XII:I - 13 (in french)
Coussot P, Pian JM (1994) (a) On the
behaviour of fine mud suspensions.
Rheol Acta 33:175-184
Coussot P, Leonov AI, Piau JM (1993)
Rheology of concentrated dispersed
systems in a low molecular weight
matrix. J Non-Newt Fluid Mech 46:
179-217

De Kee D, Chan Man Fong CF (1993) "Letter to the editor: A true yield stress?". J
Rheol 37:775-776
De Kee D, Chhabra RP, Powley MB, Roy S
(1990) Flow of viscoplastic fluids on an
inclined plane: Evaluation of yield
stress. Chem Eng Comm 96:229-239
Evans ID (1992) "Letter to the editor: On
the nature of the yield stress". J Rheol
36:1313-1316
Fink JH, Zimbelman JR (1986) Rheology
of the Royal Gardens basalt flows
Kilauea Volcano, Hawaii. Bull Volcanology 48, 87- 96
Hartnett JP, Hu RYZ (1989) The yield stress
An engineering reality. J Rheol
33:671-679
Howard CDD (1963) Flow of clay-water
suspensions. J Hydr Div. Proc ASCE,
HY 5:89-97
-

P. Coussot and S. Boyer

Determination of yield stress fluid behaviour from inclined plane test

Hulme G (1974) The interpretation of lava

flow morphology. Geophys J Roy
Astrophys Soc 39:361-383
Hunter RJ (1982) The flow behavior of
coagulated colloidal suspensions. Adv
Colloid Interface Sci 17:197-211
Hutton JF (1975) On using the Weissenberg
Rheogoniometer to measure normal
stresses in lubricating greases as examples of materials which have a yield
stress. Rheol Acta 14:979-992
Johnson AM (1970) Physical processes in
Geology. Freeman Cooper and Co, San
Francisco, p 577
Keentok M (1982) The measurement of the
yield stress of liquids. Rheol Aeta
21:325-332
Liu KF, Mei CC (1989) Slow spreading of a
sheet of Bingham fluid on an inclined
plane. J Fluid Mech 207:505-529
Liu KF, Mei CC (1994) Roll waves on a layer
of a muddy fluid flowing down a gentle
slope - A Bingham model. Phys Fluids
6:2577-2590
M'Ewen MB, Pratt MI (1957) The gelation
of montmorillonite. Part I: The formation of a structural framework in sols of
Wyoming bentonite. Trans Faraday Soc
53:535-547

Magnin A, Piau JM (1987) Shear rheometry of fluids with a yield stress. J

Non-Newt Fluid Mech 23:91-106
Magnin A, Piau JM (1990) Cone-and-plate
rheometry of yield stress fluids - Study
of an aqueous gel. J Non-Newt Fluid
Mech 36:85-108
Major JJ, Pierson TC (1992) Debris flow
rheology: experimental analysis of finegrained slurries. Water Resour Res
28:841-857
Nguyen QD, Boger DV (1983) Yield stress
measurement for concentrated suspensions. J Rheol 27:321-349
Nguyen QD, Boger DV (1992) Measuring
the flow properties of yield stress fluids.
Ann Rev Fluid Mech 24:47-88
Paslay PR, Slibar A (1958) Flow of an incompressible viscoplastic layer on an inclined plane. Trans Soc Rheol II, pp
255- 262
Phillips C J, Davies TRH (1991) Determining rheological parameters of debris
flow material. Geomorphology 4:
101-110

543

Pierson TC (1980) Erosion and deposition

by debris flows at Mt Thomas, North
Canterbury, New Zealand. Earth Surf
Proces 5:227-247
Pierson TC (1986) Flow behavior of channelized debris flows. Mount St Helens,
Washington. In: Abrahams AD (ed)
Hillslope Processes. Allen & Unwin,
Boston, pp 269-296
Schurz J (1992) "Letter to the editor: A
yield value in a true solution". J Rheol
36:1319-1321
Spaans RD, Williams MC (1995) "Letter to
the editor: At last, a true liquid-phase
yield stress". J Rheol 39:241-246
Uhlherr PHT, Park KH, Tiu C, Andrews
JRG (1984) Yield stress fluid behaviour
on an inclined plane. In: Mena B, Garcia-Rejon A, Rangel-Nagaile C (eds)
Advances in Rheology. Mexico City
2:183-190
Wadge G, Lopes RMC (1991) The lobes of
lava flows on Earth and Olympus Mons,
Mars. Bull Volcanology 54:10-24