THE UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

Fluid Mechanics Laboratory Report

ENGG1350

Viscosity by a Falling Particle

Name: Rainer Wibowo

UID: 3036458198
Group: 32
Date of Experiment: 18 October 2024
 CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

A) Objective

To determine the viscosity of a fluid by measuring the terminal velocity of a

spherical particle falling in the fluid.

B) Background Information

1. According to Stokes’ law, the frictional force acting on a small spherical

object moving slowly in a viscous fluid is given by

𝐹 = 6πµ𝑅𝑉

where 𝐹 is the frictional force, also known as Stokes drag, µ is the

dynamic viscosity of the fluid, 𝑅 is the radius of the spherical object, and 𝑉
is the flow velocity relative to the object.

2. When a spherical particle is dropped from rest to fall freely in a viscous

fluid, it will accelerate downward until it gains sufficient speed so that the
upward Stokes drag is large enough to balance the apparent weight (i.e.,
the true weight (𝑚𝑔 = ρ𝑠𝑉𝑠𝑔) minus the buoyancy force (ρ𝑓𝑉𝑠𝑔)) of the
particle where ρ𝑠 is the mass density of the particle, ρ𝑓 is the mass density
3
4π𝑅
of the fluid, 𝑔 is the acceleration due to gravity, and 𝑉𝑠 = 3
is the
volume of the particle. On reaching this equilibrium state, the particle will
fall at a constant velocity, which is known as the terminal velocity. This is
also the highest attainable velocity of the falling particle.

3. By balancing the three forces (weight = buoyancy forces + viscous forces),

one can deduce that the terminal velocity is given by

2
(ρ𝑠 − ρ𝑓)𝑔𝐷
𝑉= 18

where 𝐷 = 2𝑅 is the diameter of the particle.

1
 4. The equation above can be used to determine a fluid’s dynamic viscosity
ρ𝑓𝐷𝑉
as long as the Reynolds number 𝑅𝑒 = µ
is much smaller than 1.

C) Equipment

1. A measuring cylinder containing a colorless viscous fluid. A 30-cm ruler

is glued vertically on the outside of the cylinder.

2. Two metal spherical particles of different sizes.

3. Smartphone; phone stand tripod.

4. Fine tip tweezers; calipers; magnet; electronic weighing machine.

5. Tracker, a free video analysis and modeling tool, which can be

downloaded at https://physlets.org/tracker/

D) Procedure

1. The density of the viscous fluid is given as

ρ𝑓 = 1,248 kg/m3

2. Use the calipers to measure the diameter of the two particles.

3. Use the weighing machine to find the mass of the two particles and, hence,
calculate their density.

4. Fix your mobile phone on the tripod in a portrait position. Set the distance
and height of the tripod such that the phone camera can capture a
perpendicular view of the cylinder. The camera should be close enough so
that the field of view is just large enough to cover the top and bottom of
the cylinder. The cylinder should appear as a vertical center image on the
screen. Also make sure the graduation marks on the ruler are clearly seen.

5. Adjust the video quality to HD and increase the frame rate to 60 fps, if
available.

6. Perform the experiment as follows:

2
 - Use the tweezers to put Particle 1, approximately 2 cm, into the
fluid near the centerline of the cylinder.
- Turn on the video recording.
- Release the particle gently, allowing it to fall freely in the fluid.
- Stop the video recording when the particle reaches the bottom of
the cylinder.
- Use the magnet to get the particle out of the cylinder.

7. Play the video to check if the falling of the particle has been clearly
captured.

8. Perform Step 6 three times for Particle 1.

9. Repeat Steps 6 – 8 for Particle 2.

3
 CHAPTER II
RESULTS & ANALYSIS

A) Data

6𝑀
Given ρ𝑓 = 1,248 kg/m3 and ρ𝑠 = 3 ,
π𝐷

Particle Diameter (𝐷) Mass (𝑀) Density (ρ𝑠)

1 𝐷1 𝑀1 ρ𝑠1
(Smaller Particle) = 2.90 × 10-3 m = 1.10 × 10-4 kg = 8613.90 kg/m3

2 𝐷2 𝑀2 ρ𝑠2
(Larger Particle) = 3.80 × 10-3 m = 2.60 × 10-4 kg = 9049.49 kg/m3

B) Results Table(s)

Terminal Velocity (m/s) Average

Terminal
Particle
First Trial Second Trial Third Trial Velocity 𝑉
(m/s)

1 0.08034 0.08023 0.08162 0.08073

2 0.1331 0.1326 0.1325 0.1327

Dynamic Viscosity (Pa · s) Reynolds Number

Particle (ρ𝑠 − ρ𝑓)𝑔𝐷
2
ρ𝑓𝐷𝑉
µ= 18𝑉
𝑅𝑒 = µ

1 0.4182 0.6987

2 0.4627 1.3601

C) Plot

The following are graphs auto-generated by Tracker software’s video analysis

tool, with the x-axis representing time (seconds) and the y-axis representing
distance (meters).

4
 Figure 1: Tracker video analysis on particle 1 (smaller particle), first trial.
The slope of the line of best fit calculated by the software shows 0.08034 m/s.

Figure 2: Tracker video analysis on particle 1 (smaller particle), second trial.

The slope of the line of best fit calculated by the software shows 0.08023 m/s.

5
Figure 3: Tracker video analysis on particle 1 (smaller particle), third trial.
The slope of the line of best fit calculated by the software shows 0.08162 m/s.

Figure 4: Tracker video analysis on particle 2 (larger particle), first trial. The
slope of the line of best fit calculated by the software shows 0.1331 m/s.

6
Figure 5: Tracker video analysis on particle 2 (larger particle), second trial.
The slope of the line of best fit calculated by the software shows 0.1326 m/s.

Figure 6: Tracker video analysis on particle 2 (larger particle), third trial.

The slope of the line of best fit calculated by the software shows 0.1325 m/s.

7
 CHAPTER III
DISCUSSION

A) Factors Affecting Viscosity Variations

From the results obtained, we observe that the dynamic viscosities of the
smaller and larger particles are 0.4182 Pa·s and 0.4627 Pa·s, respectively. To
quantify the difference between these two viscosity values, we can calculate
the percentage difference using the formula that considers both the absolute
viscosity difference and the average viscosity of the two particles.

The formula is as follows:

|µ 𝑜𝑓 𝑃𝑎𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑙𝑒 2 − µ 𝑜𝑓 𝑃𝑎𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑙𝑒 1|
𝑃𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝐷𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 = 𝐴𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑉𝑖𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑦
× 100%

Calculating this gives us:

0.4182+0.4627
𝐴𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑉𝑖𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑦 = 2
= 0. 44045 𝑃𝑎 · 𝑠

Now, the absolute difference in viscosity is:

𝐴𝑏𝑠𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑡𝑒 𝐷𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 = |0. 4627 − 0. 4182| = 0. 0445 𝑃𝑎 · 𝑠

Thus, the percentage difference is:

𝑃𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝐷𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 = ( 0.0445

0.44045 ) × 100% ≈ 10. 1%
The 10.1% difference in viscosity indicates that the results are not perfectly
aligned despite both particles being measured in the same fluid, which should
theoretically yield consistent viscosity values. This discrepancy can be
attributed to several factors, including uncertainties and challenges in
accurately measuring particle diameter and mass, inconsistencies in the
particle dropping height, limitations in video recording and analysis
techniques, environmental influences, and deviations from the assumptions of
Stokes' Law. Each of these factors will be discussed in further detail below.

A1. Particle Diameter Measurement Uncertainty

8
 The accurate determination of the particle diameter using a vernier caliper
can be a significant source of error in this experiment. Vernier calipers,
while commonly used for precise measurements, have inherent
limitations in their resolution and precision, especially when dealing with
the minuscule dimensions of the particles involved. Even small parallax
errors or uncertainties in aligning the caliper jaws can lead to inaccuracies
in the recorded diameter values. Furthermore, the sphericity of the
particles and any surface imperfections may not be perfectly uniform,
introducing additional uncertainties in the effective diameter used in the
calculations.

A2. Particle Mass Measurement Challenges

The challenge of precisely measuring the mass of the tiny particles on a

laboratory scale introduces another layer of potential error. The limited
precision and sensitivity of the scale, combined with the very small mass
of the individual particles, can lead to minor yet meaningful uncertainties
in the recorded mass values. Furthermore, random disturbances, such as
subtle vibrations from footsteps or other movements in the vicinity of the
experimental setup, can adversely affect the precise measurement of
particle mass. These external influences can create fluctuations in the
readings, complicating the task of obtaining reliable and consistent
measurements.

A3. Inconsistencies in Particle Dropping Height

Ensuring a consistent and precise dropping height for the particles is a

critical aspect that can contribute to experimental uncertainties. Even with
a carefully designed setup, slight variations in the release point or the
trajectory of the falling particle can affect the time it takes for the particle
to reach the measurement point, leading to discrepancies in the terminal
velocity calculations. Any unevenness or obstructions within the
cylinder's interior surface can cause the particle to deviate from a straight,
vertical path, further complicating the velocity measurements.

A4. Video Recording and Analysis Limitations

The use of a smartphone camera to record the particle's motion introduces

additional sources of error. The frame rate, resolution, and lens distortions
of the camera can influence the accuracy of the velocity measurements

9
 obtained from the video analysis. Furthermore, the video tracking
software used to analyze the particle's movement may have limitations in
precisely capturing the subtle changes in position over time, particularly
for the faster-moving particle 2.

A5. Environmental Factors

Environmental factors, such as temperature variations within the

laboratory environment, can also affect the experiment's reliability.
Changes in temperature can directly impact the fluid viscosity and the
particle's density, both of which are crucial parameters in the Stokes' law
calculations. Additionally, air currents, vibrations, or other external
disturbances in the experimental setup can alter the particle's trajectory
and terminal velocity, leading to inaccuracies in the viscosity
determination.

A6. Deviation from Stokes’ Law Assumptions

Finally, the underlying assumptions of Stokes' law, which form the basis
of this experiment, may not be perfectly met in the real-world scenario.
The formula assumes that the particles are spherical, have a low Reynolds
number, and are moving at a steady, terminal velocity. In practice, the
particles may not align perfectly with these assumptions, introducing
systematic errors in the viscosity calculations. Factors such as particle
shape, surface roughness, or the presence of turbulence or non-laminar
flow patterns can cause deviations from the ideal Stokes' law behavior,
further contributing to the uncertainties in the measured viscosity values.

To improve experimental reliability, several key strategies can be applied.

First, using precise tools like digital micrometers and sensitive scales can
enhance the accuracy of measuring particle size and mass. Additionally,
ensuring a consistent dropping method and reducing disturbances, such as
vibrations or air currents, helps create a stable environment. Employing
high-speed cameras or specialized software for video analysis allows for more
accurate tracking of particle motion. Conducting multiple trials also helps
average out errors, while statistical analysis can quantify uncertainties. By
implementing these strategies, the reliability and accuracy of viscosity
measurements can be greatly improved.

10
B) Reynolds Number Analysis and Stokes' Law Compliance

The Reynolds number (Re) is defined by the formula:

ρ𝑓𝐷𝑉
𝑅𝑒 = µ

where ρ𝑓 is the mass density of the fluid (ρ𝑓 = 1,248 kg/m3), 𝐷 is the diameter
of the metal ball, 𝑉 is the terminal velocity, and µ is the dynamic viscosity of
the fluid being tested.

Stokes' law is applicable only when the Reynolds number is less than 1
(𝑅𝑒 < 1), indicating laminar flow conditions.

B1. Reynolds Number Comparison

The Reynolds number for the smaller and larger particles are
approximately 0.6987 and 1.3601, respectively.

The lower value for the smaller particle indicates that the flow around it is
firmly in the laminar regime, where viscous forces dominate, making it an
ideal candidate for Stokes' law. This means we can confidently apply
Stokes' law to calculate the frictional forces acting on it, ensuring accurate
results.

On the other hand, the larger particle's Reynolds number, exceeding 1,

suggests a transition towards turbulence. This higher value indicates that
the assumptions of Stokes' law may not fully apply, potentially
introducing inaccuracies in the measurements of viscosity and drag force.

B2. Assessment of Stokes’ Law Compliance

As noted in the background information, Stokes' law states that the

frictional force 𝐹 acting on a spherical object is given by:

𝐹 = 6πµ𝑅𝑉

where 𝑅 is the radius of the metal ball, 𝑉 is its flow velocity, and µ is the
dynamic viscosity of the fluid. To evaluate the compliance of Stokes' law

11
in this context, we will calculate the frictional force using Newton’s
second law. At terminal velocity, the metal ball reaches an equilibrium
state, meaning there is no net force acting on it, and its acceleration is
zero. Thus, we can express the relationship as:

𝐹 = 𝑊 − 𝐹𝑏

where 𝐹 is the frictional force, 𝑊 is the weight of the ball, and 𝐹𝑏 is the
buoyancy force, which can be calculated using the formula:

𝐹𝑏 = ρ𝑓𝑉𝑠𝑔

Here, ρ𝑓 is the mass density of the fluid, 𝑔 is the acceleration due to

3
4π𝑅
gravity, and 𝑉𝑠 = 3
is the volume of the particle.

❖ Evaluation of Particle 1 (Smaller Particle)

Frictional force calculated using Stokes’ law:

𝐹 = 6πµ𝑅𝑉
𝐷
𝐹 = 6πµ 2
𝑉
−3
2.90×10
𝐹 = 6π × 0. 4182 × 2
× 0. 08073
−4
𝐹 ≈ 9. 227586102 × 10 𝑁

Frictional force calculated using Newton’s second law:

𝐹 = 𝑊 − 𝐹𝑏
𝐹 = 𝑀𝑔 − ρ𝑓𝑉𝑠𝑔
3
4π𝑅
𝐹 = 𝑀𝑔 − ρ𝑓 3
𝑔
𝐷 3

𝐹 = 𝑀𝑔 − ρ𝑓
4π ( )
2
𝑔
3
3

( )
−3
2.90×10
−4 4π 2
𝐹 = 1. 10 × 10 × 9. 81 − 1248 × 3
× 9. 81
−4
𝐹 ≈ 9. 227578037 × 10 𝑁

12
 The percentage of error when applying Stokes’ law:

−4 −4
9.227586102×10 −9.227578037×10
𝑃𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑒𝑟𝑟𝑜𝑟 = −4 × 100%
9.227578037×10
−5
≈ 8. 69468246 × 10 %

The close agreement between the frictional forces calculated using

Stokes' law and Newton's second law suggests that for the smaller
particle 1, the assumptions and applicability of Stokes' law are valid.
The small percentage error implies that Stokes' law can accurately
describe the fluid dynamics and frictional forces acting on the smaller
particle. This validates the use of Stokes' law for characterizing the
behavior of the smaller particle in this scenario.

❖ Evaluation of Particle 2 (Larger Particle)

Frictional force calculated using Stokes’ law:

𝐹 = 6πµ𝑅𝑉
𝐷
𝐹 = 6πµ 2
𝑉
−3
3.80×10
𝐹 = 6π × 0. 4627 × 2
× 0. 1327
−3
𝐹 ≈ 2. 19899958 × 10 𝑁

Frictional force calculated using Newton’s second law:

𝐹 = 𝑊 − 𝐹𝑏
𝐹 = 𝑀𝑔 − ρ𝑓𝑉𝑠𝑔
3
4π𝑅
𝐹 = 𝑀𝑔 − ρ𝑓 3
𝑔
𝐷 3

𝐹 = 𝑀𝑔 − ρ𝑓
( )
4π 2
𝑔
3
3

( )
−3
3.80×10
−4 4π 2
𝐹 = 2. 60 × 10 × 9. 81 − 1248 × 3
× 9. 81
−3
𝐹 ≈ 2. 198850892 × 10 𝑁

−3 −3
2.19899958×10 −2.198850892×10
𝑃𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑒𝑟𝑟𝑜𝑟 = −3 × 100%
2.198850892×10

13
 −3
≈ 6. 762077435 × 10 %

The larger percentage error between the frictional forces calculated

using Stokes' law and Newton's second law suggests that for the
larger particle 2, the assumptions and applicability of Stokes' law may
not be fully valid. The flow around the larger particle is likely in a
transitional or turbulent regime, where Stokes' law no longer
accurately describes the frictional forces. Additional considerations
beyond Stokes' law may be necessary to characterize the fluid
dynamics for the larger particle properly. The significant difference in
the frictional force values indicates the limitations of using Stokes'
law alone for the larger particle.

C) Identifying the Fluid

C1. Given Parameters

Density of fluid = 1,248 kg/m3

0.4182 + 0.4627
Average viscosity of fluid = 2
= 0.44045 Pa·s
State of fluid: Liquid
Color of fluid: Colorless
Temperature: Room temperature (assumed to be around 20-25°C)

C2. References

Figure 7: Densities of several common liquids. Full list can be accessed

at https://engineeringtoolbox.com/liquids-densities-d_743.html.

14
 Figure 8: Viscosity of glycerol and aqueous solutions of glycerol as a
function of temperature. Available from:
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/scosity-of-glycerol-and-aqueous-solut
ions-of-glycerol-as-a-function-of-temperature_fig9_270899362.

C3. Final Conclusion

Based on the provided parameters and references, the fluid can be

identified as a 90% glycerol solution. The key evidence supporting this
conclusion is:

❖ Density of 1,248 kg/m³

This density value is consistent with a high-concentration glycerol

solution, which ranges from 1,220 to 1,260 kg/m³ for 90% glycerol.

❖ Average Viscosity of 0.44045 Pa·s

The high viscosity matches the viscous nature of a concentrated

glycerol solution, which can reach over 0.4 Pa·s for a 90% glycerol
mixture at room temperature.

❖ Liquid State and Colorless Appearance

Glycerol is a clear, colorless liquid at room temperature.

15