Home Search Collections Journals About Contact us My IOPscience

Viscoelastic properties of MR fluids

This article has been downloaded from IOPscience. Please scroll down to see the full text article.

1999 Smart Mater. Struct. 8 460

(http://iopscience.iop.org/0964-1726/8/4/303)

View the table of contents for this issue, or go to the journal homepage for more

Download details:
IP Address: 130.251.63.75
The article was downloaded on 22/02/2011 at 10:43

Please note that terms and conditions apply.

Smart Mater. Struct. 8 (1999) 460–468. Printed in the UK PII: S0964-1726(99)04629-7

Viscoelastic properties of MR fluids

W H Li, G Chen and S H Yeo
Mechanics of Machines Laboratory, School of Mechanical and Production Engineering,
Nanyang Technological University, Nanyang Avenue, Singapore 639798
E-mail: p143409524@ntu.edu.sg

Received 11 January 1998, in final form 13 May 1999

Abstract. Mechanical properties of magnetorheological (MR) fluids are classified into

pre-yield and post-yield regions according to whether the shear stress is below or above the
yield stress. MR fluids within the pre-yield region exhibit viscoelastic properties; and these
properties are important for understanding MR suspensions, especially for vibration damping
applications. MR suspensions composed of reduced iron powders dispersed in silicone oil are
utilized to study the viscoelastic properties with the help of a strain-controlled rheometer with
plate–plate configuration. Two types of experiments, i.e. strain-amplitude sweep mode and
frequency-sweep mode, were carried out to investigate the viscoelastic properties of MR
fluids: (a) strain-amplitude sweep mode, the strain amplitude was swept from 0.0001 to 0.001
at a fixed driving frequency of 10 Hz. (b) Frequency-sweep mode, the driving frequency was
swept from 1 Hz to 100 Hz at a constant strain amplitude of 0.001. The results show that both
storage modulus G0 and loss modulus G00 decrease with the increment of the strain amplitude,
however, the loss factor increases with the increment of the strain amplitude. On the other
hand, both the storage modulus and loss modulus increase with the increment of frequency,
which is different from the loss factor. Moreover, the effects of magnetic field and volume
fraction on the viscoelastic properties are also investigated. The higher the magnetic field, the
higher the storage modulus and loss modulus, and the lower the loss factor. The higher the
volume fraction, the higher the storage modulus and the loss factor.

1. Introduction • dynamic methods such as the vibrating sandwich beam

Magnetorheological (MR) fluids exhibit rapid, reversible and
significant changes in their viscosity and shear modulus when
subjected to external magnetic fields. The fact that one is
able to adjust the shear modulus of certain materials has been
very promising and thus the dynamically tunable MR-based
devices were developed [1]. Recently, many attempts have
been made to apply the MR fluid to various research and
industrial fields utilizing its quick response and easy control
characteristics [2].
It is crucial to accurately understand the comprehensive
properties of MR fluids. In addition to the rheology of
MR fluids in the post-yield region, i.e. the shear thinning
phenomenon and yield stress [3], the dynamic properties
within the pre-yield region are also important for practical
applications. As a matter of fact, many existing MR devices
already operate under certain dynamic conditions. Therefore,
an understanding of the dynamic behaviour of the MR fluid
will be crucial for the design [4].
Several techniques exist for measuring the complex shear
moduli of viscoelastic materials [5]. However, a reliable test
method to use with electrorheological (ER) fluids has not yet
been determined. In general, the following three types of
measurements are usually employed to investigate the linear
viscoelastic properties of ER/MR fluids [6]:
• sinusoidal oscillatory flow;
• steady flow in a concentric cylinder or disk rheometer;
and shear wave propagation.
Most MR devices operate under dynamic conditions
(vibrators, dampers, etc). Thus, a small amplitude oscillatory
rheometer may provide more useful results.
Some experiments on ER dynamic properties have been
performed. Dynamic studies of ER fluids subjected to
sufficiently small oscillatory strain show that ER fluids
exhibit linear viscoelastic properties. Gamota and Filisco [7]
studied the high-frequency (300–400 Hz) dynamic properties
of an ER suspension composed of aluminosilicate particles
in paraffin oil. The response of the material is liner
viscoelastic when subjected to electric fields in the range of
0.0–3.0 kV mm−1 . The effect of electric field on the linear
viscoleastic parameters, i.e. the shear storage modulus (G0 ),
the shear loss modulus (G00 ), and the loss factor (G00 /G0 ),
were investigated. The moduli were found to increase with
increasing applied field and the loss factor decreased with
increasing applied field. At a frequency of 190 Hz, Brooks
et al [8] also studied the effect of electric fields (0.0 to
0.8 kV mm−1 ) on the dynamic properties. The ER test
sample consisted of lithium poly (methacrylate) dispersed in
chlorinated hydrocarbon oil. They recorded data showing
that G0 and G00 initially increased with field, reached a
maximum and then decreased. Choi and Kim [9] also
studied dynamic properties of two types of ER fluids, i.e.
cornstarch in coin oil and zeolite particles in silicone oil.
They found that G0 increases with frequency but decreases

0964-1726/99/040460+09$30.00 © 1999 IOP Publishing Ltd


Figure 1. Relation between stress (τ ) and strain (γ ) in: (a) perfect
elastic; (b) purely viscous; and (c) viscoelastic materials.
with strain amplitude. On the other hand, the loss factor
slightly decreased with increasing frequency but increased
slightly with increasing strain amplitude.
Very few reports have been found reporting studies on
the viscoelastic properties of MR fluids. Weiss et al [10]
compared the visoelastic properties of ER and MR fluids
through the use of oscillatory rheometry techniques. Their
experimental results showed that the storage modulus (G0 ) of
MR fluids can reach as high as 4.2 MPa in a magnetic field
of 2000 Oe, much higher than that of ER fluids. The yield
strains of MR fluids are within 0.5% to 0.8%, below which
MR fluid behaves as an elastic solid.
We have investigated the viscoelastic properties of
MR suspensions, including the storage modulus (G0 ), loss
modulus (G00 ), and loss factor (G00 /G0 ) using a strain-
controlled rheometer modified by the Gernany Paar Physica
Corporation. The samples are composed of reduced iron
powder dispersed in silicone oil. The effects of strain
amplitude (γ0 ), frequency (f ), magnetic field (I ) and
particle volume fraction (φ) on viscoelastic parameters are
studied via strain amplitude mode and frequency sweep
mode measurements. Among these experiments, the strain
amplitude (γ0 ) was sufficiently small, smaller than the yield
strain (γy ), so the MR fluids exhibited linear viscoelastic
properties.
2. Linear viscoelastic theory
Figure 1 shows the relationship between stress and strain for
three types of materials, namely a perfectly elastic material,
a purely viscous material and a viscoelastic material, when
subject to a sinusoidal deformation γ = γ0 sin ωt. For an
elastic material, the stress response is in phase with the strain
(curve a), while a purely viscous material produces a stress
90◦ out-of-phase (curve b). A viscoelastic material however,
would yield a stress with components both in-phase and
Viscoelastic properties of MR fluids
out-of-phase (curve c). Viscoelastic behaviour may thus be
described by the complex modulus
G∗ = G0 + iG00 (1)
where G0 is the storage (in-phase) modulus and G00 is the
loss (out-of-phase) modulus. Based on the theory of linear
viscoelasticity [5], the constitutive law for a one-dimensional
stress–strain can be written as
Z t
d
σ (t) = G(t)γ (0) + G(t − τ ) γ (τ ) dτ (2)
0 dτ
where the strain γ is restricted to zero for t ∈ (−∞, 0) and
G(t) is the material relaxation function. This stress relaxation
represents energy loss from the material, hence damping.
Transferring the constitutive relation to the Laplace
domain yields
σ̄ (s) = s Ḡ(s)γ̄ (s) (3)
wherein sG(s) will be referred to as the material modulus
function. This modulus function when evaluated along the
imaginary axis of the s-plane, yields the complex modulus
G∗ (ω) = jωḠ(jω) = G0 (ω) + jG00 (ω) (4)
the real and imaginary parts of the complex modulus,
namely the storage modulus G0 (ω) and the loss modulus
G00 (ω), represent the in-phase and out-of-phase components,
respectively, of the stress response to a sinusoidal unit strain
input. The complex modulus is used as a standard form in
the presentation of the viscoelastic material properties.
A useful quantity called the material loss factor may be
defined from the complex modulus
G00 (ω)
δ(ω) = . (5)
G0 (ω)
The loss factor is a measure of the ratio of the energy
dissipated from the material per radian to the stored energy
during the steady state sinusoidal excitation.
3. Experimental setup
3.1. Sample preparation
The MR samples were composed of reduced iron powder
in silicone oil. The Newtonian viscosity of silicone oil is
0.340 PaS and the density is 0.965 g cm−3 .
The reduced iron powders are easily magnetizable
and are spherical in shape. The average particle size of
these grains was approximately 4.7 µm, measured with
particle characterization systems supplied by the Malnern
Corporation. Some other specifications of the materials
are shown in table 1 and figure 2. Additionally, the iron
powder purity was as high as 99.97%. Two MR samples
with different volume/weight fractions were prepared. A
small amount of foamed silica (2% weight) was added to
each suspension as a surfactant so as to reduce or to prevent
sedimentation. Each sample was mixed and stirred by using
an electric stirrer for about an hour so as to ensure a uniform
suspension before testing. The two MR samples had very
little sedimentation even after 6 h and the main compositions
are given in table 2.
461
W H Li et al

Figure 2. Particle size distribution of reduced iron powder.

Table 1. Specifications of reduced iron powder. (Average particle

size, 4.743 µm; uniformity, 0.484 819.)
Particle Particle Particle
size Volume size Volume size Volume
(µm) (%) (µm) (%) (µm) (%)
1.002 0 2.825 6.23 7.962 4.78
1.125 0.13 3.170 7.13 8.934 3.71
1.282 0.49 3.557 7.83 10.024 2.77
1.416 0.93 3.990 8.25 11.247 1.95
1.589 1.54 4.477 8.38 12.619 1.23
1.783 2.30 5.024 8.13 14.159 0.78
2.000 3.19 5.637 7.58 15.887 0.43
2.244 4.19 6.325 6.78 17.825 0.20
2.518 5.23 7.098 5.80 20.000 0.1

Table 2. Composition of reduced iron/silicone oil suspensions.

(a)

Composition Weight fraction(%) Volume fraction (%)

No (iron/oil) wt% φ
#1 173.3 g/190 g 48 10
#2 275.3 g/190 g 60 15

3.2. Apparatus
A universal dynamic spectrometer (MR-rheometer), as
shown in figure 3(a), modified by the German Paar Physica
Corporation was used to carry out the experiments [11].
The measuring system included three main parts, i.e.
the measuring drive system for the testing specimen, the
electronics for data processing and the user-interface software
package. The relationship of these three parts is shown in
figure 3(b).
Unlike a conventional rheometer, the MR-rheometer was
equipped with an additional MR cell, having a plate–plate
configuration as shown in figure 4. The measuring gap was
fixed as h = 1 mm. With this plate–plate arrangement,
the torque which was transferred by the MR fluid from the
stationary dispenser to the rotor could be measured.
The rotor of the MR-rheometer could provide a high
enough torque to meet the requirements of the experiment.
(b)
Figure 3. Schematic of the MR rheometer. (a) Picture of MR
rheometer; (b) flow chart of MR rheometer.
For instance, a maximum shear stress of τmax ≈ 100 kPa
could be generated at the maximum torque of M =
150 mN m. Also, if the rate of revolution of the rotor
was n = 800 rev min−1 , the shear strain rate could reach
a maximum of γ̇ = 750 s−1 .
Approximately 0.4 ml of samples was filled in the gap
between the two parallel plates during the experiment. The
characteristics and dimensions of the MR cell, as well as the
coil, are listed in table 3.

462

Table 3. Characteristics and dimensions of MR cell.
Radius of the rotor plate R = 9 mm
Gap width h = 1 mm
Total volume of MR fluid V = 0.4 ml
MR fluid volume in the measuring gap V = 0.25 ml
Diameter of copper wire in coil D = 1 mm
Turns of electromagnetic coil N = 690 turns
Figure 4. Schematic of the MR Cell.
Table 4. Composition of CK45.
0.42 ∼ 0.5% carbon
<0.4% silicon
0.5% to 0.8% manganese
<0.035% phosphorus
<0.03% sulphur
Others: iron
3.3. Magnetic field
The magnetic field applied to the MR fluid was generated by
the built-in coil of the MR cell (figure 4). The coil had n =
690 turns copper wires, with a diameter of 1 mm (table 3).
The magnetic field lines ran perpendicular to the plate through
the gap filled with MR fluid and the magnetic flux was
transferred by the material CK45, whose specifications are
shown in table 4. The magnetic flux density (BMRF ) in
the measuring gap depends not only on the coil current (I ),
but also on the materials through which the flux is flowing,
in particular, the magnetic properties of the MR fluids
[11, 12]. Since MR fluids are usually superparamagnetic
materials, they have a saturation magnetization. Their
relative permeability (µr ) depends on the magnetic field
strength. It has been shown that for conventional MR fluids
5 < µr < 9 [12].
For a MR fluid there is a certain relationship between
the magnetic flux density (BMRF ) in the measuring gap and
the driving coil current (I ), which is used to produce the
magnetic field. Figure 5 shows a typically linear relationship
between the magnetic flux density (BMRF ) and the coil
current (I ) for MRF-132LD [13], supplied by the Lord
Corporation, measured with this rheometer. The relationship
of BMRF against I was calibrated by the German Paar Physica
Corporation. and the magnetic field in the gap was uniform
[11]. This relationship may not fit for other MR fluids.
However, there is very little difference (field error less than
Viscoelastic properties of MR fluids
Figure 5. The dependence of the magnetic flux density (BMRF ) in
the measuring gap filled with MRF-132LD on the driving coil
current I .
5.6%) for different MR samples as analysed in the appendix.
To be concise, the experimental results presented in this paper
will be in terms of the coil current I instead of the magnetic
flux density BMRF .
3.4. Dynamic measurements
The principle of the measurement was to compare the
oscillating shear-strain signal with the response shear-stress
signal. A sinusoidal strain of given amplitude and frequency,
as well as the resulting stress, could be applied by the
controlled strain rheometer. The dynamic properties were
then calculated from the relation between the applied and the
response signals.
The disk edge shear strain amplitude γ0 was calculated
by
γ0 = ϕ0 R/ h (6)
where ϕ0 is the angular amplitude of oscillation, R is the rotor
radius of 9 mm and h is a constant gap of 1 mm.
Using the measuring system and the software the storage
shear modulus (G0 ), loss modulus (G00 ) and loss factor
(G00 /G0 ) was determined as a function of the oscillatory
frequency (f ) and strain amplitude (γ0 ).
4. Experimental results
A MR fluid exhibits linear viscoelastic properties when it
behaves in the pre-yield region [8, 9]. That is, when the
applied strain amplitude (γ0 ) is smaller than the yield strain
(γy ), MR samples behave with linear viscoelasticity. Hence,
prior to carrying out viscoelastic measurements, the yield
strain (γy ) for each MR sample at various magnetic fields
should be measured. Using the dynamic oscillatory method,
Weiss et al [10] measured the yield strain within 0.5% to
0.8%. Unlike their method, a shear method was used to
measure the static yield strain. An example of the yield strain
463
W H Li et al

(a)

Figure 6. Plot of shear stress against shear strain for 15 vol% MR

suspension for a coil current of I = 0.8 A.

for 15 vol% MR suspension with a coil current I = 0.8 A is

shown in figure 6. The rotor was first set to rotate uniformly
for about 1 min under a fixed shear rate of 400 s−1 so that
the sample was well blended. Next, the magnetic field was
applied by setting the required coil current of I = 0.8 A.
Then the shear stress was ramped logarithmically from 60 Pa
to 6000 Pa within 500 s. The stress/strain data were obtained
from the experimental results. From figure 6 the yield strain
(γy ) is about 0.0054, which is in good agreement with Weiss
et al results [10] (γy = 0.5–0.8%). Other yield strains for MR
fluids at different magnetic fields were also measured using a
similar method. However, all our experimental results show
that the yield strains vary from 0.002 to 0.006, different from
those of Weiss et al [10]. Thus, in order to ensure that all
these MR samples behave in the pre-yield region, the applied (b)
maximum strain amplitudes of γ0 = 0.001 were applied in
each experiment.

4.1. Frequency sweep mode

In this part, the applied strain amplitude for a 10 vol% MR
suspension at various magnetic fields was fixed as γ0 = 0.001
and the oscillatory driving frequency was swept from 1 to
100 Hz. The frequency response of the storage modulus
(G0 ), the loss modulus (G00 ) and loss factor (G00 /G0 ) for
this suspension at different magnetic fields are illustrated in
figures 7(a)–(c), respectively. It can be seen that G0 , G00 and
G00 /G0 are all very sensitive to the applied magnetic fields.
The higher the magnetic field (I ), the higher the storage
modulus G0 and the loss modulus G00 . In figure 7(a), G0
at I = 0.8 A is over ten times of that at I = 0.2 A for an
oscillating frequency of 8 Hz. Also, it can be seen that the
magnitude of storage shear modulus G0 can reach as high as
2 MPa at a coil current I = 0.8 A and a driving frequency
f = 100 Hz. In contrast, the loss modulus does not change (c)
as much as that of the storage modulus. For example, G00 at Figure 7. Frequency dependence of: (a) storage shear modulus
G0 ; (b) loss modulus G00 ; and (c) loss factor G00 /G0 for a 10 vol%
I = 0.8 A is only about three times that at I = 0.2 A and 8 Hz. reduced iron/silicone oil suspension at various coil currents
Thus, with the increase in magnetic field, MR suspensions I = 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8 A.

464
 Viscoelastic properties of MR fluids

exhibit increased storage energy capability rather than energy

dissipation capability. On the other hand, the loss factors
(G00 /G0 ) are not as well behaved as the storage modulus and
loss modulus: as the driving frequency increases, the loss
factor decreases gradually (figure 7(c)). By the way, the
loss factor is also a function of the magnetic field. At a low
magnetic field (I = 0.2 A), the loss factor decreases from
1.07 at f = 8 Hz to 0.27 at f = 100 Hz. However, at a high
magnetic field (I = 0.8 A), the loss factor displays almost
no change (0.29 at 8 Hz and 0.21 at 100 Hz). This may
be attributed to the internal structures. At a low magnetic
field, not all the particles can form into stable structures, the
suspension is more viscous at certain driving frequencies,
which corresponds to a high loss factor. Whereas, when the
magnetic field is above a certain value, almost all the particles
form into stable solid structures and the loss factor has only
a light variance.

4.2. Amplitude sweep mode (a)

The effect of the strain amplitude γ0 on the dynamic

properties was established using the amplitude sweep
method. The applied strain amplitude was linearly increased
from 0.0001 to 0.001 and the driving frequency was 10 Hz.
Figure 8(a)–(c) show the plots of G0 , G00 and G00 /G0 against
γ0 , at a driving frequency of 10 Hz and a driving coil current
I = 0.2 A, for a 15 Vol% MR suspension. As can be seen
in this figure, both the storage modulus and the loss modulus
decrease with increment of strain amplitude (γ0 ). However,
the loss factor increases with increasing strain amplitude.
The result for the storage modulus and loss modulus
in dependence of shear strain can also be explained from
the internal structure of MR suspensions. For very small
shear strain amplitude, the chains that the particles form
are not broken as the result of very small displacement.
This also suggests that MR fluids exhibit dominant elastic
properties at very small displacement. Our finding for MR
(b)
fluids are similar to those found by Korobko et al [14] on ER
fluid composed of diatomite and transformer oil at several
concentrations. They found that the storage shear modulus
and loss modulus were strong functions of strain amplitude.

4.3. Effect of magnetic field

Figures 9(a)–(c) shows the plots of G0 , G00 and G00 /G0 against
coil current I at various driving frequencies of f = 8, 16, 50,
80, 100 Hz and a strain amplitude of 0.001. All the data in
this figure were collected from figure 7. It can be seen from
figure 9(a) that the storage modulus G0 first increases sharply
(I = 0.2 A to 0.6 A) then increases gradually (I = 0.6 A to
0.8 A) with the driving coil current I . This is maybe attributed
to the magnetic field effect on the internal structures. The
chain or column structures would become more stable with
the increased magnetic field, i.e. behave more like a solid.
Also, the loss modulus G00 has similar trends to the storage
modulus G0 (figure 9(b)). However, the loss factor decreases
with the increase in magnetic field I (figure 9(c)). Again,
the loss factor is very dependent on the magnetic field, which (c)
is different from the experimental results on ER fluids [9].
Figure 8. Strain dependence of: (a) storage modulus G0 ; (b) loss
The lower the magnetic field, the wider the range of loss modulus G00 ; and (c) loss factor G00 /G0 for a 15 vol% suspension
factor. When the coil current is above 0.6 A, the loss factor at I = 0.2 A and f = 10 Hz.

465
W H Li et al

only displays a small change for various driving frequencies,

which suggests that the particles have formed into a quite
stable structure when the magnetic field is above 0.6 A.

4.4. Effect of volume fraction

The viscoelastic properties, i.e. G0 , G00 and loss factor G00 /G0 ,
are also influenced by particle concentration. G0 , G00 and
G00 /G0 against frequency for a strain amplitude of 0.001 and
a coil current of I = 0.2 A for two volume fractions are
shown in figure 10(a)–(c). It has been found that the higher
the volume fraction, the higher the storage modulus, as well
as the loss modulus and loss factor. The experimental results
are in good agreement with the effect of volume fraction on
the MR yield stress [15].

5. Discussion
(a)
All the experimental results are based on linear viscoelastic
theory. MR fluids behave with linear viscoelastic properties
within the pre-yield regions. The measured yield strains of
different MR samples at various magnetic fields varied from
0.2% to 0.6%, which were smaller than the results of Weiss
et al (0.5–0.8%) [10]. The reason for this may be due to the
different measurement methods. Due to the limitations of the
data gathering and analysing system of this MR rheometer it
was difficult to obtain the stress/strain hysteresis loop, which
is an additional method with which to determine the linear
viscoelastic regions as presented by Gamota et al [7]. Some
studies [16] have argued that ER or MR fluid could not exhibit
perfect linear elastic properties even at its pre-yield region,
especially at its yielding region (γ → γy ). We also found
this problem. Thus the nonlinear visocelastic properties of
MR fluid together with its model and parameter identification
still needs further study.
A preferred carrier fluid should have a low initial
(b) viscosity, low toxicity and a wide range of temperature
stability [4]. In our experiments, the rather high viscosity
of 0.34 PaS of silicone oil might have reduced the MR effect
though it was useful in order to reduce sedimentation.

6. Conclusion

In this paper, the experimental investigation the dynamic

properties of MR fluids in terms of storage modulus (G0 ), loss
modulus (G00 ) and loss factor (G00 /G0 ) were presented. They
were directly measured as a function of oscillating frequency
(f ), strain amplitude (γ0 ), applied coil current (I ) and volume
fraction (φ). The findings can be summarized as follows.
• Generally speaking, storage modulus G0 as well as loss
modulus G00 increases with driving frequency. However,
the loss factor does not change in the same way as the
storage modulus and loss modulus. When the driving
frequency increases the loss factor decreases.
• The storage modulus G0 , loss modulus G00 and loss
(c) factor G00 /G0 were measured using the amplitude sweep
method. G0 and G00 decrease with the increase of strain
Figure 9. The dependence of: (a) storage modulus G0 ; (b) loss
modulus G00 ; and (c) loss factor for a 10 vol% suspension at amplitude. However, the loss factor increases with
various frequencies on the coil current (I ). increasing strain amplitude.

466
 Viscoelastic properties of MR fluids

• The storage modulus G0 , loss modulus G00 and loss

factor G00 /G0 are strong functions of the coil current I
producing the magnetic field. The higher the current, the
higher the G0 and G00 . However, the loss factor G00 /G0
decreases with increasing magnetic field.
• The viscoelastic parameters are also influenced by
particle concentration φ. The higher the volume fraction,
the higher the storage modulus and the loss modulus, as
well as the loss factor.

Appendix. Analysis of magnetic flux density in the

gap

According to ampere’s law

I
H dL = N I (A.1)
(a)
Referring to figure 4, (A.1) can be expressed
NI = H (body)L(body) + H (air gap)L(air gap)
+H (plate)L(plate) + H (MRF)L(MRF) (A.2)
where N = number of coil turns, I = coil current; H ( ) =
magnetic field strength; L( ) = length.
Assume no magnetic leakage, i.e. B is constant. The
relation of B against H is

B = µ0 µr H or H = B/µ0 µr (A.3)

Substituting (A.3) into (A.2)


B L(body) L(air gap)
NI = +
µ0 µr (body) µr (air gap)

L(plate) L(MRF)
+ + (A.4)
µr (plate) µr (MRF)
(b) where µr (body) ≈ 1000; µr (air gap) = 1; µr (plate) ≈
1 µr (MRF) = 5–9. L(body) ≈ 150 mm; L(air gap) =
1.2 mm; L(plate) = 1.3 mm; L(MRF) = 1 mm.
Substituting these parameters into (A.4), the magnetic flux
B can be expressed as

µ0 NI
B= L(body) L(air gap)
µr (body)
+ µr (air gap)
+ µL(plate)
r (plate)
+ L(MRF)
µr (MRF)
µ0 N I
≈ 150 1.2
1000
+ 1
+ 1.3
1
+ 1
µr (MRF)
µ0 N I
= 1
(A.5)
2.65 + µr (MRF)

Therefore, the maximum relative flux density error can be

calculated
|1B| 1µr (MRF)
Berror = × 100% = 1
× 100%
B (2.65 + µ (MRF) )µ2r r

(c) 9−5
6 . (A.6)
Figure 10. Frequency dependence of: (a) storage modulus G0 ; (2.65 + 15 ) × 52
00
(b) loss modulus G ; and (c) loss factor for 10% and 15% vol%
(φ) suspensions for a coil current of I = 0.2 A and strain For different MR fluids, the maximum flux density difference
amplitude γ0 = 0.001. is below 5.6%.

467
W H Li et al
References
[1] Carlson J D, Catnazarite D M and St Clair K A 1995
Commercial magnetorheological fluid devices 5th Int.
Conf. on ER Fluids, MR Suspensions and Associate
Technology (Sheffield, UK, July 1995) ed W A Bullough
(Singapore: World Scientific) pp 20–8
[2] Dykes S J, Spencer B F Jr, Sain M K and Carlson J D 1998
An experimental study of MR dampers for seismic
protection Smart Mater. Struct. 7 693–703
[3] Liu J, Mou T, Zhu Y, Pousset J, Haddadian E and Lim S R
1995 Effect of cell confinement on the evolution of
field-induced structures in a MR Fluid J. Intell. Mater.
Syst. Struct. 7 583–8
[4] Osama A, Rogers C A and Kordonsky W 1996
Magnetorheological fluids: materials, characterization
and devices J. Intell. Mater. Syst. Struct. 7 123
[5] Ferry J D 1980 Viscoelastic Properties of Polymers 3rd edn
(New York: Wiley)
[6] Mahjoob M J 1995 On the identification and control of
adaptive ER fluid-based structures PhD Thesis Waterloo,
Ontario, Canada
[7] Gamota D R and Filisco F E 1991 High frequency dynamic
mechanical study of an aluminosilicate electrorheological
material J. Rheol. 35 1411
468
[8] Brooks D, Goodwin J, Hjelm C, Marshall L and Zukoski C
1986 Visco-elastic studies on electro-rheological fluid
Colloids and Surfaces 18 293
[9] Choi Y D and Lim S G 1996 Viscoelastic properties of
electrorheological fluids Rheology and Fluid Mechanics
of Nonlinear Materials 217 301–7
[10] Weiss K D, Carlson J D and Nixon D A 1994 Viscoelastic
properties of magneto- and electro-rheological fluids
J. Intell. Mater. Syst. Struct. 5 772
[11] Operating Manual: Magnetorheological Cell MR 100-450.
1998. Version 1, Paar Physica, Germany
[12] Ginder J M 1998 Behavior of magnetorheological fluids
MRS Bulletin (August) 26–9
[13] www.mrfluid.com
[14] Korobko E V and Shulman Z P 1989 Proc. 1st Int. Symp. ER
Fluids ed H Conrad, A F Sprecher and J D Carlson
(Raileigh, NC: NCSU Engr) p 115
[15] Felt D W, Hagenbuchle M and Liu J 1996 Rheology of a
magnetorheological fluid J. Intell. Mater. Syst. Struct. 7
589
[16] Lee C Y 1995 Finite element formulation of a sandwich
beam with embedded electro-rheological fluids J. Intell.
Mater. Syst. Struct. 6 718