2

nd
Mercosur Congress on Chemical Engineering
4
th
Mercosur Congress on Process Systems Engineering


1
NON-NEWTONIAN FLUID FLOW IN DUCTS: FRICTION FACTOR
AND LOSS COEFICIENTS
Adelson Belizrio Leal, Luis Amrico Calada, Cludia Mirim Scheid
*

Departamento de Engenharia Qumica - Universidade Federal Rural do Rio de Janeiro


Abstract. The knowledge of the head loss in the flow of non-Newtonian fluids is very important for the
execution of pipelines and pumping systems designs, common in plants of almost all kinds of industries. The
determination of the total head loss involves the establishment of the friction factor corresponding to pressure
drop in the straight section and the loss coefficients caused by each fittings and valves existent in piping
systems. In this context, the head loss in globe valve, sudden contraction, 90 degree standard elbow and
straight smooth circular pipe was studied. The fluids used in the tests were aqueous solutions of
carboxymethylcellulose (CMC) and xanthan gum, in different concentrations, flowing in fully-developed
turbulent flow. The rheology was determined by a capillary rheometer, in the same temperature condition of
the head loss experiments. All solutions employed in this work showed non-Newtonian and pseudoplastic
behavior. The rheological data were adjusted for the Ostwald-de Waele model and the correlation
coefficients were above 0.99. The experimental data of friction factors were compared with predictive
correlations proved in literature. On the other hand, the experimental data of loss coefficients were compared
to that obtained to water flow and non-Newtonian flow those data available in literature.

Keywords: Fittings, pressure drop and valve.


1. Introduction

The non-Newtonian fluids, unlike the Newtonian, are defined as materials which do not conform to a direct
proportionality between shear stress and shear rate. Among different models to represent this relationship, the
Ostwald-of Waele model, though empirical, represents a great many non-Newtonian fluids given by,

n
k = , (1)

where e are shear stress and shear rate respectively. While n is flow behavior index and k is fluid consistency
index, both rheological parameters.
Due to the necessity of the knowledge of the head loss in the execution designs of piping systems and
pumping, the study of the flow of fluids non-Newtonian in ducts is very important for engineering. These fluids
are present in many processes of the plants of almost all of the types of industries.
The total head loss, h
t
, caused by some piping system consists of the sum of losses regarding to the straight
pipe section, h
d
, and the losses regarding to the several fittings and valves present in this system, h
s
. In the case
of a steady and isothermal flow of the incompressible fluid, without pump and no work involved, the

*
To whom all correspondence should be addressed.
Address: LSP/DEQ/IT, UFRRJ, BR-465, Km 07, 23890-000 Seropdica Rio de JaneiroBrazil
E-mail: scheid@ufrrj.br

2
nd
Mercosur Congress on Chemical Engineering
4
th
Mercosur Congress on Process Systems Engineering


2
total head loss can be given by the macroscopic mechanical energy balance applied to two points any of the
piping (Bird et al, 1960), is given by,

2 1
2
2
2
1 2 1
t
z z
g 2
v v
g
p p
h +

= , (2)

where p
1
and p
2
, v
1
and v
2
, z
1
and z
2
, are pressures, average velocities, the heights at points 1 and 2 respectively.
is the fluid density and g is the gravitational acceleration.

1.1. Friction factor
The turbulent flow in straight cylindrical duct of length L and diameter D, lying in a horizontal plane so that
z
1
=z
2
and v
1
=v
2
, the eq. (2) can be simplified to the equation given by

g
P
g
p p
h h
2 1
d t

= =

, (3)

where P is the static pressure difference between 1 and 2. The dimensional analysis of the fully turbulent flow
in straight cylindrical tube leads to the definition of the Fanning friction factor, f, given by,

2
v 2
D
L
P
f

= . (4)

It is common to find in the literature the definition of Darcy friction factor; relationship by f
D
=4f.
An important review about friction factor was made by Kemblowski and Kolodziejski (1973) and Coelho
(1982), in which it is shown the three trends followed by the researchers in the attempt of correlating the factor
friction in the turbulent flow of non-Newtonian fluids. The main correlations mentioned by these authors are
presented in the table 1, with their respective definitions of Reynolds number and range of behavior index. All
the equations, except the eq. (8), use the Fanning friction factor definition given by the eq. (4).
The first trend, which maybe the oldest, uses the equations developed for the turbulent flow of Newtonian
fluids to correlate the flow fluids of non-Newtonian, using several viscosity definitions in the expression for the
Reynolds number. The second correlates the experimental data of friction factor and Reynolds number to the
equations of the type Blasius, given by,

b
Re a f = , (9)

where a and b are functions of the rheological properties fluids. For Newtonian fluids, a is 0.079 and b is -0.25.
The correlation proposed by Shaver and Merrill (1959), eq. (5), is an exemple of this trend and was developed

2
nd
Mercosur Congress on Chemical Engineering
4
th
Mercosur Congress on Process Systems Engineering


3
with base in the experimental data obtained in the turbulent flow of aqueous solutions of CMC, carbopol and
polyisobutylene in cyclohexeno.
The last of those trends makes use of the "Prandtl law" to predict the friction factor. Equations of this type
have the general form given by,

( ) C f Re log A
f
1
B
+ =
, (10)

where the parameters A, B and C are functions of the rheological properties of the fluid. The correlations given
by the equations 6, 7, 8 are considered the most important for this case.
Dodge and Metzner (1959), through a theoretical and experimental study using solutions of CMC, carbopol
and clay, presented a correlation in which the hypothesis of the Newtonian turbulent flow was extended to non-
Newtonian turbulent fluid flow. In the special case of fluids that follow the model of Ostwald-of Waele, this
correlation is given by the eq. (6), where the Reynolds number used was defined by Metzner and Reed (1955)
with base in the laminar flow. The deviation observed is this case were smaller than 2,5%, except for CMC
solutions that present viscoelastic behavior.
Clapp (1961), working with the flow of pseudoplastic fluids, presented, as well as Dodge and Metzner
(1959), a correlation where the parameters A, B and C are functions of the rheological properties of the fluid.
The correlation of Clapp is given by the eq. (7) with a maximum deviation of 4% in the range worked
(Skelland, 1967).
Tomita (1959) proposed a correlation for the turbulent friction factor based on the similarity criteria and
Prandtls mixing length theories (Skelland, 1967). Unlike Dodge and Metzner (1959) and Clapp (1961), the
correlation proposed by Tomita presents the parameters A, B and C independent of the rheology of the fluid and
another definition for friction factor. This definition for friction factor consists of an extension of the Fanning
friction factor. In the case of fluids that obeyed the Ostwald-of Waele model, Tomita correlation is given by the
eq. (8) and Tomita friction factor corresponding is defined by

+
+

=
1 n 3
1 n 2
v L 3
P D 2
f
2
T
. (11)

It is valid to remind that the correlations of Dodge and Metzner, eq. (7), and Tonita, eq. (9) assume, when n
equal to the unit (Newtonian fluids), the well-known expression of Karman-Nikuradse given by,

( ) 4 , 0 f Re log 0 , 4
f
1
= . (12)



2
nd
Mercosur Congress on Chemical Engineering
4
th
Mercosur Congress on Process Systems Engineering


4
Table 1. Correlations for turbulent flow of non-Newtonian fluids
Author n Reynolds number Correlation
Shaver and
Merril
(1959)
0.51.0
n
1 n
n 2 n
SM
1 n 3
n 4
k 8
v D
Re

( )
n
5 . 10
63 . 2
SM
5
Re n
079 , 0
f =
(5)
Dodge and
Metzner
(1959)
0.41.0
n
1 n
n 2 n
MR
1 n 3
n 4
k 8
v D
Re

2 . 1
2
n 2
MR 75 . 0
n
4 . 0
f Re log
n
0 . 4
f
1

=

(6)
Clapp
(1961)
0.70.8
k 8
v D
Re
1 n
n 2 n
Cl

=

n
75 . 2 n 45 . 0
f Re log
n
53 . 4
f
1
2
n 2
Cl

+

=

(7)
Tomita
(1959)
0.20.9

n
1 n 2
2
n
1 n 3
6
k
v D
Re
n
n 1
n 2 n
T

( ) 4 . 0 f Re log 0 . 4
f
1
T T
T
= (8)

2.2. Loss Coefficient
The head loss in fittings and valves, h
s
, is resulted of the wall friction, of changes in the cross-section and/or
direction of the flow and is expressed in function of the loss coefficients K, given by,

g 2
v
K h
2
s
= . (13)

The loss coefficient, K, is characteristic of each fitting and valve type while, h
s
, it can be obtained through
the eq. (2). However, it should be taken into account the particularities of each fitting and valve during the
simplifications of this equation, for example: the variation in the cross-section flow and the heights. It is valid to
observe that in the case of the fittings, as a sudden contraction, in which there is variation in the average velocity
before and after the fitting, the loss coefficient is related with the velocity regarding to the smallest diameter.
The Crane Company (1976) provided a very extensive tabulation of loss coefficients for turbulent flow
thorough various types and sizes of fitting and valves for Newtonian fluids. In the case of non-Newtonian fluids,
Turian et al. (1998) studied the pressure drop in different types and sizes of fittings, valves and venturi meters
for the flow of non-Newtonian slurries. These authors obtained loss coefficients similar to the flow of water for
majority of the fittings and valves. Already Etmad (2004), accomplishing similar study with aqueous solutions
of the CMC, obtained loss coefficients dependent of the rheology of the non-Newtonian fluid.
In this context, this work seeks to test the correlations of friction factor and to compare the loss coefficients
existent in the literature to that obtained experimentally, all in turbulent regime. For such an objective, polymeric
solutions of xanthan gum and CMC were used in different concentrations, flowing through smooth cylindrical
tube and two basic types of fittings (90 elbow and 1-3/4 sudden contraction ) and one globe valve.

2
nd
Mercosur Congress on Chemical Engineering
4
th
Mercosur Congress on Process Systems Engineering


5
2. Materials and Methods

The experimental apparatus used for the tests is showed in figure 1. It consists of a reservoir tank, with 500
liters of capacity, a centrifugal pump of 1.5 HP (model CAM W-6C made by Dancor, Brazil) and 6 m of pipe
system in a horizontal plane working in loop. The friction factor was studied in a section of length 387cm with
2.65 cm of internal diameter. The friction loss coefficient was determined for globe valve and 90 degree
standard, elbow with 1 diameter both and a sudden contraction 1 to . All the parts, except valve were made
of PVC. The pressure drop in the fittings and the straight section was obtained by tube in U manometer in
turbulent flow without end effects. The pressure drops in the fittings and the straight section were measured
by means of U-tube manometers containing mercury and tetrachloromethane. The flow rate was calculated using
a measuring cylinder and stop watch. For the tests, aqueous solutions of carboxymethylcellulose (CMC) and
xanthan gum in different concentrations were used.
The rheological behaviors of the solutions were obtained by the capillary rheometer in the average
temperature and in the same range of shear rate of each experiment. All the fluids presented non-Newtonian and
pseudoplastic behavior allowing the adjustment for the model of Ostwald-of Waele with coefficients of
correlation over than 0.99 for all worked concentrations. The results of the rheology are presented in table 2.

Table 2. Concentration, temperature, rheological parameters and density of the polymeric solutions
n: Flow behavior index; k: Fluid consistency index; : Shear rate; T: Temperature and : Fluid density.
Solutions
%
(p/v)
T
(C)
n
k
(dyna s
n
/cm
2
)

(s
-1
)

(g/cm
3
)
26.0 0.965 0.0144 100 - 2044 1.01
0.010
28.0 0.979 0.0121 110 - 2028 1.01
26.0 0.907 0.0219 85 - 1739 1.01
0.012
28.5 0.906 0.0215 88 - 2052 1.01
26.9 0.786 0.0590 45 - 2012 1.01
0.020
28.5 0.799 0.0520 52 - 1720 1.01
0040 25.4 0.579 0.3185 27 - 1063 1.01
24.5 0.399 1.8490 2 - 496 1.01
XG
0.100
26.5 0.397 1.8680 2 - 485 1.01
28.0 0.921 0.0227 81 - 1527 1.00
0.100
30.0 0.933 0.0206 85 - 1570 1.00
0.150 31.0 0.895 00314 64 - 1544 1.00
0.200 26.0 0.858 0.0521 43 - 1198 1.00
0.250 27.5 0.840 0.0645 36 - 1100 1.00
0.400 29.0 0.832 0.0869 25 - 818 1.00
0.500 29.5 0.817 0.1109 20 - 682 1.00
0.900 30.0 0.830 0.1964 6 - 251 1.00
1.000 32.7 0.825 0.2404 5 - 209 1.00
CMC
1.350 32.9 0.816 0.3160 3 - 158 1.00

2
nd
Mercosur Congress on Chemical Engineering
4
th
Mercosur Congress on Process Systems Engineering


6

Fig. 1. Schematic of the experimental apparatus.

3. Results and Discussions

In order to check the validity of the friction factor and loss coefficients data obtained in the unit of flow tests
were done using water as standard fluid. The friction factors and the loss coefficients were evaluated throught
the eq. (4) and eq. (13) and the data of P e v obtained experimentally. The deviations for the friction factor
were always smaller than 5% in module for every range of Reynolds studied, indicating that the unit of test can
be used in the determination of the friction factors for other fluids. In case of loss coefficients, the table 3 shows
the values provided by the references and obtained in the experimental unit, with their respective standard
deviations and correlation coefficients, for all the fittings and valve studied. The deviations differences observed
can be explained by the different geometric configurations of the fittings employed in the determination of the
loss coefficients while the low standard deviations and the correlation coefficients near the unit, confirm the
capacity of the experimental unit to supply data for other fluids.

Table 3. Comparison of Newtonian experimental data with available results in the literature
Experimental
Crane
(1976)
Turian
(1998)
Fittings and
Valve
K
R
2

K K
Globe valve
10.40 0.10 0.99 7.82
10.000,75
90 Elbow
1.33 0.05 0.99 0.69 1.110,163
1-3/4 Sudden
contraction
0.41 0.03 0.99 0.20 -
K: Average loss coefficients, R
2
: Correlation coefficients and : Standard deviation.

90
Elbow
50
Manovacuumeter
50 50
387
50
Manometer
V=500L
Centrifugal Pump
50 50
Globe Valve
120
80
*
Distances are in cm.
Straight duct
Sudden contraction

2
nd
Mercosur Congress on Chemical Engineering
4
th
Mercosur Congress on Process Systems Engineering


7
The friction factors obtained experimentally through the eq. (4) were compared with the friction factors
predicted by the eq. (5), eq. (6), eq. (7). and eq. (8), with the purpose of evaluating the performance of each
correlation in turbulent flow, Re
MR
> 4000.
The figure 2a shows that the deviations between the experimental and predicted friction factors by the
correlation of Shaver and Merrill (1959), eq. (5), are less than 15% in module for the solutions of CMC. In the
case of xanthan gum solutions, the deviations vary among -15% for solutions with n=0.965 to value larger than
+90% for solutions with n=0.399. It is pertinent to remind that Shaver and Merrill (1959) observed deviations
among +33% to -15% for solutions with 0.53n1.0 and it is not indicated the use of their correlation to
solutions with n <0.40.
The performance of correlation of Dodge and Metzner (1959), eq. (6), is presented in the figure 2b. It can be
observed in this figure that the predicted friction factors are larger than obtained experimentally, for all of the
solutions of CMC and xanthan gum studied. In the case of the xanthan gum, the deviations were between -35%
and -15% for the solutions with n=0.399 and n=0.965 respectively. Taking into account the case of CMC flow
with 0.81<n<0.92, the deviations between the experimental and predicted by the eq. (6) were smaller than -10%.
The figure 2c shows the deviations between the experimental friction factors and predicted by correlation of
Clapp (1961), given by the eq. (7). It is pertinent to point out that this correlation is valid for 0.698n0.813, but
it was used to predict frictions factors of xanthan gum and CMC solutions with 0.399n0.965 showing
deviations which are among +5% and-20%.
The figure 2d shows the deviations between the experimental and predicted friction factors by the correlation
of Tomita (1959), eq. (8). This equation overestimates the frictions factors for all the solutions. In the case of
CMC solutions, the deviations are among -10% to -20% while for the xanthan gum solutions the deviations were
between -20% and -70%.
The table 4 shows the results of the statistical treatment applied to the experimental friction factors
(totalizing 151 points) and calculated by the equations 5, 6, 7 and 8. It can be observed in this table that the
correlation of Clapp (1961), eq. (7) is the best one while the correlation of Shaver and Merrill (1959), eq. (5),
supplies the worst results for the friction factor. In this table, y is average, is standard deviation and DMA is
average absolute deviation.
Table 4. Statistical treatment for several correlations
Statistical
Shaver and
Merrill
Dodge and
Metzner
Clapp Tomita Equation
y 1.49 0.89 0.93 0.79

=
n
1 i
i
. pred
. exp
f
f
n
1
y

1.66 0.09 0.06 0.14
5 . 0
n
1 i
i
. pred
. exp
y
f
f
1 n
1

=

=

DMA
(%)
15.98 13.66 8.66 33.26

=

=
n
1 i . exp
. pred . exp
f
f f
n
100
DMA


2
nd
Mercosur Congress on Chemical Engineering
4
th
Mercosur Congress on Process Systems Engineering


8
0.000 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.010 0.012
0.000
0.002
0.004
0.006
0.008
0.010
0.012
+10%
+20%
+40% +90%
-10%
f
E
x
p
e
r
i
m
e
n
t
a
l
f
Predicted-Shaver and Merrill
n=0.816 -CMC n=0.399 -XG
n=0.817 -CMC n=0.579 -XG
n=0.825 -CMC n=0.773 -XG
n=0.830 -CMC n=0.907 -XG
n=0.832 -CMC n=0.965 -XG
n=0.840 -CMC
n=0.858 -CMC
n=0.895 -CMC
n=0.921 -CMC
(a)
0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.010
0.002
0.004
0.006
0.008
0.010
-10%
-20%
-30%
+10%
f
E
x
p
e
r
i
m
e
n
t
a
l
f
Predicted - Dodge and Metzner
n=0.816 - CMC n=0.399 - XG
n=0.817 - CMC n=0.579 - XG
n=0.825 - CMC n=0.773 - XG
n=0.830 - CMC n=0.907 - XG
n=0.832 - CMC n=0.965 - XG
n=0.840 - CMC
n=0.858 - CMC
n=0.895 - CMC
n=0.921 - CMC
(b)
0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.010 0.012
0.002
0.004
0.006
0.008
0.010
0.012
-20%
-10%
+10%
f
E
x
p
e
r
i
m
e
n
t
a
l
f
Predicted-Clapp
n=0.816 - CMC n=0.399 - XG
n=0.817 - CMC n=0.579 - XG
n=0.825 - CMC n=0.773 - XG
n=0.830 - CMC n=0.907 - XG
n=0.832 - CMC n=0.965 - XG
n=0.840 - CMC
n=0.858 - CMC
n=0.895 - CMC
n=0.921 - CMC
(c)
0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.010 0.012
0.002
0.004
0.006
0.008
0.010
0.012
n=0.816 - CMC n=0.399 - XG
n=0.817 - CMC n=0.579 - XG
n=0.825 - CMC n=0.773 - XG
n=0.830 - CMC n=0.907 - XG
n=0.832 - CMC n=0.965 - XG
n=0.840 - CMC
n=0.858 - CMC
n=0.895 - CMC
n=0.921 - CMC
-20%
-30%
-50%
-70%
-10%
f
E
x
p
e
r
i
m
e
n
t
a
l
f
Predicted-Tomita
(d)

Fig. 2. Comparison of experimental friction factor and the factor predicted by eq. (5), (6), (7) e (8).

The curves of h
s
versus v
2
/2g for elbow 90, globe valve and sudden contraction are presented in the figures
3a, 3b and 3c respectively, for all the solutions. In these plotters the slope represents the loss coefficients of each
fitting and it can be observed that the rheological behavior of the fluid is not important in the loss coefficient
results. For the globe valve and the elbow 90, the dispersion of the points was smaller than in the sudden
contraction presented deviations smaller than 5%. For sudden contraction this deviations were in maximum
15%. The table 5 presents a summary of the medium loss coefficients for non-Newtonian fluids and water with
their respective deviations.


2
nd
Mercosur Congress on Chemical Engineering
4
th
Mercosur Congress on Process Systems Engineering


9
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
n=0.816 - CMC n=0.397 - XG
n=0.817 - CMC n=0.579 - XG
n=0.825 - CMC n=0.786 - XG
n=0.830 - CMC n=0.906 - XG
n=0.832 - CMC n=0.979 - XG
n=0.840 - CMC
n=0.858 - CMC
n=0.895 - CMC
n=0.933 - CMC
h
s

(
c
m
)
v
2
/2g (cm)

(a)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
n=0.817-CMC n=0.397- XG
n=0.825-CMC n=0.579- XG
n=0.830-CMC n=0.799- XG
n=0.832-CMC n=0.906- XG
n=0.840-CMC n=0.979- XG
n=0.858-CMC
n=0.895-CMC
n=0.933-CMC
h
s

(
c
m
)
v
2
/2g (cm)

(b)
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
n=0.816 - CMC n=0.397 - XG
n=0.817 - CMC n=0.579 - XG
n=0.825 - CMC n=0.786 - XG
n=0.830 - CMC n=0.906 - XG
n=0.832 - CMC n=0.979 - XG
n=0.840 - CMC
n=0.858 - CMC
n=0.895 - CMC
n=0.933 - CMC
h
s
(
c
m
)
v
2
/2g(cm)

(c)

Fig. 3. Loss coefficients for: a: 90 elbow, b: globe valve and c: 1-3/4 sudden contraction.

Table 5. Mean losses coefficients for turbulent flow of xanthan gum and CMC
XG CMC XG - CMC Water Fittings and
Valve K K K K
Globe valve 10.95 0.40 10.53 0.420 10.67 0.457 10.40 0.10
90 Elbow 1.42 0.071 1.42 0.067 1.42 0.067 1.33 0.05
1-3/4 Sudden
contraction
0.49 0.062 0.43 0.051 0.45 0.062 0.41 0.03
K: Average loss coefficients and : Standard deviation.

2
nd
Mercosur Congress on Chemical Engineering
4
th
Mercosur Congress on Process Systems Engineering


10
4. Conclusions

For the studied non-Newtonian solutions, it can be concluded that the correlations of Clapp (1961), Dodge
and Metzner (1959) and Tomita (1959), in the average, overestimate the friction factor. While the opposite
occurs with the correlation proposed for Shaver and Merrill (1959). It is important to point out that the
correlation of Clapp (1961) was the one that presented better performance and Shaver and Merrill (1959) is the
worst. In relation to the loss coefficients, it can be concluded that these do not depend on the rheological
behavior of the fluid, what it indicates that the defined loss coefficients for Newtonian fluids can be used in the
calculation of pressure drop for the non-Newtonian fluid flow.

References

Bird, R. B., Stewart, W. E., Lightfoot, E. N. (1960). Transport Phenomena, John Wiley & Sons, NY.
Clapp, R. M. (1961). International Developments in Heat Transfer, Part III, 652-61; D-159: D-211-5. A.S.M.E., NY. In
Skelland, A. h. P. (1967). Non-Newtonian Flow and Heat Transfer. John Wiley & Sons, NY.
Coelho, G. L. V., (1982). Reologia e Escoamento Turbulento de Suspenses de Minrio de Ferro, Thesis de M. Sc.,
Campinas, Brasil.
Crane Co. (1976). Flow of Fluids Through Valves, Fittings and Pipe. Tech. Paper No. 410, 16
th
printing. Crane Co., 300 Park
Avenue, NY.
Dodge, D. W., Metzner, A. B. (1959). Turbulent Flow of non-Newtonian Systems. A.I.Ch.E. Journal, 5, 191.
Etmad, S. Gh. (2004). Turbulent Flow Friction Loss Coefficients of fittings for Purely Viscous non-Newtonian Fluids. Int.
Comm. Heat Mass Transfer, 31, 763.
Kemblowski, Z., Kolodziejski, J. (1973). Flow Resistances of non-Newtonian Fluids in Transitional and Turbulent Flow. Int.
Chem. Eng., 13, 265.
Metzner, A. B., Reed, J. C. (1955). Flow of non-Newtonian Fluids-Correlation of the Laminar, Transition and Turbulent-
Flow Regions. A.I.Ch.E. Journal, 1, 434.
Shaver, R. G., Merrill, E. W. (1959). Turbulent Flow of Pseudoplastic Polymer Solutions in Straight Cylindrical Tubes.
A.I.Ch.E. Journal, 5, 181.
Skelland, A. h. P. (1967). Non-Newtonian Flow and Heat Transfer. John Wiley & Sons, NY.
Tomita, Y. (1959). A study on non-Newtonian Flow in Pipe Lines. Bulletin of J.S.M.E, 2, 10.
Turian, R. M., Ma, T. W., Hsu, F. L. G., Sung, M. D. J., Plackmann, G. W. (1998). Flow of Concentrated non-Newtonian
Slurries: 2. Friction Losses in Bends, Fittings, Valves and Venturi Meters. Int. J. Multiphase Flow, 24, 243.

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge the financial support of the CAPES.