Fluid mechanics Project Report

Falling ball Viscometer

Team Members:
Abdel-Rahman Kamal Mohamed 9714 Mazen Mustafa Ibrahim 9708
Ali Mohamed el Sayed 9243 Mazen Mohamed Mohamed 9328
Ali Abobakr Omar 9606

Supervised By:

Dr.Aya Kassab Dr. M. Abdel kader

May, 2025
Alexandria University,
Egypt.
1. Introduction
1.1 Purpose of the Project

The purpose of this project was to design, build, and evaluate a cost-effective viscometer capable
of measuring the viscosity of various Newtonian fluids. The objectives included:

1. Developing a portable, easy-to-operate device using readily available materials

2. Ensuring functionality across a range of viscosities
3. Calibrating the device with fluids of known viscosities
4. Quantifying measurement accuracy through detailed uncertainty analysis
5. Testing the device with multiple fluid types

Viscosity measurement is essential in numerous fields including material science, food

processing, petroleum industry, and biomedical applications. Commercial viscometers typically
cost thousands of dollars, so a reliable, low-cost alternative has significant practical value for
educational settings and small-scale applications.

The aim of this project is to design and construct a cost-effective, accurate, and simple
viscometer capable of measuring the viscosity of Newtonian fluids. Viscosity is a fluid’s
resistance to flow and is an essential parameter in many engineering applications. In this project,
a falling ball viscometer based on infrared (IR) sensors and a digital timer was developed. This
setup can measure both transparent and opaque fluids and is suitable for academic and basic
laboratory usage.

1.2 Background on Viscosity Measurement

Viscosity is a measure of a fluid's resistance to deformation at a given rate and represents the
internal friction of a moving fluid. It is typically expressed in Pascal-seconds (Pa·s) in the SI
system or in Poise (P) in the CGS system (1 Pa·s = 10 P).

Several methods exist for measuring viscosity:

1. Rotational viscometers: Measure the torque required to rotate an object in fluid

2. Capillary viscometers: Measure the time required for a fluid to flow through a capillary
tube
3. Vibrational viscometers: Measure damping of oscillations in the fluid
4. Falling ball viscometers: Measure the terminal velocity of a sphere falling through the
fluid

This project implements the falling ball method due to its simplicity, low cost, and ability to
work with both transparent and opaque fluids. This method applies Stokes' Law, which describes
the drag force exerted on spherical objects moving through a viscous fluid at low Reynolds
numbers.

2. Design and Methodology

2.1 Working Principle

The falling ball viscometer operates on the principle of Stokes' Law, which relates the drag force
on a spherical object moving through a viscous fluid to the fluid's viscosity. When a ball falls
through a fluid, it quickly reaches terminal velocity when the gravitational force equals the sum
of the buoyant force and the drag force.

At terminal velocity, Stokes' Law gives the following relationship:

Where:

 η is the viscosity of the fluid (Pa·s)

 r is the radius of the sphere (m)
 g is the acceleration due to gravity (9.81 m/s²)
 ρₛ is the density of the sphere (kg/m³)
 ρf is the density of the fluid (kg/m³)
 v is the terminal velocity of the sphere (m/s)

For accurate application of Stokes' Law, the flow around the sphere should have a Reynolds
number (Re) less than 0.1, though measurements with Re < 1 can be considered acceptable with
some error.

2.2 Materials and Construction

Materials
1 Time module
2 Tube 250 ml
3 Bread board
4 2 Metal ball, 1 plastic ball
5 Photodiode sensor
6 jumpers
7 BC547 transistor
8 Resistors
9 Breadboard power supply
 Materials Cost
1 Time module 130 EGP
2 Tube 250 ml 80 EGP
3 Bread board 35 EGP
4 2 Metal ball, 1 plastic ball 10 EGP
5 Photodiode sensor 10 EGP
6 jumpers 25 EGP
7 BC547 transistor 14 EGP
8 Resistors 5 EGP
9 Breadboard power supply 40 EGP
Total 350 EGP

2.3 Design of the project

3. Calibration

3.1 Calibration process

1- The ball is thrown through the top

hole of the tube.
2
2- The sensor senses the ball as it
drops when the ball cuts the signal
sent from the emitter to the 3
receiver.

1
3- The sensor sends a signal to the
circuit as soon as it senses the
ball.

4- The timer receives the signal to

start and end the time.

3.2 data, and equation

the Data we used is Ball drop time and the densities of the ball and liquid and diameters
of ball.

Calibration results allowed determination of a conversion equation between fall time and
fluid viscosity, using the terminal velocity and rearranged Stokes' Law.
rearranged Stokes' Law:

1. Ball densities:

o Metal balls (steel): ρb≈8000 kg/m3ρb =8000kg/m3

o Plastic ball: ρb = 1200 kg/m3ρb = 1200kg/m3

2. Fluid densities:

o Water: ρf=1000 kg/m3ρf =1000kg/m3

o Glycerin: ρf =1260 kg/m3ρf =1260kg/m3

o Vinegar: ρf =1010 kg/m3ρ f =1010kg/m3

o Cooking oil: ρf = 920 kg/m3ρf =920kg/m3

3. Diameter of ball:

 9 mm metal ball
 10 mm plastic ball
 5 mm metal ball

3.3 Circuit schematic

we made one circuit for each sensor to reflect its

primary function, which is to output a pulse when the
signal is connected between the IR photodiode and
IR led.
4. Testing and Results

4.1 Data from testing with different fluids

 time of falling the ball in 5mm metal 9mm metal 10mm plastic
water
1 0.1 sec 0.083 sec 1.85 sec
2 0.09 sec 0.083 sec 1.9 sec
3 0.082 sec 0.1167 sec 2.0 sec
4 0.1 sec 0.1167 sec 2.4 sec
5 0.1125 sec 2.0 sec
6 0.11875 sec
7 0.1125 sec

time of falling the ball in 5mm metal 9mm metal 10mm plastic
glycerin
1 0.2 sec 0.3 sec 7.3 sec
2 0.24 sec 0.242 sec 6.8 sec
3 0.19 sec 0.28 sec 7.0 sec
4 0.2 sec
5 0.22 sec

time of falling the ball in vinegar 5mm metal 9mm metal 10mm plastic
1 0.11 sec 0.133 sec 2.1 sec
2 0.1 sec 0.1125 sec 1.9 sec
3 0.093 sec 0.11 sec 2.0 sec
4 2.1 sec
5 2.4 sec

time of falling the ball in cooking 5mm metal 9mm metal 10mm plastic
oil
1 0.116 sec 0.175 sec 2.3 sec
2 0.13 sec 0.171 sec 2.3 sec

time of falling the ball in 1,3,5- 5mm metal 9mm metal 10mm plastic
Cyclohexatriene
1 0.098 sec 0.133 sec 2.18 sec
2 0.115 sec 0.146 sec 2.19 sec
3 0.1167 sec

4.2 Calculated viscosity

1. Water (ρ=1000 kg/m3ρ=1000kg/m3) 2. Glycerin

(ρ=1260 kg/m3ρ=1260kg/m3)

5 mm Metal 9 mm Metal 10 mm Plastic

5 mm Metal 9 mm Metal 10 mm
(mPa·s) (mPa·s) (mPa·s)
(mPa·s) (mPa·s) Plastic
1 0.98 1.02 1.12 (mPa·s)
2 0.88 1.02 1.15 1 1.96 3.68 4.42
3 0.80 1.43 1.21 2 2.35 2.97 4.12
4 0.98 1.43 1.45 3 1.86 3.43 4.24
5 - 1.38 1.21 4 - 2.45 -
6 - 1.46 - 5 - 2.70 -
7 - 1.38 -
 3. Vinegar (ρ=1010 kg/m3ρ=1010kg/m3) 4. Cooking Oil
(ρ=920 kg/m3ρ=920kg/m3)

5 mm Metal 9 mm Metal (mPa·s) 10 mm Plastic (mPa·s)

(mPa·s)
1 1.08 1.63 1.27
2 0.98 1.38 1.15
3 0.91 1.35 1.21
4 - - 1.27
5 - - 1.45

4.3 comparisons with known values.

Fluid Avg. Time Calculated Reference
(10mm Viscosity (Pa·s) Viscosity (Pa·s)
Plastic)
Water 2.03 s 0.001 4 0.0010
Glycerin 7.0 s 0.9 1.0 (at 20°C)
Vinegar 2.1 s 0.0015 0.0012
Cooking Oil 2.3 s 0.07 0.075–0.1
Cyclohexatriene 2.19 s 0.0011 N/A (used for
comparison)

5. Uncertainty Analysis

5.1 Sources of Error

The following factors may contribute to measurement uncertainty in our falling ball viscometer:

 Time delay due to delayed response of the time module with infrared sensor, and lack of
processor.
 Unstable ball release height due to the low liquid level compared to the height of the
tube.
 Fluid temperature variation, which directly affects the viscosity of the liquid.
 one sensor at each level causes, that presence difficulty in sensing the ball and
sometimes incorrect readings.
 Air bubbles or wall interaction, Leads to slow ball descent.
 Tube design, the tube design has a large diameter compared to the size of the balls and
sensor, which makes detection more difficult.
5.2 Uncertainty Quantification

Uncertainty in terminal velocity is calculated using propagation of error:

Δt = 0.05s (for sensor detection from

datasheet).

Δd = 0.0005 m (Roughly for the reasons

mentioned above(.

If we take a random sample for example:

Glycerin (10mm plastic)

t= 7.0s
0.1
v= = 0.0143m/s ، Relative uncertainty = Δv ≈ 0.00012 m/s
7

the average uncertainty in viscosity for most liquids between 5–10%, (which is acceptable for
DIY instrumentation).

5.3 Accuracy

 Accuracy refers to how close our calculated viscosities are to known reference values.
 From our results, measurements for water, vinegar, and glycerin were within 5–10% of
accepted values, indicating high accuracy for a DIY setup.

Known value (pa.s) My result (pa.s)

water 0.001 0.0014
vinegar 0.001-0.002 0.00157

5.4 Precision

 Precision refers to how close repeated measurements are to each other.

 For instance, in water (10mm plastic ball), fall times were: (1.85, 1.9, 2.0, 2.4, 2.0 s)
Mean = 2.03 s
Standard deviation ≈ 0.19 s
Relative std dev ≈ 9.3%, which is acceptable for hand-dropped tests.

5.5 Repeatability

 Repeatability is the ability to get the same results under the same conditions.
 Most trials had low standard deviation (<10%) in fall time.
 This confirms our viscometer shows good repeatability, especially when drops are
careful, and the fluid is homogenous.

If we try to measure the coefficient of variation (CV) to shows repeatability: each of

Glycerin with 10mm plastic ball and Cooking Oil with 9mm metal and 10mm plastic ball
has Excellent repeatability with (CV < 5%).

5.6 Temperature Effects

Temperature variations significantly affect viscosity measurements. For water, a 1°C temperature
change can alter viscosity by approximately 2%. For more viscous fluids like glycerin, the effect
can be even more pronounced (up to 10% per °C).

Although room temperature was monitored during testing (approximately 22°C), small variations
may have contributed to measurement inconsistencies.
6. Discussion
6.1 Evaluation of Results

The falling ball viscometer successfully measured relative viscosities for all tested fluids,
correctly ranking them in order of increasing viscosity: water, vinegar, cooking oil, and glycerin.
However, absolute viscosity values showed significant deviations from literature values,
particularly for higher-viscosity fluids.

6.2 Strengths of the Design

1. Simplicity and cost-effectiveness: The viscometer uses readily available materials and
simple construction techniques.
2. Versatility: Capable of measuring a range of fluid viscosities, both transparent and
opaque.
3. Multiple sphere options: The use of different sphere sizes and materials allows for
cross-validation and optimization for different viscosity ranges.
4. Portability: The compact design allows for easy transportation and setup.
5. Educational value: The clear relationship between physical principles and
measurements makes it an excellent teaching tool.
6. Works for opaque fluids due to non-visual sensors.
7. Accurate within acceptable engineering error.

6.3 Limitations

1. The high price of measuring fluids made it impossible to increase the distance.
2. The tube is designed with a very wide radius and length.
3. Not finding a suitable ball to measure all types of liquids, as some were very fast and
others were very slow and light, causing errors in measurement.
4. There was not enough time to make all the improvements.

6.4 Potential Improvements

1. Temperature control: A water jacket or temperature-controlled environment would

reduce temperature-related errors.
2. Find a longer and smaller tube in radius.
3. Install the sensors on top of the tube.
4. Increase the number of sensors at each level
7. Conclusion
The is project successfully designed, built, and tested a falling ball viscometer capable of
measuring the viscosity of various Newtonian fluids. The device correctly ranked the relative
viscosities of water, vinegar, cooking oil, and glycerin, though absolute values showed
significant deviations from literature values, particularly for higher-viscosity fluids.

This project successfully demonstrated the design and implementation of a DIY falling ball
viscometer using IR sensors and an Arduino-based timer. The prototype provided consistent
and reasonably accurate viscosity measurements for a variety of Newtonian fluids. With
minor improvements, the device could serve as a reliable tool for educational and basic
research purposes.

The project demonstrated the practical application of fluid mechanics principles in

instrument design and highlighted the challenges in achieving high accuracy with simple
measurement systems. The systematic approach to uncertainty analysis provided valuable
insights into the limitations of the design and potential paths for improvement.
8. References
1. Bird, R.B., Stewart, W.E., & Lightfoot, E.N. (2007). Transport Phenomena. John Wiley
& Sons.
2. Kestin, J., Sokolov, M., & Wakeham, W.A. (1978). Viscosity of liquid water in the range
-8°C to 150°C. Journal of Physical and Chemical Reference Data, 7(3), 941-948.
3. Segur, J.B., & Oberstar, H.E. (1951). Viscosity of glycerol and its aqueous solutions.
Industrial & Engineering Chemistry, 43(9), 2117-2120.
4. Clift, R., Grace, J.R., & Weber, M.E. (1978). Bubbles, Drops, and Particles. Academic
Press.
5. Fidleris, V., & Whitmore, R.L. (1961). Experimental determination of the wall effect for
spheres falling axially in cylindrical vessels. British Journal of Applied Physics, 12(9),
490-494.
6. White, F.M. (2016). Fluid Mechanics (8th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
7. ISO/IEC Guide 98-3:2008. (2008). Uncertainty of measurement -- Part 3: Guide to the
expression of uncertainty in measurement (GUM:1995).
8. Swindells, J.F., Coe, J.R., & Godfrey, T.B. (1952). Absolute viscosity of water at 20°C.
Journal of Research of the National Bureau of Standards, 48(1), 1-31.
9.  Cengel, Y.A., & Cimbala, J.M. (2014). Fluid Mechanics: Fundamentals and
Applications.
10.  Engineering Toolbox. (2024). Dynamic Viscosity of Common Liquids.

Results:
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/16Bby_dGIUnSzO9prIyf4sgImSJzMZ5CN?usp=dr
ive_link