← Services & Pricing

Sample Rheology Diagnostic Report

What you receive, shown on an example case.

A shortened version of a Rheology Diagnostic Report, built on a fictional cathode-slurry case so you can see the structure, depth and tone before you order.

CaseCathode slurry — coating-weight variation
ServiceRheology Diagnostic Report
Data receivedFormulation, 4 flow curves, mixing logs, coating weights
ReviewerTheBulkLab

01Summary

  • Pattern: measured viscosity is up to 2.0× the formulation-based prediction at low shear, but within 10% at coating-relevant shear rates (≥100 1/s).
  • Most likely cause: a weak particle network — consistent with incomplete dispersion of the conductive carbon — rather than a solids-loading or binder-concentration error.
  • Linked variable: the low-shear excess shrinks as mixing time increases, and tracks mixing time more closely than raw-material lot.
  • First action: standardise the rheometer pre-shear, then run a three-level mixing-energy series with an amplitude sweep.

02The question

Coating weight varies by about ±6% between batches of the same NMC cathode slurry, although the recipe is unchanged. Why does it vary, and what should be tested first?

03Data received

ItemDetails (fictional)
FormulationSolids 94 / 3 / 3 wt% (NMC / carbon black / PVDF), 70 wt% solids in NMP
RheologyFlow curves 0.1–1000 1/s, four batches (A–D), protocol without a defined pre-shear
ProcessPlanetary mixing, 20–60 min; slot-die coating; coating weight per batch
Already triedAdjusting coating gap; changing NMP lot

04Prediction vs. measurement

The formulation-based model predicts the viscosity expected from solids loading, particle size and binder content. The difference between predicted and measured curves — the residual — is where the diagnosis starts.

0.11101001000110100shear rate (1/s)viscosity (Pa·s)Predicted from formulationBatch A — 20 min mixingBatch D — 60 min mixing1×1.5×2×0.11101001000measured ÷ predictedshear rate (1/s)2.0× at 0.1 1/s
Fictional data. Top: viscosity vs. shear rate. Bottom: measured ÷ predicted. Batches B and C fall between A and D and are omitted for clarity.

05Observations

What the data showsWhat it does not show
The excess over prediction grows as shear rate falls (1.06× → 2.0× for batch A).The structure behind the excess — the flow curve alone cannot distinguish particle networks from binder gelation.
Longer mixing reduces the low-shear excess (batch D: 1.25× at 0.1 1/s).Whether mixing time or mixing temperature is the active variable; both rose together in the logs.
High-shear viscosity agrees with prediction for all batches.Any information about the measurement history of each sample, because no pre-shear was applied.

06Cause hypotheses, ranked

#HypothesisEvidence forEvidence against / gapsConfidence
H1Incomplete dispersion of conductive carbon forms a weak networkLow-shear excess; decreases with mixing time; high shear unaffectedNot yet confirmed by oscillatory dataModerate
H2Partial PVDF gelation from moistureAlso raises low-shear viscosityNo rise during storage; no moisture dataLow
H3Measurement artefact (no pre-shear, wall slip)Protocol not standardisedBatch ordering is consistent across shear ratesLow

07Recommended next tests

PriorityTestSeparatesDecision it supports
1Re-measure retained samples with a fixed pre-shear and rest stepH3 vs. H1/H2Whether the variation is real or a protocol effect
2Three-level mixing-energy series with amplitude sweep (storage-modulus plateau) and coating weightH1Whether a minimum mixing energy should be specified
3Moisture check of NMP and PVDF lotsH2Whether raw-material handling needs a moisture limit

Decision rule: if the low-shear excess and the storage-modulus plateau both fall with mixing energy while coating-weight spread narrows, set a minimum mixing-energy specification and monitor low-shear viscosity as a release check.

08Limitations

  • Conclusions are limited to the data supplied; temperature during measurement was not recorded.
  • Hypotheses are ranked by available evidence and remain to be confirmed by the proposed tests.
  • Any process change must be validated under the client's own operating and safety procedures.

Print or save as PDF

Opening soon

Get this report for your slurry.

The Rheology Diagnostic Report ($1,950, planned launch price) opens for bookings soon. Join the launch list to be notified first.