Source author record

Patrick D. Anderson

Patrick D. Anderson appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Catalog footprint

What is connected

1works
2topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

1 published item(s)

preprint2026arXiv

Bayesian Model Selection for Complex Flows of Yield Stress Fluids

Modeling yield stress fluids in complex flow scenarios presents significant challenges, particularly because conventional rheological characterization methods often yield material parameters that are not fully representative of the intricate constitutive behavior observed in complex conditions. We propose a Bayesian uncertainty quantification framework for the calibration and selection of constitutive models for yield stress fluids, explicitly accounting for uncertainties in both modeling accuracy and experimental observations. The framework addresses the challenge of complex flow modeling by making discrepancies that emanate from rheological measurements explicit and quantifiable. We apply the Bayesian framework to rheological measurements and squeeze flow experiments on Carbopol 980. Our analysis demonstrates that Bayesian model selection yields robust probabilistic predictions and provides an objective assessment of model suitability through evaluated plausibilities. The framework naturally penalizes unnecessary complexity and shows that the optimal model choice depends on the incorporated physics, the prior information, and the availability of data. In rheological settings, the Herschel-Bulkley and biviscous power law models perform well. However, when these rheological outcomes are used as prior information for a rheo-informed squeeze flow analysis, a significant mismatch with the experimental data is observed. This is due to the yield stress inferred from rheological measurements not being representative of the complex squeeze flow case. In contrast, an expert-informed squeeze flow analysis, based on broader priors, yields accurate predictions. These findings highlight the limitations of translating rheological measurements to complex flows and underscore the value of Bayesian approaches in quantifying model bias and guiding model selection under uncertainty.