MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2006496021 · doi:10.1115/imece2010-38640

Modelling of T-Junction Droplet Generator in the Transition Regime

2010· article· en· W2006496021 on OpenAlexaff
Tomasz Glawdel, Çağlar Elbüken, Carolyn L. Ren

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInnovative Microfluidic and Catalytic Techniques Innovation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrochannelBreakupSurface tensionMicrofluidicsMechanicsPhase transitionCapillary actionMaterials scienceGenerator (circuit theory)PerpendicularShear (geology)NanotechnologyPhysicsCondensed matter physicsPower (physics)ThermodynamicsComposite materialMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the most commonly used microfluidic droplet generator designs is the T-junction as shown in Figure 1. In this design, the dispersed phase microchannel, usually containing an aqueous solution, perpendicularly intersects the main channel, which contains the continuous phase (oil). The T-junction design has been widely adopted because of its simplicity and the superior control it offers over droplet size. Two primary operational regimes have been identified where breakup is dominated by confinement of the emerging droplet within the microchannel, known as the squeezing regime (Ca<0.002), or by the balance of shear and surface tension forces known as the dripping regime (Ca>0.02). The operational mode of the T-junction generator is primarily characterized by the Capillary number (Ca = μU / γ), which describes the competition between the aforementioned forces. In between the two regimes exists the transition regime where both confinement and shear forces are important.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.195 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInnovative Microfluidic and Catalytic Techniques InnovationFrench-language works237,207