An Analytical and Numerical Study of Rectangular Orifice Plate Micro-Flowmeters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The paper presents the design and analysis of differential pressure micro-flowmeter, for low flows of gases (0.1–120 mg/s) with different inlet pressure conditions (1–4 bars). The device consists of a planar micro orifice obstruction in a rectangular microchannel, with two pressure ports, upstream and downstream of the constriction. The particularities of this micro orifice is the small scale and the planar two-dimensional configuration, i.e. only in the width of the rectangular microchannel changes. A series of micro orifice sizes will be studied, with hydraulic diameters ranging from 200 to 465 μm and channel Reynolds numbers up to 7000. The geometric parameters of these micro orifices were determined to have a measurable pressure drop and to avoid choking. The calculation of the pressure drop through a micro orifice are represented using analytical equations, and modeled numerically using computational fluid dynamics to further investigate the flow patterns and 3D effects. The discharge coefficient is determined for each orifice micro-flowmeter by numerical analysis. This work aims to implement integrated mass flow measurements in micro chemical and fluidic devices that cannot use macroscopic mass flow meters, either due to their large volume, high cost, or inability to withstand harsh environments.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".