Numerical Simulation of a Novel Passive Micromixer With Curved Channel and Slanted Grooves
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A novel passive micromixer with slanted grooves on the top and bottom of curved microchannel, denoted as CMG, is investigated numerically. The total mixing length is fixed at approximate 5.17 mm. The curved channel is applied to generate Dean vortices in the microchannel at high Reynolds numbers. The slanted grooves are used to assist to create the rotation of flow at low Reynolds numbers. The validation of present numerical simulation is done through the comparison with literatures. Three parameters, the slanted angle (θ), the grooves width angle (ω), and the height ratio of grooves (Hg/H), are selected to achieve the optimization. The tested Reynolds numbers range from 1 to 50. Compared with slanted grooved micromixer (SGM) and the curved microchannel (CM), the present micromixer has better mixing efficiency. In order to investigate the flow characteristics, a particle located at one inlet is selected and the trajectory is performed to observe the flow rotation. The rotation angle is defined to estimate the rotation strength. The results show that CMG has largest rotation angle than CM and SGM, which indicates a stronger rotation/helical motion generated in the curved channel. The mixing efficiency of present design has 60% at Re = 50 with a pressure drop of 1.8 kPa.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".