MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2064737154 · doi:10.1115/1.1598993

Influence of Three-Dimensional Roughness on Pressure-Driven Flow Through Microchannels

2003· article· en· W2064737154 on OpenAlexafffund
Yandong Hu, Carsten Werner, Dongqing Li

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fluids Engineering · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHeat Transfer and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMicrochannelMicroscale chemistryMaterials scienceSurface finishPressure dropSurface roughnessMechanicsFlow (mathematics)Volume of fluid methodComposite materialNanotechnologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Surface roughness is present in most of the microfluidic devices due to the microfabrication techniques or particle adhesion. It is highly desirable to understand the roughness effect on microscale flow. In this study, we developed a three-dimensional finite-volume-based numerical model to simulate pressure-driven liquid flow in microchannels with rectangular prism rough elements on the surfaces. Both symmetrical and asymmetric roughness element arrangements were considered, and the influence of the roughness on pressure drop was examined. The three-dimensional numerical solution shows significant effects of surface roughness in terms of the rough elements’ height, size, spacing, and the channel height on both the velocity distribution and the pressure drop. The compression-expansion flow around the three-dimensional roughness elements and the flow blockage caused by the roughness in the microchannel were discussed. An expression of the relative channel height reduction due to roughness effect was presented.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.203
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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations119
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Fluids EngineeringSame topicHeat Transfer and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207