MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2889533745 · doi:10.1515/revce-2017-0104

Laminar mixing of non-Newtonian fluids in static mixers: process intensification perspective

2018· article· en· W2889533745 on OpenAlexafffund
Sinthuran Jegatheeswaran, Farhad Ein‐Mozaffari, Jiangning Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueReviews in Chemical Engineering · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicRheology and Fluid Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsLaminar flowNewtonian fluidNon-Newtonian fluidMechanicsMixing (physics)ViscoelasticityPressure dropFluid dynamicsReynolds numberComplex fluidMaterials scienceComputational fluid dynamicsClassical mechanicsComputer sciencePhysicsThermodynamicsTurbulence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Static mixers are widely used in various industrial applications to intensify the laminar mixing of non-Newtonian fluids. Non-Newtonian fluids can be categorized into (1) time-independent, (2) time-dependent, and (3) viscoelastic fluids. Computational fluid dynamics studies on the laminar mixing of viscoelastic fluids are very limited due to the complexity in incorporating the multiple relaxation times and the associated stress tensor into the constitutive equations. This review paper provides recommendations for future research studies while summarizing the key research contributions in the field of non-Newtonian fluid mixing using static mixers. This review discusses the different experimental techniques employed such as electrical resistance tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, planar laser-induced fluorescence, and positron emission particle tracking. A comprehensive overview of the mixing fundamentals, fluid chaos, numerical characterization of fluid stretching, development of pressure drop correlations, and derivations of generalized Reynolds number is also provided in this review paper.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.272 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations51
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReviews in Chemical EngineeringSame topicRheology and Fluid Dynamics StudiesFrench-language works237,207