A novel approach to determining the hydrodynamic resistance of droplets in microchannels using active control and grey-box system identification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Inaccurate prediction of droplet hydrodynamic resistance has a profound impact on droplet chip performance and lengthens the iterative design process. Previous studies measuring droplet resistance use various approaches such as interface comparison to quantify flow rate, and pressure taps; all these methods are classified as passive. Although each study supports well their own findings, the wide variety of conditions such as channel geometry and use of surfactant in combination with the difficulty in quantifying the droplet resistance leads to poor consensus across the different studies. Overall guidelines would be broadly beneficial to the community, but are currently fairly crude, with a rule of thumb of 2 to 5 times resistance increase. The active droplet control platform previously developed enables a novel approach that is herein confirmed as promising. This proof-of-concept study focuses on verifying this approach that employs a system identification method to determine the hydrodynamic resistance of a channel containing a single droplet, from which the droplet resistance is retrieved. This method has the potential to be further applied to a large variety of conditions, and most importantly, to non-Newtonian fluids once key limitations are overcome to improve measurement resolution. The current results qualitatively agree with the literature and demonstrate the promising future for this novel active approach to quantifying droplet resistance.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".