MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389151570 · doi:10.1002/cjce.25146

Optimization study of obstacles in <scp>T–T</scp> mixing channel at low Reynolds numbers

2023· article· en· W4389151570 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shasidhar Rampalli, V. R. K. Raju

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrofluidic and Capillary Electrophoresis Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReynolds numberMixing (physics)MechanicsObstaclePressure dropMaterials scienceDrop (telecommunication)GeometryPhysicsMathematicsMechanical engineeringEngineeringTurbulence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this study, numerical simulations were conducted to optimize obstacle geometry for improving mixing in T–T mixers at low Reynolds numbers (2 < Re < 100). The study considered obstacles of cylindrical and prismatic shapes and optimized their pitch and geometrical parameters for enhanced mixing. For cylindrical obstacles, the optimized configuration resulted in symmetrical recirculation zones at Re > 30, which led to larger mixing qualities of 80% and 85% for Re values above 30 and 50, respectively. However, the pressure drop increased in the optimized T–T mixer due to the larger size of the obstacles. On the other hand, in the case of prismatic obstacles, the mixing qualities of 80% and 85% were achieved only at relatively higher Re values of 70 and 90, respectively. The recirculation zone formed behind the obstacle was asymmetric due to the asymmetrical shape of the optimized prism. At higher Re, the optimized cylindrical obstacle configuration resulted in better mixing than the prismatic configuration. However, the choking effect in the former increased the pressure drop.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.173 · 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
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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicMicrofluidic and Capillary Electrophoresis ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207