4.3 Article

Concave wall-based mixing chambers and convex wall-based constriction channel micromixers

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/03067319.2019.1669585

关键词

CFD; concave wall-based mixing chamber; convex wall-based constriction channel; mixing index

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated the mixing performance of micromixers with concave wall-based mixing chambers and convex wall-based constriction channel, exploring the impact of obstacle shape and aspect ratio on mixing dynamics. Two distinct flow regimes were identified based on Reynolds number, with rectangular obstacle-based micromixer showing superior mixing index at Re ≥ 30. The micromixers are simple in design and suitable for environmental and clinical analysis or diagnostic systems.
Micromixers with concave wall-based mixing chambers and convex wall-based constriction channel are studied. The effect of shape and aspect ratio of the obstacle on mixing performance was investigated for the Reynolds number in the range of 0.1-75 using Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD). The micromixers showed interesting mixing dynamics and flow features in respect of two flow regimes identified for the present study. The first flow regime is for the Reynolds number in the range 0.1 < Re < 5 wherein diffusion-dominated mixing was observed and the second flow regime is for the Reynolds number in the range 5 < Re <= 75 wherein convection-dominated mixing was observed. The simulation results reveal that the rectangular obstacle-based micromixer gives mixing index MI >= 0.90 at the Re >= 30 in all cases of aspect ratio and it is highest compared to triangular obstacle-based and teardrop obstacle-based micromixers. Further, in respect of pressure drop, teardrop obstacle-based micromixer showed less pressure drop. Both mixing index and pressure drop increase with increase in aspect ratio of the obstacle. The proposed micromixers are simple in design which make them best candidates for environmental and clinical analysis or diagnostic systems.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据