![]() ![]() Whitesides, Chaotic mixer for microchannels, Science (80. Stone HA, Stroock AD, Ajdari A (2004) Engineering flows in small devices: microfluidics toward a lab-on-a-chip. Le The H, Le Thanh H, Dong T, Ta BQ, Tran-Minh N, Karlsen F (2015) An effective passive micromixer with shifted trapezoidal blades using wide Reynolds number range. Nguyen N-T, Wu Z (2004) Micromixers-a review. Suh YK, Kang S (2010) A review on mixing in microfluidics. Lee CY, Chang CL, Wang YN, Fu LM (2011) Microfluidic mixing: a review. ![]() Taassob A, Kamali R, Bordbar A (2018) Investigation of rarefied gas flow through bended microchannels. Whitesides GM (2006) The origins and the future of microfluidics. Moreover, a mixing efficiency of more than 80% is achieved at the outlet of the micromixer for solutions with viscosities of 160% higher than that of water. ![]() We demonstrate that mixing efficiencies higher than 90% are attainable for species with viscosities of about 54% higher than that of water (O(10 −3) kg m −1 s −1) a result that is not attainable in the corresponding single-phase micromixer. The performance of the proposed slug-flow micromixer is compared with that of a single-phase micromixer with similar geometrical configuration. Various cases are studied, in which the liquid samples to be mixed are either water or glycerol–water solution. In the present work, we investigate the mixing of similar fluids with viscosities equal to or higher than that of water in a two-phase (gas-liquid) slug-flow micromixer, as an economical passive design. Two-phase flow micromixers have attracted attention due to their low cost, simple structure, and high performance. glycerol–water solutions) is challenging and costly and often requires employing active mixing methods. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |