Advertisement

Microsystem Technologies

, Volume 25, Issue 2, pp 521–530 | Cite as

Numerical study on micromixers with Wall-Fractal structure

  • Shuai Zhang
  • Xueye ChenEmail author
  • Duo Yang
Technical Paper
  • 72 Downloads

Abstract

The ability for low reagent consumption and minimum waste production in a miniaturised system has generated great interest in the green chemistry field and medical testing. Microfluidic technology is the trend of miniaturization of testing instruments. Passive micromixer in particular has attracted much attention over active micromixers due to their fabrication and operation simplicity. This article presents a Wall-Fractal micromixer, in which, the effect of fractal structure on mixing efficiency was studied by numerical simulation. On the basis of fractal principle, the study focus on the Primary Wall-Fractal (PWF) and Secondary Wall-Fractal (SWF) in the single wall and double walls on the mixing efficiency. Under different numbers of Reynolds (Res), the efficiency of SWF was better than that of PWF. With the distance A-B increasing, it does not contribute to improve the mixing efficiency. Effected by the symmetrically Wall-Fractal that the mixing efficiency at Re = 0.05 and Re = 100 reach up to 95% in outlet. Because of its high mixing efficiency, Wall-Fractal micromixer will have broad application prospects.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by The Key Project of Department of Education of Liaoning Province (JZL201715401). Liaoning province BaiQianWan Talent Project.

References

  1. Barz DPJ, Zadeh HF, Ehrhard P (2007) Measurements and simulations of the flow field in an electrically excited meander micromixer. Particle image velocimetry. Springer, Berlin, pp 1–18Google Scholar
  2. Cao Q, Han X, Li L (2015) An active microfluidic mixer utilizing a hybrid gradient magnetic field. Int J Appl Electromagn Mech 47(3):583–592CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chen X, Li T (2016) A novel design for passive misscromixers based on topology optimization method. Biomed Microdevice 18(4):1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chen X, Shen J (2017) Numerical and experimental investigation on splitting-and-recombination micromixer with E-shape mixing units. Microsyst Technol 23(10):4671–4677CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chen X, Wang X (2015) Optimized modular design and experiment for staggered herringbone chaotic micromixer. Int J Chem React Eng 13(3):305–309Google Scholar
  6. Chen X, Liu C, Xu Z, Liu J, Du L (2012) Macro-micro modeling design in system-level and experiment for a micromixer. Anal Methods 4(8):2334–2340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chen X, Li T, Zeng H et al (2016a) Numerical and experimental investigation on micromixers with serpentine microchannels. Int J Heat Mass Transf 98:131–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chen X, Shen J, Zhou M (2016b) Rapid fabrication of a four-layer PMMA-based microfluidic chip using CO2-laser micromachining and thermal bonding. J Micromech Microeng 26(10):107001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chen X, Li T, Hu Z et al (2017) Using orthogonal experimental method optimizing surface quality of CO2 laser cutting process for PMMA microchannels. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 88(9–12):2727–2733CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Choi E, Kwon K, Lee SJ et al (2015) Non-equilibrium electrokinetic micromixer with 3D nanochannel networks. Lab Chip 15(8):1794–1798CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chung C, Chen YJ, Chen PC et al (2015) Fabrication of PDMS passive micromixer by lost-wax casting. Int J Precis Eng Manuf 16(9):2033–2039CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cortes-Quiroz CA, Azarbadegan A, Moeendarbary E (2010) An efficient passive planar micromixer with fin-shaped baffles in the tee channel for wide Reynolds number flow range. World Acad Sci Eng Technol 61:170–175Google Scholar
  13. Dixon C, Ng AHC, Fobel R et al (2016) An inkjet printed, roll-coated digital microfluidic device for inexpensive, miniaturized diagnostic assays. Lab Chip 16(23):4560–4568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Du Y, Zhang Z, Yim CH, Lin M, Cao X (2010) A simplified design of the staggered herringbone micromixer for practical applications. Biomicrofluidics 4(2):024105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Duan X, Feng X, Yang C et al (2016) Numerical simulation of micro-mixing in stirred reactors using the engulfment model coupled with CFD. Chem Eng Sci 140:179–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fitzgerald DA (2001) Making every nanoliter count: microfluidics devices promise great potential in small packages (Lab Consumer). The Scientist 15(21):22–25Google Scholar
  17. Fu LM, Fang WC, Hou HH, Wang YN, Hong TF (2014a) Rapid vortex microfluidic mixer utilizing double-heart chamber. Chem Eng J 249:246–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fu LM, Fang WC, Hou HH, Wang YN, Hong TF (2014b) Rapid vortex microfluidic mixer utilizing double-heart chamber. Chem Eng J 249:246–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Guo MT, Rotem A, Heyman JA et al (2012) Droplet microfluidics for high-throughput biological assays. Lab Chip 12(12):2146–2155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jain M, Rao A, Nandakumar K (2013) Numerical study on shape optimization of groove micromixers. Microfluid Nanofluid 15(5):689–699CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kakavandi FH, Rahimi M, Jafari O et al (2016) Liquid–liquid two-phase mass transfer in T-type micromixers with different junctions and cylindrical pits. Chem Eng Process 107:58–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Liu K, Yang Q, Chen F, Zhao Y, Meng X, Shan C, Li Y (2015) Design and analysis of the cross-linked dual helical micromixer for rapid mixing at low Reynolds numbers. Microfluid Nanofluid 19(1):169–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Manz A, Effenhauser CS, Burggraf N et al (1994) Electroosmotic pumping and electrophoretic separations for miniaturized chemical analysis systems. J Micromech Microeng 4(4):257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ríos Á, Zougagh M (2015) Modern qualitative analysis by miniaturized and microfluidic systems. TrAC Trends Anal Chem 69:105–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ryu G, Huang J, Hofmann O et al (2011) Highly sensitive fluorescence detection system for microfluidic lab-on-a-chip. Lab Chip 11(9):1664–1670CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Srinivasan V, Pamula VK, Fair RB (2004) An integrated digital microfluidic lab-on-a-chip for clinical diagnostics on human physiological fluids. Lab Chip 4(4):310–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Vasilakis N, Moschou D, Prodromakis T (2016) Computationally efficient concentration-based model for accurate evaluation of T-junction inlet staggered herringbone micromixers. Micro Nano Lett 11(5):236–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Viktorov V, Nimafar M (2013) A novel generation of 3D SAR-based passive micromixer: efficient mixing and low pressure drop at a low Reynolds number. J Micromech Microeng 23(5):055023CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Vozzi G, Mazzei D, Tirella A, Vozzi F, Ahluwalia A (2010) Finite element modelling and design of a concentration gradient generating bioreactor: application to biological pattern formation and toxicology. Toxicol In Vitro 24(6):1828–1837CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Weigl BH, Bardell RL, Cabrera CR (2003) Lab-on-a-chip for drug development. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 55(3):349–377CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Mechanical Engineer and AutomationLiaoning University of TechnologyJinzhouChina
  2. 2.Faculty of Mechanical EngineeringDalian UniversityDalianChina

Personalised recommendations