The platform will undergo maintenance on Sep 14 at about 7:45 AM EST and will be unavailable for approximately 2 hours.
2009 9th International Conference on Electronic Measurement &Amp; Instruments 2009
DOI: 10.1109/icemi.2009.5274808
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparative analysis of mixing performance and pressure loss of three types of passive micromixers

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
2
1

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 22 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In general, an external energy force with various forms was applied in active micromixers to dazzle the sample species. This force can come from various sources including a magnetic microstirrer, 152−154 an ultrasonic micromixer, 155 a pressure perturbation micromixer, 147 or an electrokinetic micromixer. 156 In passive microfluidic mixers, the integration of an external energy source is not required.…”
Section: Microfluidic Synthesis Techniquementioning
confidence: 99%
“…In general, an external energy force with various forms was applied in active micromixers to dazzle the sample species. This force can come from various sources including a magnetic microstirrer, 152−154 an ultrasonic micromixer, 155 a pressure perturbation micromixer, 147 or an electrokinetic micromixer. 156 In passive microfluidic mixers, the integration of an external energy source is not required.…”
Section: Microfluidic Synthesis Techniquementioning
confidence: 99%