Sensors and Actuators B 211 (2015) 198–205

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Sensors and Actuators B: Chemical

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/snb

Convergent–divergent micromixer coupled with pulsatile flow

Arshad Afzal, Kwang-Yong Kim ∗
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Inha University, 253 Younghyun-Dong, Nam-Gu, Incheon 402-751, Republic of Korea

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: An efficient mixing system for a microfluidic platform that uses periodic sinusoidal characteristics in
Received 16 October 2014 space and time is proposed in this work. A convergent–divergent channel with sinusoidal walls (space-
Received in revised form 1 January 2015 periodic) represented the most effective coupling with pulsatile (time-periodic) flow among the five
Accepted 6 January 2015
tested geometries. The effects of sinusoidal pulsing on mixing performance in the convergent–divergent
Available online 28 January 2015
microchannel were examined using unsteady Navier–Stokes equations. The mixing performance was
analyzed using the Reynolds and Strouhal numbers, and the ratio of pulsing amplitude to steady flow
Keywords:
velocity. The micromixer shows interesting mixing behaviors with these parameters in terms of instan-
Pulsatile flow
Convergent–divergent micromixer
taneous mixing patterns as well as overall mixing performance. The micromixer with pulsing inputs
Mixing index achieved mixing index, 0.92 within two periods of the sinusoidal walls.
Strouhal number © 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Navier–Stokes equations

1. Introduction effect of flow recirculations on mixing at high Reynolds numbers.

Microfluidic systems are widely used in applications involving
fast chemical reactions, DNA analysis, cell separation, and sample
preparation and analysis [1–4]. In microfluidic devices, the laminar
flow condition poses a challenge for the mixing of liquid samples.
Mixing is dominated by molecular diffusion instead of turbulence
at the micro-scale. Therefore, for high performance lab-on-a-chip
and micro-total analysis systems (␮-TAS), it is essential to find a
method to achieve fast and compact mixing at the micro-scale.
The key to effective mixing lies in the ability to mix fluids
across the cross-section of the microchannel, i.e., create a large
contact between the fluid samples, thereby, accelerating the dif-
fusion processes. In the past few years, several innovative methods
have been proposed to improve micro-scale mixing. Geometrical
modifications applied to manipulate flows have been proved to
be very effective for the development of efficient micromixers.
Such passive-type micromixers have advantages of simplicity and
easy fabrication. Stroock et al. [5] devised a method that uses bas-
relief structures on the floor of the channel to generate chaotic
flows that lead to effective mixing. The three-dimensional (3-D)
twisted micromixer developed by Liu et al. [6] introduces sec-
ondary motion at higher Reynolds numbers (Re ∼ 6–70) for efficient
mixing. Mengeaud et al. [7] studied the mixing process in a zig-
zag microchannel using finite element simulations to highlight the
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +82 32 872 3096; fax: +82 32 868 1716.
E-mail address: kykim@inha.ac.kr (K.-Y. Kim).
Parsa and Hormozi [8] carried out a study on passive micromix-
ers with sinusoidal walls using experiment and CFD. The phase
shift between the side walls turned out to be important parameter
affecting the mixing performance via the formation of Dean and
separation vortices. Nguyen and Wu [9] and Hessel et al. [10] pre-
sented brief reviews of the design of different passive micromixers.
In another approach, external agitations in the form of mag-
netic energy, electrical energy, and ultrasonic can be used to stir the
fluids. These active-type micromixers rely on such external fields
to enhance the mixing of fluid samples [11–13]. Recently, time-
dependent pulsatile flows have been used by many researchers
for fast and efficient mixing [14–18]. In this approach, the flow is
pulsed from either one or both of the inlets in a regular fashion.
In some cases, the pulsing can be applied via secondary channels
along the path of the main flow. A simple example of pulsing is
a sinusoidal flow with respect to time. Tabeling et al. [14] stud-
ied the mixing in a cross-channel intersection micromixer (a main
channel with two side channels). The main channel has steady
flow which consists of fluid samples, whereas the side channels
drive time-dependent flows. For large amplitudes of the side flows,
stretching and folding of the fluid interface cause chaotic advection.
Bottauski et al. [15] extended the work [14] and presented a design
with three cross-stream secondary channels. The results show that
high mixing performance can be achieved by a perturbation of
the main flow via secondary channels using oscillating sinusoidal
jet flows. However, for complete mixing, the secondary channels
need to be actuated by a strong sinusoidal flow (high amplitude
and frequency). Glasgow and Aubry [16–18] conducted a series of

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.snb.2015.01.062
0925-4005/© 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
 A. Afzal, K.-Y. Kim / Sensors and Actuators B 211 (2015) 198–205
extensive studies on pulsed flows through “T” channels with differ-
ent configurations and operating parameters using computational
fluid dynamics (CFD). The pulsing was performed using a low fre-
quency sinusoidal flow rate superimposed upon a steady flow rate.
In one of these studies [18], they investigated the mixing behaviors
in ribbed and 3-D twisted micromixers under pulsed flow condi-
tions. The results indicate that mixing can be significantly improved
using time pulsing compared to a constant flow rate condition in
all tested micromixers.
For a micromixer coupled with pulsatile flow, important dimen-
sionless parameters that govern the dynamics of the flow through
the micromixer are the Reynolds number (Re = Vs D/), Strouhal
number (St = fD/Vs ), and velocity ratio (Vo /Vs ) where Vs is the steady
flow velocity and D is the hydraulic diameter of the inlet chan-
nel. For the pulsatile flow, Vo is the amplitude of velocity and f is
the pulsing frequency. The Reynolds number is the ratio of iner-
tial to viscous forces. The Strouhal number relates the flow (D/Vs )
and pulsing (1/f) time scales to characterize the pulsatile flow phe-
nomenon.
The objective of the present study was to design a micromixer
that can utilize the full advantage of pulsatile flows over a short
mixing length. A numerical investigation was carried out for a
convergent–divergent microchannel with sinusoidal walls (space-
periodic in the streamwise direction) under pulsed sinusoidal flow
(time-periodic). The Reynolds number, Strouhal number and the
ratio of the pulsing amplitude to the steady flow velocity of the
pulsatile flow, were used as the operating parameters in the per-
formance evaluation. Also, a comparison was made with other
microchannel designs in terms of overall mixing performance with
and without pulsing.
2. Problem formulation
A schematic layout of the present problem is shown in Fig. 1(a).
The profile of the convergent–divergent microchannel was gener-
ated using a sine function of the form y = A sin(2x/) where A is
the amplitude,  is the pitch or wavelength, and x and y are the
spatial coordinates along the longitudinal and transverse direc-
tions, respectively. The values of A and  were taken to be 0.15
and 1.12 mm, respectively. The depth of the channel is 0.125 mm
as measured in the z-direction. The two inlets, Inlet 1 and Inlet 2, are
merged to the main channel with a T-joint as shown in Fig. 1. The
cross-sections of the inlet channels are rectangular with dimen-
sions of 0.1 mm × 0.125 mm. The axial lengths of the connecting
channel Li , main channel Lm , and exit channel Le , are 0.2, 2.24, and
1.4 mm, respectively.
2.1. Flow and mixing analysis
The flow dynamics and mixing inside the microchannel were
studied by solving the unsteady continuity and Navier–Stokes
equations using ANSYS CFX-12.1 [19], a commercial computational
fluid dynamics (CFD) software package based on the finite volume
method. The unsteady continuity and Navier–Stokes equations can
be expressed as follows:
 · V = 0
∇ (1)
∂V  )V = − 1 ∇ p + ∇ 2 V
+ (V · ∇ (2)
∂t 
where V represents the fluid velocity, and  and  are the fluid den-
sity and kinematic viscosity, respectively. For the multi-component
fluids, the bulk motion of the fluid is modeled by using single veloc-
ity and pressure values, and each component has its own equation
for the conservation of mass. The mixing analysis was performed
199
with the following transient advection–diffusion model [20] for the
species concentration field:
∂Ci  )C = ˛∇ 2 C
+ (V · ∇ i i (3)
∂t
where ˛ is the diffusivity coefficient and Ci is the concentration of
the species.
In the present model, two similar fluids having the same vis-
cosity, , and the same fluid density, , were used. The kinematic
viscosity  and diffusion coefficient ˛, were set to 10−6 m2 s−1
(the kinematic viscosity of water at room temperature) and
10−10 m2 s−1 (a typical diffusivity value for microfluidic applica-
tions), respectively [16–18]. To study mixing, pure water and a
solution of dye in water were used as working fluids with the dye
mass fraction determined from the solution of Eq. (3) in space and
time.
To introduce the pulsatile flows in the microchannel, the
time dependent velocities at Inlet 1 and Inlet 2 are defined as
V = Vs + Vo sin(2f t + ϕ), which represents a superposition of steady
(first term) and sinusoidal (second term) flows. For the sinusoidal
flow, Vo is the amplitude, f is the pulsing frequency, and ϕ is the
phase lag between flows at Inlet 1 and Inlet 2. Fig. 1(b) shows the
mean inlet velocity at Inlet 1 and Inlet 2 for the anti-phase (ϕ = 180◦ )
pulsing. T is the time period of the pulse, and is defined as T = 1/f.
The symbols are marked at times t = 0, T/4, T/2, 3 T/4, and T for one
complete cycle. At the outlet, zero static pressure was specified. A
no-slip condition was applied at the walls. The concentrations were
set to 1 and 0 at Inlet 1 and Inlet 2, respectively.
Hexahedral cells were used to discretize the computational
domain. Along the streamwise direction, the grid lines were well
aligned with the geometry of the channel to capture the sinusoidal
walls. A grid sensitivity test was performed for the mixing index as
the criterion to determine the total number of nodes for spatial res-
olution. Five different grid systems with 51,219, 98,440, 160,116,
276,861, and 449,072 nodes were tested. The grid with 276,861
nodes was found to be adequate for analysis with a relative error
of less than 0.5% in the mixing index compared to a finer grid. For
the unsteady calculations, 40 time steps was used to capture the
temporal behavior. This corresponds to time steps of 0.01, 0.005,
0.0025, and 0.00125 s for 2.5, 5, 10, and 20 Hz pulsing, respectively.
The present numerical simulations were performed by Intel Core
I7 (8 CPUs) with a clock speed of 2.94 GHz. Each calculation was
subdivided into eight tasks. The computational time was typically
12–15 h for each simulation.
A second-order upwind differencing scheme was used to dis-
cretize the advection terms in the governing equations [21]. For
transient calculations, the discretization in time was performed
using a second-order backward Euler scheme. The SIMPLEC algo-
rithm [22] was used for pressure–velocity coupling. The linearized
algebraic system of equations resulting from discretization was
solved using a multigrid accelerated incomplete lower-upper fac-
torization procedure. Multigrid techniques significantly improved
the convergence behavior. The criterion for convergence was the
normalized root mean square residual value of 10−6 . However, the
pulsatile flows were computed over enough time to obtain a peri-
odic solution; namely, a solution that does not change measurably
from one cycle to the next.
A variance-based method was employed to evaluate the mix-
ing efficiency of the micromixer. The variance of the species was
determined on a cross-sectional plane perpendicular to the x-axis.
Variance is based on the concept of the intensity of segregation,
which is based on the variance of concentration in relation to the
mean concentration. However, Glasgow and Aubry [16] have used
a weighting factor to account for the differences in the mass flow
rate from the channel centerline to the walls. The variance of the
200 A. Afzal, K.-Y. Kim / Sensors and Actuators B 211 (2015) 198–205
Fig. 1. Schematic of convergent–divergent microchannel and inlet flow velocities. (a) Geometry and (b) inlet flow velocities (ϕ = 180◦ and St = 0.139).
mass fraction of the mixture on a cross-sectional plane normal to
the flow direction can be expressed mathematically as follows:

 N
 (C − )2  V 
= i i
N Vmean
i=1
where N is the number of sampling points on the plane, Ci is the
mass fraction at sampling point i, and is the optimal mixing mass
fraction (=0.5, the mass fraction in the targeted case of equal mixing
of the two fluids). Vi is the velocity in the ith cell, and Vmean is the
area-averaged fluid velocity at the selected cross-sectional plane.
Finally, the mixing index at any cross-sectional plane perpendicular
to the axial direction is defined as
 (Fig. 2(b)). These two cases exhibit qualitatively similar mass frac-
N
i=1
((Ci − )2 /N)(Vi /Vmean )
MI = 1 −
The variance was taken to be the maximum for completely
unmixed fluids and the minimum for completely mixed fluids. A
higher value of MI (close to 1) indicates a better mixing quality.
To account for the time dependency of Eqs. (4) and (5), the mix-
ing index was averaged over four values at quarter-cycle intervals.
The mixing index 0.2 mm downstream of the end of the 2nd mixing
cycle, MIo , was used to measure the overall mixing performance of
the micromixer.
3. Results and discussion
(4)
The prediction accuracy of the numerical methods used in the
present study was validated by comparison with the experimen-
tal and numerical results of Glasgow and Aubry [16] for the same
conditions. In their experiment, the flow in a straight microchan-
nel with two inlets (one in-line with, and the other perpendicular
to, the channel) was considered. Fig. 2 shows the mass fraction
distributions for two different cases. In the first case, the inlets are
fed at Re = 0.3 without pulsing (Fig. 2(a)). The other case involves an
anti-phased pulsing (ϕ = 180◦ ) with Vo /Vs = 7.5, Re = 0.3, and St = 0.13
tion distributions compared to those obtained by the experiment
(5) [16].
As a preliminary step, the effect of pulsing the flow on mix-
ing performance in the convergent–divergent microchannel was
analyzed with different flow settings at the inlets. Also, in case
of pulsing from both inlets, the phase difference, ϕ, varies from
0 to 180◦ . The various inlet flow settings and the corresponding
mixing indexes are listed in Table 1. It is found that the mixing per-
formance of the convergent–divergent microchannel is maximum
 A. Afzal, K.-Y. Kim / Sensors and Actuators B 211 (2015) 198–205
Fig. 2. Comparison of dye mass fraction distribution on central x–y plane between (left) present computation and (right) experiment of Glasgow and Aubry [15] for two
cases: (a) without pulsing at both inlets (Re = 0.3), and (b) anti-phased pulsing (St = 0.13, Re = 0.3, and Vo /Vs = 7.5).
Table 1
Mixing performance of the convergent–divergent microchannel with pulsatile flow
(Re = 0.5, St = 0.278, and Vo /Vs = 1.88) with inflow conditions.
Inlet flow setting Mixing index
(a) No pulsing 0.14
(b) Pulsing from single inlet 0.40
Pulsing from both inlets
(c) In phase (ϕ = 0) 0.14
(d) 90◦ phase difference (ϕ = 90◦ ) 0.35
(e) 180◦ phase difference (ϕ = 180◦ ) 0.83
(MIo = 0.83) in the case of pulsing from both inlets with phase dif-
ference of 180◦ . Fig. 3 shows mass fraction contours on the x–y
plane at one-half of the channel depth at time instant, t = 0/T (data
were collected after the pulsing was fully established) for various
inlet conditions listed in Table 1. For constant flow at the inlets
(no pulsing) (Fig. 3(a)), the flow velocity at each inlet corresponds
to Re = 0.5. The interface is straight and mixing is governed only
by molecular diffusion. With pulsing, the Strouhal number, St and
velocity ratio, Vo /Vs were fixed at 0.278, and 1.88, respectively.
With pulsing the flow at single inlet (Fig. 3(b)), the mixing per-
formance is found to improve as a result of interface perturbation
(MIo = 0.40). However, pulsing at both the inlets in phase (ϕ = 0◦ )
lead to the mixing index value (MIo = 0.14) same as that without
pulsing as shown in Table 1. Fig. 3(c) shows that no stretching of
the interface is observed and the interface remains straight along
the microchannel, which is same as the pattern shown in Fig. 3(a)
for no-pulsing case. For ϕ = 90◦ (Fig. 3(d)), interface perturbation is
observed with an improvement in mixing performance (MIo = 0.35).
In case of anti-phase pulsing (ϕ = 180◦ ), a remarkable increase in the
mixing performance is shown in Table 1 (MIo = 0.83), and a signif-
icant increase in the interfacial area between the co-flowing fluids
manifested by fine puffs in the microchannel as shown in Fig. 3(e).
Also, from a practical viewpoint, the inlet flow condition with phase
difference of 180◦ is desirable because it provides a nearly constant
flow rate at the outlet.
In Table 2, the proposed convergent–divergent microchannel
is compared with different micromixer designs, i.e., straight [16],
square-wave [6], zig-zag [7], and sinusoidal [23] found in the
literature, with and without pulsing the flow. All of the tested
micromixer designs have two inlets connected by a T-junction,
201
Inlet 1 and Inlet 2, with dimensions of 0.1 mm × 0.125 mm as
shown in Fig. 1. Since the fluids in the serpentine channels (square-
wave, zig-zag, and sinusoidal) travel different paths, the mixing
length was fixed for the purpose of comparison. The mixing length
was measured along the streamwise direction in each channel
and was kept constant at 2.4 mm. The anti-phased (180◦ phase
difference between inlets) pulsing from the inlets was used to
input fluids into the microchannels. The Reynolds number, Strouhal
number, and Vo /Vs were maintained at the following reference
values: Re = 0.5, St = 0.278 and Vo /Vs = 1.88, respectively. Table 2
lists the microchannel designs tested and the corresponding mix-
ing indices calculated in this work, with and without pulsing. As
previously mentioned, the mixing index was calculated by aver-
aging over four values at quarter-cycle intervals. It is noted that
the proposed convergent–divergent microchannel shows remark-
ably high mixing performance compared to other designs. In the
case without pulsing, due to the low Reynolds number (Re = 0.5),
all of the micromixer designs show low mixing indexes that are
not much different from each other in a range from 0.14 to 0.18.
The convergent–divergent geometry shows the lowest mixing
index, 0.14, in the case without pulsing, but shows the highest
mixing index, 0.83, in the case with pulsing among the tested
designs. In the case with pulsing, the convergent–divergent geom-
etry improves the mixing index by 66.7% compared to the straight
channel (T-channel). This indicates that the effect of pulsing flow
strongly depends on the microchannel geometry. Another impor-
tant parameter in pulsed flow mixing is the variation in mixing
with each pulse cycle; i.e., the difference between maximum and
minimum mixings in each cycle [16]. During each cycle, the varia-
tions in the mixing index (MIo ) were found to be ±10%, ±9%, ±2%,
±5% and ±0.1% for straight, square-wave, zig-zag, sinusoidal, and
convergent–divergent microchannels, respectively. This indicates
that the convergent–divergent microchannel also resulted in the
most stable mixing. Therefore, the convergent–divergent channel
represents the most effective coupling with pulsatile flow among
the tested cases.
The effect of varying the Strouhal number on mixing perfor-
mance is important for pulsatile flows. The Reynolds number
and velocity ratio were fixed at 0.5 and 1.88, respectively. For
pulsed flow, the Strouhal number was varied over a range of
0.070 ≤ St ≤ 0.556. A quantitative variation of the mixing index, MIo ,
202 A. Afzal, K.-Y. Kim / Sensors and Actuators B 211 (2015) 198–205
Table 2
Mixing performance of various micromixers with pulsatile flow (Re = 0.5, St = 0.278, and Vo /Vs = 1.88).
Microchannel design Type
Straight channel
Square-wave
Zig-zag
Sinusoidal
Convergent–divergent
with the Strouhal number, St is depicted in Fig. 4. The mixing index
was calculated by averaging over four values at quarter-cycle inter-
vals for a particular Strouhal number. It was observed that the
overall mixing performance was sensitive to the Strouhal number,
and thus to the frequency of the pulsatile flow. At St = 0.278, the
mixing performance of the convergent–divergent microchannel
was found to be maximum (83%). To explain the mixing behavior
with varying Strouhal number, mass fraction contours on the x–y
plane at one-half of the channel depth are plotted at time instants
t = 0/T (data were collected after the pulsing was fully established)
for four different Strouhal numbers, as shown in Fig. 5. It can be seen
that alternate puffs of liquids 1 and 2 from the two inlets are shed
along the streamwise direction at all Strouhal numbers. The shape
and thickness of the puffs depend on the Strouhal number, with
the centerline of the channel being the line of symmetry. At low
Strouhal numbers (St = 0.070 and 0.139), the impact of pulsing the
flow is weak, and is manifested by large-sized puffs and low mix-
ing performance. With an increase in Strouhal number (St = 0.278),
the large puffs are broken down to produce finer striations along
the streamwise direction. The puffs grow in size, starting with an
arc-shaped design following the divergent slope, which increas-
ingly converges at the center as dictated by the convergent slope
of the sinusoidal wall. Moving farther downstream, the sizes of the
puffs decrease as they enter the next divergent part of the chan-
nel, with the shapes dictated by the convergent–divergent slope as
previously described. However, the puffs appear to be more elon-
gated with the diffusion, causing the puffs to dissipate in the bulk
fluid. At this optimum Strouhal number (Fig. 5), the enhanced mix-
ing is due to enlargement of the interfacial area between the two
fluids, which results from the reduced thickness of the puffs. Inter-
estingly, a further increase in Strouhal number (St = 0.556) results
in slightly different mixing characteristics. Even though the thick-
ness of the puffs is further reduced, the reduction in the width
of the puffs overrides the effect of the thickness. This results in
a reduction of the interfacial area, and the reduced puffs fail to
interact with the fluids in the near-wall region, leaving zones of
unmixed fluids. These are the reasons for the decrease in the mixing
MIo (no pulsing) MIo (pulsing) MIo variation over a cycle (%)
0.15 0.51 10
0.17 0.70 9
0.16 0.68 2
0.18 0.66 5
0.14 0.83 0.1
performance at St = 0.556, as shown in Fig. 4. However, in the core
region, the diffusion occurs very rapidly due to the thinning of the
puffs at this Strouhal number.
The ratio of pulsing velocity Vo to the steady flow velocity Vs
is also an important factor that affects the mixing characteristics.
Fig. 6 shows the variation in mixing index MIo with the velocity
ratio Vo /Vs . Here, the Reynolds and Strouhal numbers were fixed at
Re = 0.5 and St = 0.278, respectively. It is noted that the mixing per-
formance increases rapidly with the increase in the velocity ratio;
i.e., the magnitude of pulsing relative to the steady flow velocity
for Vo /Vs less than 1.88. Beyond this velocity ratio, the increasing
rate slows down, and the mixing index was found to be 90% at
Vo /Vs = 3.76. With a further increase in pulsing velocity, Vo /Vs = 7.52
shows only a 2.0% increase in the mixing index. Fig. 7 shows the
dye mass fraction distributions in the x–y plane at one-half of the
channel depth at time t = 0/T (data were collected after the pulsing
was fully established). For Vo /Vs = 0.47, the distribution represents
a weak oscillatory behavior of the interface between two fluids.
As the Vo /Vs ratio increases, the dominance of the pulsed flow
increases, which results in a rapid distortion of the interface, and
thus an enlargement of the interfacial area. This phenomenon was
observed up to a Vo /Vs ratio of 0.94. However, a quite different pat-
tern was observed at Vo /Vs = 1.88: alternate puffs of the two mixing
fluids were shed downstream, resulting in remarkable increase in
the interfacial area. This is the reason why the mixing is enhanced
significantly at this velocity ratio, as shown in Fig. 7. With a further
increase in Vo /Vs , the alternate puffs in the main flow remained
unaffected, and a relatively small increase in the mixing index was
observed as shown in Fig. 7.
The effect of Reynolds number on the mixing performance of the
convergent–divergent micromixer with pulsing inputs was ana-
lyzed as shown in Fig. 8. The Strouhal number and velocity ratio
were fixed at St = 0.278 and Vo /Vs = 1.88, respectively. The symbols
correspond to the Reynolds numbers, Re = 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, and 4,
respectively. It is found that the mixing index is almost constant
with the Reynolds number. Therefore, the dynamics of mixing in the
convergent–divergent microchannel is invariant in this relatively
 A. Afzal, K.-Y. Kim / Sensors and Actuators B 211 (2015) 198–205
Fig. 3. Dye mass fraction distributions on the x–y plane at one-half of the chan-
nel depth (z = 0.0625 mm) at time t = 0/T in a cycle for different settings of inlet
conditions marked in Table 1 with Vo /Vs = 1.88 and St = 0.278.
Fig. 4. Variation of mixing index with Strouhal number at Re = 0.5 and Vo /Vs = 1.88.
203
Fig. 5. Dye mass fraction distributions on the x–y plane at one-half of the channel
depth (z = 0.0625 mm) at time t = 0/T in a cycle with Strouhal number at Re = 0.5 and
Vo /Vs = 1.88.
short range of the Reynolds number based on the steady base flow,
and is solely governed by the dimensionless parameters, Strouhal
number, St, and velocity ration, Vo /Vs . The dye mass fraction distri-
butions on the x–y plane at one-half of the channel depth at time
t = 0/T were similar for different Reynolds numbers, as shown in
Fig. 5 for Re = 0.5, Vo /Vs = 1.88, and St = 0.278.
Since the mixing performance also depends on the geometry of
the convergent–divergent sinusoidal walls, an exercise was per-
formed to reduce the overall length of the microchannel. Fig. 9
Fig. 6. Variation of mixing index with velocity ratio Vo /Vs at Re = 0.5 and St = 0.278.
204 A. Afzal, K.-Y. Kim / Sensors and Actuators B 211 (2015) 198–205
Fig. 7. Dye mass fraction distributions on the x–y plane at one-half of the channel
depth (z = 0.0625 mm) at time t = 0/T in a cycle with Vo /Vs at St = 0.278 and Re = 0.5.
Fig. 8. Variation of mixing index with Reynolds number at St = 0.278 and Vo /Vs = 1.88.
shows the variation of the mixing index with the wavelength of the
microchannel for anti-phased (180◦ phase difference) input flows
for St = 0.278, Re = 0.5, and Vo /Vs = 1.88. It is found that the wave-
length of the walls (i.e., the axial length of the micromixer) can
be changed in the range of /A from 6.0 to at least 7.5 without
Fig. 9. Variation of mixing index with wavelength of the sinusoidal walls at Re = 0.5,
St = 0.278, and Vo /Vs = 1.88.
Fig. 10. Variations of mixing index with Reynolds number, Strouhal number, veloc-
ity ratio, and wavelength of the sinusoidal walls (Re = 0.5, St = 0.278, and Vo /Vs = 1.88).
affecting the overall mixing performance of the micromixer
(MIo = 83%). To summarize, Fig. 10 shows the mixing characteris-
tics of the convergent–divergent microchannel under pulsatile flow
with Reynolds number (St = 0.278 and Vo /Vs = 1.88), Strouhal num-
ber (Re = 0.5 and Vo /Vs = 1.88), velocity ratio (Re = 0.5 and St = 0.278),
and ratio of wavelength to amplitude, /A (Re = 0.5, St = 0.278, and
Vo /Vs = 1.88). This figure confirms that the best mixing index in the
tested ranges of the parameters is 0.92 at Vo /Vs = 7.52.
4. Conclusions
A convergent–divergent microchannel with sinusoidal channel
walls is proposed as the geometry that is best coupled with pulsatile
 A. Afzal, K.-Y. Kim / Sensors and Actuators B 211 (2015) 198–205
inlet flows. Using Navier–Stokes analysis, the mixing character-
istics were analyzed with respect to the Reynolds and Strouhal
numbers, and the ratio of pulsing amplitude to steady flow velocity.
The numerical results were validated for the mass fraction dis-
tributions with and without pulsing in a straight microchannel
through comparison with experimental data. The mixing charac-
teristics were tested for anti-phased pulsing and two periods of the
sinusoidal walls of the convergent–divergent microchannel. The
reference conditions are Re = 0.5, St = 0.278, and Vo /Vs = 1.88. The
proposed convergent–divergent microchannel shows at least a 19%
higher overall mixing index with the most stable mixing with time
at the exit of micromixer compared to the other designs (such as
straight, square-wave, zig-zag, and sinusoidal microchannels) for a
fixed mixing length. The mixing index showed a strong dependence
on the Strouhal number of the pulsatile flow, with a maximum at
St = 0.278 (0.070 ≤ St ≤ 0.556). The enhanced mixing performance at
the optimum Strouhal number (St = 0.278) was due to an enlarge-
ment of the interfacial area between the two fluids, resulting from
the reduced thickness of the fluid puffs. The mixing performance
increases rapidly with an increase in the velocity ratio for Vo /Vs less
than 1.88. However, beyond this value, the mixing index increases
slowly and reaches 0.92 at Vo /Vs = 7.52. The mass fraction distribu-
tions show that the interfacial area increases rapidly as the velocity
ratio increases until Vo /Vs = 1.88, where the interface separates to
produce discrete puffs of fluids. From the variation of the mix-
ing index with Reynolds number at a fixed Strouhal number and
velocity ratio of the pulsatile flow (St = 0.278 and Vo /Vs = 1.88), the
mixing performance was found to be independent of Re in a range
of Reynolds number, 0.25 ≤ Re ≤ 4. It was found that the mixing per-
formance does not change with the axial length of the micromixer
in the range of /A from 6.0 to at least 7.5. With a simple in-
plane structure, the proposed convergent–divergent micromixer
combined with pulsing inputs provides efficient mixing in a short
length.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the National Research Foundation
of Korea (NRF) grant (No. 20090083510) funded by the Korean
government (MSIP) through Multi-phenomena CFD Engineering
Research Center. The authors gratefully acknowledge this support.
References
[1] Y. Li, F. Xu, C. Liu, Y. Xu, X. Feng, B.-F. Liu, A novel microfluidic mixer based
on dual-hydrodynamic focusing for interrogating the kinetics of DNA–protein
interaction, Analyst 138 (2013) 4475–4482.
[2] H.A. Stone, S. Kim, Microfluidics: basic issues, applications and challenges,
AIChE J. 47 (2001) 1250–1254.
[3] G.S. Jeong, S. Chung, C.-B. Kim, S.-H. Lee, Applications of micromixing technol-
ogy, Analyst 135 (2010) 460–473.
205
[4] D.J. Harrison, K. Fluri, N. Chiem, T. Tang, Z. Fan, Micromachining chemical and
biochemical analysis and reaction systems on glass substrates, Sens. Actuators
B 33 (1996) 105.
[5] A.D. Stroock, S.K. Dertinger, A. Ajdari, I. Mezic, H.A. Stone, G.M. Whitesides,
Chaotic mixer for microchannels, Science 295 (2002) 647–651.
[6] R.H. Liu, M.A. Stremler, K.V. Sharp, M.G. Olsen, J.G. Santiago, R.J. Adrian, H. Aref,
D.J. Beebe, Passive mixing in a three-dimensional serpentine microchannel, J.
Microelectromech. Syst. 9 (2000) 190–197.
[7] V. Mengeaud, J. Josserand, H.H. Girault, Mixing processes in a zigzag microchan-
nel: finite element simulations and optical study, Anal. Chem. 74 (2002)
4279–4286.
[8] M.K. Parsa, F. Hormozi, Experimental and CFD modeling of fluid mixing in
sinusoidal microchannels with different phase shift between side walls, J.
Micromech. Microeng. 24 (2014) 1–7.
[9] N.T. Nguyen, Z. Wu, Micromixers – a review, J. Micromech. Microeng. 15 (2005)
R1–R16.
[10] V. Hessel, H. Lowe, F. Schönfeld, Micromixers – a review on passive and active
mixing principles, Chem. Eng. Sci. 60 (2005) 2479–2501.
[11] R.H. Liu, R. Lenigk, R.L. Druyor-Sanchez, J. Yang, P. Grodzinski, Hybridiza-
tion enhancement using cavitation microstreaming, Anal. Chem. 75 (2003)
1911.
[12] H.H. Bau, J. Zhong, M. Yi, A minute magneto hydrodynamic (MHD) mixer, Sens.
Actuators B 79 (2001) 207–215.
[13] A.O.E. Moctar, N. Aubry, J. Batton, Electro-hydrodynamic micro-fluidic mixer,
Lab Chip 3 (2003) 273–280.
[14] P. Tabeling, M. Chabert, A. Dodge, C. Jullien, F. Okkles, Chaotic mixing in cross-
channel micromixers, Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A 362 (2004) 987–1000.
[15] F. Bottauski, C. Cardonne, C. Meinhart, I. Mezić, An ultrashort mixing length
micromixer: the shear superposition micromixer, Lab Chip 7 (2007) 396–398.
[16] I. Glasgow, N. Aubry, Enhancement of microfluidic mixing using time pulsing,
Lab Chip 3 (2003) 114–120.
[17] I. Glasgow, S. Lieber, N. Aubry, Parameters influencing pulsed flow mixing in
microchannels, Anal. Chem. 76 (2004) 4825–4832.
[18] I. Glasgow, N. Aubry, October, California, USA, 7th International Conference on
Miniaturized Chemical and Biochemical Analysis Systems, 2003.
[19] CFX-12.1, Solver Theory, ANSYS Inc., Canonsburg, PA, 2006.
[20] R.B. Bird, W.E. Stewart, E.N. Lightfoot, Transport Phenomenon, Wiley, New York,
1960.
[21] M. Liu, Computational study of convective–diffusive mixing in a microchannel
mixer, Chem. Eng. Sci. 66 (2011) 2211–2223.
[22] J.P. Van Doormaal, G.D. Raithby, Enhancement of the SIMPLE method for pre-
dicting incompressible fluid flows, Numer. Heat Transf. 7 (1985) 147–163.
[23] A. Afzal, K.-Y. Kim, Mixing performance of passive micromixer with sinusoidal
channel walls, J. Chem. Eng. Japan 46 (3) (2013) 230–238.
Biographies
A. Afzal received B.Tech (Mechanical Engineering) and M.Tech (Thermal Engineer-
ing) degrees from Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) in India, in 2006 and 2009,
respectively, and Ph.D. degree from Inha University, South Korea in 2015. His main
research interests are design and optimization of micromixers using CFD, surrogate
modeling and optimization algorithms.
Kwang-Yong Kim received the B.S. degree from Seoul National University in 1978,
and the M.S. and Ph.D. degrees from the Korea Advanced Institute of Science and
Technology (KAIST), Korea in 1981 and 1987, respectively. He is currently an Inha
Fellow Professor in the School of Mechanical Engineering of Inha University, Incheon,
Korea. Professor Kim is also the current Editor-in-Chief of the International Journal
of Fluid Machinery and Systems (IJFMS), associate editor of ASME Journal of Fluids
Engineering, and the chairman of Asian Fluid Machinery Committee (AFMC). He is
a Fellow of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) and an Associate
Fellow of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA).