Question: I was trying to simulate two serpentine resistors on COMSOL multiphysics with exactly the same length, width and thickness. I drew them on AutoCAD. The only difference between the two resistors is the number of bends. For resistor(1), number of bends is only 2, while for resistor(2), number of bends is 18.

After running simulation on AC/DC module and Electric Currents (ec) sub module, resistance values came as the following:

Resistor(1) = 13.221 ohm (2 number of bends)

Resistor(2)= 12.654 ohm (18 number of bends)

I expected that the number of bends will not affect the resistance value, but it actually does in an inverse manner (though not much, but it does)
Is anyone aware why would the number of bends affect the resistance value?

Simulation parameters:

Resistor(1):
Length:337mm; Width: 1mm; Thickness: 0.2mm; Number of bends:2

Resistor(2):
Length:337mm; Width: 1mm; Thickness: 0.2mm;Number of bends:18

Meshing:

Resolution: Extra fine.

Minimum Element Size: 0.18mm.

Maximum Element Size: 4.2mm.

Maximum Element Growth Rate: 1.35

Curvature Factor:0.3

Resolution of Narrow Regions: 0.8

[![The two serpentine resistors](https://i.stack.imgur.com/aR5UP.png)](https://i.stack.imgur.com/aR5UP.png)

Effect of meshing resolution on resistance values:

[![enter image description here](https://i.stack.imgur.com/2iHrt.png)](https://i.stack.imgur.com/2iHrt.png)

Answer: 
You are measuring the length through the center, but the current will not follow that path, rather it will crowd into the corners and, on average, take a somewhat shorter path through each bend, so your total resistance will be less for the serpentine pattern with more bends. Below is a [field solver simulation](https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/20141021193200-43694073-on-corner-contribution-to-resistance) showing a current density at the inside corner that is 5x higher than the average in the straightaways. 

[![enter image description here](https://i.stack.imgur.com/HHBK1.jpg)](https://i.stack.imgur.com/HHBK1.jpg)

One [rule of thumb](http://www.prenhall.com/howe3/microelectronics/pdf_folder/lectures/tth/lecture4.fm5.pdf) is that a corner square is equivalent to 0.56 squares rather than one square. Your first example has 4 corners, the second 36. 

If I back-calculate the effect from the ratios in your simulation I get 0.55 as the effect of one square, which is pretty close.
The error you see is a consequence of the effective width of the trace at the corner. Pick a corner, and draw a line from the inner corner point to the outer corner point. Observe that the line makes a 45° angle to both the entering and leaving trace. Further observe that this line is longer than the width of the trace. Specifically, it's sqrt(2)\*width, or about 1.41\*width. Since the trace in the corner is wider, the cross-sectional area is proportionally higher and the resistance proportionally lower. Changing to two 45° bends or rounded corners will reduce the effect. Carefully constructing a constant cross-section trace will eliminate the effect.

Some circuit board designers use curves instead of angled corners to reduce the impact of the varying resistance. [Here's a paper](http://www.montrosecompliance.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/corners-Japan.pdf) that discusses some corner designs, and how they affect impedance. Their finding is that there's very little difference between corner designs at high frequency, but unfortunately there's no mention of DC parameters, which definitely do change.

So in summary, though you controlled the length to be identical, you missed the area change due to the corner shape.

[![Magnified Corner with diagonal line](https://i.stack.imgur.com/K0moo.png)](https://i.stack.imgur.com/K0moo.png)