微流控技术的民主化:利用低成本 LCD 3D 打印机快速制作开放式微通道原型

IF 4.3 3区 材料科学 Q1 ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC
Kelsey M. Leong, Aileen Y. Sun, Mindy L. Quach, Carrie H. Lin, Cosette A. Craig, Felix Guo, Timothy R. Robinson, Megan M. Chang and Ayokunle O. Olanrewaju*, 
{"title":"微流控技术的民主化:利用低成本 LCD 3D 打印机快速制作开放式微通道原型","authors":"Kelsey M. Leong,&nbsp;Aileen Y. Sun,&nbsp;Mindy L. Quach,&nbsp;Carrie H. Lin,&nbsp;Cosette A. Craig,&nbsp;Felix Guo,&nbsp;Timothy R. Robinson,&nbsp;Megan M. Chang and Ayokunle O. Olanrewaju*,&nbsp;","doi":"10.1021/acsomega.4c0777610.1021/acsomega.4c07776","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p >Microfluidics offer user-friendly liquid handling for a range of biochemical applications. 3D printing microfluidics is rapid and cost-effective compared to conventional cleanroom fabrication. Typically, microfluidics are 3D printed using digital light projection (DLP) stereolithography (SLA), but many models in use are expensive (≥$10,000 USD), limiting widespread use. Recent liquid crystal display (LCD) technology advancements have provided inexpensive (&lt;$500 USD) SLA 3D printers with sufficient pixel resolution for microfluidic applications. However, there are only a few demonstrations of microfluidic fabrication, limited validation of print fidelity, and no direct comparisons between LCD and DLP printers. We compared a 40 μm pixel DLP printer (∼$18,000 USD) with a 34.4 μm pixel LCD printer (&lt;$380 USD). Consistent with prior work, we observed linear trends between designed and measured channel widths ≥4 pixels on both printers, so we calculated accuracy above this size threshold. Using a standard IPA-wash resin and optimized parameters for each printer, the average error between designed and measured widths was 2.11 ± 1.26% with the DLP printer and 15.4 ± 2.57% with the 34.4 μm LCD printer. Printing with optimized conditions for a low-cost water-wash resin designed for LCD-SLA printers resulted in an average error of 2.53 ± 0.94% with the 34.4 μm LCD printer and 5.35 ± 4.49% with a 22 μm LCD printer. We characterized additional parameters including surface roughness, channel perpendicularity, and light intensity uniformity, and as an application of LCD-printed devices, we demonstrated consistent flow rates in capillaric circuits for self-regulated and self-powered delivery of multiple liquids. LCD printers are an inexpensive alternative for fabricating microfluidics, with minimal differences in fidelity and accuracy compared with a 40X more expensive DLP printer.</p>","PeriodicalId":3,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://pubs.acs.org/doi/epdf/10.1021/acsomega.4c07776","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Democratizing Access to Microfluidics: Rapid Prototyping of Open Microchannels with Low-Cost LCD 3D Printers\",\"authors\":\"Kelsey M. Leong,&nbsp;Aileen Y. Sun,&nbsp;Mindy L. Quach,&nbsp;Carrie H. Lin,&nbsp;Cosette A. Craig,&nbsp;Felix Guo,&nbsp;Timothy R. Robinson,&nbsp;Megan M. Chang and Ayokunle O. Olanrewaju*,&nbsp;\",\"doi\":\"10.1021/acsomega.4c0777610.1021/acsomega.4c07776\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p >Microfluidics offer user-friendly liquid handling for a range of biochemical applications. 3D printing microfluidics is rapid and cost-effective compared to conventional cleanroom fabrication. Typically, microfluidics are 3D printed using digital light projection (DLP) stereolithography (SLA), but many models in use are expensive (≥$10,000 USD), limiting widespread use. Recent liquid crystal display (LCD) technology advancements have provided inexpensive (&lt;$500 USD) SLA 3D printers with sufficient pixel resolution for microfluidic applications. However, there are only a few demonstrations of microfluidic fabrication, limited validation of print fidelity, and no direct comparisons between LCD and DLP printers. We compared a 40 μm pixel DLP printer (∼$18,000 USD) with a 34.4 μm pixel LCD printer (&lt;$380 USD). Consistent with prior work, we observed linear trends between designed and measured channel widths ≥4 pixels on both printers, so we calculated accuracy above this size threshold. Using a standard IPA-wash resin and optimized parameters for each printer, the average error between designed and measured widths was 2.11 ± 1.26% with the DLP printer and 15.4 ± 2.57% with the 34.4 μm LCD printer. Printing with optimized conditions for a low-cost water-wash resin designed for LCD-SLA printers resulted in an average error of 2.53 ± 0.94% with the 34.4 μm LCD printer and 5.35 ± 4.49% with a 22 μm LCD printer. We characterized additional parameters including surface roughness, channel perpendicularity, and light intensity uniformity, and as an application of LCD-printed devices, we demonstrated consistent flow rates in capillaric circuits for self-regulated and self-powered delivery of multiple liquids. LCD printers are an inexpensive alternative for fabricating microfluidics, with minimal differences in fidelity and accuracy compared with a 40X more expensive DLP printer.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":3,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Electronic Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://pubs.acs.org/doi/epdf/10.1021/acsomega.4c07776\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Electronic Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"92\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsomega.4c07776\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"材料科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","FirstCategoryId":"92","ListUrlMain":"https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsomega.4c07776","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"材料科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

微流控技术为一系列生化应用提供了方便用户的液体处理方法。与传统的洁净室制造相比,3D 打印微流体既快速又经济。通常情况下,微流体是使用数字光投影(DLP)立体光刻(SLA)技术进行 3D 打印的,但许多正在使用的模型价格昂贵(≥ 10,000 美元),限制了其广泛应用。最近的液晶显示器(LCD)技术进步为微流控应用提供了价格低廉(500 美元)、像素分辨率足够高的 SLA 3D 打印机。然而,目前只有少数微流体制造演示,对打印保真度的验证有限,也没有对 LCD 和 DLP 打印机进行直接比较。我们比较了一台 40 μm 像素的 DLP 打印机(18,000 美元)和一台 34.4 μm 像素的 LCD 打印机(380 美元)。与之前的工作一致,我们在两台打印机上都观察到了设计和测量通道宽度≥4 像素之间的线性趋势,因此我们计算了超过这一尺寸阈值的精度。使用标准的 IPA 水洗树脂和每台打印机的优化参数,DLP 打印机的设计宽度和测量宽度之间的平均误差为 2.11 ± 1.26%,34.4 μm LCD 打印机的平均误差为 15.4 ± 2.57%。采用专为 LCD-SLA 打印机设计的低成本水洗树脂的优化条件进行打印,34.4 μm LCD 打印机的平均误差为 2.53 ± 0.94%,22 μm LCD 打印机的平均误差为 5.35 ± 4.49%。作为液晶打印设备的一项应用,我们在毛细管电路中展示了一致的流速,可用于多种液体的自我调节和自我供电输送。与昂贵 40 倍的 DLP 打印机相比,LCD 打印机在保真度和精度方面的差异极小,是制造微流体的廉价替代品。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Democratizing Access to Microfluidics: Rapid Prototyping of Open Microchannels with Low-Cost LCD 3D Printers

Microfluidics offer user-friendly liquid handling for a range of biochemical applications. 3D printing microfluidics is rapid and cost-effective compared to conventional cleanroom fabrication. Typically, microfluidics are 3D printed using digital light projection (DLP) stereolithography (SLA), but many models in use are expensive (≥$10,000 USD), limiting widespread use. Recent liquid crystal display (LCD) technology advancements have provided inexpensive (<$500 USD) SLA 3D printers with sufficient pixel resolution for microfluidic applications. However, there are only a few demonstrations of microfluidic fabrication, limited validation of print fidelity, and no direct comparisons between LCD and DLP printers. We compared a 40 μm pixel DLP printer (∼$18,000 USD) with a 34.4 μm pixel LCD printer (<$380 USD). Consistent with prior work, we observed linear trends between designed and measured channel widths ≥4 pixels on both printers, so we calculated accuracy above this size threshold. Using a standard IPA-wash resin and optimized parameters for each printer, the average error between designed and measured widths was 2.11 ± 1.26% with the DLP printer and 15.4 ± 2.57% with the 34.4 μm LCD printer. Printing with optimized conditions for a low-cost water-wash resin designed for LCD-SLA printers resulted in an average error of 2.53 ± 0.94% with the 34.4 μm LCD printer and 5.35 ± 4.49% with a 22 μm LCD printer. We characterized additional parameters including surface roughness, channel perpendicularity, and light intensity uniformity, and as an application of LCD-printed devices, we demonstrated consistent flow rates in capillaric circuits for self-regulated and self-powered delivery of multiple liquids. LCD printers are an inexpensive alternative for fabricating microfluidics, with minimal differences in fidelity and accuracy compared with a 40X more expensive DLP printer.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
4.30%
发文量
567
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信