A simple and low-cost chip bonding solution for high pressure, high temperature and biological applications

Serra, Marco; Pereiro, Iago; Yamada, Ayako; Viovy, Jean‐Louis; Descroix, Stéphanie; Ferraro, Davide

doi:10.1039/c6lc01319h

Cited by 48 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These nanometric rugosities indicate that the roughness of tape does not have any effect on the flow profile and particle focusing. Although optically transparent, the optical characteristics of the PMMA sheet (2-mm-thick) and adhesive tape were evaluated to identify the possibility of accurate fluorescence imaging 47 . Hence, the UV-visible absorbance spectra for a wide range of wavelengths (i.e., from 200 to 1100 nm) were recorded via a spectrophotometer (Cary 60 VU-Vis spectrophotometer, Agilent Technologies).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

3D Printing of Inertial Microfluidic Devices

Bazaz

Rouhi

Raoufi

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

143

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Inertial microfluidics has been broadly investigated, resulting in the development of various applications, mainly for particle or cell separation. Lateral migrations of these particles within a microchannel strictly depend on the channel design and its cross-section. Nonetheless, the fabrication of these microchannels is a continuous challenging issue for the microfluidic community, where the most studied channel cross-sections are limited to only rectangular and more recently trapezoidal microchannels. As a result, a huge amount of potential remains intact for other geometries with cross-sections difficult to fabricate with standard microfabrication techniques. In this study, by leveraging on benefits of additive manufacturing, we have proposed a new method for the fabrication of inertial microfluidic devices. In our proposed workflow, parts are first printed via a high-resolution DLP/SLA 3D printer and then bonded to a transparent PMMA sheet using a double-coated pressure-sensitive adhesive tape. Using this method, we have fabricated and tested a plethora of existing inertial microfluidic devices, whether in a single or multiplexed manner, such as straight, spiral, serpentine, curvilinear, and contraction-expansion arrays. Our characterizations using both particles and cells revealed that the produced chips could withstand a pressure up to 150 psi with minimum interference of the tape to the total functionality of the device and viability of cells. As a showcase of the versatility of our method, we have proposed a new spiral microchannel with right-angled triangular cross-section which is technically impossible to fabricate using the standard lithography. We are of the opinion that the method proposed in this study will open the door for more complex geometries with the bespoke passive internal flow. Furthermore, the proposed fabrication workflow can be adopted at the production level, enabling large-scale manufacturing of inertial microfluidic devices.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

3D Printing of Inertial Microfluidic Devices

Bazaz

Rouhi

Raoufi

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

143

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Devices produced using a polymer:curing agent ratios of 15:1 were used for tissue culture after a 5 mm × 3 mm opening was made into the top compartment with a scalpel for later tissue insertion, which was closed with pressure-sensitive adhesive tape (plate sealer tape, Thermo Scientific, USA) 47 . Another device, containing a square chamber (3 mm long, 3 mm wide, and 1 mm high), linked to two inlet and outlet channels (2 mm long, Figure 2.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Culture medium, as previously utilized, consisted of Minimum essential medium (Sigma-Aldrich, USA) supplemented with 4.2 µg ml −1 insulin, 3.8 µg ml −1 transferrin, 5 ng ml −1 selenium, 2 mM L-glutamine, 100 µg ml −1 penicillin G sodium and streptomycin sulfate, 0.05 mM ascorbic acid, 1 mg ml −1 polyvinyl alcohol, and 10 ng ml −1 follicle stimulating hormone (FSH, porcine-derived, Vetoquinol, USA). The open top of the devices was sealed using PCR plate sealer (Thermo Scientific, USA) to prevent leakage after tissue insertion 47 . Tissues (two pieces/ individual) were also statically cultured outside the microfluidics devices, either submerged in 500 µl culture medium in a 4-well petri dish or incubated on top of a 1.5% agarose gel block which was partially submerged in culture medium, as previously utilized for domestic cat ovarian tissue culture 45 .…”

Section: Gc-ms and Lc-ms/ms Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

3D printed mold leachates in PDMS microfluidic devices

Ferraz

Nagashima

Venzac

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The introduction of poly(dimethylsiloxane) (PDMS) and soft lithography in the 90's has revolutionized the field of microfluidics by almost eliminating the need for a clean-room environment for device fabrication. More recently, 3D printing has been introduced to fabricate molds for soft lithography, the only step for which a clean-room environment is still often necessary, to further support the rapid prototyping of PDMS microfluidic devices. However, toxicity of most of the commercial 3D printing resins has been established, and little is known regarding the potential for 3D printed molds to leak components into the PDMS that would, in turn, hamper cells and/or tissues cultured in the devices. In the present study, we investigated if 3D printed molds produced by stereolithography can leach components into PDMS, and compared 3D printed molds to their more conventional SU-8 counterparts. Different leachates were detected in aqueous solutions incubated in the resulting PDMS devices prepared from widely used PDMS pre-polymer:curing agent ratios (10:1, 15:1 and 20:1), and these leachates were identified as originating from resins and catalyst substances. Next, we explored the possibility to culture cells and tissues in these PDMS devices produced from 3D printed molds and after proper device washing and conditioning. Importantly, we demonstrated that the resulting PDMS devices supported physiological cultures of HeLa cells and ovarian tissues in vitro, with superior outcomes than static conventional cultures. Organ-on-a-chip models, by providing an in vivo-like environment, show great potential to advance our understanding of tissue development, physiology, and pathology 1. However, the spread of these highly promising platforms out of specialized microfluidic laboratories is hindered by essential technical challenges. The fabrication of these devices requires having access to dedicated infrastructure such as clean-room facilities with specialized equipment, which is absent in most biological laboratories 1. Novel fabrication processes have been developed to support the rapid prototyping of microfluidic devices, including soft-lithography using PDMS (polydimethylsiloxane) 2,3. PDMS is a transparent, flexible, gas-permeable, fairly inexpensive and rapidly prototyped elastomeric material, which has now become ubiquitous in the field of microfluidics 2,3. PDMS devices are commonly fabricated using molds based on SU-8 (Microchem Corp.), which is a negative epoxy-based photoresist 4. However, the fabrication of SU-8 molds uses lithography and includes multiple steps, it altogether takes several hours per fabrication cycle, and still requires dedicated training and access to a clean-room facility 5,6. As a new revolution in the field of microfluidics, 3D printing has more recently been introduced 7. Initially the use of 3D printing was limited by the price of the printers, their low resolution, the roughness of the 3D printed structures, and the toxicity of the resins 8-10. Photopolymerization-based techniques, such as dig...

show abstract

“…This second method significantly increases the variety of materials that can be employed as adhesives are able to hold together most materials. While adhesive bonding is a significant enabling method, devices that employ adhesive bonding traditionally struggle to maintain high pressures (beyond 5 bar), and can be prone to uneven bonding and channel heights [19]. In some cases, the pressure that can be sustained by adhesive-bonded devices can be increased.…”

Section: Laminatesmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Review of Current Methods in Microfluidic Device Fabrication and Future Commercialization Prospects

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Microfluidic devices currently play an important role in many biological, chemical, and engineering applications, and there are many ways to fabricate the necessary channel and feature dimensions. In this review, we provide an overview of microfabrication techniques that are relevant to both research and commercial use. A special emphasis on both the most practical and the recently developed methods for microfluidic device fabrication is applied, and it leads us to specifically address laminate, molding, 3D printing, and high resolution nanofabrication techniques. The methods are compared for their relative costs and benefits, with special attention paid to the commercialization prospects of the various technologies.

show abstract

A simple and low-cost chip bonding solution for high pressure, high temperature and biological applications

Abstract: An adhesive-based strategy for the low-cost and reversible sealing of a wide range of materials used in microfluidics, requiring only the application of manually-achievable pressures.

Cited by 48 publications

References 35 publications

3D Printing of Inertial Microfluidic Devices

3D Printing of Inertial Microfluidic Devices

3D printed mold leachates in PDMS microfluidic devices

A Review of Current Methods in Microfluidic Device Fabrication and Future Commercialization Prospects

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About