4.6 Article

Thermoplastic building blocks for the fabrication of microfluidic masters

Journal

RSC ADVANCES
Volume 5, Issue 119, Pages 97934-97943

Publisher

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c5ra22742a

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Department of Chemistry
  2. Nebraska Center for Materials and Nano Science (NCMN), at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln
  3. University of Nebraska-Lincoln
  4. Nebraska University Research Council - Layman Fund
  5. NSF through the Nebraska EPSCoR FIRST Award program [EPS-1004094]
  6. 3M through a Non-tenured Faculty Award

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Microfluidic channels are typically fabricated in polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) using a combination of photolithography and soft lithography. Photolithography, while ubiquitous in the fabrication of microfluidic devices, generally requires skilled technicians, expensive chemicals, and specialized equipment. This manuscript describes a simple method for the fabrication of masters for use in soft lithography that is based on combining thermoplastic building blocks using thermal welding. This approach is applicable to the fabrication of an array of devices that possess many of the basic functionalities (e.g., droplet generation, mixing, and splitting) required in microfluidics. In addition to these systems, which are routinely fabricated using photolithographically produced masters, this manuscript describes how thermoplastic building blocks can be stacked, assembled, and replicated to fabricate microfluidic devices with channel crossings and/or channels of variable cross-sectional height-geometries that normally require multiple steps of photolithography. The methods described here enable a range of scientists of varying expertise to prototype a variety of functional microfluidic devices easily and rapidly, even when access to traditional fabrication techniques or time is limited, or when an optimized design is not available.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available