4.7 Article

A theoretical framework to determine the optimal centrifugation angle for separation of plasma from blood samples

Journal

SENSORS AND ACTUATORS A-PHYSICAL
Volume 353, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.sna.2023.114234

Keywords

Blood plasma separation; Centrifugation; Boycott effect

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The separation of blood plasma by centrifugation can be accelerated by tilting the sample relative to the direction of the centrifugal force. This is due to the Boycott effect and buoyancy-induced convection, resulting in enhanced sedimentation of red blood cells. Flow instability invalidates the traditional predictive model, but our new model accounts for these factors and predicts the optimal tilt angle for highest separation efficiency. Experimental data confirms the accuracy of our theoretical prediction, and sensitivity analysis investigates the influence of blood sample variation on physical parameters.
The separation of blood plasma by centrifugation can be accelerated by placement of the sample at an angle relative to the direction of the centrifugal force. This geometric effect, which has been known for a century, is due to the Boycott effect, while the enhanced sedimentation of red blood cells (RBCs) in tilted vessels can be attributed to buoyancy-induced convection. Moreover, flow instability would invalidate the traditional predictive model and weaken separation enhancement. While current model considers only the geometric effect, by considering the buoyancy-induced convection and flow instability, we devise a model for the first time enabling the prediction of the optimal tilt angle to achieve the highest separation efficiency. A comparison of our theoretical prediction with the available experimental data shows good agreement. A sensitivity analysis is also conducted to investigate the influence of variation in blood samples on the physical parameters.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available