4.6 Article

Rapid Fabrication of Poly(methyl methacrylate) Devices for Lab-on-a-Chip Applications Using Acetic Acid and UV Treatment

期刊

ACS OMEGA
卷 5, 期 28, 页码 17396-17404

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acsomega.0c01770

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) - Korea government (MSIT) [NRF-2020R1A2B5B01001971]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In the present study, we introduce a new approach for rapid bonding of poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA)-based microdevices using an acetic acid solvent with the assistance of UV irradiation. For the anticipated mechanism, acetic acid and UV irradiation induced free radicals on the PMMA surfaces, and acrylate monomers subsequently formed cross-links to create a permanent bonding between the PMMA substrates. PMMA devices effectively bonded within 30 s at a low pressure using clamps, and a clogging-free microchannel was achieved with the optimized 50% acetic acid. For surface characterizations, contact angle measurements and bonding performance analyses were conducted using predetermined acetic acid concentrations to optimize bonding conditions. In addition, the highest bond strength of bonded PMMA was approximately 11.75 MPa, which has not been reported before in the bonding of PMMA. A leak test was performed over 180 h to assess the robustness of the proposed method. Moreover, to promote the applicability of this bonding method, we tested two kinds of microfluidic device applications, including a cell culture-based device and a metal microelectrode-integrated device. The results showed that the cell culture-based application was highly biocompatible with the PMIVIA microdevices fabricated using an acetic acid solvent. Moreover, the low pressure required during the bonding process supported the integration of metal microelectrodes with the PMMA microdevice without any damage to the metal films. This novel bonding method holds great potential in the ecofriendly and rapid fabrication of microfluidic devices using PMMA.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据