TY - JOUR
T1 - Polymer microchannel and micromold surface polishing for rapid, low-quantity polydimethylsiloxane and thermoplastic microfluidic device fabrication
AU - Tsao, Chia Wen
AU - Wu, Zheng Kun
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
PY - 2020/11
Y1 - 2020/11
N2 - Polymer-based micromolding has been proposed as an alternative to SU-8 micromolding for microfluidic chip fabrication. However, surface defects such as milling marks may result in rough microchannels and micromolds, limiting microfluidic device performance. Therefore, we use chemical and mechanical methods for polishing polymer microchannels and micromolds. In addition, we evaluated their performance in terms of removing the machining (milling) marks on polymer microchannel and micromold surfaces. For chemical polishing, we use solvent evaporation to polish the sample surfaces. For mechanical polishing, wool felt polishing bits with an abrasive agent were employed to polish the sample surfaces. Chemical polishing reduced surface roughness from 0.38 µm (0 min, after milling) to 0.13 µm after 6 min of evaporation time. Mechanical polishing reduced surface roughness from 0.38 to 0.165 µm (optimal pressing length: 0.3 mm). As polishing causes abrasion, we evaluated sample geometry loss after polishing. Mechanically and chemically polished micromolds had optimal micromold distortion percentages of 1.01% ± 0.76% and 1.10% ± 0.80%, respectively. Compared to chemical polishing, mechanical polishing could better maintain the geometric integrity since it is locally polished by computer numerical control (CNC) miller. Using these surface polishing methods with optimized parameters, polymer micromolds and microchannels can be rapidly produced for polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) casting and thermoplastic hot embossing. In addition, low-quantity (15 times) polymer microchannel replication is demonstrated in this paper.
AB - Polymer-based micromolding has been proposed as an alternative to SU-8 micromolding for microfluidic chip fabrication. However, surface defects such as milling marks may result in rough microchannels and micromolds, limiting microfluidic device performance. Therefore, we use chemical and mechanical methods for polishing polymer microchannels and micromolds. In addition, we evaluated their performance in terms of removing the machining (milling) marks on polymer microchannel and micromold surfaces. For chemical polishing, we use solvent evaporation to polish the sample surfaces. For mechanical polishing, wool felt polishing bits with an abrasive agent were employed to polish the sample surfaces. Chemical polishing reduced surface roughness from 0.38 µm (0 min, after milling) to 0.13 µm after 6 min of evaporation time. Mechanical polishing reduced surface roughness from 0.38 to 0.165 µm (optimal pressing length: 0.3 mm). As polishing causes abrasion, we evaluated sample geometry loss after polishing. Mechanically and chemically polished micromolds had optimal micromold distortion percentages of 1.01% ± 0.76% and 1.10% ± 0.80%, respectively. Compared to chemical polishing, mechanical polishing could better maintain the geometric integrity since it is locally polished by computer numerical control (CNC) miller. Using these surface polishing methods with optimized parameters, polymer micromolds and microchannels can be rapidly produced for polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) casting and thermoplastic hot embossing. In addition, low-quantity (15 times) polymer microchannel replication is demonstrated in this paper.
KW - Microchannel
KW - Micromilling
KW - Micromold
KW - PDMS casting
KW - Polymer microfabrication
KW - Polymer microfluidics
KW - Polymer polishing
KW - Thermoplastic hot embossing
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85095110206&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3390/polym12112574
DO - 10.3390/polym12112574
M3 - 期刊論文
AN - SCOPUS:85095110206
SN - 2073-4360
VL - 12
SP - 1
EP - 15
JO - Polymers
JF - Polymers
IS - 11
M1 - 2574
ER -