Fused Deposition Modeling 3D Printing for (Bio)analytical Device Fabrication: Procedures, Materials, and Applications

Abstract

In this work, the use of fused deposition modeling (FDM) in a (bio)analytical/lab-on-a-chip research laboratory is described. First, the specifications of this 3D printing method that are important for the fabrication of (micro)devices were characterized for a benchtop FDM 3D printer. These include resolution, surface roughness, leakage, transparency, material deformation, and the possibilities for integration of other materials. Next, the autofluorescence, solvent compatibility, and biocompatibility of 12 representative FDM materials were tested and evaluated. Finally, we demonstrate the feasibility of FDM in a number of important applications. In particular, we consider the fabrication of fluidic channels, masters for polymer replication, and tools for the production of paper microfluidic devices. This work thus provides a guideline for (i) the use of FDM technology by addressing its possibilities and current limitations, (ii) material selection for FDM, based on solvent compatibility and biocompatibility, and (iii) application of FDM technology to (bio)analytical research by demonstrating a broad range of illustrative examples.

How to Formulate for Structure and Texture via Medium of Additive Manufacturing-A Review

“…To differentiate themselves, various manufacturers often use different acronyms for describing the same process, and, therefore, similar techniques might have different names [43]. These have all been previously compared and reviewed comprehensively [17,[44][45][46], and many of these techniques have been individually reviewed in high detail including powder-based electron beam additive manufacturing (EBAM) technology [47], and the Fused Filament Fabrication (FFF) process, also termed, Fused Deposition Modelling (FDM) [48,49].…”

3D Printed Lab-on-a-Chip Diagnostic Systems - Developing a Safe-by-Design Manufacturing Approach

“…smaller than 100 μm are needed, but is an appropriate technique when exact fluid control through channels of this size is not needed [39]. Kadimisetty et al [40] designed and manufactured a low cost and sensitive microfluidic immunosensor for multiple cancer protein detection, using a commercial FFF 3D printer and PLA filament.…”

“…To avoid problems of leakage that emerged, the influence of modifications on specific print settings was assessed. Increasing the infill density, as investigated in [39], was not evaluated, although being a straightforward method to diminish leakage potential, due to increased cost requirements. Print settings were optimized, so as to prevent leakages while minimally interfering with required geometry, to a 240 o C extrusion temperature, a 115 o C heating platform temperature, an extrusion speed of 60 mm/s, and a layer height of 0.16 mm.…”

Integrating Reactors and Catalysts through Three‐Dimensional Printing: Efficiency and Reusability of an Impregnated Palladium on Silica Monolith in Sonogashira and Suzuki Reactions

“…[22][23][24] Although 3D-printing is an inherently slow process, its greatest virtue is the application of prototyping processes and miniaturization: the modulation of the shape and size of monoliths with precision is made possible, including cross sections, pore size and wall thicknesses, thus maximizing the catalytic surface. [25,26] The main manufacturing techniques used by 3D-printing for the synthesis of monolithic catalysts include fused deposition modeling (FDM), [27] direct ink writing (robocasting) [28] and stereo-lithography (SLA). [29] Several groups recently described the use of 3D printing techniques and different strategies to obtain monolithic structures in which different metal species are immobilized.…”