Democratizing access to microfluidics: Rapid prototyping of open microchannels with low-cost LCD 3D printers

Abstract

Microfluidics offer user-friendly liquid handling for a range of biochemical applications. 3D printing microfluidics is rapid and cost-effective compared to conventional cleanroom fabrication. Typically, microfluidics are 3D printed using digital light projection (DLP) stereolithography (SLA), but many models in use are expensive ([≥]$10,000 USD), limiting widespread use. Recent liquid crystal display (LCD) technology advancements have provided inexpensive (<$500) SLA 3D printers with sufficient pixel resolution for microfluidic applications. However, there are only a few demonstrations of microfluidic fabrication, limited validation of print fidelity, and no direct comparisons between LCD and DLP printers. We compared a 40 {micro}m pixel resolution DLP printer ([~]$18,000 USD) with a 34.4 {micro}m (<$380) LCD-SLA printer. Consistent with prior work, we observed linear trends between designed and measured channel widths [≥] 4 pixels on both printers, so we calculated accuracy above this size threshold. Using a standard IPA wash resin and optimized parameters for each printer, the average error between designed and measured widths was 2.11 {+/-} 1.26% with the DLP printer and 15.4 {+/-} 2.57% with the 34.4 {micro}m LCD printer. The average coefficient of variation [CV] was [~]2% for both printers. Printing with optimized conditions for a low-cost water wash resin designed for LCD-SLA printers resulted in an average error of 2.53 {+/-} 0.94% with the 34.4 {micro}m LCD printer and 5.35 {+/-} 4.49% with a 22 {micro}m LCD printer. We characterized additional parameters including surface roughness, channel perpendicularity, and light intensity uniformity, and as an application of LCD-printed devices, we demonstrated consistent flow rates in capillaric circuits for self-regulated and self-powered delivery of multiple liquids. In conclusion, LCD printers are an inexpensive alternative for fabricating microfluidics, with minimal differences in fidelity and accuracy compared with a 20X more expensive DLP printer.