Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-tnzcf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-12T05:20:23.677Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Numerical Simulations of Misalignment Effects in Microfluidic Interconnects

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 February 2011

Sudheer Rani,
Taehyun Park,
Byoung Hee You,
Steven Soper,
Michael C Murphy and
Dimitris E Nikitopoulos
Sudheer Rani
Affiliation:
srani1@tigers.lsu.edusudheerdrani@gmail.com, Louisiana State University, Mechanical Engineering, baton rouge, Louisiana, United States
Taehyun Park
Affiliation:
lsumems@gmail.com, Louisiana State University, Mechanical Engineering, baton rouge, Louisiana, United States
Byoung Hee You
Affiliation:
by12@txstate.edu, Texas State University, Engineering and Technology, San Marcos, Texas, United States
Steven Soper
Affiliation:
chsope@lsu.edu, Louisiana State University, Mechanical Engineering, baton rouge, Louisiana, United States
Michael C Murphy
Affiliation:
murphy@me.lsu.edu, Louisiana State University, Mechanical Engineering, baton rouge, Louisiana, United States
Dimitris E Nikitopoulos
Affiliation:
menikie@me.lsu.edu, Louisiana State University, Mechanical Engineering, baton rouge, Louisiana, United States
Get access

Abstract

Numerical simulations were performed to see the effect of geometrical misalignment in pressure driven flows. Geometric misalignment effects on flow characteristics arising in three types of interconnection methods a) end-to-end interconnection, b) channel overlap when chips are stacked on top of each other, and c) the misalignment occurring due to the offset between the external tubing and the reservoir were investigated. For the case of end-to-end interconnection, the effect of misalignment was investigated for 0, 13, 50, 58, and 75% reduction in the available flow area at the location of geometrical misalignment. In the interconnection through channel overlap, various possible misalignment configurations were simulated by maintaining the same amount of misalignment (75% flow area reduction) for all the configurations. The effect of misalignment in a Tube-in-Reservoir interconnection was investigated by positioning the tube at an offset of 164μm from the reservoir center. All the results were evaluated in terms of the equivalent length of a straight pipe. The effect of reynolds number (Re) was also taken into account by performing additional simulations of aforementioned cases at reynolds numbers ranging from 0.075 to 75. The results are interpreted in terms of equivalent length (Le) as a function of Re and misalignment area ratio (A1:A2), where A1 is the original cross-sectional area of the channel and A2 is the available flow area at mismatch location. Equivalent length calculations revealed that the effect of misalignment in tube-in-reservoir interconnection method was the most insignificant when compared to the other two methods of interconnection

Keywords

biological synthesis (assembly)fluidicsfluid

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

[1] Hashimoto, M., Barany, F., and Soper, S. A., “Polymerase chain reaction/ligase detection reaction/hybridization assays using flow-through microfluidic devices for the detection of low-abundant DNA point mutations,” Biosensors and Bioelectronics, vol. 21, pp. 1915–1923, 2006.Google Scholar
[2] Gonzalez, C., Collins, S. D., and Smith, R. L., “Fluidic interconnects for modular assembly of chemical microsystems,” Sensors and Actuators B: Chemical, vol. 49, pp. 40–45, 1998.Google Scholar
[3] Blankenstein, G. and Larsen, U. Darling, “Modular concept of a laboratory on a chip for chemical and biochemical analysis,” Biosensors and Bioelectronics, vol. 13, pp. 427–438, 1998.Google Scholar
[4] Hofmann, O., Niedermann, P., and Manz, A., “Modular approach to fabrication of threedimensional microchannel systems in PDMS—application to sheath flow microchips,” Lab Chip, vol. 1, pp. 108–114, 2001.Google Scholar
[5] Perozziello, G., Bundgaard, F., and Geschke, O., “Fluidic interconnections for microfluidic systems: A new integrated fluidic interconnection allowing plug‘n’play functionality,” Sensors and Actuators B: Chemical, vol. 130, pp. 947–953, 2008.Google Scholar
[6] Aniruddha, P. and Chong, H. A., “Self-aligning microfluidic interconnects for glass- and plastic-based microfluidic systems,” Journal of Micromechanics and Microengineering, vol. 12, p. 35, 2002.Google Scholar
[7] Rani, S. D., Soper, S. A., Nikitopoulos, D. E., and Murphy, C. M., “Simulation of Electroosmotic and Pressure Driven flows in Microfluidic Interconnects,” in ASME Conference Proceedings (IMECE 2006),Paper no: IMECE2006-15388, 459–465, Chicago, Illinois, 2006, pp. 459–465.Google Scholar
[8] You, H. B., chen, C. P., Guy, W. J., Datta, P., Nikitopoulos, D. E., Soper, S. A., and Murphy, M. C., “Passive Alignment Structures in Modular, Polymer Microfluidic Devices,” in IMECE, 2006.Google Scholar
[9] Abdelall, F. F., Hahn, G., Ghiaasiaan, S. M., Abdel-Khalik, S. I., Jeter, S. S., Yoda, M., and Sadowski, D. L., “Pressure drop caused by abrupt flow area changes in small channels,” Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science, vol. 29, pp. 425–434, 2005.Google Scholar