1. 1 | P a g e
` Faculty of Engineering and Materials Science
Mechatronics Engineering Department
German University in Cairo
Production and Characterization of helical
Micro Robots
Bachelor Thesis
Author: Mostafa Badr Elshaboury .
Supervisor: Dr. Anke Klingner .
2. 2 | P a g e
This is to certify that:
(i) The thesis comprises only my original work towards the Bachelor Degree
(ii) Due acknowledgement has been made in the text to all other material used
____________________________
Mostafa Badr Elshaboury
3. 3 | P a g e
Acknowledgment
First of all, I would like to thank Dr. Anke Klinger and Dr Islam Khalil for providing me a wealth
of information in every aspect of my thesis. I also would like to thank my family and friends for
their support to me and to my thoughts.
4. 4 | P a g e
Abstract
The presences of medical robots have caused what is called minimally invasive surgery (MIS),
enables the surgeons to operate inside the human body without making large incisions ,but what
is less invasive is the medical micro robots These new surgical tools capable of entering the human
body through natural orifices or very small incisions and delivering drugs, performing diagnostic
procedures, and even excising and repairing tissue that can be developed.The purpose of this
project is to apply new ways for the production of helical micro robots using different chemicals
with their cross linked solutions, there are different methods for the production of helical micro
robots like Self-Crimping Bi component Nanofibers Electrospunfrom Polyacrylonitrile and
Elastomeric Polyurethane and Electrospinning with Tip Collector, in this experiment a 3wt%
chitosan was used and, where the a solution is added to a syringe, the syringe is fixed in a syringe
pump a flow rate of 6 ml/min was used the syringe pump is fixed at a maximum height of 50 cm
above a container the height is variable it can be changed as the height changes the size and the
shape of the helical structure will change, the container contains 10 wt% sodium hydroxide
solution , helical structures are formed when the solution in the syringe pump drops with a flow
rate higher than or equal 6ml/mm different shapes and sizes appear due to changing of any of this
parameters ,first is the speed of the container second the height of the syringe pump from container
the third parameter is the flow rate at which the flow of the solution come out .
5. 5 | P a g e
Contents
Chapter 1.......................................................................................................................................................7
Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................8
1.1 Motivation and objectives ..................................................................................................................8
Chapter 2.......................................................................................................................................................9
Literature Review about Medical robots......................................................................................................9
2.1.1 History of Medical robots ................................................................................................................9
The DaVinci Robotic Surgical System..................................................................................................10
Minimally Invasive Prostate Surgery and Robotics.............................................................................11
2.2 Medical Micro Robots.......................................................................................................................11
2.2.1 Magnetic Medical Micro Robots................................................................................................12
2.2.2 Helical Micro Robots..................................................................................................................13
2.2.3 Production of Helical Micro Robots...........................................................................................14
Chapter 3.....................................................................................................................................................15
3. Construction of Experimental setup.......................................................................................................15
3.1 Motion stage.....................................................................................................................................15
3.1.2 Motion stage code .....................................................................................................................17
3.2 Syringe pump Holder ........................................................................................................................18
3.2.1 Designs for the syringe pump holder.........................................................................................19
3.2.2 Execution of the design..............................................................................................................21
3.3 Chemicals and container design. ......................................................................................................24
3.3.1 Chemicals preparation...............................................................................................................24
3.3. Container design..............................................................................................................................26
3.4 Experimenting...................................................................................................................................26
Chapter 4.....................................................................................................................................................27
4. Results & discussion................................................................................................................................27
4.1 production.........................................................................................................................................27
4.2 Magnetic behavior............................................................................................................................29
Chapter 5.....................................................................................................................................................31
5. Conclusion...............................................................................................................................................31
Chapter 6.....................................................................................................................................................32
6. Future studies .........................................................................................................................................32
6. 6 | P a g e
6.1 Motion stage.....................................................................................................................................32
syringe pump ..........................................................................................................................................33
Appendix .....................................................................................................................................................33
References` .................................................................................................................................................33
8. 8 | P a g e
Chapter 1
Introduction
1.1 Motivation and objectives
Major change in surgery has occurred in the last 25 years, endoscopic surgery has revolutionized
medicine by enabling surgeons to operate inside the human body without making large incisions
(Morgenstern, 2008). Endoscopic surgery, also called minimally invasive surgery (MIS), has the
advantage over open surgery that only small incisions have to be made. Small incisions reduce
patient’s trauma, hospitalization and recovery time. Over the years many techniques of MIS have
evolved. Surgical robots were developed which give the surgeon the ability to operate via small
incisions on the patient. A disadvantage of medical robots and flexible needles is that certain hard
to reach areas within the human body are not accessible. This limitation is overcome by using
micro robots as medical instrument. The use of micro robots as surgical instrument is still in an
early conceptual stage Lot of research work on micro robots for medical application has been
continuing towards the ongoing efforts to decrease damage to human body during an operation
and to reduce operation time. The human body houses a complex of twisted pathways, labyrinths
of tunnels unimaginably small. The biological systems responsible for the flow of the blood,
oxygen, and electrical impulses that sustain us are intricate and delicately coordinated. And so,
when these systems go wrong our bodies are vulnerable to diseases, like cancer it would seem
better if there is a medicine that would target specifically this cancer cells rather than subjecting
the whole body to toxic chemotherapy drugs that the whole body will suffer from it’s side effects.
Consider swallowing a device that could travel through your body, looking for signs of irritation
and illness that’s why it seems like the next step in the evolution of medical procedures will be
9. 9 | P a g e
from minimally invasive approaches towards extremely targeted, localized and high precision end
luminal techniques performed by untethered micro robots. These new surgical tools capable of
entering the human body through natural orifices or very small incisions and delivering drugs,
performing diagnostic procedures, and even excising and repairing tissue will be developed. This
new technology doesn’t only provide us with a better way in providing treatment, less trauma to
the patient and faster recovery times, but will also enable new therapies that have yet been
conceived.
Chapter 2
Literature Review about Medical robots
2.1.1 History of Medical robots
Figure 2.1, The Davinci surgical robot[1]
The first robotic system applied in a surgical procedure was the PUMA 560, used to orient a needle
for a brain biopsy under computerized tomography guidance.[2]
However, its use was discontinued
10. 10 | P a g e
because of safety issues. Later, a London group presented a robotic system called the PROBOT,
used to aid in transurethral resection of the prostate.[3]
Following the same tendency, in 1992,
International Business Machines (IBM) and associates developed a prototype for orthopedic
surgery. The ROBODOC was used to assist surgeons in milling out a hole in the femur for total
hip replacements.[4]
A new era was beginning, and the concept of telepresence technology, that would allow the
surgeon to operate at a distance from the operating room, was being intensively researched
simultaneously at the Stanford Research Institute, Department of Defense, and the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).[5]
The initial purpose was to create a prototype to
suit the needs of the military, and the robotic arms were designed to be mounted on an armored
vehicle to provide immediate operative care in the battlefield. Soon thereafter, Intuitive Surgical
acquired the prototype and commercialized the system called daVinci. At the same time, Computer
Motion unveiled the first laparoscopic camera holder, Automated Endoscopic System for Optimal
Positioning (AESOP). Computer Motion later created the Zeus surgical system, which is an
integrated robotic system.[5]
In March 2003, a fusion of both companies was announced under the
name of Intuitive Surgical Inc.
The DaVinci Robotic Surgical System
The daVinci system's main components are: a control console that is controlled by the surgeon ,
and the surgical cart that consists of three or four arms (Figure 2.1.1) with a laparoscope and two
or three surgical tools. The arms can be operated by the manipulation of two master controls on
the surgeon's console. Tremor filtering, movement scaling, increased range of motion and
ergonomic are advantages that can be achieved with the use of this system. No measurable delay
has been noticed between the movement of the surgeon's controls and instruments response. The
instruments used in the daVinci system allow the surgeon to roll, pitch, yaw and grip the
laparoscopic tools using seven degrees of freedom. The imaging system consists of two
independent cameras in the dual-channel endoscopes that are fused, providing the surgeon with a
11. 11 | P a g e
3D magnified image of the operative field. After its first use in late 1990s, the daVinci system has
been gaining an increased popularity and is now being used in many different fields of medicine,
such as cardiothoracic surgery, general surgery, gynecology and finally urology.
Minimally Invasive Prostate Surgery and Robotics
The concept of a laparoscopic approach to the treatment of prostate cancer is not new. In the early
1990s Schuessler et al.[6]
described the laparoscopic pelvic lymph node dissection. Later, in 1992,
Kavoussi and Clayman joined this group to describe their first successful laparoscopic radical
prostatectomy (LRP).[7]
The early results were less than promising, with prolonged operative times
and no major advantages over conventional surgery.[8]
However, in the late 1990s the procedure
was revived as European surgeon's re-evaluated LRP and reported feasibility with results
comparable with the open surgical approach.[9
-14]
Despite this, a lack of widespread acceptance
and utilisation of LRP has been observed, partly because of the steep learning curve of this
procedure. Even in the hands of experienced laparoscopic surgeons the technical challenges
imposed by the limitations of conventional laparoscopic instrumentation are formidable.Menon,
Guillonneau and Vallancien developed the robotic prostatectomy at Henry Ford Hospital in
2000.[15]
Since that time we have seen a tremendous growth in adoption of the procedure. In the
calendar year 2004 approximately 8500 cases were performed robotically and in 2005 the
projection is 18,000 (personal communication with Intuitive Surgical). Therefore, in 2005 it is
projected that 25% of all prostatectomies will be performed robotically. Worldwide over 30,000
robotic prostatectomies have been performed. While the growth in adoption of this procedure has
been rapid the procedure itself is still quite young and in the process of evolution. The long-term
results are still to be determined but early results for functional and oncological outcomes are
promising.
2.2 Medical Micro Robots
12. 12 | P a g e
2.2.1 Magnetic Medical Micro Robots
Figure 2.2, [16], Illustration on how bots move in the artery
On October night 2006 a hospital technician in Montreal slid the limp body of an anesthetized pig
into the tube of a magnetic resonance imaging machine, or MRI. A catheter extended from a large
blood vessel below its neck a carotid artery. Into the catheter, a surgeon injected a steel bead
slightly larger than the ball of a ballpoint pen.
Sylvain Martel received the Ph.D. degree in Electrical Engineering from McGill University,
Institute of Biomedical Engineering, Montréal, Canada, in 1997[17]
and an engineering graduate
student were testing a program designed to manipulate the machine’s magnetic forces, which
would guide the bead like a remote-controlled submarine, On a computer screen, the bead appeared
as a square white tracking icon perched on the gray, wormlike image of the scanned artery. They
stared at the square and waited there was Nothing. Seconds later and still the bead refused to budge,
then suddenly the bead was moving up and down the artery, tagging every waypoint they had
plotted.
13. 13 | P a g e
That was the first time anyone had steered an object wirelessly through the blood vessel of a living
creature. The experiment convinced them that they could engineer miniature machines to navigate
the vast circulatory system of the human body. The micro robots would be able to travel deep
inside the body, cruising our tiniest blood vessels to places that catheters can’t go and performing
tasks that would be impossible without invasive procedures.
It’s easy to imagine many such tasks delicate surgeries, diagnostic tests, and the installation of
stents and other artificial structures.
Today’s cancer drugs work by circulating throughout the body, killing healthy cells along with
cancerous ones. Even antibody-equipped drugs designed to target cancer cells don’t always hit
their marks. Injecting drugs into a tumor is out of the question because the pressure would cause
cells to spew from it like a volcano, spreading the disease elsewhere. So why not deploy robots to
deliver the medicine? Medical micro robots have the potential to revolutionize minimally invasive
medical tasks, such as targeted therapy, material ablation, and telemetry, particularly for difficult-
to-reach locations inside the human body [18]
. Key technological hurdles which must be overcome
include the development of methods for delivering energy to micro robots and the development of
propulsive techniques. Among various approaches for powering wirelessly controlled micro
robots, magnetic field actuation is promising for in vivo [19]
applications, because magnetic fields
are harmless to living cells and biological tissue. In the development of locomotion, nature
provides guidance.
2.2.2 Helical Micro Robots
Figure 2.3, [19], Bacterial flagella
14. 14 | P a g e
Inspired by the design of bacterial flagella, helical swimming microrobots with comparable
dimensions to their natural counterparts have been recently developed in Nelson's group at ETH
Zurich [21]
. The first generation of helical swimming microrobots, artificial bacterial flagella
(ABFs), were fabricated using self-scrolling techniques and consist of soft-magnetic thin-square-
plate “heads” and helical nanoribbon “tails” [22]
. A uniform low-strength (2 mT) rotating magnetic
field generated by a three-axis orthogonal Helmholtz coil system actuates the ABFs in water. The
magnetic-torque-driven ABFs swim with corkscrew motion and can be navigated in 3D with all
six degrees-of-freedom., when the magnetic helical devices are scaled to the micro scale,
magnetic-torque-driven helical devices exhibit higher swimming performance than direct pulling
using magnetic field gradients, assuming the same limitation of the electromagnetic-coil system[21]
, These ABFs provided an alternative micromanipulation tool for manipulating cellular or
subcellular objects with or without a physical contact[21] and [24]
. Furthermore, since the propulsion
matrix that serves as a swimming model can be estimated experimentally[25]
, manipulation with a
controlled force or torque can be applied.
2.2.3 Production of Helical Micro Robots
Figure 2.4, Liquid rope coiling [26]
there are different methods for the production of helical micro robots like Self-Crimping Bi component
Nanofibers Electrospunfrom Polyacrylonitrile and Elastomeric Polyurethane and Electrospinning with Tip
15. 15 | P a g e
Collector, in This helical structures are produced using the mechanism of periodic buckling ,this usually
occurs when a thin stream of viscous fluid poured in to surface from a certain height as a result the viscous
stream transforms in to helical, this mechanical phenomena has been studied in detail theoretically and
experimentally[27][28]
, liquid rope coiling process occurs due to the completion between the axial
compression and bending , the liquid robe coiling process is highly influenced by the liquid density
,viscosity, flow rate, gravity , rope size and height [27]
. The periodic coiling of viscous stream has been used
in different areas like food processing polymer processing and geo physics, etc.[29]
Chapter 3
3. Construction of Experimental setup
3.1 Motion stage
Figure 3.1, [30], Linear motion stage
16. 16 | P a g e
The motion stage is very essential part for this experiment because the container in which the cross
linker solution rests will be fixed on the motion stage and in order to control the speed at which
the container moves.
A motion stage from the MNR lab was used the type of motor used in the motion stage is a stepper
motor.
Stepper motors are different from ordinary DC motors in at least four important ways.
The first difference you notice is that they have no brushes or commutator (the parts of a DC motor
that reverse the electrical current and keep the rotor—the rotating part of a motor—constantly
turning in the same direction). In other words, stepper motors are examples of what we call
brushless motors. (You'll also find brushless motors in many electric vehicles, hidden away in the
wheel hubs; used in that way, they're called hub motors.)
The second major difference is in what rotates. Remember that in a basic DC motor, there is an
outer permanent magnet or magnets that stays static, known as the stator, and an inner coil or coils
of wire that rotates inside it, which is the rotor. In a brushless hub-motor, the coils of wire are static
in the center and the permanent magnets spin around them on the outside. A stepper motor is
different again. This time, the permanent magnets are on the inside and rotate (making up the
rotor), while the coils are on the outside and stay static (making up the stator).
The third big difference between an ordinary DC motor and a stepper motor is in the design of the
stator and the rotor. Instead of one large magnet on the outside (the stator) and one large coil
rotating inside it (the rotor), a stepper motor has an inner magnet effectively divided up into many
separate sections, which look like teeth on a gear wheel. The outer coils have corresponding teeth
that provide magnetic impulses, attracting, repelling, and making the teeth of the inner wheel rotate
by small steps. This will become clear in a moment when we look at some pictures.
The final difference is that a stepper motor can stay still, in a certain position, once it's rotated
through a particular angle. That's obviously crucially important if you want a motor to power
something like a robot arm, which might have to rotate a certain amount and then remain in
precisely that spot while another part of the robot does something else. This feature is sometimes
17. 17 | P a g e
called holding torque (torque is the rotary force something has, so "holding torque" simply means
a stepping motor's ability to stay still). In order to make the stepper motor work like a DC Motor
Arduino controller and a bipolar stepper motor driver (FIPSD3.5M) were used, driving stepper
motor is common necessity in most robotic projects. A stepper motor is a brushless, synchronous
electric motor that can drive a full rotation into a large number of steps. Stepper motor is ideally
suited for precision control. This motor can operate in forward/reverse with controllable speed
from a microcontroller through a driver circuit (FIPSD3.5M).
Figure 3.2, [31], FIPSD3.5M stepper motor driver
FIPSD3.5M step motor driver is a step and direction driver with micro-step capability.FIPSD3.5M
can drive up to 3.5 ampere per phase with 4 level selected phase current from 20% to 100% via
DIP switch. Full-step, half-step, micro-step resolution is also switch selectable. One of the most
important features of the driver is controlling the holding current as a percent of the nominal
operating current to overcome excessive motor and driver heating. This drive is compatible with
any micro-based control system or any breakout board.
Arduino controller is used to control the inputs given to the stepper motor driver.
3.1.2 Motion stage code
18. 18 | P a g e
The code should control the motion stage forth and backwards.
The first three lines in the code are defining the pins from which the output from the Arduino is
taken, meaning that pin 11 will be the enable pin in the stepper motor driver, pin 10 is the direction
pin and pin 9 is the clock pin.
In line 4 and 5 delay time and move time are defined , delay time is the speed of the motor and
move time is the distance it covers the higher value of delay time the lower speed the motion stage
will move and the higher value of move time the longer the distance it covers.
Move time = specified no / delay time.
Then pins 9, 10, 11 are defined as output pins.
A constant a is defined in order to reverse the direction of the motion stage if a =0 then motor
rotates clock wise if a =1 then motor rotates anti clock wise.
The void loop repeats the code.
The clock controls the speed of the motor because the time between the rising edge and the falling
edge of the clock is the delay time, so the more a signal is delayed the lower the speed.
3.2 Syringe pump Holder
19. 19 | P a g e
Figure 3.3, Syringe pump
The purpose of this holder is to fix the syringe pump (figure3.3) above the container and to change the
height and to study the results, Height is very important in this experiment because it is one of the
parameters in this experiment changing in height can lead to different results, the maximum height we
need to obtain from the container to the syringe pump is 50 cm.
3.2.1 Designs for the syringe pump holder
Figure 3.4, Design 1 of syringe pump holder
This design was made on solid works, its maximum height is 50 cm, the problem with this design
is that the pump can be only fixed on certain heights and each height is 5 cm away from the one
above it or below it.
The problem with this design is:
1- It doesn’t give any height accuracy.
2- It’s hard to connect any wires to the syringe pump.
20. 20 | P a g e
3- To change the elevation on the syringe pump all the design must be separated from each
other than assembled again.
Figure 3.5, Design 2 for syringe pump holder
This second design was made in order to have more accurate height
The problem with this design is:
1-the container will not move freely, because the base is very large the flow from the syringe
pump will not reach the container
21. 21 | P a g e
Figure 3.6, Design 3 for syringe pump holder
This is the third design and the most efficient design so far any height can be reached, will not
block the motion stage motion and the syringe pump can be fixed easily.
3.2.2 Execution of the design
Step 1
This design was executed using the following materials:
22. 22 | P a g e
Name Quantity
1- T-nut for
aluminum bar
2 T-nuts
2- V-Slot 20mm x
20mm Linear Rail
2 Meters
4-T-joining for
aluminum bar
4
23. 23 | P a g e
5-L-joining for
aluminum bar
8
step 2
Figure 3.7, Aluminum bars after cutting
The aluminum bars were cut using an electric saw in the industrial region,
24. 24 | P a g e
They were cut four 50 cm, two 12 cm, two 8 cm and two 25 cm used in the base .
Step 3
Figure 3.8, picture of the syringe pump Holder
The components are assembled together using the t-nut, t-plate and L-plate to implement the
design.
3.3 Chemicals and container design.
3.3.1 Chemicals preparation
The chemical used in this experiment is called chitosan.
What is chitosan?
Chitosan is a biodegradable, hydrophilic, non-toxic and biocompatible polysaccharide that
presents a remarkable economic interest due to its functional versatility, with potential applications
25. 25 | P a g e
in medical and pharmaceutical fields [32-37]
. Yamaguchi observed chitosan composites and their
application in nerve regeneration [38]
. MI studied chitosan microspheres as a coating material for
the controlled release of vaccines [39]
. Furthermore, small chitosan microspheres (<10 µm)
prepared by a spray drying process, have been developed for the specific release of drug agents
[40]
. Large chitosan microspheres (>50 µm) prepared by the emulsion method have been used in
delivery systems [41]
or as adsorbents to remove acid pollutants or heavy metals. Recently, a
number of articles have been published describing the preparation of microspheres by spray drying
and emulsion process methods. Microspheres obtained from these methods present a relatively
narrow distribution of particles. Most chitosan particle applications are greatly influenced by their
size distribution [42]
.
Chitosan was brought from sigma Aldrich in Egypt.
Figure 3.9, Chitosan left on a magnetic stirrer
26. 26 | P a g e
Chitosan is soluble in acetic acid, to prepare a 3%wt chitosan we add 3 grams chitosan 100ml of
water and acetic acid with 1% acetic acid in the 100ml mixture with water, then it was stirred for
45 min at temperature 100 degrees on a magnetic stirrer in the figure 3.9
When chitosan is subjected to sodium hydroxide it solidify and takes the final shape it when it
meet the solution, because acetic acid is acidic and sodium hydroxide is alkaline.
The preparation of sodium hydroxide with a 10%wt, first a 25 grams of sodium hydroxide
weighted to a 250 mL water.
3.3. Container design
A container with dimensions of 15 cm long, 10 cm width and 5 cm height, this container was
implemented in the digital media lab in the German university in Cairo.
3.4 Experimenting
Figure 3.10, [25], Illustration on how the experiment will work
Chitosan 3%wt was prepared as discussed above, the solution was inhaled in to a syringe, where
the inner diameter of the spinneret was 2.28 mm. A flow pump was used to pump the syringe
27. 27 | P a g e
which contains the chitosan to supply cellulose solution at a constant speed (5-6 mL min-1
). A
movable coagulating bath loaded with 10 wt% sodium hydroxide solution was then pulled by a
motion stage, between the syringe tip and the surface of the container the height is measured .
Figure 3.11, Chitosan mixed with magnetic iron fillings
3 wt% chitosan was mixed with magnetic iron fillings to test how the fibers will react to the
magnetic field at different portions of the magnetic iron filling, the syringe was filled with chitosan
up to 3mm in every experiment.
Chapter 4
4. Results & discussion
4.1 production
28. 28 | P a g e
When the flow rate of the syringe pump is less than 6 ml.min-1
the liquid jet formed will not be a
continuous stream line , so a flow rate of 6 ml.min-1
or higher is important for the experiment ,the
flow rate and the height between the container and the syringe tip is important to determine the
size and shape of the helical structures, in this table the following samples of the result were taken
from different heights with the same flow rate to study how the size varies with the varying of the
height , the container speed was 2.5 cm/s .
Height and
Flow Rate
Diameter length
H = 10 cm
Q =
6mL.min-1
L= 1836.27
micrometer
29. 29 | P a g e
H = 20 cm
Q =
L= 1121.4 micro meter
H = 25 cm
L= 1000.2 micro meter
This results were measured with microscope in the materials lab in the C –building in the GUC ,
As observed from the above samples in the table the diameter of the helical fibers is highly affected
by the height between the container and the syringe tip , so the further the distance the more that
the diameter of the fibers decrease .
4.2 Magnetic behavior
30. 30 | P a g e
Figure 4.1, Helical shape after mixing chitosan with the iron fillings
In this figure the weight of the magnetic iron fillings was 0.8 grams, the fibers were heavy as
they were stuck in the bottom, but the fibers reacted positively when subjected to a magnet.
31. 31 | P a g e
Figure 4.2, Helical shape after mixing chitosan with the iron fillings
In this figure the weight of the magnetic iron fillings mixed with the chitosan was 0.3 grams, this
fibers were relatively lighter than the above fibers as they were flowing in the container not stuck
in the bottom of the container, they also reacted positively to the magnetic field as the field was
steering the fibers and this fibers color was grey while the above was black.
Chapter 5
5. Conclusion
The preparation of helical fibers from liquid rope coiling ,the changing of height between the
syringe tip and the sodium hydroxide 10 wt% changed the obtained results, when the height
increase the diameter of the fibers decrease , from the results obtained its curtain that changing the
parameters can help in producing this fibers with different size and length, in summary liquid rope
coiling processes can be a very effective way in producing this helical micro fibers, a simple way
as well and the cost for preparing is manageable.
32. 32 | P a g e
Chapter 6
6. Future studies
6.1 Motion stage
The maximum speed at which the container was moving was approximately 2.5 cm/s which is a
very low speed for the following reasons:
Figure 6.1, helical fibers tangled together due to the low speed of the motion stage
1- The helical fibers tangled with each other as seen in the figure, which made it hard to
separate the helical fibers from each other.
2- Speed affects the number of turns in the fibers, so the lower the speed the more the
helical fibers are curled.
33. 33 | P a g e
syringe pump
The maximum flow rate the syringe pump could produce was 6mL.min-1
the problem with
this flow rate is that it’s not high enough when it pushes the syringe, because it gives a
continuous stream line momentarily, which decreases the possibilities of obtaining a
continuous stream of helical fibers.
Appendix
References`
34. 34 | P a g e
1. http://www.theoldrobots.org/hospital.html
2. Holmberg L, Bill-Axelson A, Helgesen F et al. A randomized trial comparing radical
prostatectomy with watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2002; 347: 781−9.
3. Dharia SP, Falcone T. Robotics in reproductive medicine. Fertil Steril 2005; 84: 1−11.
4. Kwoh YS, Hou J, Jonckheere EA, Hayati S. A robot with improved absolute positioning
accuracy for CT guided stereotactic brain surgery. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 1988; 35: 153−60.
5. Davies BL, Hibberd RD, Coptcoat MJ, Wickham JE. A surgeon robot prostatectomy − a
laboratory evaluation. J Med Eng Technol 1989; 13: −2737.
6. Bann S, Khan M, Hernandez J et al. Robotics in surgery. J Am Coll Surg 2003; 196: 784−95.
7. Satava RM. Robotic surgery: from past to future − a personal journey. Surg Clin North Am
2003; 83: 1491−500, xii.
8. Schuessler WW, Vancaillie TG, Reich H, Griffith DP. Transperitoneal endosurgical
lymphadenectomy in patients with localized prostate cancer. J Urol 1991; 145: 988−91.
9. Schuessler WW, Schulman PG, Clayman RV, Kavoussi LR. Laparoscopic radical
prostatectomy: initial short-term experience. Urology 1997; 50: 854–7.
10. Salomon L, Sebe P, De la Taille A et al. Open versus laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: part
I. BJU Int 2004; 94: 238–43.
11. Guillonneau B, Vallancien G. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: the montsouris experience.
J Urol 2000; 163: 418–22.
12. Rassweiler J, Seemann O, Schulze M, Teber D, Hatzinger M, Frede T. Laparoscopic versus
open radical prostatectomy: a comparative study at a single institution. J Urol 2003; 169: 1689–
93.
35. 35 | P a g e
13. Rassweiler J, Sentker L, Seemann O, Hatzinger M, Stock C, Frede T. Heilbronn laparoscopic
radical prostatectomy. Technique and results after 100 cases. Eur Urol 2001; 40: 54–64.
14. Turk I, Deger IS, Winkelmann B, Roigas J, Schonberger B, Loening SA. Laparoscopic radical
prostatectomy. Experiences with 145 interventions. Urologe A 2001; 40: 199–206.
15. Salomon L, Levrel O, de la Taille A et al. Radical prostatectomy by the retropubic, perineal
and laparoscopic approach: 12 years of experience in one center. Eur Urol 2002; 42: 104–10;
discussion 10–11.
16. http://spectrum.ieee.org/robotics/medical-robots/magnetic-microbots-to-fight-cancer
17. Eden CG, Cahill D, Vass JA, Adams TH, Dauleh MI. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: the
initial UK series. BJU Int 2002; 90: 876–82.
18. B.J. Nelson, et al , Annu Rev Biomed Eng, 12 (2010), p. 55
19. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_vivo .
20. http://biologos.org/blog/self-assembly-of-the-bacterial-flagellum-no-intelligence-required
21. L. Zhang, et al. Lab Chip, 10 (2010), p. 2203
22 . L. Zhang, et al.Appl Phys Lett, 94 (2009), p. 064107
23. J.J. Abbott, et al. Int J Rob Res, 28 (2009), p. 1434
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/nl901869j
24. K.E. Peyer, et al. Appl Phys Lett, 99 (2011), p. 174101
25. L. Zhang, et al. Nano Lett, 9 (2009), p. 3663
26. Preparation of helical microfibers from cellulose-cuprammonium solution based on liquid rope
coiling.
27. N. M. Ribe, M. Habibi and D. Bonn, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. ,2012, 44,249-266
28. L. Mahadevan, W. S. Ryu and A. D. T. Samuel, Nature, 1998, 392, 140.
29. N. M.Ribe, proc. R. Soc London, Ser . A, 2004, 460, 3223-3239.
36. 36 | P a g e
30. http://www.lasermotion.com/stages.html
31.http://farespcbeg.com/ServesPages/ProductInfo.aspx?PID=13&TypePage=Category&Cat=81
32. Roberts GAF. Chitin Chemistry. The Macmillian Press Ltd, London; 1992.
33. Tangpasuthadol V, Pongchaisirikul V, Hoven VP. Surface modification of chitosan films:
Effects of hydrophobicity on protein adsorption. Carbohydrate Research. 2003; 338(9):937-942.
34. Lee ST, Mi FL, Shen YJ, Shyu SS. Equilibrium and kinetic studies of copper(II) ion uptake by
chitosan-tripolyphosphate chelating resin. Polymer. 2001; 42(5):1879-1892.
35. Huang RYM, Moon GY, Pal R. N-acetylated chitosan membranes for the pervaporation
separation of alcohol/toluene mixtures. Journal of Membrane Science. 2000; 176(1):223-231.
36. Chirachanchai S, Lertworasirikul A, Tachaboonyakiat W. Carbaryl insecticide conjugation
onto chitosan via iodochitosan and chitosan carbonyl imidazolide precursors. Carbohydrate
Polymers. 2001; 46(1):19-27.
37. Muslim T, Morimoto M, Saimoto H, Okamoto Y, Minami S, Shigemasa Y. Synthesis and
bioactivities of poly(ethylene glycol)–chitosan hybrids. Carbohydrate Polymers. 2001; 46(4):323-
330.
38. Yamaguchi I, Itoh S, Suzuki M, Osaka A, Tanaka J. The chitosan prepared from crab tendon:
II. The chitosan/apatite composites and their application to nerve regeneratio. Biomaterials. 2003;
24(1):3285-3292.
39. Mi FM, Shyu SS, Chen CT, Schoung JY. Porous chitosan microsphere for controlling the
antigen release of Newcastle disease vaccine: preparation of antigen-adsorbed microsphere and in
vitro release. Biomaterials. 1999; 20(17):1603-1612.
40. Mi FL, Wong TB, Shyu SS, Chang SF. Journal of Applied Polymer Science. 1999; 71:747.
41. He P, Davis SS, Illum L. Chitosan microspheres prepared by spray drying. International
Journal of Pharmaceutics. 1999; 187(1):53-65.
42. Braek S, Anthonsen T, Sandford P. Chitin and Chitosan. London: Elsevier; 1989. 835p.
