This document discusses 3D printing methods and their potential impact on research laboratories. It provides:
1) A brief history of 3D printing, from its origins in the 1980s to its increasing applications in fields like engineering, medicine, and consumer goods.
2) An overview of common 3D printing methods like stereolithography, inkjet printing, and fused deposition modeling, explaining how they work and the types of materials they can use.
3) Examples of current and future uses of 3D printing in research settings, with the potential to revolutionize fields like chemistry, biotechnology, and science education.
3D printing is called as additive manufacturing technology where a three dimensional object is created by laying down successive layers of material. It is also known as rapid prototyping, is a mechanized method whereby 3D objects are quickly made on a reasonably sized machine connected to a computer containing blueprints for the object. It is working under the principle of Fused Deposition Modelling (FDM). The 3D printing concept of custom manufacturing is exciting to nearly everyone. The basic principles include materials cartridges, flexibility of output, and translation of code into a visible pattern.3D Printers are the machines that produce physical 3D models from digital data by printing layer by layer. It can make physical models of objects either designed with a CAD program or scanned with a 3D Scanner. Here we are going to propose a model report on design and fabrication of a 3D printer.
IRJET- 3D Printer for Printing Biological StructuresIRJET Journal
This document discusses 3D printing technology for printing biological structures. It begins with an abstract that provides an overview of 3D printing as a process of prototyping where a structure is synthesized from a 3D model. The document then covers the core technology of 3D printing in the biological domain and its applications. It discusses how 3D printing is being applied in various medical situations and for developing medical research. The document also provides background on the history and development of 3D printing technology.
Recent 3D printing technologies: A comparative review and future perspectivevivatechijri
Additive manufacturing (AM) is generally recognized as three-dimensional (3D) printing or rapid
prototyping, which has evolved rapidly in numerous applications. In this review paper, recent major fundamentals
and technology development in 3DP are reviewed, including its features and latest findings. Moreover, some
potential applications in 3D printing are involved, followed by its typical applications, advance trend, and future
perspective.
Integrating parametric design with robotic additive manufacturing for 3D clay...Antonio Arcadu
ABSTRACT This paper presents an ongoing work in relation to the development of a parametric design algorithm and an automated system for additive manufacturing that aims to be implemented in 3D clay printing tasks. The purpose of this experimental study is to establish a first insight and provide information as well as guidelines for a comprehensive and robust additive manufacturing methodology that can be implemented in the area of 3D clay printing, aiming to be widely available and open for use in the relevant construction industry. Specifically, this paper emphasizes on the installation of an industrial extruder for 3D clay printing mounted on a robot, on toolpath planning process using a parametric design environment and on robotic execution of selected case studies. Based on existing 3D printing technology principles and on available rapid prototyping mechanisms, this process suggests an algorithm for system’s control as well as for robotic toolpath development applied in additive manufacturing of small to medium objects. The algorithm is developed in a parametric associative environment allowing its flexible use and execution in a number of case studies, aiming to tentatively test the effectiveness of the suggested robotic additive manufacturing workflow and their future implementation in large scale examples.
Autors: O. Kontovourkisa and G. Tryfonos
3D printing market - a global study (2014-2022)BIS Research
The report presents a detailed market analysis of 3D printing and Additive Manufacturing by incorporating complete pricing and cost analysis of 3D printers and materials. Besides porter’s and PESTLE analysis of the market have also been done. The report deals with all the driving factors, restraints, and opportunities with respect to the 3D printing and Additive Manufacturing market, which are helpful in identifying trends and key success factors for the industry.
Lastly, the current market landscape is covered with detailed competitive landscape and company profiles of all key players across the ecosystem. The report also formulates the entire value chain of the market, along with industry trends of 3D printing application industries and materials used with emphasis on market timelines & technology road-maps
It include the introduction about 3d pharmaceutical how it works and their different types model used in the manufacturing and their applications in medical
The document provides an overview of additive manufacturing techniques, including:
- A brief history and introduction to additive manufacturing.
- Descriptions of 7 common additive manufacturing technologies: Laminated Object Manufacturing, Fused Deposition Modeling, 3D Printing, Selective Laser Sintering, Electron Beam Melting, Multijet Modeling, and Stereolithography.
- Each technology description includes information on the process, key application areas, advantages, disadvantages, and current market leaders.
3D printing is called as additive manufacturing technology where a three dimensional object is created by laying down successive layers of material. It is also known as rapid prototyping, is a mechanized method whereby 3D objects are quickly made on a reasonably sized machine connected to a computer containing blueprints for the object. It is working under the principle of Fused Deposition Modelling (FDM). The 3D printing concept of custom manufacturing is exciting to nearly everyone. The basic principles include materials cartridges, flexibility of output, and translation of code into a visible pattern.3D Printers are the machines that produce physical 3D models from digital data by printing layer by layer. It can make physical models of objects either designed with a CAD program or scanned with a 3D Scanner. Here we are going to propose a model report on design and fabrication of a 3D printer.
IRJET- 3D Printer for Printing Biological StructuresIRJET Journal
This document discusses 3D printing technology for printing biological structures. It begins with an abstract that provides an overview of 3D printing as a process of prototyping where a structure is synthesized from a 3D model. The document then covers the core technology of 3D printing in the biological domain and its applications. It discusses how 3D printing is being applied in various medical situations and for developing medical research. The document also provides background on the history and development of 3D printing technology.
Recent 3D printing technologies: A comparative review and future perspectivevivatechijri
Additive manufacturing (AM) is generally recognized as three-dimensional (3D) printing or rapid
prototyping, which has evolved rapidly in numerous applications. In this review paper, recent major fundamentals
and technology development in 3DP are reviewed, including its features and latest findings. Moreover, some
potential applications in 3D printing are involved, followed by its typical applications, advance trend, and future
perspective.
Integrating parametric design with robotic additive manufacturing for 3D clay...Antonio Arcadu
ABSTRACT This paper presents an ongoing work in relation to the development of a parametric design algorithm and an automated system for additive manufacturing that aims to be implemented in 3D clay printing tasks. The purpose of this experimental study is to establish a first insight and provide information as well as guidelines for a comprehensive and robust additive manufacturing methodology that can be implemented in the area of 3D clay printing, aiming to be widely available and open for use in the relevant construction industry. Specifically, this paper emphasizes on the installation of an industrial extruder for 3D clay printing mounted on a robot, on toolpath planning process using a parametric design environment and on robotic execution of selected case studies. Based on existing 3D printing technology principles and on available rapid prototyping mechanisms, this process suggests an algorithm for system’s control as well as for robotic toolpath development applied in additive manufacturing of small to medium objects. The algorithm is developed in a parametric associative environment allowing its flexible use and execution in a number of case studies, aiming to tentatively test the effectiveness of the suggested robotic additive manufacturing workflow and their future implementation in large scale examples.
Autors: O. Kontovourkisa and G. Tryfonos
3D printing market - a global study (2014-2022)BIS Research
The report presents a detailed market analysis of 3D printing and Additive Manufacturing by incorporating complete pricing and cost analysis of 3D printers and materials. Besides porter’s and PESTLE analysis of the market have also been done. The report deals with all the driving factors, restraints, and opportunities with respect to the 3D printing and Additive Manufacturing market, which are helpful in identifying trends and key success factors for the industry.
Lastly, the current market landscape is covered with detailed competitive landscape and company profiles of all key players across the ecosystem. The report also formulates the entire value chain of the market, along with industry trends of 3D printing application industries and materials used with emphasis on market timelines & technology road-maps
It include the introduction about 3d pharmaceutical how it works and their different types model used in the manufacturing and their applications in medical
The document provides an overview of additive manufacturing techniques, including:
- A brief history and introduction to additive manufacturing.
- Descriptions of 7 common additive manufacturing technologies: Laminated Object Manufacturing, Fused Deposition Modeling, 3D Printing, Selective Laser Sintering, Electron Beam Melting, Multijet Modeling, and Stereolithography.
- Each technology description includes information on the process, key application areas, advantages, disadvantages, and current market leaders.
Through the development of 3D printing Services, we have only seen an increment in the number of companies that have adopted this technology. The applications and use cases fluctuate across industries, yet comprehensively incorporate tooling aids, visual and functional prototypes — and even end parts.
www.makenica.com
The recapitualtion of 3 d printing in pharamceutical epochShipraRath
The document is a presentation on 3D printing in the pharmaceutical industry presented by Shipra Rath. It defines 3D printing and provides an introduction to the technology. It then discusses the history of 3D printing in pharmaceuticals and describes commonly used 3D printing methods like fused deposition modeling (FDM), selective laser sintering (SLS), and selective laser melting (SLM). Applications of 3D printing for drug delivery systems and challenges/future of the technology are also outlined.
This document is a seminar report on 3D printing submitted by Ankit Sharma to the Department of Mechanical Engineering at Global Institute of Technology, Jaipur, India in fulfillment of his B.Tech degree. The report consists of 10 chapters that provide an introduction to 3D printing, discuss current technologies like stereolithography and selective laser sintering, examine additive and subtractive manufacturing processes, explore the advantages and disadvantages of 3D printing, and analyze applications in various fields such as medical, jewelry, footwear, construction, toys, food, and human organs.
This document summarizes a technical seminar on 3D printing presented by B.Vineetha. It discusses the history and development of 3D printing, how 3D printers work by building objects layer by layer from a digital design. It describes common 3D printing methods like stereolithography, selective laser sintering, and fused deposition modeling. The document also covers applications of 3D printing in fields like industrial design, medicine, fashion, and more. It concludes that 3D printing offers advantages like time and cost savings compared to traditional manufacturing.
3D printing, also known as additive manufacturing, involves building 3D objects from a digital file by laying down successive layers of material under computer control. It allows objects to be created with almost any shape or geometry in a process where layers of material are formed under computer control to produce an object. 3D printers can use materials like plastic, metal, concrete, or even food to construct physical objects from 3D model data layer by layer until the object is complete.
This document summarizes a seminar on 3D printing of pharmaceuticals. 3D printing, also called additive manufacturing, is the process of making 3D objects from a digital file by laying down successive layers of material. There are several methods of 3D printing including selective laser sintering (SLS), fused deposition modeling (FDM), and stereolithography (SLA). 3D printing offers advantages like reduced costs, customization, and increased productivity through constant prototyping. However, it also faces challenges like high costs, limited materials, and slow printing speeds. The seminar discusses the various applications, growth, and challenges of 3D printing in the pharmaceutical industry.
The document discusses 3D printing of pharmaceuticals. It begins with an introduction to 3D printing and how it creates physical objects layer by layer directly from CAD models. It then covers the general principles, types of printers including nozzle-based and laser-based systems, and materials that can be used like metals, resins, plastics, and fibers. The document also addresses challenges, advantages like rapid production and low costs, disadvantages such as intellectual property issues. It concludes that 3D printing has potential in personalized medicine by aiding drug development and production.
The document discusses additive manufacturing (AM) processes and applications in construction. It provides an overview of AM, including common processes like material extrusion and powder bed fusion. Examples of AM construction projects are described, such as a printed office building and hotel. Key challenges in applying AM to large-scale construction include developing suitable feedstock materials that can be extruded while maintaining appropriate properties. Cementitious materials are most commonly used and studies have found optimized mixes include cement, fly ash, silica fume and additives to achieve desired strength and printability.
Additive manufacturing (AM), also known as 3D printing, refers to a process where a 3D digital design is used to build a component layer by layer by depositing material. The CAD model is first converted into an STL file format using triangles to describe the surfaces. Common materials used in AM include polymers, metals, ceramics, composites, and various plastics. The document provides an overview of AM and discusses the steps involved in the AM process from CAD modeling to the final 3D printed object.
1. Rapid prototyping is a group of techniques that quickly fabricate a scale model of a physical part using 3D computer-aided design data through additive layer manufacturing. 2. The document discusses the history and development of rapid prototyping technologies from the 1980s onward. 3. It describes common rapid prototyping processes like stereolithography, selective laser sintering, and fused deposition modeling which build parts layer-by-layer from materials in different states of matter.
IRJET- Design and Fabrication of 3D Printer to Enhance ProductivityIRJET Journal
The document describes the design and fabrication of a 3D printer to increase productivity. It aims to increase the speed of 3D printing compared to traditional printers by decreasing the cooling time of deposited polymer on the heat bed. The 3D printer uses fused deposition modeling and is analyzed based on parameters of speed and accuracy. It discusses the working process which involves CAD design, file conversion to G-code using slicer software, controlling stepper motors via G-code instructions to deposit polymer layer-by-layer on the heated bed. The document also covers 3D model preparation and errors, printing process, and applications of the finished prototype.
in this presentation i have discussed about 4D Printing technology. you can watch out it in video form on my You Tube channel https://youtu.be/ZDaurFz2byc
Wohlers report 2013 : Additive Manudacturing and 3D Printing State of the Ind...alain Clapaud
The document provides an executive summary of the Wohlers Report 2013, which analyzes the additive manufacturing (AM) industry. Some key points:
- The global AM market grew 28.6% to $2.204 billion in 2012. Unit sales of industrial AM systems grew 19.3% to 7,771 systems.
- Metal-based AM saw nearly 200 systems sold in 2012, and demand for these systems is rising.
- The use of AM for direct part production continues to grow rapidly, accounting for 28.3% of AM revenues in 2012.
- The US has the largest installed base of AM systems at 38%, followed by Japan, Germany, and China. Interest and investment
The document provides information on using Modelspace and Paperspace in AutoCAD. It explains that Modelspace is used for drawing components while Paperspace allows setting up printing sheets with multiple views at different scales. Paperspace properties like page size and printable area can be configured. Multiple views can be created on a single printing sheet in Paperspace by copying and pasting drawing windows.
This document discusses 3D modeling and rendering techniques as well as 3D printing technologies. It provides information on computer-aided design (CAD) and computer-aided manufacturing (CAM) software used to create and modify digital designs. It also describes different 3D printing processes like stereolithography, selective laser sintering, and fused deposition modeling that build 3D objects layer by layer, as well as examples of 3D printed artworks and products.
Tc manufacturing technologies 2018s_v2_10_30_18_sJurgen Daniel
The document provides an overview of additive manufacturing (AM) technologies, with an emphasis on 3D printing. It discusses conventional manufacturing versus AM, advantages of AM such as design freedom and reduced waste. Several AM technologies are described, including fused deposition modeling (FDM), stereolithography (SLA), selective laser sintering (SLS), and multi-jet fusion. Application areas for AM like aerospace, automotive, medical and more are highlighted. The document aims to give a broad technology overview while noting that continuous innovation leads to new developments.
Rapid prototyping refers to technologies that can automatically construct physical models from CAD data. These technologies allow designers to quickly create tangible prototypes rather than just 2D pictures. The document discusses several rapid prototyping techniques including stereolithography, laminated object manufacturing, selective laser sintering, fused deposition modeling, solid ground curing, and 3D inkjet printing. All techniques involve slicing a 3D CAD model into layers and building the model layer-by-layer. Rapid prototyping enables faster and cheaper prototype production compared to traditional methods, facilitating improved product design and testing.
1) Additive manufacturing (AM) technologies like selective laser sintering (SLS) and selective laser melting (SLM) can be used to print metal components in a layer-by-layer process, offering advantages over conventional machining like design freedom and the ability to integrate multiple parts.
2) The document discusses screening current conventionally-made products and components to identify opportunities to redesign them using AM technologies to achieve competitive advantages not possible through conventional manufacturing.
3) An example of exploring AM opportunities is through a workshop identifying "killer applications" by examining how AM can strengthen competitive advantages through attributes like shorter time-to-market, customization, and mass reduction.
3 d cad cam and rapid prototypingv1.1 2navannandha
The document provides an overview of 3D CAD modeling for rapid prototyping and different rapid prototyping technologies. It discusses converting 3D CAD models to an STL file format, which is understood by most rapid prototyping software. It also covers several common rapid prototyping processes like stereolithography, laminated object manufacturing, and fused deposition modeling. The document compares additive rapid prototyping to subtractive CNC machining.
Additive manufacturing, commonly referred to as 3d printing, is a manufacturing
technique that rises in the 1980’s mainly focused on engineering prototyping. Current
advances in the precision and cost of the techniques, as well as the widespread use of 3d
designing have increased 3d printing’s scope of use from high-end engineering prototypes
to a large variety of uses in manufacturing. 3d printing improve the processing time,
decrease waste, and increase the level of customization of certain products by eliminating
the need for the specialty tooling and dies that are traditionally used in manufacturing. In
addition, the ability to physically print difficult shapes based on a computer model has
given rise to new products that would otherwise be simply impossible to create. The
various fields have taken advantage of this technology by printing 3d objects.
This document provides an overview of 3D printing and additive manufacturing. It discusses the core technologies used in additive manufacturing, including extrusion deposition, granular material binding, photopolymerization, and lamination. It describes how additive manufacturing works by building 3D objects layer by layer from a digital file. The document highlights applications in industries like automotive, aerospace, medical, and more. It also discusses advantages like reduced waste and materials usage compared to traditional manufacturing.
This is the seminar report of my presentation
Link for the pressentaion file is
http://www.slideshare.net/arjunrtvm/3d-printing-additive-manufacturing-with-awesome-animations-and-special-effects
Through the development of 3D printing Services, we have only seen an increment in the number of companies that have adopted this technology. The applications and use cases fluctuate across industries, yet comprehensively incorporate tooling aids, visual and functional prototypes — and even end parts.
www.makenica.com
The recapitualtion of 3 d printing in pharamceutical epochShipraRath
The document is a presentation on 3D printing in the pharmaceutical industry presented by Shipra Rath. It defines 3D printing and provides an introduction to the technology. It then discusses the history of 3D printing in pharmaceuticals and describes commonly used 3D printing methods like fused deposition modeling (FDM), selective laser sintering (SLS), and selective laser melting (SLM). Applications of 3D printing for drug delivery systems and challenges/future of the technology are also outlined.
This document is a seminar report on 3D printing submitted by Ankit Sharma to the Department of Mechanical Engineering at Global Institute of Technology, Jaipur, India in fulfillment of his B.Tech degree. The report consists of 10 chapters that provide an introduction to 3D printing, discuss current technologies like stereolithography and selective laser sintering, examine additive and subtractive manufacturing processes, explore the advantages and disadvantages of 3D printing, and analyze applications in various fields such as medical, jewelry, footwear, construction, toys, food, and human organs.
This document summarizes a technical seminar on 3D printing presented by B.Vineetha. It discusses the history and development of 3D printing, how 3D printers work by building objects layer by layer from a digital design. It describes common 3D printing methods like stereolithography, selective laser sintering, and fused deposition modeling. The document also covers applications of 3D printing in fields like industrial design, medicine, fashion, and more. It concludes that 3D printing offers advantages like time and cost savings compared to traditional manufacturing.
3D printing, also known as additive manufacturing, involves building 3D objects from a digital file by laying down successive layers of material under computer control. It allows objects to be created with almost any shape or geometry in a process where layers of material are formed under computer control to produce an object. 3D printers can use materials like plastic, metal, concrete, or even food to construct physical objects from 3D model data layer by layer until the object is complete.
This document summarizes a seminar on 3D printing of pharmaceuticals. 3D printing, also called additive manufacturing, is the process of making 3D objects from a digital file by laying down successive layers of material. There are several methods of 3D printing including selective laser sintering (SLS), fused deposition modeling (FDM), and stereolithography (SLA). 3D printing offers advantages like reduced costs, customization, and increased productivity through constant prototyping. However, it also faces challenges like high costs, limited materials, and slow printing speeds. The seminar discusses the various applications, growth, and challenges of 3D printing in the pharmaceutical industry.
The document discusses 3D printing of pharmaceuticals. It begins with an introduction to 3D printing and how it creates physical objects layer by layer directly from CAD models. It then covers the general principles, types of printers including nozzle-based and laser-based systems, and materials that can be used like metals, resins, plastics, and fibers. The document also addresses challenges, advantages like rapid production and low costs, disadvantages such as intellectual property issues. It concludes that 3D printing has potential in personalized medicine by aiding drug development and production.
The document discusses additive manufacturing (AM) processes and applications in construction. It provides an overview of AM, including common processes like material extrusion and powder bed fusion. Examples of AM construction projects are described, such as a printed office building and hotel. Key challenges in applying AM to large-scale construction include developing suitable feedstock materials that can be extruded while maintaining appropriate properties. Cementitious materials are most commonly used and studies have found optimized mixes include cement, fly ash, silica fume and additives to achieve desired strength and printability.
Additive manufacturing (AM), also known as 3D printing, refers to a process where a 3D digital design is used to build a component layer by layer by depositing material. The CAD model is first converted into an STL file format using triangles to describe the surfaces. Common materials used in AM include polymers, metals, ceramics, composites, and various plastics. The document provides an overview of AM and discusses the steps involved in the AM process from CAD modeling to the final 3D printed object.
1. Rapid prototyping is a group of techniques that quickly fabricate a scale model of a physical part using 3D computer-aided design data through additive layer manufacturing. 2. The document discusses the history and development of rapid prototyping technologies from the 1980s onward. 3. It describes common rapid prototyping processes like stereolithography, selective laser sintering, and fused deposition modeling which build parts layer-by-layer from materials in different states of matter.
IRJET- Design and Fabrication of 3D Printer to Enhance ProductivityIRJET Journal
The document describes the design and fabrication of a 3D printer to increase productivity. It aims to increase the speed of 3D printing compared to traditional printers by decreasing the cooling time of deposited polymer on the heat bed. The 3D printer uses fused deposition modeling and is analyzed based on parameters of speed and accuracy. It discusses the working process which involves CAD design, file conversion to G-code using slicer software, controlling stepper motors via G-code instructions to deposit polymer layer-by-layer on the heated bed. The document also covers 3D model preparation and errors, printing process, and applications of the finished prototype.
in this presentation i have discussed about 4D Printing technology. you can watch out it in video form on my You Tube channel https://youtu.be/ZDaurFz2byc
Wohlers report 2013 : Additive Manudacturing and 3D Printing State of the Ind...alain Clapaud
The document provides an executive summary of the Wohlers Report 2013, which analyzes the additive manufacturing (AM) industry. Some key points:
- The global AM market grew 28.6% to $2.204 billion in 2012. Unit sales of industrial AM systems grew 19.3% to 7,771 systems.
- Metal-based AM saw nearly 200 systems sold in 2012, and demand for these systems is rising.
- The use of AM for direct part production continues to grow rapidly, accounting for 28.3% of AM revenues in 2012.
- The US has the largest installed base of AM systems at 38%, followed by Japan, Germany, and China. Interest and investment
The document provides information on using Modelspace and Paperspace in AutoCAD. It explains that Modelspace is used for drawing components while Paperspace allows setting up printing sheets with multiple views at different scales. Paperspace properties like page size and printable area can be configured. Multiple views can be created on a single printing sheet in Paperspace by copying and pasting drawing windows.
This document discusses 3D modeling and rendering techniques as well as 3D printing technologies. It provides information on computer-aided design (CAD) and computer-aided manufacturing (CAM) software used to create and modify digital designs. It also describes different 3D printing processes like stereolithography, selective laser sintering, and fused deposition modeling that build 3D objects layer by layer, as well as examples of 3D printed artworks and products.
Tc manufacturing technologies 2018s_v2_10_30_18_sJurgen Daniel
The document provides an overview of additive manufacturing (AM) technologies, with an emphasis on 3D printing. It discusses conventional manufacturing versus AM, advantages of AM such as design freedom and reduced waste. Several AM technologies are described, including fused deposition modeling (FDM), stereolithography (SLA), selective laser sintering (SLS), and multi-jet fusion. Application areas for AM like aerospace, automotive, medical and more are highlighted. The document aims to give a broad technology overview while noting that continuous innovation leads to new developments.
Rapid prototyping refers to technologies that can automatically construct physical models from CAD data. These technologies allow designers to quickly create tangible prototypes rather than just 2D pictures. The document discusses several rapid prototyping techniques including stereolithography, laminated object manufacturing, selective laser sintering, fused deposition modeling, solid ground curing, and 3D inkjet printing. All techniques involve slicing a 3D CAD model into layers and building the model layer-by-layer. Rapid prototyping enables faster and cheaper prototype production compared to traditional methods, facilitating improved product design and testing.
1) Additive manufacturing (AM) technologies like selective laser sintering (SLS) and selective laser melting (SLM) can be used to print metal components in a layer-by-layer process, offering advantages over conventional machining like design freedom and the ability to integrate multiple parts.
2) The document discusses screening current conventionally-made products and components to identify opportunities to redesign them using AM technologies to achieve competitive advantages not possible through conventional manufacturing.
3) An example of exploring AM opportunities is through a workshop identifying "killer applications" by examining how AM can strengthen competitive advantages through attributes like shorter time-to-market, customization, and mass reduction.
3 d cad cam and rapid prototypingv1.1 2navannandha
The document provides an overview of 3D CAD modeling for rapid prototyping and different rapid prototyping technologies. It discusses converting 3D CAD models to an STL file format, which is understood by most rapid prototyping software. It also covers several common rapid prototyping processes like stereolithography, laminated object manufacturing, and fused deposition modeling. The document compares additive rapid prototyping to subtractive CNC machining.
Additive manufacturing, commonly referred to as 3d printing, is a manufacturing
technique that rises in the 1980’s mainly focused on engineering prototyping. Current
advances in the precision and cost of the techniques, as well as the widespread use of 3d
designing have increased 3d printing’s scope of use from high-end engineering prototypes
to a large variety of uses in manufacturing. 3d printing improve the processing time,
decrease waste, and increase the level of customization of certain products by eliminating
the need for the specialty tooling and dies that are traditionally used in manufacturing. In
addition, the ability to physically print difficult shapes based on a computer model has
given rise to new products that would otherwise be simply impossible to create. The
various fields have taken advantage of this technology by printing 3d objects.
This document provides an overview of 3D printing and additive manufacturing. It discusses the core technologies used in additive manufacturing, including extrusion deposition, granular material binding, photopolymerization, and lamination. It describes how additive manufacturing works by building 3D objects layer by layer from a digital file. The document highlights applications in industries like automotive, aerospace, medical, and more. It also discusses advantages like reduced waste and materials usage compared to traditional manufacturing.
This is the seminar report of my presentation
Link for the pressentaion file is
http://www.slideshare.net/arjunrtvm/3d-printing-additive-manufacturing-with-awesome-animations-and-special-effects
Create Your Product. Build Your Business. Design, Make & Sell.
3 D Printing Scaled For You. Fast, affordable prints. Industrial manufacturing tech.
All at your fingertips.
3 D Print Plastics. Superior Quality. Bring Your Ideas to Life.
3D printing, also known as additive manufacturing, involves laying down successive layers of material to build a three-dimensional object from a digital model. The technology was first developed in 1984 by Charles Hull and has since evolved to include techniques like fused deposition modeling, selective laser sintering, and stereolithography. 3D printing has applications in industries like automotive, aerospace, medical, fashion, and more due to its ability to quickly produce customized components and parts. It has the potential to revolutionize manufacturing by enabling mass customization and personalized production.
This document discusses 3D printing technologies and their applications. It describes common 3D printing processes like stereolithography, digital light processing, material jetting, and selective laser sintering. The advantages of 3D printing include customization, increased productivity through rapid prototyping, affordability compared to traditional manufacturing, and applications in education, dentistry, and healthcare. However, 3D printing also faces limitations such as restricted object sizes, limited raw materials, and potential for copyright violations or producing dangerous items.
The document provides an overview of 3D printing technologies and their applications in dentistry. It discusses the history of 3D printing, starting with Charles Hull's development of stereolithography in the 1980s. It then describes several common 3D printing technologies like fused deposition modeling (FDM), stereolithography (SLA), selective laser sintering (SLS), and thermal inkjet printing (TIJ). The document also discusses various materials that can be used for 3D printing like plastics, metals, ceramics, and resins specifically designed for dental applications. It provides examples of how 3D printing is used to create dental models, splints, and orthodontic devices.
Power from the burnt gases in the combustion chamber is delivered to the crankshaft through the piston, piston pin and connecting rod. The crankshaft changes reciprocating motion of the piston in cylinder to the rotary motion of the flywheel. Crankshaft is designed for multi cylinder engine and its 3D model is created using modeling software CATIA V5R20.The 3D printer prints the CATIA design layer by layer forming a real object. 3D printing process is derived from inkjet desktop printers in which multiple deposit jets and the printing material, layer by layer derived from the CATIA data. 3D printing significantly challenges mass production processes in the future. This type of printing is predicted to influence industries, like automotive, medical, education, equipment, consumer products industries and various businesses. T. Venkata Ramana | Sagam Kunta Subhash | Sangem Devendra Kumar | Vanga Balakrishna ""Modelling and 3D Printing of Crankshaft"" Published in International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development (ijtsrd), ISSN: 2456-6470, Volume-3 | Issue-3 , April 2019, URL: https://www.ijtsrd.com/papers/ijtsrd23224.pdf
Paper URL: https://www.ijtsrd.com/engineering/mechanical-engineering/23224/modelling-and-3d-printing-of-crankshaft/t-venkata-ramana
This document summarizes a presentation on 3D printing. It begins with an introduction and overview of the topics to be covered, which include the history of 3D printing, how the process works, applications, advantages and disadvantages, and the future of the technology. It then goes into more detail on the history, additive manufacturing processes like fused deposition modeling, the basic steps of 3D printing, current and potential applications across different industries, benefits and limitations, and promising areas of future growth and development for 3D printing.
The document discusses various applications of 3D printing in the medical field, including hearing aids, surgical guides and tools, prosthetics, surgical learning tools, implants, modeling patient anatomy, and bandages. It outlines how 3D printing allows for customization, presurgical planning, education and training, testing of medical devices, and more personalized treatment options in a safe, cost-effective manner.
The document discusses 3D printing and additive manufacturing. It provides an overview of the history of 3D printing from the late 1970s to present day, the various 3D printing processes like fused deposition modeling, and applications across different industries like prototyping, manufacturing, and medicine. The document also outlines the basic procedure of 3D printing from designing a CAD model to building the final object layer by layer, and discusses advantages like flexible design and disadvantages like limited materials.
Rapid prototyping is impacting medicine in several ways such as designing and developing medical devices, planning complex surgeries, surgical simulation, diagnosis, and manufacturing implants and tools. This document discusses the history and basic principles of rapid prototyping processes. It explores applications in orthopedics, maxillofacial surgery, and tissue engineering. Recent trends include using rapid prototyping to plan the separation of conjoined twins. The future of rapid prototyping in medicine depends on improvements in speed, cost, accuracy, biomaterials, and collaboration between medical professionals and engineers.
3D PRINTING IN ARCHITECTURE AND STRUCTUREIRJET Journal
This document discusses 3D printing in architecture and structures. It begins with an introduction to 3D printing and additive manufacturing, describing how 3D printers build three-dimensional objects by laying down successive layers of material based on a digital file. It then discusses some key aspects of 3D printing like extrusion deposition which extrudes plastics, and granular material binding which uses laser sintering of powders. The document emphasizes how 3D printing can reduce costs, decrease risks, and create new design opportunities compared to traditional manufacturing.
3D printing is fully described here. Anyone can understand it by going through the slides just once. Each slide is carefully created with no errors. Engineering students you can see this and make your own slides.
1) The document discusses 3D printing technology and provides an overview of its history and applications. It describes how 3D printers work by depositing thin layers of material to build up a 3D object based on a digital design file.
2) The key 3D printing techniques - fused deposition modeling (FDM) and stereolithography - are introduced. The growth of 3D printing applications from rapid prototyping to production of end-use parts in industries like defense, aerospace, automotive and biomedical is noted.
3) A timeline of milestones in 3D printing development is given, from the invention of the main techniques in the 1980s to recent innovations and expanding applications in medicine, transportation
3D printing, also known as additive manufacturing, is a process that creates three-dimensional solid objects from a digital file by building up successive layers of material. The digital file is first designed in a CAD program or scanned with a 3D scanner. The file is then sliced into thin horizontal layers and printed one layer at a time. There are several 3D printing technologies that differ in how the layers are deposited including photopolymerization, material extrusion, powder bed fusion, and directed energy deposition. 3D printing has applications in rapid prototyping, healthcare, entertainment, and is expected to significantly impact and transform many industries.
This document discusses 3D printing, including how it works, the different processes and technologies involved, and examples of applications. It begins by explaining that 3D printing involves creating 3D objects by laying down successive layers of material using additive processes based on a digital file. It then describes the main technologies like stereolithography, fused deposition modeling, and selective laser sintering that work by melting or curing materials layer by layer. Finally, it outlines examples of 3D printing applications and discusses the growth of the 3D printing industry.
CREATING 3D MODELS WITH 3D PRINTING PROCESS ijcsit
This scientific paper will cover the process of creating two 3D objects, accompanied by a brief history of
3D printing technology, designing the model in CAD software, saving in appropriate format supported by
the 3D printer, features of technology and the printer, materials from which the object can be made and
examples where the products created by the 3D printing process can be applied. The printing of models
was made by the studio "Xtrude Design & 3D Print" in Skopje. Two 3D models have been printed. A
creative model of intertwined 4 triangles in STL file format has been made, which will be transferred and
printed with PLA material. The model with the heart on the stand is printed with popular FDM process
also with PLA material which is biodegradable and environmentally friendly. Both models are printed on
Anet A8 3D printer. Different printing times, layer thicknesses and cost price of producion we have in our
research.
This document discusses the process of creating 3D models for 3D printing. It begins with an introduction to 3D printing technology and processes like fused deposition modeling (FDM). It then discusses designing 3D models in software like 3D Studio Max, including considerations for making models printable. Two models were printed - an intertwined triangle shape and a heart on a stand. Both were printed using FDM with polylactide (PLA) plastic material. The heart model took longer to print at 5 hours compared to the triangle model which took 3 hours and 20 minutes. The document analyzes and compares the two models and printing process.
International Conference on NLP, Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning an...gerogepatton
International Conference on NLP, Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning and Applications (NLAIM 2024) offers a premier global platform for exchanging insights and findings in the theory, methodology, and applications of NLP, Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning, and their applications. The conference seeks substantial contributions across all key domains of NLP, Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning, and their practical applications, aiming to foster both theoretical advancements and real-world implementations. With a focus on facilitating collaboration between researchers and practitioners from academia and industry, the conference serves as a nexus for sharing the latest developments in the field.
Using recycled concrete aggregates (RCA) for pavements is crucial to achieving sustainability. Implementing RCA for new pavement can minimize carbon footprint, conserve natural resources, reduce harmful emissions, and lower life cycle costs. Compared to natural aggregate (NA), RCA pavement has fewer comprehensive studies and sustainability assessments.
Embedded machine learning-based road conditions and driving behavior monitoringIJECEIAES
Car accident rates have increased in recent years, resulting in losses in human lives, properties, and other financial costs. An embedded machine learning-based system is developed to address this critical issue. The system can monitor road conditions, detect driving patterns, and identify aggressive driving behaviors. The system is based on neural networks trained on a comprehensive dataset of driving events, driving styles, and road conditions. The system effectively detects potential risks and helps mitigate the frequency and impact of accidents. The primary goal is to ensure the safety of drivers and vehicles. Collecting data involved gathering information on three key road events: normal street and normal drive, speed bumps, circular yellow speed bumps, and three aggressive driving actions: sudden start, sudden stop, and sudden entry. The gathered data is processed and analyzed using a machine learning system designed for limited power and memory devices. The developed system resulted in 91.9% accuracy, 93.6% precision, and 92% recall. The achieved inference time on an Arduino Nano 33 BLE Sense with a 32-bit CPU running at 64 MHz is 34 ms and requires 2.6 kB peak RAM and 139.9 kB program flash memory, making it suitable for resource-constrained embedded systems.
Understanding Inductive Bias in Machine LearningSUTEJAS
This presentation explores the concept of inductive bias in machine learning. It explains how algorithms come with built-in assumptions and preferences that guide the learning process. You'll learn about the different types of inductive bias and how they can impact the performance and generalizability of machine learning models.
The presentation also covers the positive and negative aspects of inductive bias, along with strategies for mitigating potential drawbacks. We'll explore examples of how bias manifests in algorithms like neural networks and decision trees.
By understanding inductive bias, you can gain valuable insights into how machine learning models work and make informed decisions when building and deploying them.
Comparative analysis between traditional aquaponics and reconstructed aquapon...bijceesjournal
The aquaponic system of planting is a method that does not require soil usage. It is a method that only needs water, fish, lava rocks (a substitute for soil), and plants. Aquaponic systems are sustainable and environmentally friendly. Its use not only helps to plant in small spaces but also helps reduce artificial chemical use and minimizes excess water use, as aquaponics consumes 90% less water than soil-based gardening. The study applied a descriptive and experimental design to assess and compare conventional and reconstructed aquaponic methods for reproducing tomatoes. The researchers created an observation checklist to determine the significant factors of the study. The study aims to determine the significant difference between traditional aquaponics and reconstructed aquaponics systems propagating tomatoes in terms of height, weight, girth, and number of fruits. The reconstructed aquaponics system’s higher growth yield results in a much more nourished crop than the traditional aquaponics system. It is superior in its number of fruits, height, weight, and girth measurement. Moreover, the reconstructed aquaponics system is proven to eliminate all the hindrances present in the traditional aquaponics system, which are overcrowding of fish, algae growth, pest problems, contaminated water, and dead fish.
ACEP Magazine edition 4th launched on 05.06.2024Rahul
This document provides information about the third edition of the magazine "Sthapatya" published by the Association of Civil Engineers (Practicing) Aurangabad. It includes messages from current and past presidents of ACEP, memories and photos from past ACEP events, information on life time achievement awards given by ACEP, and a technical article on concrete maintenance, repairs and strengthening. The document highlights activities of ACEP and provides a technical educational article for members.
Literature Review Basics and Understanding Reference Management.pptxDr Ramhari Poudyal
Three-day training on academic research focuses on analytical tools at United Technical College, supported by the University Grant Commission, Nepal. 24-26 May 2024
Redefining brain tumor segmentation: a cutting-edge convolutional neural netw...IJECEIAES
Medical image analysis has witnessed significant advancements with deep learning techniques. In the domain of brain tumor segmentation, the ability to
precisely delineate tumor boundaries from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)
scans holds profound implications for diagnosis. This study presents an ensemble convolutional neural network (CNN) with transfer learning, integrating
the state-of-the-art Deeplabv3+ architecture with the ResNet18 backbone. The
model is rigorously trained and evaluated, exhibiting remarkable performance
metrics, including an impressive global accuracy of 99.286%, a high-class accuracy of 82.191%, a mean intersection over union (IoU) of 79.900%, a weighted
IoU of 98.620%, and a Boundary F1 (BF) score of 83.303%. Notably, a detailed comparative analysis with existing methods showcases the superiority of
our proposed model. These findings underscore the model’s competence in precise brain tumor localization, underscoring its potential to revolutionize medical
image analysis and enhance healthcare outcomes. This research paves the way
for future exploration and optimization of advanced CNN models in medical
imaging, emphasizing addressing false positives and resource efficiency.
2. Analytical Chemistry Feature
Figure 1. Graphic representation of information in an .STL file. The object, shown on the left, was created in a CAD program and was subsequently
saved as an .STL file. The graphical information displayed in the .STL file is shown on the right for the same object. Notice that the surface of the
object is triangulated. The spatial coordinates of the triangle vertices are stored in the .STL file, and that information is transmitted to the printer for
fabrication.
■ 3D PRINTING METHODS
Overview and .STL Format. 3D printing is utilized for the
rapid prototyping of 3D models originally generated by a
computer aided design (CAD) program, e.g., AutoDesk,
AutoCAD, SolidWorks, or Creo Parametric. The original
design is drafted in a CAD program, where it is then converted
to an .STL (Standard Tessellation Language or STereo-
Lithography) file. The .STL file format, developed by Hull at
3D systems, has been accepted as the gold standard for data
transfer between the CAD software and a 3D printer. The .STL
file stores the information for each surface of the 3D model in
the form of triangulated sections, where the coordinates of the
vertices are defined in a text file.12 By increasing the number of
triangles that define a surface, more data points exist in the text
file to spatially define the part surface. This increase in vertices
results in an increased resolution of the printed device. A visual
example of how an .STL file triangulates the defined surfaces
can be seen in Figure 1.
The 3D printer interprets the digitally supplied coordinates
derived from the .STL file by converting the file into a G-file via
slicer software present in the 3D printer. The G-file divides the
3D .STL file into a sequence of two-dimensional (2D)
horizontal cross sections (25−100 μm, depending on the
fabrication technique),13 which allows the 3D object to be
printed, starting at the base, in consecutive layers of the desired
material, essentially constructing the model from a series of 2D
layers derived from the original CAD file.14,15 Development of
better slicing algorithms to improve the finished product
characteristics is an active area in engineering research.16
In the medical field, several other methods are utilized to
generate 3D object renderings, e.g., computerized tomography
(CT), laser scanning, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI),
which generate data that can all be converted to the .STL
format. When merging this digital scanning technology with 3D
printing, physicians are able to model the digital images
obtained through CTs or MRIs by utilizing CAD software to
create an .STL file and subsequently an exact replica of the
original scan is printed.17
There is an assortment of 3D printing techniques ranging
from well-established methods, which have been employed in
industrial settings for years, to more recent techniques under
development in research laboratories that are used for more
specific applications. In the next section, we will expand on five
of the more pertinent systems: stereolithography (3D systems),
inkjet printing (Z Corporation), selective laser sintering (EOS
GmbH), fused deposition modeling (Stratasys), and laminate
object manufacturing (Cubic Technologies).
Stereolithography (SLA). Developed by Chuck Hull at 3D
Systems,2 SLA was the first commercialized rapid prototyping
method. There are several different approaches to SLA,13,18−20
including direct/laser writing (Figure 2A) and mask-based
Figure 2. (A) Schematic of a bath configuration SLA printer with a
direct write curing process. The stage is located just below the surface
of the liquid resin. A single laser moves along the surface of the resin,
row by row, until completely curing the desired layer. To initiate the
following layer, the stage sinks lower into the vat until a new layer of
liquid resin covers the surface and the curing process repeats. (B)
Schematic of a layer configuration SLA printer with a projection based
curing method. In this particular configuration of an SLA printer, the
stage is submerged a defined distance into the photopolymer reservoir.
Next, a laser is guided to the stage to polymerize the material in the
reservoir that is between the laser and the stage. In the projection
based curing method, the digital mirror device allows for a whole layer
to be cured simultaneously. The stage can then be raised again by a
defined distance, and another layer can be cured. This procedure
repeats until the object is printed.
writing (Figure 2B, digital light projection).20,21 The various
approaches can be broken up into a free surface (Figure 2A,
bath configuration)22,23 or constrained surface technique
(Figure 2B, layer configuration)24−26 depending on the
orientation of the laser source. The direct/laser writing
technique contains the common components of a movable
base, a tank of liquid resin, a UV light beam, and a computer
interface. The mask-based writing also contains the movable
platform, resin vat, computer, and UV beam as well as a “mask”
in the form of a digital mirror device (DMD) that allows for the
curing of a single layer at once.
In the bath configuration, the UV beam traces a 2D cross
section onto a base submerged in a tank of liquid photoactive
resin that polymerizes upon illumination. The thickness of the
3241 dx.doi.org/10.1021/ac403397r | Anal. Chem. 2014, 86, 3240−3253
3. Analytical Chemistry Feature
Figure 3. (A) Schematic of an inkjet printing apparatus. For this printing process, the fabrication stage is lowered a defined distance from its initial
level. Then, the powder material that will form the device is leveled onto the stage with a roller. An inkjet printing head then prints liquid binding
material onto the powder to form one layer of the object. The stage lowers a defined distance again, and the process repeats. (B) Schematic of an
SLS 3D printer. The printing steps in SLS are nearly identical to that in inkjet printing, i.e., the stage lowers a defined distance and powder is rolled
onto the stage. However, in SLS, a guided laser sinters the material to form the object.
cured resin is dependent upon such factors as duration of
exposure, scan speed, and intensity of the power source, all of
which depend on the energy of the UV light. After completion
of the 2D cross section, the base lowers further into the resin by
a predefined distance, and the UV beam begins the addition of
the next layer, which is polymerized on top of the previous
layer. In between layers, a blade loaded with resin levels the
surface of the resin to ensure a uniform layer of liquid prior to
another round of UV light exposure. This process is repeated,
slice by slice, until the 3D object is completed. The bath
configuration is the oldest technique for SLA,2 and drawbacks
include the size of the vat restricting the height of the desired
object, resin waste, and extensive cleaning procedures, making
the layer configuration an attractive alternative.22,23
The layer configuration requires the same components as the
bath configuration. However, the movable platform is
suspended above the resin reservoir, in contrast to the bath
configuration where it is submerged. The light source is located
beneath the vat, which has an optically clear bottom. The
change in setup requires lower volumes of resin, and the height
of the printed part is unrestricted. A thin layer of resin fills a
reservoir where it comes in contact with the movable platform.
After the initial layer cures, the platform raises, with uncured
resin filling the gaps left from the cured layer. If the resin has a
high viscosity, the filling step can become quite tedious. The
previous steps are repeated until the device is completed (with
minimal cleaning stages in comparison to those of the bath
configuration).24−26
In both configurations, a post fabrication step, using a UV
light to guarantee all reactive groups of the resin are
polymerized, is required to strengthen the bonding in the
final 3D object.27,28 The direct laser writing method, while able
to generate detailed 3D objects, is time-consuming. The mask-based
approach uses the same fundamentals as the afore-mentioned
direct/laser writing, but in a high throughput
application where a DMD employs millions of mirrors that can
be simultaneously controlled. The specific control of the
mirrors allows an entire layer to be cured at once, greatly
reducing layer production time.18,20 The thickness of the cured
layer (CD) can be expressed by the following equation:
CD = DP ln(E/EC)
The intensity of the light source (E), the critical energy of the
resin (EC), and the depth of light penetration (DP) are all key
aspects that define the cured layer.20,29 It is important to
optimize the layer thickness to increase the curing efficiency,
and this information can also be utilized to guide resin choice
based on critical energies. The vertical resolution, which is
dependent on the cured layer thickness, has been reported at
submicrometer to single-digit micrometer resolution, and the
lateral resolution depends directly upon the diameter of the UV
beam (80−250 μm).18,22,27,30
The choice of UV light source varies depending on the resin,
but common sources include the HeCd laser (325 nm)18,25 and
the xenon lamp.26 Two photon polymerization has also been
used in SLA fabrication to reach higher resolutions of final
printed objects.31 Resins are one of the main limitations of SLA,
not only due to the cost associated with the resin but also due
to the fact that only one resin can be used in the printing
process at a time, thus limiting overall device design. Resins are
limited to either epoxy or acrylic bases, and the majority of
these materials are brittle and can shrink upon polymer-ization.
13,27 SLA 3D printers are traditionally expensive, but
high resolution (25 μm layers) and efficient (1.5 cm/h building
speed) desktop models are becoming more accessible to
laboratories and even personal homes.32
Inkjet Printing. The concept of inkjet printing was initially
described in 1878 by Lord Rayleigh,33 and in 1951, Siemens
patented the first two-dimensional (2D) inkjet type printer
called a Rayleigh break-up inkjet device.34 Since its advent,
inkjet printing has served much use in commercial industry,
mostly for printing inks on paper. However, as far back as 2001,
inkjet printing has also been used for printing structures out of
sol−gel, conductive polymers, ceramic, metal, and nucleic acid
or protein materials, as described in reviews.35
The two main types of inkjet printing are continuous and
drop-on-demand (DOD). The continuous inkjet printing
technique, which was developed by Sweet at Stanford
University in the mid 1960s, requires electrostatic plates in
the printer head to direct ink droplets onto paper for printing
or into a waste compartment to be recycled and reused.36 The
3242 dx.doi.org/10.1021/ac403397r | Anal. Chem. 2014, 86, 3240−3253
4. Analytical Chemistry Feature
droplet size and spacing are controlled by application of a
pressure wave pattern. In the DOD technique (Figure 3A),
which was pioneered by Zoltan37 and Kyser and Sears,38 a
voltage and pressure pulse directs the ink droplet, eliminating
the need for the separation of waste ink from the printer head.
Since the advent of the two main inkjet printing methods, there
has been significant development of new printing techniques in
both categories.
3D inkjet printing is mainly a powder-based method where
layers of solid particles, typically 200 μm in height with particle
sizes ranging between 50 and 100 μm,39 are bound together by
a printed liquid material to generate a 3D model. Specifically, a
first layer of powder is distributed evenly on the top of a
support stage, e.g., by a roller, after which an inkjet printer head
prints droplets of liquid binding material onto the powder layer
at desired areas of solidification. After the first layer is
completed, the stage drops and a second powder layer is
distributed and selectively combined with printed binding
material. These steps are repeated until a 3D model is
generated, after which the model is usually heat-treated to
enhance the binding of the powders at desired regions.
Unbound powder serves as support material during the process
and is removed after fabrication.
As a powder-based 3D printing technique, inkjet printing
does not require photopolymerizable materials or liquids with
modified viscosities. Powders from polymer, ceramic, or glass
materials can be combined with liquid binding materials to
generate a 3D model,40 which has significantly expanded the
technique’s application in areas like art design and industrial
modeling.41 Biological scaffold fabrication,42 which will be
discussed in more detail in later sections particularly with
respect to drug delivery studies, was impacted by the
aforementioned technique. However, one caveat for the
method is that the printed liquid’s chemical and physical
properties will dominate those of the printed device. For
example, many polymer glues are biologically toxic and thus
cannot be used for tissue scaffold fabrication.43 Another
limitation of inkjet printing is the optical transparency of
finished devices; incomplete interaction of binding liquid with
powder particles can cause a material to have reduced
transparency due to light scattering, which would be a severe
limitation for microscopy studies. Unbound particles can also
result in significant porosity of finished materials and surface
roughness, which, depending on the application, can be an
advantage or limitation. However, nonpowder based (usually
polymer-based) inkjet methods do exist,44 e.g., Stratasys PolyJet
technology, which can print 16 μm photopolymer layers.45
Selective Laser Sintering (SLS). Developed by Carl
Deckard and Joseph Beaman in the Mechanical Engineering
Department at the University of Texas-Austin in the mid-
1980s,46 SLS is another powder-based 3D model fabrication
method. Although SLS is similar to inkjet printing (Figure 3),
SLS uses a high power laser, e.g, CO2 and Nd:YAG,47 to sinter
polymer powders to generate a 3D model, rather than using
liquid binding materials to glue powder particles together. In
the SLS process, a first layer of powder is distributed evenly
onto a stage by a roller and is then heated to a temperature just
below the powder’s melting point. Following the cross-sectional
profiles designated in the .STL file, a laser beam is selectively
scanned over the powder to raise the local temperature to the
powder’s melting point to fuse powder particles together. After
the first layer is completed, a second layer of powder is added,
leveled, and sintered in the desired areas. These steps are
repeated to create a 3D model. The powders that are not
sintered by the laser serve as support material during the
process and are removed after fabrication. Figure 3B provides a
schematic of the process of SLS. A more detailed discussion of
SLS basics such as laser types and binding mechanisms can be
found in the literature.47,48
One advantage of SLS is that a wide range of materials can be
used, from polymers such as polycarbonate (PC), polyvinyl
chloride (PVC), acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS), nylon,
resin, and polyester49 to metal and ceramic powders.50,51 Also, a
binding liquid material is not required in SLS. However, SLS
printed models suffer shrinkage or deformation due to thermal
heating from the laser and subsequent cooling, which has been
under investigation in the literature for some time.52 Achievable
resolutions in SLS techniques are dependent on multiple
parameters including laser power and focusing as well as the
size of the powder material. Work is ongoing to push fabricated
feature sizes using SLS below that of inkjet printing techniques,
roughly below 50 μm.50,53
Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM). Developed by Scott
Crump of Stratasys, FDM is one of the most widely used
manufacturing technologies for rapid prototyping today. FDM
fabricates a 3D model by extruding thermoplastic materials and
depositing the semimolten materials onto a stage layer by
layer.15,40,54 As shown in the schematic process in Figure 4,
Figure 4. Schematic of an FDM 3D printer. In this method, plastic
filament is directed into a heating block where it is heated to a
semimolten state. The molten material can be printed onto an
adjustable stage to form a layer of the desired object. The stage is
adjusted (lowered) and another semimolten layer is printed.
thermoplastic filaments, the material used to build 3D models,
are moved by two rollers down to the nozzle tip of the extruder
of a print head, where they are heated by temperature control
units to a semimolten state. As the print head traces the design
of each defined cross-sectional layer horizontally, the semi-molten
materials are extruded out of the nozzle and solidified in
the desired areas. The stage then lowers and another layer is
deposited in the same way. These steps are repeated to
fabricate a 3D structure in a layer-by-layer manner. The outline
of the part is usually printed first, with the internal structures
(2D plane) printed layer by layer. Surface defects from this
particular process include staircase and chordal effects resulting
3243 dx.doi.org/10.1021/ac403397r | Anal. Chem. 2014, 86, 3240−3253
5. Analytical Chemistry Feature
from the nature of the slicing software and .STL file format.
Internal defects can result from heterogeneities in the filament
feed diameter and density, as these can effect how the material
is extruded from the printer nozzle.55
A notable advantage of FDM is that it can create objects
fabricated from multiple material types by printing and
subsequently changing the print material, which enables more
user control over device fabrication for experimental use.
Besides conventional materials such as PC, polystyrene (PS),
and ABS, FDM can also print 3D models out of glass reinforced
polymers,56 metal,57,58 ceramics,57,59 and bioresorbable materi-als.
60 However, a binder is typically mixed with ceramic or
metal powders, enabling the material to be used in a filament
form.57
Laminated Object Manufacturing (LOM). LOM, devel-oped
by Helisys,61 generates a 3D model by stacking layers of
defined sheet materials such as paper, plastic, and metal.49 As
shown in the schematics in Figure 5, after the first layer of a
sheet material is loaded onto a stage, a laser (CO2 lasers have
been used62) or razor traces the designed cross-section to
define the pattern on the layer.63 After the excess material of
the sheet is removed, a second layer covers the previous layer
and the laser or knife tracing will define the next pattern based
on information in the .STL file. Adjacent layers are combined
by use of adhesives or welding,64 e.g., for paper or metal,
respectively. These steps are repeated to generate a layered 3D
model.
The LOM process does require a heating step during
production, either on the support stage or on the roller, to
ensure that the adhesive acts to bond the sheets together. The
effects of this step on the nonuniformities in the fabricated part
are, in general, minimal compared to defects that arise in other
techniques, such as FDM.65 However, if the local temperature
of either the roller or the stage is not controlled well enough,
the part could become delaminated due to inefficient adhesive
heating or the part can suffer structural damage if the
temperature is high enough to damage the adhesive.66 Another
limitation of LOM is that the materials applicable for method
use are limited by their ability to be formed into sheets and to
be integrated with adhesive.
Each additive manufacturing technique described above has
its own limitations and advantages in producing prototype
models. For a better understanding, numerous comparisons of
these rapid prototyping techniques have been reported in
detail.40,67 Table 1 addresses the principle, materials, solvent
compatibility, resolution, cost, and applications associated with
the five 3D printing techniques discussed above.
Solvent compatibility for 3D printer materials is still under
exploration; however, polymer reactivity, as well as the other
mentioned materials’ reactivities, with aqueous and organic
solvents are generally known and well documented. It is
anticipated that as techniques and materials become more
popular in the chemical and biochemical community, solvent
compatibility will become less of a variable in such studies. In
the methods that require a laser, resolution is determined not
only by the laser spot size but also by the physical properties of
the materials that govern the polymerization (SLA) or the
thermal heating and cooling (SLS and LOM). Resolutions in
the other mentioned techniques are limited by a material’s
cooling properties (FDM), viscosity, and nozzle diameter.
Printer costs were obtained by contacting the listed company
for quotes, and printer brand name and model name are
provided, if possible. Desktop printers that may be lacking in
terms of resolution are generally <$10,000 while midtier
printers can cost up to $100,000. Printers for industrial use,
high resolution, or for high throughput printing can cost
$250,000 or more. These price points are estimates of the
market prices.
■ CURRENT APPLICATIONS
The assortment of topics that follows is not meant to be an
inclusive list on the full applications of 3D printing technology.
Rather, it aims to give the reader an appreciation for the
potential 3D printing has in an array of disciplines. Specifically,
the topics to be discussed are the applications of rapid
prototyping in biomedical engineering, pharmacokinetics/
pharmacodynamics, forensic science, education, micro/macro-fluidics,
electronics, scaling (industry), and customizable
labware.
Biological Applications. Biomedical Engineering. Tissue
Scaffolding. Additive manufacturing has found widespread use
as a tool to bioengineer tissue, varying in composition from
bone and teeth to vascular and organ scaffolding. Major
concerns when introducing a foreign scaffold to the body are
the ability of the material to be absorbed by the body
(bioresorption) and whether or not it will be rejected by the
body (biocompatibility). For these reasons, scaffolds are
traditionally comprised of tissue taken from the individual in
need (autogenous tissue). However, in some cases the required
scaffold area is large enough that autogenous tissue sampling is
not feasible for the patient. The ability to customize a 3D
printed scaffold for tissue regeneration allows for individualized
treatment while avoiding the need to sample from the patient’s
own tissue for scaffold formation. In this respect, 3D printing
has become an attractive avenue for the development of
biocompatible materials that are resorbable.68,69 Electrospin-ning
is one of several fabrication methods that have been
conventionally used for bone scaffold materials and is capable
of fabricating bone replicate fibers that are submicrometer to
nanometer in diameter. This fabrication technique relies on a
high voltage power supply to electrospray a polymer feed
solution containing nanoparticles of bone substitute from a
nozzle onto a conductive rotating drum. Limitations with this
Figure 5. Schematic of an LOM 3D printer. A sheet of material to
form the object is rolled over the stage, and a laser (shown here) or a
razor can trace the outline of the desired object. The excess material is
removed, the stage is adjusted, and another layer of material is rolled
over the stage. Each layer is secured to the previous by an adhesive in
the case of paper or by welding when metals are employed as the
material.
3244 dx.doi.org/10.1021/ac403397r | Anal. Chem. 2014, 86, 3240−3253
6. Table 1. Comparison of 3D Printing Methods
method principle materials solvent compatibility
resolution (XY/Z)
(μm) [ref] cost (USD) applications [ref]
SLA UV initiated curing of
defined photoresin
layers
Epoxy or acrylate based resins with proprietary photoinitiators, support material is mix of
propy-lene/polyethylene glycols, glycerin, and/or acrylate
Most polymer materials can
absorb small organic mole-cules
and can absorb organic
or aqueous solvents resulting
in swelling of the bulk ma-terial
70−250/1−10, <1
with two photon
polymerization;
refs 13, 26, 31, 130
Formlabs Forml 3 299; 3D
Systems ProX 950: >500 000
refs 13, 22, 136
Inkjet Powder-liquid binding;
Polyjet technology
(hybrid between SLA
and Inkjet) allows
inkjet printing of
photoresins
Photoresins or more commonly, plaster powder particles (50−100 μm in diameter) Most polymer materials can
absorb small organic mole-cules
and can absorb organic
or aqueous solvents resulting
in swelling of the bulk ma-terial
20−50/50;
refs 35, 131
3D Systems Zcorp Zprinter
150: 16 580, 650: 59 000,
850: 93 000; Stratasys (pol-yjet)
Objet 30: 55 660, Objet
24: 19 900
refs 76, 106, 107
SLS Laser induced heating of
powder particles
Powdered PC, PVC, ABS, nylon, resin, polyester, metals, ceramic powders Most polymer materials can
absorb small organic mole-cules
and can absorb organic
or aqueous solvents resulting
in swelling of the bulk ma-terial
50/1−2;
refs 132−134
3D Systems: 250−450 000 ref 100
FDM Extrusion of molten
thermoplastics
Wax blends, PC, PS, ABS, nylon, metals/ceramics (with binder) Most polymer materials can
absorb small organic mole-cules
and can absorb organic
or aqueous solvents resulting
in swelling of the bulk ma-terial
250/50; refs 15, 89 Stratasys Mojo: 9 900, Dimen-sion:
34 900, UPrint: 20 900;
Makerbot Replicator 2 000
refs 15, 137
LOM Laser/razor cutting of
heated, adhesive
coated sheet material
Adhesive-coated polymer, paper, cellulose, metal sheets Paper or cellulose may not be
amenable to some chemical
applications
10/100; refs 15, 135 Cubic Technologies 14 995 ref 138
Analytical Chemistry Feature
3245 dx.doi.org/10.1021/ac403397r | Anal. Chem. 2014, 86, 3240−3253
7. Analytical Chemistry Feature
Figure 6. 3D printed bionic ear. Computer schematic of completed bionic ear (left). 3D printed silicon scaffold incorporating chondrocytes and
silver nanoparticles for cochlea formation (center). Experimental setup of bionic ear complete with electronic modalities (right). Reprinted from ref
91. Copyright 2013 American Chemical Society.
Figure 7. 3D printing technologies used for microvascular formation. Direct printing of fugitive ink into a photocurable gel reservoir (left). Void
spaces are filled in with a liquid filler chemically resembling the gel reservoir. After photopolymerization of the filler and gel reservoir, the printed ink
is removed by liquification (center). Fluorescent image of red stained fugitive ink in a completed microvasculature device (right). Scale bar = 10 mm.
Reprinted with permission from ref 96. Copyright 2011 John Wiley & Sons.
method include the utilization of a high voltage (often >20 kV)
as well as lack of control over scaffold geometry and porosity as
is encountered with other traditional methods.70,71
Autogeneous bone is ideal for bone graphs, as it allows for
new bone growth at the implantation site due to already
present growth factors. The risk of infection, often seen with
foreign implants, is lowered in patients with autogenous
grafts.72 Many bone replicate materials are made from calcium
phosphate ceramics (tricalcium phosphate (TCP, Ca3(PO4)2),
hydroxyapatite (HA, Ca10(PO4)6(OH)2), calcium phosphate
cements (CPC), monetite (CaHPO4), or brushite (CaHPO4·
2H2O)), as these are comparable to the mineral components of
bone.72,73 This is not an exclusive list, however, as new
combinations of materials are being tested for increased
bioresorption and biocompatibility, such as a β-TCP and
bioactive glass mixture.74 These materials are made into 3D
scaffolds by selective laser sintering,75 inkjet-based printing,76 or
printing the powdered form of the chosen material with an
organic binder to form a ceramic 3D scaffold.77 The porosity of
the implant becomes important as implant adhesion to bone
occurs through bone ingrowth into the pores of the prosthetic78
and it facilitates biodegradability of the scaffold due to reduced
material presence.76 Ideal porosity and pore size of the 3D
printed scaffold to encourage bone ingrowth have been
reported as 30−70% and 500−1000 μm, respectively.78
However, micro to macroscopic pore sizes ranging from less
than 20 μm to 0.5 mm have been reported.79,80 Each of the
bone replicate materials have a different pore size and
achievable porosity,81 and the choice of bone scaffold material
depends largely on the purpose of the graft, as the materials
used to form 3D grafts have variable resorption times.72 For
example, monetite structures have been found to absorb faster
into muscle than brushite.77 Many articles have outlined
fabrication and in vivo and/or in vitro testing of various bone
substitute materials,76,82,83 with 3D printed materials displaying
comparable biocompatibility to commercial bone substitutes.80
Soft tissues have previously been fabricated using a number
of techniques including thermally induced phase separation.84
This technique requires a polymer mixed with a solvent to be
injected into a glass mold; after several tedious steps (including
3 h in liquid nitrogen, followed by a 7 day incubation in alcohol
to remove the solvent, and a day to dry) the scaffold is
completed. Traditional techniques for soft tissue fabrication
suffer from lengthy protocols and a lack of control with regards
to scaffold porosity.71 Producing synthetic organs for organ
transplants is plausible when utilizing 3D tissue engineering.
While the technology is still far from achieving this ambitious
goal, 3D printing allows for the printing of cells and hydrogels,
which are hydrated polymers that provide a biodegradable
structure onto which cells can adhere and grow.85 When using
hydrogels for tissue engineering, the scaffold must be
biocompatible, retain its structure, and allow for cell adherence
and growth.86 Scaffold dimensions range from μm to mm, with
a variety of materials available depending on the desired
scaffold strength, porosity, and type of tissue application (soft
or hard). Hydrogels are most suited for soft tissues.87 Ideal
porosity composition of scaffolds for tissue engineering has
been reported to be between 60 and 80%, with pore sizes
ranging from 100 to 500 μm.88 Reviews by Tsang and Bhatia,89
Fedorovich et al.,90 and Yeong et al.71 highlight 3D tissue
engineering techniques available for printing cells and tissue
scaffold materials as well as the various compositions that can
3246 dx.doi.org/10.1021/ac403397r | Anal. Chem. 2014, 86, 3240−3253
8. Analytical Chemistry Feature
Figure 8. Use of 3D printing for presurgical planning. MRI, CT, magnetic resonance angiography (MRA), and digital subtraction angiography
(DSA) were used to create the 3D computer models of the cranial anatomy. SLS was used to print realistic color models of the anatomy for
simulating tumor removal. (A) Computer schematic of 3D model obtained from imaging of patient anatomy. (B) Resulting 3D printed plaster model
used for simulation. (C) Detailed 3D printed plaster models for surgical simulation. (D) Presurgical performance of procedures on a printed model
viewed microscopically. Reprinted with permission from ref 101. Copyright 2013 The Journal of Neurosurgery Publishing Group.
be selected to suit a specific application. Inkjet and direct
writing are commonly used 3D printing techniques for soft
tissue fabrication and offer a faster completion time than their
predecessors.
Examples of hydrogel applications for tissue engineering
encompass a vast array of organ and soft tissues. Incorporation
of support (silicon), biological (chondrocytes), and electronic
(conducting silver nanoparticles) modalities has led to the
development of an anatomically correct 3D printed bionic ear
(Figure 6) capable of detecting electromagnetic frequencies
produced from a stereo.91 The liver has proven difficult to
recreate on a 3D platform due to its complex structure. There
are a number of rapid prototyping techniques that lend
themselves to the fabrication of bioartificial livers, each with
their own advantages and disadvantages.92 Despite the apparent
challenges, there are a variety of examples where hepatocytes
were successfully integrated into a 3D printed scaffold.93,94
With the number of diseases that affect the cardiovascular
system, it is appropriate to apply tissue engineering for
vasculature reconstruction. This has been accomplished using
a variety of rapid prototyping techniques and materials, from
designs as simple as a single channel,95 to designs that recreate
the complex geometries of vascular pathways,96 and even
scaffolds based off complex collagen forms.97 Figure 7 shows an
example of intricate microvascular construction using 3D
printing.
Surgical Preparation. 3D printing has facilitated advance-ment
in individualized patient care, allowing for development of
patient specific treatment plans via the printing of patient
anatomy. Having a tangible model of the patient’s anatomy that
can be studied before surgery serves to better prepare
physicians than relying solely on 3D images acquired by MRI
or CT scans, which are viewed on a flat screen.68 Furthermore,
having an exact replica of the anatomy allows for medical
procedures to be simulated beforehand. Although still in a
mostly exploratory stage, there have already been numerous
cases where 3D printed models have been used to gain insight
into a patient’s specific anatomy prior to performing a medical
procedure. Namely, this methodology has been applied in
recreating a calcified aorta with 3D printing to develop a
procedure for plaque removal presurgery,98 using a 3D model
of bone growths on a shoulder to aid in surgical organization of
their removal,99 constructing a premature infant’s airway to
study aerosol drug delivery to the lungs,100 and simulating
presurgical tumor removal from a skull and deep tissue, as seen
in Figure 8.101
Pharmacokinetics/Pharmacodynamics. Inkjet-based 3D
printing has been used extensively in the fabrication of drug
3247 dx.doi.org/10.1021/ac403397r | Anal. Chem. 2014, 86, 3240−3253
9. Analytical Chemistry Feature
delivery devices, as it allows for more control of the design and
fabrication of implants that can be used for direct treatment.
Traditional systemic treatment of localized infections affects the
intended site as well as nonafflicted tissues. In many cases, such
as the treatment of bone infections, it is advantageous to have
direct treatment without unnecessary widespread effects. 3D
printed drug implants are fabricated via the printing of binder
(a solution that is able to solubilize the chosen powder) onto a
matrix powder bed, facilitating controlled drug release by
providing a barrier between tissue and drug, or printing of
binder onto a powder bed of drug in an additive manner,
resulting in layers that are typically 200 μm thick.102,103 In this
manner, a number of different drug delivery devices have been
designed that allow for various drug release profiles. Additive
manufacturing technology has been used to fabricate drug
delivery devices that are more porous than their compression-based
counterparts and can incorporate powdered drugs,104
allowing for faster drug release. These devices can be made in a
number of complex geometries,103 with multiple drugs loaded
throughout a device, surrounded by barrier layers that modulate
drug release.102,105 Traditional compression fabricated devices
are made from a homogeneous mixture of support material and
drug and are restrained to a continuous and singular drug
release profile.106 For these reasons, 3D printed drug implants
offer several advantages over traditional fabrication methods
and have been successfully used in animal models showing
localized drug dispersion.102
Forensic Science. 3D printing has had a meaningful impact
on medical imaging in the field of forensic science, allowing for
anatomically correct recreation of bodily injuries from CT and
MRI scans. For example, models of both internal and external
wounds have been recreated that allow for better explanation of
forensic findings, while avoiding the need to present disturbing
evidence in the presence of victims’ relatives.107 3D printing
techniques were used to recreate skull fragments from a blunt
force head injury and aid in weapon identification and
determination of the mechanism of injury leading to death.108
A similar use of 3D printing saw the recreation of a skull after a
traumatic injury to deduce the cause of injury, with results
comparable to those achieved using traditional methods to
isolate bone from the victim.109 Forensic assessment of a
deformed skull from the 18th century yielded a facial
reconstruction based on a 3D printed version of the skull,
from which authors inferred the cause of deformation.110
Education. The educational applications of 3D printing
extend beyond the study of anatomically correct models of
body parts in healthy and diseased states.111 As the technology
becomes more affordable, its use in educational settings is more
commonplace. Recently, a model of a polypeptide chain has
been fabricated using 3D printing and is able to mimic folding
into secondary structures due to incorporation of bond
rotational barriers and degrees of freedom considerations.112
Such a model could greatly aid in students’ ability to
comprehend peptide structure, and the application need not
be limited to biomacromolecules. Studies have led to the
conclusion that students were better able to conceptualize
biomolecular structures when using 3D models, as confirmed
by administering pre- and postcomprehension tests.113,114
Chemical Applications. Micro/Macrofluidics. 3D printing
stands to have a substantial impact on the field of microfluidics
and lab on a chip technology. While the possible functions of
3D printed microfluidic devices are far reaching, utilization of
3D printing for bioanalytical research seems a likely extension
of previous efforts made with 3D environments to control cell
patterning using soft lithography.115 And while soft lithography
has proven successful for this purpose, as noted in a review by
Kane et al.,116 there are many benefits to moving to a 3D
printed regime. Compared to the lithographic techniques
typically employed by many educational laboratories, ours not
excluded, 3D printing offers a much simpler fabrication process
by foregoing the need to use a master for replica molding.117
What has made soft lithography-based PDMS microfluidic
devices attractive as a rapid prototyping tool lies in the user’s
ability to fine-tune the device easily until the desired effect is
achieved, all within a short period of time. Rightly so, the
comparison of 3D printing to standard microfluidic fabrication
techniques as well as the merger of the two has already been
made by Rapp et al.117 While traditional techniques have their
value, 3D printing may be the answer to some of the troubles
that have plagued traditional replica molding techniques,
including a lack of standardization between laboratories and
the labor-intensive fabrication processes.
The fabrication of a complex microvascular network
composed of 100−300 μm cylindrical channels capable of
diffusion-based mixing under laminar flow profiles as well as
mixing from turbulent flow is one of the earliest examples of 3D
printing for microfluidic applications.118 The microvascular
scaffold was fabricated layer-by-layer on a moving stage using
robotic deposition of a fugitive organic ink, a process known as
direct writing. Overall, a 16-layer scaffold could be formed in
under 3 min. Afterward, ambient-curing clear epoxy resin was
introduced as a support material for the scaffold. The fugitive
organic ink that denotes the space for the microchannels is
removed from the cured epoxy by heating at 60 °C under a
vacuum, leaving interconnected channels with root-mean-square
surface roughness on the order of tens of nanometers.
In order to form isolated complex connections between
microchannel layers, a photocurable epoxy was selectively
introduced to areas of the scaffold. Using a mask to selectively
cure portions of the epoxy following UV exposure, mixing
channels that spanned several layers of the scaffold were
formed. The extent of mixing between a red and green
fluorescent dye, when introduced at two different areas of the
device, was quantified by measuring average yellow intensity
across a mixing channel versus the complete mixing of the two
dyes off channel. Flow rates of 0.1−45 mL/h were employed
during the study. Previous efforts at 3D microfluidic devices
were made from layering sections created from conventional
lithographic techniques. While this example draws on a
combination of lithographic and 3D techniques, it serves as a
prime example of where 3D printing in microfluidic-based
microvascular mimics started.
The Cronin group fabricated a 3D printed reaction device
(0.65 mL total volume) for flow-based organic synthesis that
has been directly paired via connectors with electrospray
ionization mass spectrometry for the characterization of small
amounts of synthesized organic products. The device was made
from chemically inert polypropylene using an FDM 3D printer.
Device dimensions were 46.5 mm × 80 mm, and the internal
feature diameter was 1.5 mm. The device employed reaction
flow rates varying from 62.5 to 312.5 μL/min during
synthesis.119 Another polypropylene device used for organic
synthesis printed via FDM coming from the Cronin group
weighs 3.9 g with dimensions of 25 mm × 50 mm × 3 mm. It
consists of a reaction chamber, cylindrical channels 0.8 mm in
diameter, and has a total reaction volume of 60 μL. With this
3248 dx.doi.org/10.1021/ac403397r | Anal. Chem. 2014, 86, 3240−3253
10. Analytical Chemistry Feature
Figure 9. 3D printed fluidic devices. (Top panel) (A) Design schematic before printing . (B) Printed organic reactionware device (total volume of
270 μL) with channels stained for visualization purposes. (C) Completed device including connectors for sample introduction. Reprinted with
permission from ref 120. Copyright 2012 Royal Society of Chemistry. (Bottom panel) (D) Computer rendering of macrofluidic device. (E) Printed
device incorporating connectors for fluid flow through internal channels and membrane inserts on top of the device. Reprinted from ref 121.
Copyright 2013 American Chemical Society.
device, imine formation from a reaction of benzaldehyde and
benzylamine was characterized based on flow rates in the
reaction vessel ranging from 10 to 200 μL/min. A benefit to
these organic reactionware devices is that they can be fabricated
in a few hours, are reusable, and due to the millimeter scale of
the devices, can avoid blockages from formed products.120
Examples of 3D printed reactionware for organic synthesis can
be seen in Figure 9A−C.
Recently, work has been published by the Spence group on
the utilization of 3D printing to develop a multiple channel
device (1.5 mm deep and 3 mm wide channels) with integrated
connectors and membrane inserts, for the purpose of
monitoring drug transport through the device, capable of
affecting cells cultured on the inserts. This device, fabricated
using a polyjet-based printer, is reusable and is capable of high-throughput
studies with eight parallel channels. It integrates
with commercially available parts and syringe pumps for ease of
construction and sample delivery. For drug transport studies,
two antibiotics ranging in concentrations from 100 to 2000 nM
were flowed in a channel underneath a cell culture insert at 1
μL/min and were subsequently sampled from the insert for
analysis using mass spectrometry. Cell viability on the device
was confirmed by application of a dead cell stain to endothelial
cells after flowing saponin in the channel underneath the cell
culture insert containing the confluent layer of endothelial
cells.121 Figure 9D−E shows the 3D printed fluidic device used
for these studies.
Using stereolithography, an electrochemical flow cell has
been fabricated that can be integrated with electrodes without
the use of adhesives. The dimensions of the channel in the cell
were 3 mm in width by 3.5 mm in length and either 190 or 250
μm in height. Flow rates up to 64 mL/min were employed
without leaking. To characterize mass transport in the flow cell,
the oxidation of ferrocenylmethyl trimethylammonium hexa-florophosphate
was monitored using a two-electrode setup with
a working electrode of either gold or a polycrystalline boron-doped
diamond band and a quasi-reference electrode of a silver
chloride coated silver wire. Such a device has potential impact
on future analytical and kinetic based flow measurements.122
Electronics. There are vast applications concerning the
integration of 3D printing and electronics, and while this
partnership is still in its infancy, the foundation that has been
laid thus far is promising for future endeavors. A lithium ion
battery has been 3D printed with implications in energy
storage.123 3D printing technology has been used to fabricate a
usable electrochemical cell.124 A prototype of an electrically
conductive model was made by 3D printing a plaster-based
structure that contained carbon nanofibers.125 Precise inkjet-based
3D printing of conductive copper has been achieved, with
low costs and low material waste, and has applications in
directly applying conductive material for circuit board
production. Traditional methods to fabricate circuitry rely on
lithographic technology which is time-consuming and expensive
due to the many steps involved.126 Current electroencephalog-raphy
(EEG) and electrocardiography (ECG) technologies rely
on a Ag/AgCl electrode that suffers from several drawbacks,
including the use of gel to lower impedance between the
electrode and skin and the possibility of skin lesions. Dry
electrodes bypass these drawbacks, and recently a 3D printed
dry electrode has been fabricated with gold spin-coated on the
surface. Results are comparable to standard wet Ag/AgCl
electrode models.127
Scaling. Additive manufacturing techniques have been used
for industrial prototyping in the past, but when it comes to
3249 dx.doi.org/10.1021/ac403397r | Anal. Chem. 2014, 86, 3240−3253
11. Analytical Chemistry Feature
large-scale prototyping and fabrication, traditional methods
such as hot embossing and injection molding are preferable
methods. A benefit 3D printing has over these more traditional
methods is that 3D printing-based prototyping does not require
the fabrication and use of a mold from which all others will be
based.117 Instead, the “master” for 3D printing is the .STL file.
However for small-scale or scalable applications, 3D printing
would be an ideal rapid fabrication technique given the array of
available materials that can be printed and time saved due to
not having a physical master for rapid prototyping.
Custom Labware. Rapid prototyping has practical applica-tions
in the fabrication of everyday or custom labware. Having
the luxury of easily acquiring a necessary piece of equipment
through rapid prototyping has far reaching applications for the
general lab and has been applied to the creation of custom
organic chemistry reaction vessels.124,128 In some cases, the
total volume capacity approaches microliter volumes.120
Further highlighting the utility of additive manufacturing in
this area, a custom 3D printed sample holder was made to aid
in the live imaging of tumor cell growth using single plane
illumination microscopy.129
■ FUTURE DIRECTION
Materials. Those developing materials to be utilized for 3D
printing must take into account variety, composition, strength,
and finishing procedures in order to increase the versatility of
the technology. Currently, the variety of materials is limited to
the ability of the materials to be powder-based or have low
enough viscosities to be extruded from the printing head. Many
manufacturers require proprietary materials to be used in their
3D printers or risk forfeiting the warranty. This scenario has
limited the material pool, and thus, for 3D printing to continue
to grow, the quantity and diversity of materials must increase.
Research for the development of 3D printing materials has a
plethora of opportunities. Including synthesis and discovery of
new or mixed material compositions that are amenable to
printing techniques, new methods of printing to increase speed
while simultaneously reaching higher resolutions, and materials
on par with the strengths of materials machined by conven-tional
methods. Another area of growth centers on the need for
postprint processing. More efficient ways to remove support
material will prove beneficial, specifically in microfluidics, by
allowing smaller details and features, such as channels, to be
printed and subsequently cleared of support material. The
development of a chemical polish for clear materials would be
advantageous for developing optically transparent devices,
especially for designs with areas that are difficult to access by
conventional polishing methods.
File Sharing. 3D printing offers an unprecedented
opportunity for sharing and collaboration between laboratories
due to the nature of the digital data files, i.e., .STL files,
generated from CAD software during part development.
Currently, device fabrication is described in publications, but
when a different group aims to fabricate a similar device, they
would have to mimic the description in the original paper in
their own lab. This process can lead to user error during
fabrication based on subtle differences and interpretations.
With 3D printing, the .STL file can be shared, whether upon
publication of a concept or perhaps in an open scientific
database, and an exact replica of the original device can be
printed, enabling researchers to share their experimental
designs with other researchers throughout academia.
Outlook. The creation of nearly any imaginable geometry
can be made tangible using CAD software capable of producing
.STL files to be read and fabricated by a 3D printer. Choosing
the appropriate printer type, SLA, inkjet, SLS, FDM, or LOM,
depends on the design, materials, and purpose of the device. 3D
printing has become a useful tool in a number of different fields,
and as printer performance, resolution, and available materials
have increased, so too have the applications. While this featured
article does not present a complete offering of what is possible
with 3D printing, it serves to show the platform from which
future endeavors will launch. As evidenced by the above-mentioned
publications, researchers in chemical and biochem-ical
disciplines are exploring new applications with this
technology to improve upon current methods and to facilitate
new experimental designs that can expand the types of
questions scientists can probe. The authors anticipate that
this exciting new technology will lead to new avenues of
research with 3D printing at its foundation.
■ AUTHOR INFORMATION
Corresponding Author
*Phone: 517-355-9715 ext. 174. E-mail: dspence@chemistry.
msu.edu.
Notes
The authors declare no competing financial interest.
Biography
Bethany C. Gross graduated from Kalamazoo College in 2010 with a
B.A. in chemistry. Currently, her research at Michigan State University
encompasses the development of a flow-based 3D printed microfluidic
device with integrated electrodes to initiate and evaluate injury-induced
blood-clot formation. Jayda L. Erkal graduated from
Vanderbilt University with a B.A. in chemistry in 2010. Currently,
she is a Ph.D. candidate in the Spence group at Michigan State
University, and her research focuses on the development of
electrochemical and optical methods for determining the release of
red cell metabolites in microfluidic systems. Sarah Y. Lockwood
graduated from Saginaw Valley State University in 2010 with a B.S. in
chemistry. She is a Ph.D. candidate at Michigan State University,
where her research focus has delved into the development of a
diffusion-based dynamic in vitro system, using soft lithography or more
recently 3D printing, to obtain PK/PD profiles, simultaneously, on a
single platform. Chengpeng Chen received his bachelor’s degree in
chemical oceanography from the Ocean University of China. Since
joining Michigan State University as a doctoral candidate, he has been
developing new enabling technologies using 3D printing for enhanced
measurements involving cell to cell communication. Dana Spence is an
Associate Professor of Chemistry and Cell and Molecular Biology. His
group develops necessary technologies for investigating the role of red
cells in human disease based upon these cells’ interactions and
responses to chemical and physical stimuli.
■ REFERENCES
(1) SPIE-Professional. Chuck Hull: Pioneer in Stereolithography;
http://spie.org/x91418.xml (accessed September 27, 2013).
(2) Hull, C. W. Apparatus for production of three-dimensional objects by
stereolithography. U.S. Patent 4,575,330, March 11, 1986.
(3) Hull, C. W. Method for production of three-dimensional objects by
stereolithography. U.S. Patent 4,929,402, May 29, 1990. Hull, C. W.;
Spence, S. T.; Lewis, C. W.; Vinson, W. A.; Freed, R. S.; Smalley, D. R.
Method of and apparatus for production of three-dimensional objects by
stereolithography with reduced curl. U.S. Patent 5,104,592, April 14,
1992. Hull, C. W. Method of and apparatus for production of three
dimensional objects by stereolithography. U.S. Patent 5,236,637, August
3250 dx.doi.org/10.1021/ac403397r | Anal. Chem. 2014, 86, 3240−3253
12. Analytical Chemistry Feature
17, 1993. Hull, C. W.; Spence, S. T.; Albert, D. J.; Smalley, D. R.;
Harlow, R. A.; Stinebaugh, P.; Tarnoff, H. L.; Nguyen, H. D.; Lewis, C.
W.; Vorgitch, T. J.; Remba, D. Z. Method and apparatus for production
of high resolution three-dimensional objects by stereolithography. U.S.
Patent 5,184,307, February 2, 1993. Hull, C. W.; Spence, S. T.; Lewis,
C. W.; Vinson, W.; Freed, R. S.; Smalley, D. R. Stereolithographic curl
reduction. U.S. Patent 5,273,691, December 28, 1993. Hull, C. W.;
Leyden, R. N.; Sekowski, M. Methods of coating stereolithographic parts.
U.S. Patent 5,234,636, August 10, 1993. Hull, C. W.; Jacobs, P. F.;
Schmidt, K. A.; Smalley, D. R.; Vinson, W. A. Apparatus for building
three-dimensional objects with sheets. U.S. Patent 5,192,559, March 9,
1993.
(4) 3DSystems. 30 Years of Innovation. http://www.3dsystems.com/
30-years-innovation (accessed September 27, 2013).
(5) Crump, S. S. Apparatus and method for creating three-dimensional
objects. U.S. Patent 5,121,329, June 9, 1992.
(6) Sachs E. M. Haggerty, J. S.; Cima, M. J. Williams, P. A. Three-dimensional
printing techniques. U.S. Patent 5,204,055, April 20, 1993.
(7) Jones, R.; Haufe, P.; Sells, E.; Iravani, P.; Olliver, V.; Palmer, C.;
Bowyer, A. Robotica 2011, 29, 177−191.
(8) 3DSystems. Solutions. http://www.3dsystems.com/solutions/
overview (accessed September 30, 2013). Bak, D. Assem. Autom.
2003, 23, 340−345.
(9) Leukers, B.; Gülkan, H.; Irsen, S. H.; Milz, S.; Tille, C.; Schieker,
M.; Seitz, H. J. Mater. Sci.: Mater. Med. 2005, 16, 1121−1124.
Mironov, V.; Boland, T.; Trusk, T.; Forgacs, G.; Markwald, R. R.
Trends Biotechnol. 2003, 21, 157−161.
(10) Lipton, J.; Arnold, D.; Nigl, F.; Lopez, N.; Cohen, D.; Noren,
N.; Lipson, H. In Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium, 2010.
(11) Daanen, H.; Hong, S.-A. Int. J. Cloth. Sci. Technol. 2008, 20, 15−
25. Campbell, J.; Parsons, J. J. Text. Apparel, Technol. Manage. 2005, 4,
1−10.
(12) Dolenc, A.; Mäkelä, I. Comput.-Aided Des. 1994, 26, 119−126.
(13) Melchels, F. P. W.; Feijen, J.; Grijpma, D. W. Biomaterials 2010,
31, 6121−6130.
(14) Waterman, N. A.; Dickens, P. World Class Des. Manuf. 1994, 1,
27−36.
(15) Pham, D. T.; Gault, R. S. Int. J. Machine Tools Manuf. 1998, 38,
1257−1287.
(16) Pandey, P. M.; Reddy, N. V.; Dhande, S. G. Int. J. Machine Tools
Manuf. 2003, 43, 61−71. Tata, K.; Fadel, G.; Bagchi, A.; Aziz, N. Rapid
Prototyp. J. 1998, 4, 151−167. Pandey, P. M.; Reddy, N. V.; Dhande, S.
G. Rapid Prototyp. J. 2003, 9, 274−288.
(17) Landers, R.; Pfister, A.; Hübner, U.; John, H.; Schmelzeisen, R.;
Mülhaupt, R. J. Mater. Sci. 2002, 37, 3107−3116. Webb, P. A. J. Med.
Eng. Technol. 2000, 24, 149−153. Kermer, C.; Rasse, M.; Lagogiannis,
G.; Undt, G.; Wagner, A.; Millesi, W. J. Cranio-Maxillofacial Surg.
1998, 26, 360−362. Sailer, H. F.; Haers, P. E.; Zollikofer, C. P. E.;
Warnke, T.; Caris, F. R.; Stucki, P. Int. J. Oral Maxillofacial Surg. 1998,
27, 327−333. Hieu, L. C.; Zlatov, N.; Vander Sloten, J.; Bohez, E.;
Khanh, L.; Binh, P. H.; Oris, P.; Toshev, Y. Assembly Autom. 2005, 25,
284−292.
(18) Bertsch, A.; Renaud, P. Microstereolithography. In Stereo-lithography:
Materials, Processes and Applications; Springer: New York,
2011; pp 81−112.
(19) Waldbaur, A.; Rapp, H.; Länge, K.; Rapp, B. E. Anal. Methods
2011, 3, 2681−2716.
(20) Pan, Y.; Zhou, C.; Chen, Y. In Proceedings of the 2012
International Manufacturing Science and Engineering Conference, 2012;
pp 4−8.
(21) Lu, Y.; Mapili, G.; Suhali, G.; Chen, S.; Roy, K. J. Biomed. Mater.
Res., Part A 2006, 77, 396−405. Melchels, F. P.; Feijen, J.; Grijpma, D.
W. Biomaterials 2009, 30, 3801−3809. Choi, J.-W.; Wicker, R.; Lee, S.-
H.; Choi, K.-H.; Ha, C.-S.; Chung, I. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2009,
209, 5494−5503. Mapili, G.; Chen, S.; Roy, K. J. Manuf. Sci. Eng. 2008,
130, 021005. Liska, R.; Schuster, M.; Inführ, R.; Turecek, C.; Fritscher,
C.; Seidl, B.; Schmidt, V.; Kuna, L.; Haase, A.; Varga, F. J. Coat.
Technol. Res. 2007, 4, 505−510.
(22) Cooke, M. N.; Fisher, J. P.; Dean, D.; Rimnac, C.; Mikos, A. G.
J. Biomed. Mater. Res., Part B: Appl. Biomater. 2003, 64, 65−69.
(23) Lee, K.-W.; Wang, S.; Fox, B. C.; Ritman, E. L.; Yaszemski, M.
J.; Lu, L. Biomacromolecules 2007, 8, 1077−1084. Kwon, I. K.;
Matsuda, T. Biomaterials 2005, 26, 1675−1684. Lee, J. W.; Lan, P. X.;
Kim, B.; Lim, G.; Cho, D.-W. Microelectron. Eng. 2007, 84, 1702−1705.
Chan, V.; Zorlutuna, P.; Jeong, J. H.; Kong, H.; Bashir, R. Lab Chip
2010, 10, 2062−70.
(24) Huang, Y.-M.; Kuriyama, S.; Jiang, C.-P. Int. J. Adv. Manuf.
Technol. 2004, 24, 361−369.
(25) Takagi, T.; Nakajima, N. In Micro Electro Mechanical Systems,
1993, MEMS’93, Proceedings An Investigation of Micro Structures,
Sensors, Actuators, Machines and Systems, Fort Lauderdale, FL, February
7−10, 1993; pp 173−178.
(26) Ikuta, K.; Hirowatari, K. In Micro Electro Mechanical Systems,
1993, MEMS’93, Proceedings An Investigation of Micro Structures,
Sensors, Actuators, Machines and Systems, Fort Lauderdale, FL, February
7−10, 1993; pp 42-47.
(27) Harris, R. A.; Hague, R. J. M.; Dickens, P. M. Int. J. Machine
Tools Manuf. 2004, 44, 59−64.
(28) Wang, Y.; Balowski, J.; Phillips, C.; Phillips, R.; Sims, C. E.;
Allbritton, N. L. Lab Chip 2011, 11, 3089−3097.
(29) Jacobs, P. F. Rapid Prototyping and Manufacturing: Fundamentals
of Stereolithography; Society of Manufacturing Engineers: Dearborn,
MI, 1992; pp 32−35.
(30) Hutmacher, D. W.; Sittinger, M.; Risbud, M. V. Trends
Biotechnol. 2004, 22, 354−362.
(31) Maruo, S.; Ikuta, K. Sens. Actuators, A: Phys. 2002, 100, 70−76.
(32) FormLabs. Formlabs-High Resolution Desktop 3D Printer. http://
formlabs.com/ (accessed September 30, 2013).
(33) Strutt, J. W.; Rayleigh, L. Tr. Mat. O-va 1879, 4−13.
(34) Elmqvist, R. Measuring Instrument of the Recording Type. U.S.
Patent 2,566,443, September 4, 1951.
(35) Calvert, P. Chem. Mater. 2001, 13, 3299−3305. Boland, T.; Xu,
T.; Damon, B.; Cui, X. Biotechnol. J. 2006, 1, 910−917. Xu, T.; Jin, J.;
Gregory, C.; Hickman, J. J.; Boland, T. Biomaterials 2005, 26, 93−99.
(36) Sweet, R. G. Rev. Sci. Instrum. 1965, 36, 131−136.
(37) Zoltan, S. I. Pulsed Droplet Ejecting System. U.S. Patent
3,683,212, August 8, 1972.
(38) Kyser, E. L.; Sears, S. B. Method and apparatus for recording with
writing fluids and drop projection means therefor. U.S. Patent 3,946,398,
March 23, 1976.
(39) Pfister, A.; Landers, R.; Laib, A.; Hubner, U.; Schmelzeisen, R.;
Mulhaupt, R. J. Polym. Sci. Polym. Chem. 2004, 42, 624−638.
(40) Waldbaur, A.; Rapp, H.; Lange, K.; Rapp, B. E. Anal. Methods
2011, 3, 2681−2716.
(41) Breen, J.; Nottrot, R.; Stellingwerff, M. Autom. Construct. 2003,
12, 649−653.
(42) Lam, C. X. F.; Mo, X.; Teoh, S.-H.; Hutmacher, D. Mater. Sci.
Eng.: C 2002, 20, 49−56. Landers, R.; Pfister, A.; Hubner, U.; John,
H.; Schmelzeisen, R.; Mulhaupt, R. J. Mater. Sci. 2002, 37, 3107−3116.
Leong, K.; Cheah, C.; Chua, C. Biomaterials 2003, 24, 2363−2378.
Yang, S.; Leong, K.-F.; Du, Z.; Chua, C.-K. Tissue Eng. 2002, 8, 1−11.
(43) Doraiswamy, A.; Dunaway, T. M.; Wilker, J. J.; Narayan, R. J. J.
Biomed. Mater. Res., Part B: Appl. Biomater. 2009, 89B, 28−35.
(44) de Gans, B. J.; Duineveld, P. C.; Schubert, U. S. Adv. Mater.
2004, 16, 203−213.
(45) 3DSystems. PolyJet Technology. http://www.stratasys.com/3d-printers/
technology/polyjet-technology (accessed September 27,
2013).
(46) Beaman, J. J.; Deckard, C. R. Selective laser sintering with assisted
powder handling. U.S. Patent 4,938,816, July 3, 1990.
(47) Kumar, S. JOM 2003, 55, 43−47.
(48) Kruth, J.-P.; Mercelis, P.; Van Vaerenbergh, J.; Froyen, L.;
Rombouts, M. Rapid Prototyp. J. 2005, 11, 26−36. Kruth, J.-P.; Wang,
X.; Laoui, T.; Froyen, L. Assem. Autom. 2003, 23, 357−371. Song, Y.-
A.; Koenig, W. CIRP Ann.-Manuf. Technol. 1997, 46, 127−130. Ready,
J. F.; Farson, D. F.; Feeley, T. LIA Handbook of Laser Materials
Processing; Laser Institute of America, Magnolia Publishing: Orlando,
3251 dx.doi.org/10.1021/ac403397r | Anal. Chem. 2014, 86, 3240−3253
13. Analytical Chemistry Feature
FL, 2001. Cervera, G. B. M.; Lombera, G. Rapid Prototyp. J. 1999, 5,
21−26. Klocke, F.; Wagner, C. CIRP Ann.-Manuf. Technol. 2003, 52,
177−180. Kruth, J.-P.; Levy, G.; Schindel, R.; Craeghs, T.; Yasa, E. In
Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Polymers and Moulds
Innovations, 2008; pp 15−30; Chivel, Y.; Smurov, I. Phys. Proc. 2010, 5,
515−521.
(49) Yan, X.; Gu, P. Comput.-Aided Des. 1996, 28, 307−318.
(50) Ko, S. H.; Pan, H.; Grigoropoulos, C. P.; Luscombe, C. K.;
Fréchet, J. M. J.; Poulikakos, D. Nanotechnology 2007, 18, 345202.
(51) Tolochko, N. K.; Khlopkov, Y. V.; Mozzharov, S. E.; Ignatiev,
M. B.; Laoui, T.; Titov, V. I. Rapid Prototyp. J. 2000, 6, 155−161.
(52) Wang, R.-J.; Wang, L.; Zhao, L.; Liu, Z. Int. J. Adv. Manuf.
Technol. 2006, 33, 498−504. Raghunath, N.; Pandey, P. M. Int. J.
Machine Tools Manuf. 2007, 47, 985−995. Senthilkumaran, K.;
Pandey, P. M.; Rao, P. V. M Virtual Phys. Prototyp. 2009, No. 4,
49−62.
(53) Chung, J.; Bieri, N. R.; Ko, S.; Grigoropoulos, C. P.; Poulikakos,
D. Appl. Phys. A: Mater. Sci. Process. 2004, 79, 1259−1261. Chung, J.;
Ko, S.; Bieri, N. R.; Grigoropoulos, C. P.; Poulikakos, D. Appl. Phys.
Lett. 2004, 84, 801−803.
(54) Ziemian, C. W.; Crawn, P. M., III Rapid Prototyp. J. 2001, 7,
138−147. Sood, A. K.; Ohdar, R. K.; Mahapatra, S. S. Mater. Des. 2009,
30, 4243−4252.
(55) Van Weeren, R.; Agarwala, M.; Jamalabad, V.; Bandyophadyay,
A.; Vaidyanathan, R.; Langrana, N.; Safari, A.; Whalen, P.; Danforth,
S.; Ballard, C. In Proceedings of the Solid Freeform Fabrication
Symposium; ASME: New York, 1995; pp 314−321.
(56) Zhong, W. H.; Li, F.; Zhang, Z. G.; Song, L. L.; Li, Z. M. Mater.
Sci. Eng. A: Struct. 2001, 301, 125−130.
(57) Agarwala, M.; Van Weeren, R.; Bandyopadhyay, A.; Whalen, P.;
Safari, A.; Danforth, S. In Proceedings of Solid Freeform Fabrication
Symposium, The University of Texas, Austin, TX, August 12−14, 1996;
pp 385−392.
(58) Wu, G.; Langrana, N.; Sadanji, R.; Danforth, S. Mater. Des. 2002,
23, 97−105.
(59) Jafari, M. A.; Han, W.; Mohammadi, F.; Safari, A.; Danforth, S.
C.; Langrana, N. Rapid Prototyp. J. 2000, 6, 161−174. Bandyopadhyay,
A.; Panda, R. K.; Janas, V. F.; Agarwala, M. K.; Danforth, S. C.; Safari,
A. J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 2005, 80, 1366−1372. Bellini, A. Fused deposition
of ceramics: A comprehensive experimental, analytical and computational
study of material behavior, fabrication process and equipment design.
Ph.D. Thesis, Drexel University, Ann Arbor, MI, 2002.
(60) Zein, I.; Hutmacher, D. W.; Tan, K. C.; Teoh, S. H. Biomaterials
2002, 23, 1169−1185.
(61) Feygin, M.; Shkolnik, A.; Diamond M. N.; Dvorskiy, E.
Laminated object manufacturing system. U.S. Patent 5,730,817, March
24, 1998.
(62) Klosterman, D.; Chartoff, R.; Graves, G.; Osborne, N.; Priore, B.
Composites, Part A: Appl. Sci. Manuf. 1998, 29, 1165−1174.
(63) Dutta, D.; Prinz, F. B.; Rosen, D.; Weiss, L. J. Comput. Inf. Sci.
Eng. 2001, 1, 60−71.
(64) Frank, M. C.; Peters, F. E.; Karthikeyan, R. 24th Annual
International Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium−An Additive
Manufacturing Conference, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin,
TX, 2010.
(65) Mueller, B.; Kochan, D. Comput. Ind. 1999, 39, 47−53.
(66) Flach, L.; Jacobs, M. A.; Klosterman, D. A.; Chartoff, R. In Solid
Freeform Fabrication Symposium Proceedings, University of Texas at
Austin, Austin, TX, 1998; pp 407−416.
(67) Kruth, J. P. CIRP Ann.-Manuf. Technol. 1991, 40, 603−614.
Komuro, N.; Takaki, S.; Suzuki, K.; Citterio, D. Anal. Bioanal. Chem.
2013, 405, 5785−5805. Upcraft, S.; Fletcher, R. Assem. Autom. 2003,
23, 318−330.
(68) Rengier, F.; Mehndiratta, A.; von Tengg-Kobligk, H.;
Zechmann, C. M.; Unterhinninghofen, R.; Kauczor, H.-U.; Giesel, F.
L. Int. J. Comput. Assisted Radiol. Surg. 2010, 5, 335−341.
(69) Klein, G. T.; Lu, Y.; Wang, M. Y. World Neurosurg. 2013, 80,
233−235.
(70) Wutticharoenmongkol, P.; Sanchavanakit, N.; Pavasant, P.;
Supaphol, P. Macromol. Biosci. 2006, 6, 70−77.
(71) Yeong, W.; Chua, C.; Leong, K.; Chandrasekaran, M. Trends
Biotechnol. 2004, 22, 643−652.
(72) Tadic, D.; Epple, M. Biomaterials 2004, 25, 987−994.
(73) Weiss, P.; Obadia, L.; Magne, D.; Bourges, X.; Rau, C.;
Weitkamp, T.; Khairoun, I.; Bouler, J. M.; Chappard, D.; Gauthier, O.;
Daculsi, G. Biomaterials 2003, 24, 4591−4601.
(74) Bergmann, C.; Lindner, M.; Zhang, W.; Koczur, K.; Kirsten, A.;
Telle, R.; Fischer, H. J. Eur. Ceram. Soc. 2010, 30, 2563−2567.
(75) Williams, J. M.; Adewunmi, A.; Schek, R. M.; Flanagan, C. L.;
Krebsbach, P. H.; Feinberg, S. E.; Hollister, S. J.; Das, S. Biomaterials
2005, 26, 4817−4827.
(76) Seitz, H.; Rieder, W.; Irsen, S.; Leukers, B.; Tille, C. J. Biomed.
Mater. Res., Part B: Appl. Biomater. 2005, 74B, 782−788.
(77) Gbureck, U.; Holzel, T.; Klammert, U.; Wurzler, K.; Muller, F.
A.; Barralet, J. E. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2007, 17, 3940−3945.
(78) Cuodeau, A.; Sachs, E.; Cadarise, S. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. 2000,
53, 525−535.
(79) Dutta Roy, T.; Simon, J. L.; Ricci, J. L.; Rekow, D. E.;
Thompson, V. P.; Parsons, J. R. J. Biomed. Mater. Res., Part A 2003,
67A, 1228−1237.
(80) Warnke, P. H.; Seitz, H.; Warnke, F.; Becker, S. T.; Sivananthan,
S.; Sherry, E.; Liu, Q.; Wiltfang, J.; Douglas, T. J. Biomed. Mater. Res.,
Part B: Appl. Biomater. 2010, 93B, 212−217.
(81) Karageorgiou, V.; Kaplan, D. Biomaterials 2005, 26, 5474−5491.
(82) Tamimi, T. J.; Alkhraisat, M. H.; Prados-Frutos, J. C.;
Rastikerdar, E.; Gbureck, U.; Barralet, J. E.; Lopez-Cabarcos, E. J.
Clin. Periodontol. 2011, 38, 1147−1153.
(83) Leukers, B.; Gulkan, H.; Irsen, S. H.; Milz, S.; Tille, C.; Seitz, H.;
Schieker, M. Mater. Sci. Eng. Technol. 2005, 36, 781−787.
(84) Guan, J.; Fujimoto, K. L.; Sacks, M. S.; Wagner, W. R.
Biomaterials 2005, 26, 3961−3971.
(85) Mironov, V.; Boland, T.; Trusk, T.; Forgacs, G.; Markwald, R. R.
Trends Biotechnol. 2003, 21, 151−161.
(86) Fedorovich, N. E.; Swennen, I.; Girones, J.; Moroni, L.; van
Blitterswijk, C. A.; Schacht, E.; Albalas, J.; Dhert, W. J. A.
Biomacromolecules 2009, 10, 1689−1696.
(87) Hollister, S. J. Nat. Mater. 2005, 4, 518−524.
(88) Tamas, S.; Dermot, B. Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium
Proceedings, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, 2007; pp
470−481.
(89) Tsang, V. L.; Bhatia, S. Adv. Drug Delivery Rev. 2004, 56, 1635−
1647.
(90) Fedorovich, N. E.; Alblas, J.; De Wijn, J. R.; Hennink, W. E.;
Verbout, A. J.; Dhert, W. J. A. Tissue Eng. 2007, 13, 1905−1925.
(91) Mannoor, M. S.; Jiang, Z.; James, T.; Kong, Y. L.; Malatesta, K.
A.; Soboyejo, W. O.; Verma, N.; Gracias, D. H.; McAlpine, M. C. Nano
Lett. 2013, 13, 2634−2639.
(92) Wang, X.; Yan, Y.; Zhang, R. Trends Biotechnol. 2007, 25, 505−
513.
(93) Wang, X.; Yan, Y.; Pan, Y.; Xiong, Z.; Liu, H.; Cheng, J.; Liu, F.;
Lin, F.; Wu, R.; Zhang, R.; Lu, Q. Tissue Eng. 2006, 12, 83−90.
(94) Liu, H.; Yan, Y.; Wang, X.; Cheng, J.; Lin, F.; Xiong, Z.; Wu, R.
Chin. Sci. Bull. 2006, 51, 1830−1835.
(95) Zhao, L.; Lee, V. K.; Yoo, S.; Dai, G.; Intes, X. Biomaterials
2012, 33, 5325−5332.
(96) Wu, W.; DeConinck, A.; Lewis, J. A. Adv. Mater. 2011, 23,
H178−H183.
(97) Liu, C. Z.; Xia, Z. D.; Han, Z. W.; Hulley, P. A.; Triffitt, J. T.;
Czernuszka, J. T. J. Biomed. Mater. Res., Part B: Appl. Biomater. 2008,
85B, 519−528.
(98) Hakansson, A.; Rantatalo, M.; Hansen, T.; Wanhainen, A. VASA
2011, 40, 453−459.
(99) Tam, M. D.; Laycock, S. D.; Duncan, B.; Chonjnowski, A.
Radiol. Case 2012, 6, 31−37.
(100) Minocchieri, S.; Burren, J. M.; Bachmann, M. A.; Stern, G.;
Wildhaber, J.; Buob, S.; Schindel, R.; Kraemer, R.; Frey, U. P.; Nelle,
M. Pediatr. Res. 2008, 64, 141−146.
3252 dx.doi.org/10.1021/ac403397r | Anal. Chem. 2014, 86, 3240−3253
14. Analytical Chemistry Feature
(101) Oishi, M.; Fukuda, M.; Yajima, N.; Yoshida, K.; Takahashi, M.;
Hiraishi, T.; Takao, T.; Saito, A.; Fujii, Y. J. Neurosurg. 2013, 119, 94−
105.
(102) Weigang, W.; Qixin, Z.; Xiaodong, G.; Weidong, H. J. Wuhan
Univ. Technol.-Mater. 2009, 24, 977−981.
(103) Yu, D.; Branford-White, C.; Ma, Z.; Zhu, L.; Li, X.; Yang, X.
Int. J. Pharm. 2009, 370, 160−166.
(104) Yu, D.; Shen, X.; Branford-White, C.; Zhu, L.; White, K.; Yang,
X. L. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 2009, 61, 323−329.
(105) Huang, W.; Zheng, Q.; Sun, W.; Xu, H.; Yang, X. Int. J. Pharm.
2007, 339, 33−38.
(106) Wu, W.; Zheng, Q.; Guo, X.; Sun, J.; Liu, Y. Biomed. Mater.
2009, 4, 065005.
(107) Ebert, L. C.; Thali, M. J.; Ross, S. Forensic Sci. Int. 2011, 211,
e1−e6.
(108) Wozniak, K.; Rzepecka-Wozniak, E.; Moskala, A.; Pohl, J.;
Latacz, K.; Dybala, B. Forensic Sci. Int. 2012, 222, e29−e32.
(109) Kettner, M.; Schmidt, P.; Potente, S.; Ramsthaler, F.; Schrodt,
M. J. Forensic Sci. 2011, 56, 1015−1017.
(110) Klepacek, I.; Mala, P. Z. Forensic Sci. Med. Pathol. 2012, 8,
451−459.
(111) Noecker, A. M.; Chen, J.-F.; Zhou, Q.; White, R. D.; Kopcak,
M. W.; Arruda, M. J.; Duncan, B. Pediatr. Circ. Support Perfusion 2006,
52, 349−353.
(112) Chakraborty, P.; Zuckermann, R. N. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.
U.S.A. 2013, 110, 13368−13373.
(113) Jittivadhna, K.; Ruenwongsa, P.; Panijpan, B. Biochem. Mol.
Biol. Educ. 2009, 37, 220−226.
(114) Jittivadhna, K.; Ruenwongsa, P.; Panijpan, B. Biochem. Mol.
Biol. Educ. 2010, 38, 359−364.
(115) Singhvi, R.; Kumar, A.; Lopez, G. P.; Stephanopoulos, G. N.;
Wang, D. I.; Whitesides, G. M.; Ingber, D. E. Science 1994, 264, 696−
698. Chiu, D. T.; Jeon, N. L.; Huang, S.; Kane, R. S.; Wargo, C. J.;
Choi, I. S.; Ingber, D. E.; Whitesides, G. M. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.
2000, 97, 2408−2413.
(116) Kane, R. S.; Takayama, S.; Otsuni, E.; Ingber, D. E.;
Whitesides, G. M. Biomaterials 1999, 20, 2363−2376.
(117) Waldbaur, A.; Rapp, H.; Lange, K.; Rapp, B. E. Anal. Methods
2011, 3, 2681−2716.
(118) Therriault, D.; White, S. R.; Lewis, J. A. Nat. Mater. 2003, 2,
265−271.
(119) Mathieson, J. S.; Rosnes, M. H.; Sans, V.; Kitson, P. J.; Cronin,
L. Beilstein J. Org. Chem. 2013, 4, 285−291.
(120) Kitson, P. J.; Rosnes, M. H.; Sans, V.; Dragone, V.; Cronin, L.
Lab Chip 2012, 12, 3267−3271.
(121) Anderson, K. B.; Lockwood, S. Y.; Martin, R. S.; Spence, D. M.
Anal. Chem. 2013, 85, 5622−5626.
(122) Snowden, M. E.; King, P. H.; Covington, J. A.; Macpherson, J.
V.; Unwin, P. R. Anal. Chem. 2010, 82, 3124−3131.
(123) Sun, K.; Wei, T.; Ahn, B. Y.; Seo, J. Y.; Dillon, S. J.; Lewis, J. A.
Adv. Mater. 2013, 25, 4539−4543.
(124) Symes, M. D.; Kitson, P. J.; Yan, J.; Richmond, C. J.; Cooper,
G. J. T.; Bowman, R. W.; Vilbrandt, T.; Cronin, L. Nat. Chem. 2012, 4,
349−354.
(125) Czyzewski, J.; Burzynski, P.; Gawel, K.; Meisner, J. J. Mater.
Process. Technol. 2009, 209, 5281−5285.
(126) Park, B. K.; Kim, D.; Jeong, S.; Moon, J.; Kim, J. S. Thin Solid
Films 2007, 515, 7706−7711.
(127) Salvo, P.; Raedt, R.; Carrette, E.; Schaubroeck, D.; Vanfleteren,
J.; Cardon, L. Sens. Actuators, A: Phys. 2012, 174, 96−102.
(128) Johnson, D. R. Nat. Chem. 2012, 4, 338−339. Kitson, P. J.;
Symes, M. D.; Dragone, V.; Cronin, L. Chem. Sci. 2013, 4, 3099−3103.
Dragone, V.; Sans, V.; Rosnes, M. H.; Kitson, P. J.; Cronin, L. Beilstein
J. Org. Chem. 2013, 9, 951−959.
(129) Desmaison, A.; Lorenzo, C.; Rouquette, J.; Ducommun, B.;
Lobjois, V. J. Microsc. 2013, 251, 128−132.
(130) Park, S. H.; Lim, T. W.; Yang, D.-Y.; Kim, R. H.; Lee, K.-S.
Macromol. Res. 2006, 14, 559−564.
(131) Ko, S. H.; Chung, J.; Hotz, N.; Nam, K. H.; Grigoropoulos, C.
P. J. Micromech. Microeng. 2010, 20, 125010.
(132) Lü, L.; Fuh, J. Y. H.; Wong, Y. S. Laser-Induced Materials and
Processes for Rapid Prototyping; Kluwer Academic Publishers: Boston,
MA, 2001; pp 89−142.
(133) Antonov, E. N.; Bagratashvili, V. N.; Whitaker, M. J.; Barry, J. J.
A.; Shakesheff, K. M.; Konovalov, A. N.; Popov, V. K.; Howdle, S. M.
Adv. Mater. 2005, 17, 327−330.
(134) Yadroitsev, I.; Shishkovsky, I.; Bertrand, P.; Smurov, I. Appl.
Surf. Sci. 2009, 255, 5523−5527.
(135) Paul, B. K.; Voorakarnam, V. J. Manuf. Processes 2001, 3, 94−
101.
(136) Sodian, R.; Loebe, M.; Hein, A.; Martin, D.; Hoerstrup, S.;
Potapov, E.; Hausmann, H.; Lueth, T.; Hetzer, R. ASAIO J. 2002, 48,
12−16.
(137) Tek, P.; Chiganos, T. C.; Mohammed, J. S.; Eddington, D. T.;
Fall, C. P.; Ifft, P.; Rousche, P. J. J. Neurosci. Methods 2008, 172, 263−
269.
(138) Gomes, C.; Travitzky, N.; Greil, P.; Acchar, W.; Birol, H.; de
Oliveira, A. P. N.; Hotza, D. Rapid Prototyp. J. 2011, 17, 424−428.
3253 dx.doi.org/10.1021/ac403397r | Anal. Chem. 2014, 86, 3240−3253