Droplet based microfluidics
Fast medium switch in microfluidic channels is generally a required technique to perform a wide range of biomedical and chemical microfluidic assays, such as the analysis of living cells in vitro, particle washing, etc.
For this reason, Elveflow® proposes two different configurations of its microfluidic instruments to perform ultrafast flow changes.
– Configuration A: Elveflow® OB1 + MUX Flow switch (consult its corresponding Application Note)
– Configuration B: Elveflow® OB1 (consult its corresponding Application Note)
In this review the medium change speed of these two configurations are measured, analyzed and compared in order to help our clients finding the best configuration to perform their particular assays.
To measure the medium change speed, the two configurations have been set and several medium flow switches have been carried out (see figure below) and recorded using a frame rate of 30fps for each configuration.
Secondly, each video has been analyzed using the “ImageJ” software and sliced into a stack of images (one image every 0.003 seconds). Finally, the changes in intensity have been monitored through each stack and the average intensity at a fixed position has been calculated giving different results for each configuration.
a) Configuration A: Elveflow OB1 + MUX
– Switch each 4 seconds: Average time= 0.2897
– Switch each 8 seconds: Average time= 0.2933
– Switch each 12 seconds: Average time = 0.2833s
– Switch each 16 seconds: Average time = 0.3007s
– Switch each 24 seconds: Average time = 0.2793s
b) Configuration B: Elveflow OB1
– Switch each 4 seconds: Average time = 0.3337s
– Switch each 8 seconds: Average time = 0.6893s
– Switch each 12 seconds: Average time = 1.0927s
– Switch each 16 seconds: Average time = 1.5757s
– Switch each 24 seconds: Average time = 2.4970s
The results show that the Configuration A (OB1+MUX) can perform a faster medium switch than the Configuration B (OB1). This observation remains true even when the switch frequency time between each of the three tested mediums becomes longer: the Configuration A shows a constant average time whereas the Configuration B shows an increment directly proportional to the switch frequency time (see the figure below).
The reason for this increment is that some flow always comes back from the main channel and passes through the other two channels. The longer this flow carries on flowing the longer it will take to come back through the main channel.
There is an alternative way to perform the medium switch with this configuration which allows to reduce the average switch time: when a little residual laminar flow of the other two mediums is allowed on the edges of the main channel, we avoid any back flow. As a result no extra time will be needed by the medium to come back on every switch.
As every assay or experiment is different, the best configuration will depend on its objectives and conditions. The following SWOT analysis expects to be helpful to decide which configuration is more suitable in each case.
Email* I hereby agree than Elveflow uses my personal data
Do you want tips on how to best set up your microfluidic experiment? Do you need inspiration or a different angle to take on your specific problem? Well, we probably have an application note just for you, feel free to check them out!
Revolutionizing Microfluidics with Acoustic Particle Manipulation
This short note will introduce you to the key takeways about microfluidic T junction among other microfluidic junctions.
Fluid mixing at microscale is of importance for many fields of application. This short review summarises the key takeaway aspects of fluid mixing at microscale.
In the past two years, several new microfluidic syringe pump systems have changed the use of syringe pumps in microfluidic experiments.
This review presents a few examples of applications where magnetic flux sources, magnetic particles and microfluidics are combined in order to perform particle sorting and handling.
In microfluidic laminar flows, traditional turbulent mixing between two liquids cannot occur. However, controllable and fast mixing is critical for microfluidic and lab-on-chip devices. So different mixing techniques were developed and are here presented.
There are three main classes of systems to control liquid motion in microfluidic and nanofluidic devices.
One of the great challenges for researchers using microfluidics is miniaturizing analysis processes in very small microchip.
Microfluidic flow controllers are designed to control flows in microfluidic chips.
Despite their sturdiness & simplicity, syringe pumps are often problematic in microfluidics.
The performance of your flow control instruments depends on your experimental conditions.
Liquid flow sensors are a compulsory element of microfluidic systems requiring a control of the sample volume dispensed and/or, obviously, the sample flow rate.
What are the strengths and weaknesses of each type of microfluidic flow control system? Pressure controller, syringe pump...?
Outside of conventional syringe pumps which generate flow oscillation at low flow rate and long settling time, we can now find syringe pumps like the NE-1002X which is dedicated to microfluidic experiments.
Common syringe pumps have two major drawbacks when it comes to research in MICROFLUIDICS: RESPONSIVENESS and flow OSCILLATION/PULSATILE FLOW. Recently, some syringe pump manufacturers have developed...
Get a quote
Name*
Email*
Message
Newsletter subscription
We will answer within 24 hours
By filling in your info you accept that we use your data.
Collaborations
Need customer support?
Serial Number of your product
Support Type AdviceHardware SupportSoftware Support
Subject*
I hereby agree that Elveflow uses my personal data Newsletter subscription
How can we help you?
Message I hereby agree that Elveflow uses my personal data Newsletter subscription