Comparison of separation performance of laser-ablated and wet-etched microfluidic devices.
Laser ablation of glass allows for production of microfluidic devices without the need for hydrofluoric acid and photolithography. The goal of this study was to compare the separation performance of microfluidic devices produced using a low-cost laser ablation system and conventional wet etching. During laser ablation, cracking of the glass substrate was prevented by heating the glass to 300 °C. A range of laser energy densities was found to produce channel depths ranging from 4 to 35 μm and channel widths from 118 to 162 μm. The electroosmotic flow velocity was lower in laser-ablated devices, 0.110±0.005 cm s(-1), as compared to wet-etched microfluidic chips, 0.126±0.003 cm s(-1). Separations of both small and large molecules performed on both wet- and laser-ablated devices were compared by examining limits of detection, theoretical plate count, and peak asymmetry. Laser-induced fluorescence detection limits were 10 pM fluorescein for both types of devices. Laser-ablated and wet-etched microfluidic chips had reproducible migration times with ≤ 2.8% relative standard deviation and peak asymmetries ranged from 1.0 to 1.8. Numbers of theoretical plates were between 2.8- and 6.2-fold higher on the wet-etched devices compared to laser-ablated devices. Nevertheless, resolution between small and large analytes was accomplished, which indicates that laser ablation may find an application in pedagogical studies of electrophoresis or microfluidic devices, or in settings where hydrofluoric acid cannot be used.
Baker
Christopher A
CA
Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Florida State University, 95 Chieftain Way, Dittmer Building, Tallahassee, FL 32306, USA.
Bulloch
Rayford
R
Roper
Michael G
MG
D007834:Lasers; D046210:Microfluidic Analytical Techniques; D017155:Wettability
J Am Chem Soc. 2003 Nov 26;125(47):14613-9
14624612
Electrophoresis. 2003 Nov;24(21):3607-19
14613185
Anal Chem. 2002 Feb 15;74(4):871-8
11866067
Analyst. 2009 Jan;134(1):97-106
19082181
Science. 1998 May 15;280(5366):1046-8
9582111
J Chromatogr A. 2010 Jul 9;1217(28):4743-8
20730040
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008 Nov 4;105(44):16843-8
18974218
Science. 2000 Nov 24;290(5496):1536-40
11090344
Anal Chem. 2010 Mar 15;82(6):2310-6
20151681
Anal Chem. 2002 Mar 15;74(6):1415-22
11922312
Opt Lett. 2001 Jan 15;26(2):93-5
18033517
Anal Chem. 2003 Apr 15;75(8):1880-6
12713046
Anal Chem. 2001 Jun 1;73(11):2648-55
11403312
Opt Lett. 2001 Dec 1;26(23):1912-4
18059735
Lab Chip. 2002 Nov;2(4):242-6
15100818
Nat Biotechnol. 2001 May;19(5):461-5
11329017
Anal Chem. 2009 Jun 1;81(11):4524-30
19476392
Anal Chem. 2006 Feb 1;78(3):956-8
16448074
Anal Chem. 1998 Dec 1;70(23):4974-84
21644679
Science. 1993 Aug 13;261(5123):895-7
17783736
Anal Chem. 2003 Dec 1;75(23):6544-54
14640726
Analyst. 2006 Feb;131(2):194-201
16440082
Science. 2002 Oct 18;298(5593):580-4
12351675
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004 Jun 29;101(26):9740-4
15210942