Fig 1 - available via license: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
Content may be subject to copyright.
Source publication
Ultraviolet light (UV)-curable three dimensional (3D) printing has emerged as a prominent additive manufacturing technology, finding diverse applications in industries such as figurine production, artifact restoration, dentistry, jewelry design, and etc. For liquid crystal display (LCD) type UV-curable 3D printers, achieving a uniform and collimate...
Context in source publication
Context 1
... the resin vat. Following the curing of each layer, the platform elevates to replenish the resin, subsequently descending to expose and cure the resin through UV light. This process enables the gradual solidification and fabrication of intricate 3D objects in a step-by-step manner. The working principle of the LCD-type 3D printer is illustrated in Fig. 1 In LCD-type 3D printing systems, achieving a uniform and collimated light distribution on the LCD is crucial as it directly affects the precision of 3D shaping. The energy density of the illumination influences the 3D printing speed. Some research and explorations have been conducted for a higher light performance of LCD-type 3D ...
Similar publications
Microfluidics offer user-friendly liquid handling for a range of biochemical applications. 3D printing microfluidics is rapid and cost-effective compared to conventional cleanroom fabrication. Typically, microfluidics are 3D printed using digital light projection (DLP) stereolithography (SLA), but many models in use are expensive (≥$10,000 USD), li...
Citations
... If light is not properly collimated through the LCD display, the illumination across the build plate is nonuniform and results in imprecise features. 31 We found that the UV intensity was generally uniform for both the LCD printers and the measured widths of the capillaric features depicted high precision regardless of print location. ...
Microfluidics offer user-friendly liquid handling for a range of biochemical applications. 3D printing microfluidics is rapid and cost-effective compared to conventional cleanroom fabrication. Typically, microfluidics are 3D printed using digital light projection (DLP) stereolithography (SLA), but many models in use are expensive (≥500 USD) SLA 3D printers with sufficient pixel resolution for microfluidic applications. However, there are only a few demonstrations of microfluidic fabrication, limited validation of print fidelity, and no direct comparisons between LCD and DLP printers. We compared a 40 μm pixel DLP printer (∼380 USD). Consistent with prior work, we observed linear trends between designed and measured channel widths ≥4 pixels on both printers, so we calculated accuracy above this size threshold. Using a standard IPA-wash resin and optimized parameters for each printer, the average error between designed and measured widths was 2.11 ± 1.26% with the DLP printer and 15.4 ± 2.57% with the 34.4 μm LCD printer. Printing with optimized conditions for a low-cost water-wash resin designed for LCD-SLA printers resulted in an average error of 2.53 ± 0.94% with the 34.4 μm LCD printer and 5.35 ± 4.49% with a 22 μm LCD printer. We characterized additional parameters including surface roughness, channel perpendicularity, and light intensity uniformity, and as an application of LCD-printed devices, we demonstrated consistent flow rates in capillaric circuits for self-regulated and self-powered delivery of multiple liquids. LCD printers are an inexpensive alternative for fabricating microfluidics, with minimal differences in fidelity and accuracy compared with a 40X more expensive DLP printer.
