Bastien Venzac1, Shanliang Deng1, Ziad Mahmoud2, Aufried Lenferink3, Aurélie Costa2, Fabrice Bray2, Cees Otto3, Christian Rolando2,4, Séverine Le Gac1. 1. Applied Microfluidics for BioEngineering Research, MESA+ Institute for Nanotechnology & TechMed Centre, University of Twente, 7500AE Enschede, The Netherlands. 2. Université Lille, CNRS, USR 3290, MSAP, Miniaturisation pour la Synthèse l'Analyse et la Protéomique, 59000 Lille, France. 3. Medical Cell BioPhysics, TechMed Centre, University of Twente, 7500AE Enschede, The Netherlands. 4. Shrieking Sixties, 59650 Villeneuve-d'Ascq, France.
Abstract
Three-dimensional (3D)-printing techniques such as stereolithography (SLA) are currently gaining momentum for the production of miniaturized analytical devices and molds for soft lithography. However, most commercially available SLA resins inhibit polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) curing, impeding reliable replication of the 3D-printed structures in this elastomeric material. Here, we report a systematic study, using 16 commercial resins, to identify a fast and straightforward treatment of 3D-printed structures and to support accurate PDMS replication using UV and/or thermal post-curing. In-depth analysis using Raman spectroscopy, nuclear magnetic resonance, and high-resolution mass spectrometry revealed that phosphine oxide-based photo-initiators, leaching out of the 3D-printed structures, are poisoning the Pt-based PDMS catalyst. Yet, upon UV and/or thermal treatments, photo-initiators were both eliminated and recombined into high molecular weight species that were sequestered in the molds.
Three-dimensional (3D)-printing techniques such as stereolithography (SLA) are currently gaining momentum for the production of miniaturized analytical devices and molds for soft lithography. However, most commercially available SLA resins inhibit polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) curing, impeding reliable replication of the 3D-printed structures in this elastomeric material. Here, we report a systematic study, using 16 commercial resins, to identify a fast and straightforward treatment of 3D-printed structures and to support accurate PDMS replication using UV and/or thermal post-curing. In-depth analysis using Raman spectroscopy, nuclear magnetic resonance, and high-resolution mass spectrometry revealed that phosphine oxide-based photo-initiators, leaching out of the 3D-printed structures, are poisoning the Pt-based PDMS catalyst. Yet, upon UV and/or thermal treatments, photo-initiators were both eliminated and recombined into high molecular weight species that were sequestered in the molds.
The introduction of soft lithography
has greatly contributed to the expansion of the field of microfluidics
into nonspecialized laboratories.[1,2] In this technique,
structures on a mold are replicated into a transparent, nonfragile,
and elastomeric material, polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS), using standard
laboratory equipment. PDMS remains the number-one material to produce
miniaturized (bio)-analytical devices for molecular separation, biosensing,
diagnostic purposes, cell separation, single cell and extracellular
vesicle analysis, droplet microfluidics, and for creating mini-organ
models in vitro.[3]Molds for soft lithography have historically been produced using
the standard clean-room processes of photolithography and silicon
dry-etching,[1] which ensure high replication
accuracy and high resolution in the low micrometer range. Yet, these
techniques are expensive and time-consuming; and they request access
to dedicated facilities and extensive training. Alternative technologies
have been explored to produce molds, while addressing these issues.
For example, micromachining of aluminum, brass, or poly(methyl methacrylate)
plates using micromilling allowed for the creation of nonplanar geometries
in about 2 h, with excellent replication of channel down to 10 μm
in size.[4] Additive approaches have also
been proposed using wax printers,[5] laser
printers,[6] fused-deposition modeling,[7] or multijet three-dimensional (3D) printers.[8] Yet, these techniques all exhibit a lower resolution
and often yield rough surfaces, which is far from being ideal for
casting. Using stereolithography (SLA), 3D structures are created
through the layer-by-layer polymerization of a photosensitive resin
in a tank using UV light, for example, at 405 nm, by scanning a laser
beam in a plane or projecting images for each plane using digital
micromirrors or liquid-crystal display screens.[9] The SLA lateral resolution ranges from 50 μm for
printers costing less than $1000, down
to <5 μm for more advanced setups.[10] While SLA has been widely used to produce molds for PDMS casting,[11−16] PDMS curing is inhibited in the vicinity of these 3D-printed molds,
for nearly all commercially available SLA resins, precluding faithful
replication. Alternatively, PDMS strongly adheres to those molds.[12,16,17] Therefore, SLA molds must be
treated, with, for example, UV post-curing,[11−16,18,19] temperature,[12,14,17−19] solvents,[11,13,16] sonication,[11] silanization,[12,16,17] or a coating[11,20] (for an overview, see Supporting Information Table S1). However, all these treatments have been reported for
one specific resin.The Pt-based catalyst found in PDMS (Sylgard
184) cross-links vinyl-terminated
oligomers via a hydrosilylation mechanism.[21] Tri-organophosphite, vinyl, maleate, fumarate, and β-alkynol can reversibly or
irreversibly inhibit
PDMS curing due to their strong affinity for the catalyst or by sequestering
it in small droplets.[22−24] Moreover, 3D-printed objects release a variety of
chemicals in solution, including polyethylene glycols, diethyl-phthalates,[25] unreacted monomers,[26] and phosphine-oxide photoinitiators,[27] which can also inhibit the catalyst. However, to the best of our
knowledge, PDMS curing inhibition has never been investigated in the
case of 3D-printed molds, and no study has examined the role of post-treatments.Here, we first developed a generic post-treatment recipe for molds
produced from 16 commercial SLA resins. PDMS curing inhibition on
those molds was systematically quantified, and the influence of a
UV and/or heat treatment was evaluated. Using Raman spectroscopy,
nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR), and high-resolution mass spectrometry
(HR-MS), we next elucidated this curing inhibition mechanism and examined
how the proposed post-treatment remedied to this issue.
Materials and
Methods
Experimental Approach for Identifying Post-Treatment Recipes
for 16 Commercial Resins
First, 3D-printed molds were treated
with UV and heat (60 or 120 °C) before PDMS casting. Curing inhibition
was assessed using two test structures through image analysis. To
extend the scope of our study to a wider range of resins that could
not be processed with our printer, we cast and UV-cured other resins
on PDMS molds presenting the same test structures (Figure ).
Figure 1
Schematic overview of
the experimental approach. A test mold fabricated
in resin 1 (FTD deep black or industrial red) was exposed to UV and/or
heat, and its PDMS curing inhibition was evaluated (see Figure ). The resulting PDMS layer
was used to cast molds from other resins (resin 2, here) not processable
using our printer. These molds were exposed to UV and/or heat, and
their PDMS curing inhibition was characterized.
Schematic overview of
the experimental approach. A test mold fabricated
in resin 1 (FTD deep black or industrial red) was exposed to UV and/or
heat, and its PDMS curing inhibition was evaluated (see Figure ). The resulting PDMS layer
was used to cast molds from other resins (resin 2, here) not processable
using our printer. These molds were exposed to UV and/or heat, and
their PDMS curing inhibition was characterized.
Figure 2
(a) Microscopy picture of shuriken structures in PDMS for three
representative conditions (from left to right; successful, partial
replication, and no treatment. Top: top view of PDMS replicates; bottom:
cross-sections of PDMS replicates). Red arrows indicate the location
of the measurements. (b) Typical gray value profile recorded along
the red arrows in (b) to determine the apparent step width. (c) Microscopy
pictures of the comb structures in PDMS after successful (left) and
partial post-treatment (right), top view (top), and cross-section
(bottom). (d) Example of post-treatment screening for FTD industrial
red. Numbers correspond to the apparent step width (no value provided in the case of serious PDMS curing inhibition)
and the colors to the critical aspect ratio (as detailed
in the Experimental
Section).
Mold 3D-Printing
Molds were printed using a digital
light processing printer (FlashForge Hunter, FlashForge, Jinhua City,
China), with a 405 nm light-emitting diode (LED) source, a pixel size
of 62.5 × 62.5 μm2, and a step height of 50
μm using industrial red and deep black resins (Fun-To-Do, Alkmaar,
The Netherlands). Molds were rinsed with isopropanol before treatment.
Mold Treatment
Printed molds were post-cured in a homemade
405 nm LED UV box for 15 min, 1, 2, or 4 h at 14 mW/cm2 and/or exposed
to a thermal treatment at
either 60 °C (in an oven) for 1, 2, 4, 8, 24, or 48 h or at 120
°C (on a hotplate covered with a glass dish) for 1, 2, 4, or
8 h.
Quantitative Evaluation of the PDMS Curing Inhibition
A 1:10 w/w ratio of the curing agent and PDMS pre-polymer (Sylgard
184, Dow Corning, USA) was mixed, degassed under vacuum, and poured
on the molds. PDMS was cured for 3 h at 60 °C. Top pictures of
the PDMS replicas were captured with a binocular microscope equipped
with a camera (Motic sMZ-171, Motic, Xiamen, China) using backlight
illumination. PDMS inhibition was quantified using two 400 μm
high test structures, a shuriken (Figure a), and a comb (Figure c), comprising a
series of 2 mm long teeth with widths of 190–500 μm (aspect
ratio height/width of 2.1–0.8). The width of the transition
between the bottom and the top of the shuriken was measured at four
locations using ImageJ (NIH, Bethesda, USA), as depicted in Figure a. The width at half
maximum of the peak corresponding to the transition on a gray-value
plot, orthogonal to the wall, was determined (Figure b), and these four values were averaged into
a so-called “apparent step width” (in
μm). From the thinnest perfectly replicated structure in the
comb, a “critical aspect ratio” was
extracted.(a) Microscopy picture of shuriken structures in PDMS for three
representative conditions (from left to right; successful, partial
replication, and no treatment. Top: top view of PDMS replicates; bottom:
cross-sections of PDMS replicates). Red arrows indicate the location
of the measurements. (b) Typical gray value profile recorded along
the red arrows in (b) to determine the apparent step width. (c) Microscopy
pictures of the comb structures in PDMS after successful (left) and
partial post-treatment (right), top view (top), and cross-section
(bottom). (d) Example of post-treatment screening for FTD industrial
red. Numbers correspond to the apparent step width (no value provided in the case of serious PDMS curing inhibition)
and the colors to the critical aspect ratio (as detailed
in the Experimental
Section).
SLA Resin Mold Casting
PDMS replicates from printed
molds, after post-treatment, were exposed to plasma (Cuter, Femto
Science, Gyeonggi-Do, South Korea) for 40 s at 50 W, 50 kHz,
and 0.7 mbar and silanized by vapor deposition of (1H,1H,2H,2H-perfluorooctyl)-trichlorosilane
for 20 min in a closed container. 16 resins were cast on these PDMS
countermolds: Fun-To-Do industrial black and red, standard black,
standard red, and deep black; Formlabs black, clear, flex, and high
temperature (Formlabs, Sommerville, USA); DWS GL4000, GM08, DS3000,
and DL260 (DWS, Thiene, Italy); EnvisionTec PIC100, R11, and E-Shell
300 (EnvisionTec, Dearborn, USA). Resins were carefully pipetted in
the countermolds, which was next covered by a glass slide and exposed
to 405 nm UV light (15 s at 2 mW/cm2) on each side, except
for the R11, Formlabs Black, and Flex (30 s at 5 mW/cm2). Test molds were removed from the countermolds and exposed to UV
on each side (30 s at 5 mW/cm2). Minimal UV doses were
employed to limit the interference between casting and post-curing,
while supporting successful casting. Cast molds were treated and analyzed
using aforementioned protocols.
Mass Loss of the Treated
Resins
Tiles of 7.5 ×
7.5 × 0.75 mm3 were cast for every resin in PDMS molds,
post-cured (2 h at 14 mW/cm2), then heated 4 h at 120 °C,
and weighted between each step using a high-precision balance (AS60,
Radwag, Radom, Poland) (three tiles per condition).
Sample Preparation
for Spectroscopic Analysis
Similar
tiles were cast with the industrial red, clear, GL4000 and PIC100
resins and treated using corresponding optimal protocols (see Table ; UV and thermal treatment
at 120 °C for the industrial red and PIC100, only UV for GL4000
and only curing at 120 °C for clear resin).
Table 1
Post-Treatments Established for 3D-Printed
Molds as Determined in This Study for 16 Commercial Resinsa
recipe 1
recipe 2
company/provider
resin name
resin characteristics
UV
heating (120 °C)
UV
heating (60 °C)
Fun-To-Do
standard black
1 h
4 h
X
X
standard red
2 h
8 h
X
X
industrial black
composite
15 min
2 h
X
X
industrial red
composite
15 min
2 h
15 min
48 h
deep black
composite (carbon nanotube)
15 min
2 h
1 h
48 h
Formlabs
black
0 h
1 h
0 h
24 h
flex
flexible
0 h
2 h
2 h
0 h
HT
high temperature
0 h
1 h
0 h
1 h
clear
transparent
0 h
1 h
0 h
24 h
Envisiontec
PIC100
casting resin
2 h
4 h
X
X
E-shell 300
transparent, biocompatible
0 h
1 h
0 h
24 h
R11
2 h
4 h
X
X
DWS
DL260
composite with ceramic
0 h
1 h
2 h
24 h
DS3000
transparent, biocompatible
0 h
2 h
0 h
24 h
GL4000
flexible
1 h
8 h
4 h
0 h
GM08
flexible,
transparent
1 h
8 h
2 h
24 h
“X” stands for the
absence of treatment found in the range of tested duration of the
two steps.
“X” stands for the
absence of treatment found in the range of tested duration of the
two steps.100 μL
of phenylbis(2,4,6-trimethylbenzoyl)-phosphine oxide
(BAPO, Sigma-Aldrich, Saint-Louis, USA) and 100 mg of ethyl(2,4,6-trimethylbenzoyl)phenyl
phosphinate (TPO-L, IGM resins, Waalwijk, The Netherlands) were treated
with UV (1 h at 14 mW/cm2) followed by 2 h at 120 °C
on a hotplate covered with a glass dish. Liquids (or gels) condensed
on the glass dishes were collected after treatment for analysis.
Raman Spectroscopy
A custom-built Raman upright microscope
with an excitation source (Kr + laser Innova 90-K, Coherent Inc.,
Santa Clara, USA; wavelength 647 nm; power 35 mW) was used
for the characterization of the liquid resins; corresponding untreated
and treated tiles; corresponding condensed liquids; BAPO and TPO-L
untreated, treated with only UV, only heat or both UV then heat; their
condensed liquids; methyl methacrylate; and (1,6)-hexanediol di-methacrylate
(Sigma-Aldrich). The excitation beam was focused onto the tiles, about
5 to 70 μm below the surface. The liquid samples (40 μL)
were placed in a cavity in a borosilicate glass slide. Scattered photons
were collected for 100 ms and focused on a 15 μm
pinhole at the entrance of a custom-made spectrograph, dispersing
them in the range of −40 till +3655 rel·cm–1. Spectral data were recorded with an EMCCD camera (Newton DU-970N-BV,
Andor Technology Ltd., Belfast, Northern Ireland), with an average
spectral resolution of 2.3 cm–1. By applying a raster
scan pattern covering a 30 × 30 μm2 area, 3600
spectra were recorded for each sample. Baseline correction was applied
for the treated industrial red and GL4000 resins that gave rise to
significant autofluorescence.
Mass Spectroscopy Analysis
Fourier-transform ion cyclotron
resonance mass spectra were acquired in a positive ion mode on a SolariX
XR instrument with a 9.4 T actively shielded superconducting magnet
and a dynamically harmonized cell (Bruker Daltonics, Bremen, Germany)
fitted with a nano-electrospray online source. Samples (1 mg/mL in
acetone) were introduced in the MS using a syringe pump (Cole-Parmer,
USA) at a rate of 10 μL/min, connected to a capillary line (100
μm i.d., 360 μm o.d.), equipped with a SilicaTip needle
(10 ± 1 μm, PicoTip Emitter, New Objective, USA), to which
a potential of 1.3 kV was applied. The front and back trapping potentials
were set at 1.6 V with a skimmer voltage at 10 V, and the ions were
accumulated in the hexapole for 0.01 s. Spectra were acquired using
broadband detection, 16 M data points, 150 scans accumulation, and
a mass range of m/z 144 to 2000.The instrument was calibrated using sodium trifluoroacetate (0.01
mg/mL in H2O/MeOH 50/50 v/v) with a linear calibration.
Spectra were internally calibrated in the Data Analysis software v.5.0
(Bruker Daltonics, Germany) using a list of assigned signals.
Nuclear
Magnetic Resonance
NMR spectra were recorded
on an AVANCE 500 (Bruker Biospin, France) operating at 202.45 MHz
(31P) equipped with a 5 mm triple resonance probe (TXI)
at 295 K. 31P spectra were acquired with proton decoupling
and reported using indirect referencing. NMR chemical shifts were
calibrated using residual solvent (CDCl3, 7.27 ppm). All
experiments were run using a software from the Bruker library, and
data were processed with Topspin 4.0.
Chemical Inhibition of
PDMS
A 10:1 w/w base/curing
agent PDMS mixture was supplemented with chemicals or mixtures thereof,
all of them at 1% w/v: pure and treated BAPO, pure and treated TPO-L,
2-benzyl-2-dimethylamino-1-(4-morpholinophenyl)-butanone-1 (Irgacure
369), 1-[4-(2-hydroxyethoxy)-phenyl]-2-hydroxy-2-methyl-1-propane-1-one
(Irgacure 2959), methyl methacrylate (all Sigma-Aldrich), deep black
resin, and condensed liquids/gels collected after thermal treatment
of either deep black molds, or BAPO and TPO-L. These mixtures were
cast on treated 3D-printed deep black molds, and test structures were
imaged to quantify curing inhibition.
Results and Discussion
Qualitative
and Quantitative Evaluation of PDMS Curing Inhibition
First,
3D-printed test molds in the industrial red resin were employed
to evaluate the PDMS curing inhibition and the effects of post-treatments.
Without any post-treatment, PDMS on the mold was completely uncured
(Figure a, right).
After 1 h baking at 120 °C, the replication of sharp vertical
steps (Figure a, center
and Figure c, right)
failed due to either incomplete curing of PDMS or its strong attachment
to the mold. After 1 h UV exposure and 1 h thermal treatment at 120
°C, both the shuriken and comb test structures were perfectly
replicated (Figures a, left and 2c, left). In an attempt to quantify
PDMS curing inhibition, the “apparent step width” was measured, as detailed in the Experimental Section.The apparent step width typically increased with the degree of inhibition.
In a perfectly replicated structure, the wall is vertical, so that
only its shadow could affect the measurement (Figure a, left), leading to an apparent step width
<50 μm. The same illumination parameters were kept for all
experiments, not to introduce any bias. Partial PDMS curing typically
resulted in a damaged PDMS surface after demolding and an increased
apparent width (Figure a, middle). In the case of severe inhibition, no step could be defined
(Figure a, right).
Determining an Optimal Post-Treatment Recipe for 16 SLA Resins
Next, we systematically applied this methodology to 16 commercial
resins from four manufacturers, exhibiting a wide range of properties
(e.g., transparent, flexible, or high resolution) and therefore diverse
formulations (Table ). However, resins from DWS and Formlabs could not be processed with
our printer because they strongly adhere to its Teflon-coated tank.
Moreover, all resins have differences in penetration depth for the
UV light, minimum dose to initiate the polymerization, or horizontal
migration of activated species, which all affect the produced features
and their sizes. Therefore, the resins were cast against a PDMS countermold
to yield identical structures for all resins (Figure ). All molds were subjected to the same combinations
of UV exposure and baking at 60 or 120 °C. The apparent step
width and thinnest properly replicated tooth were systematically determined
to identify treatment recipes (Figure d and Tables S2 and S3).
For every resin, a first recipe was defined for an “apparent
step width” smaller than 50 μm and successful replication
of the finest tooth (aspect ratio 2.1). This recipe typically includes
baking at 120 °C, sometimes after a UV step (for 9/16
resins) with a total treatment duration shorter than 135 min for 10
resins (recipe 1, Table ). For most of the resins (11/16), a second recipe was defined with
only UV or baking at 60 °C, or a combination of both (recipe
2, Table ). Formlabs
resins and those sold as biocompatible (E-shell 300 and DS3000) were
the easiest to treat. A short baking step at 120 °C (<2 h)
or longer at 60 °C was sufficient, which, importantly, does not
require any specialized equipment.It is worth noticing that
treatments recommended by manufacturers to complete the polymerization
of the resins after 3D printing are shorter that the treatments established
in this study to avoid PDMS curing inhibition (see Table S4 for an overview); yet, those “commercial”
treatments are not sufficient to prevent PDMS curing inhibition. Flexible
resins (flex and GL4000) were successfully treated using only UV exposure.
All these recipes, established using cast molds, were next verified
on 3D-printed molds for the industrial and deep black resins: for
triplicate structures, an apparent step width <45 μm was
found and the finest tooth was successfully replicated, confirming
the results obtained using cast structures.All treatment processes
were found to work for our two test structures.
However, other elements should be considered for other types of structures.
In our hands, higher aspect-ratio structures typically required longer
UV exposures due to shadowing effects.[18,19] Some resins,
when exposed to long UV exposure or high-temperature treatments (120
°C), tend to bend and change colors, and molds produced in flexible
resins became harder. In the latter case, recipes using a longer thermal
treatment at a lower temperature should be preferred.
Decrease in
the Mold Mass after Post-Treatment
In a
first hypothesis, inhibitory compounds could be eliminated through
heating, which was tested by weighing tiles before and after treatment
(i.e., 2 h UV exposure, followed by 4 h at 120 °C). All
tiles lost mass after treatment (Figure ), with variations ranging from −0.41
± 0.02% (DS3000) to −3.13 ± 0.23% (flex). These mass
changes could be explained by the release of volatile compounds from
the 3D-printed materials, which is confirmed by the condensation of
liquids. This loss of mass was associated with negligible shrinkage
of less than 2% (see Figure S1).
Figure 3
Variation in
mass of tiles cast from 16 commercially available
SLA resins, after 2 h of UV post-curing at 405 nm (blue), or a combined
UV post-curing and 4 h post-baking at 120 °C (red), expressed
as % of the initial mass (n = 3).
Variation in
mass of tiles cast from 16 commercially available
SLA resins, after 2 h of UV post-curing at 405 nm (blue), or a combined
UV post-curing and 4 h post-baking at 120 °C (red), expressed
as % of the initial mass (n = 3).
Raman Spectroscopy of Resins and Condensed Liquids
To identify
potential chemical changes induced by the mold post-treatments,
Raman spectroscopy analysis was performed on PIC100, clear, industrial
red and GL4000 samples (liquid resins, and cast and treated molds).
The inherent complexity of the resins precludes a thorough molecular
analysis, and only a few major differences were found between samples
(indicated by arrows on Figure ; see Table S5 for a detailed overview).
Characteristic bands of methyl methacrylate (3100, 1630, and 1400
rel·cm–1, blue arrows) and hexanediol dimethacrylate
monomers (Figure S2) were not found any
more after casting and treatment. No significant chemical changes,
unless linked to the polymerization, were identified after the post-treatment.
The condensed liquids collected for PIC100, clear and industrial red
were similarly analyzed. The resulting spectra for PIC100 and clear
significantly differed from those of the liquid resins and acrylate
monomers, suggesting that the released compounds were not highly abundant
in the resins. Similar bands were detected for the industrial red
condensed liquid and the methacrylate monomers (black stars in Figure ; see Table S5 for an overview).
Figure 4
Raman spectra acquired
for four resins (clear, PIC100, Industrial
Red and GL4000) before casting (blue), after casting (black), after
post-treatment (red), and for the corresponding condensed liquids
(green). Arrows indicate bands being attributed to the methacrylate
monomers that are not present after polymerization. Stars indicate
bands found, respectively, in the BAPO and TPO-L spectra (red), and
the methyl methacrylate spectrum (black).
Raman spectra acquired
for four resins (clear, PIC100, Industrial
Red and GL4000) before casting (blue), after casting (black), after
post-treatment (red), and for the corresponding condensed liquids
(green). Arrows indicate bands being attributed to the methacrylate
monomers that are not present after polymerization. Stars indicate
bands found, respectively, in the BAPO and TPO-L spectra (red), and
the methyl methacrylate spectrum (black).
Raman Spectroscopy Analysis of Photo-Initiators
We
next examined if the condensed liquids obtained from the resins would
contain photo-initiators and/or fragments thereof. Two phosphine oxide
photo-initiators found in the SLA resins (BAPO and TPO-L) were subjected
to several post-treatments: 1 h UV exposure, 2 h at 120 °C or
combination thereof, that all yielded a similar brownish paste. BAPO
(powder) lost 48.0 ± 0.2% of its mass after treatment, against
16.1 ± 5% for TPO-L (liquid).Raman analysis of these two
photo-initiators after full treatment yielded very similar spectra
(Figure S2), which suggests that the post-treatment
produces similar fragments for BAPO and TPO-L. Furthermore, a large
number of bands detected on the Raman spectra of the resin condensed
liquids were also found on the spectra of the photo-initiator condensed
liquids (7/11 bands for the clear, 14/15 bands for the PIC100, and
8/15 bands for the industrial red resin, red stars in Figure ; see Table S5 for an overview). Altogether, these data collectively suggest
that the mixtures released from the 3D-printed molds through heating
are very likely to contain phosphine oxide-based photo-initiators
and/or fragments thereof with yet a small amount of uncured methacrylate
monomers.
PDMS Curing Inhibition by Photo-Initiators and Fragments Thereof
To test if PDMS curing was inhibited by the photo-initiators, fragments
thereof, and/or methacrylate monomers, PDMS (10:1 w/w pre-polymer:
curing agent) was supplemented with these compounds or one resin (deep
black), its condensed liquid, and Irgacure 2959 and 369, two α-ketone photo-initiators (all
at 1% w/v).
These different mixtures were cured (3 h at 60 °C) on a treated
test mold. FTD deep black resin and its condensed liquid strongly
inhibited PDMS curing, leading to a viscous silicone paste (Figure S3), indicating that both samples contained
a catalyst poison. In contrast, PDMS cured correctly in the presence
of methyl methacrylate, while strongly attaching to the mold, most
probably through cross-linking with the 3D-printed mold. This result
is actually reminiscent of the previous work in which polyacrylate
is employed to enhance adhesion between silicone-based and acrylic
resin structures, while no mechanisms explaining the underlying chemistry
have been proposed so far.[28] Both TPO-L
and BAPO strongly inhibited PDMS curing, even after either UV or thermal
treatment at 120 °C. However, after exposure to a combined treatment,
these two photo-initiators formed a paste that did not solubilize
anymore in PDMS, so that only a thin layer of PDMS around the paste
remained uncured, while the bulk successfully polymerized. PDMS did
not cure at all after supplementation with BAPO or TPO-L condensed
liquids. Irgacure 2959 and Irgacure 369 which do not contain phosphorus
did not inhibit PDMS curing, even at a much higher concentration (10%
w/v) (data not shown). These qualitative results (Figure S3) collectively reveal that phosphine oxide-based
photo-initiators are likely poisoning the PDMS catalyst, while unreacted
methacrylate monomers leaching from untreated molds promote adhesion
of the PDMS replica, as previously reported.[12,16,17] After a photo-thermal treatment, neither
BAPO nor TPO-L did inhibit PDMS curing, in sharp contrast to their
condensed liquids.
MS and NMR Analyses of Photo-Initiators
NMR and MS
analyses were performed for the BAPO and TPO-L photo-initiators after
a combined UV and thermal treatment, as well as on their condensed
liquids to elucidate the effect of the post-treatment. 31P NMR spectra (Figure S4) confirmed the
presence of phosphorus on all these samples, with compounds belonging
to at least two PV families as phosphine oxide and phosphonate,
and the absence of PIII compounds such as phosphines.[29] MS analysis demonstrated that for both photo-initiators,
the treated brown pastes and the condensed liquids were composed of
a large variety of molecules containing mesitoyl, phenyl, mesitylethanone,
and similar groups attached to one or several phosphorus atoms, with
molecular weights ranging from 311 to 1650 g/mol for the treated BAPO
and 339 to 1250 g/mol for the treated TPO-L (Figure ). Such recombination has recently been reported
after photolysis of BAPO;[30] in this study,
at least 16 molecules were identified and formation mechanisms proposed
from the molecular formula determined using HR-MS (see Figure S5). The detected molecular weights were
lower for both condensed liquids compared to their treated counterparts
(from m/z 187–967 for BAPO
and m/z 237–795 for TPO-L).
Next to this, no striking differences in chemical structures were
observed.
Figure 5
HR-mass spectra of BAPO and TPO-L after 1 h UV exposure and 2 h
at 120 °C and of their condensed liquid collected after heat
treatment. Colored horizontal lines indicate the addition of: C10H10 (m/z 130.0777,
red), C10H10O (m/z 146.0726, orange), C10H12O (m/z 148.0882, yellow), C10H10O2 (m/z 162.0675, green),
C10H12O2 (m/z 164.0831, blue), and C8H11O2P (m/z 170.0491, purple).
HR-mass spectra of BAPO and TPO-L after 1 h UV exposure and 2 h
at 120 °C and of their condensed liquid collected after heat
treatment. Colored horizontal lines indicate the addition of: C10H10 (m/z 130.0777,
red), C10H10O (m/z 146.0726, orange), C10H12O (m/z 148.0882, yellow), C10H10O2 (m/z 162.0675, green),
C10H12O2 (m/z 164.0831, blue), and C8H11O2P (m/z 170.0491, purple).MS analysis therefore suggests that the applied
treatment induces
the formation of inert high molecular weight molecules from the photo-initiators
and the elimination by vaporization of low molecular weight inhibiting
compounds (as the condensed liquids still inhibit PDMS curing). While
this result was only obtained for two typical photo-initiators and
not for the complex matrix as found in commercial resins, we can nevertheless
elaborate on possible PDMS curing inhibition mechanisms. Photo-initiators
in excess and their fragments produced during 3D-printing can leach
from the mold into the PDMS, inhibiting its curing. During treatment,
these fragments partly recombine into larger species, which are trapped
in the surrounding poly-acrylic network, while smaller and volatile
molecules are released from the mold, both processes reducing drastically
the quantity of inhibitors able to diffuse out of the molds during
PDMS casting.
Conclusions
We first established
a series of post-treatment, combining UV exposure
and heat, using 3D-printed test structures produced from 16 SLA resins
for their faithful replication in PDMS with no curing inhibition.
For at least 11 of those resins, this treatment was shorter than 135
min. We believe that both the simple equipment required for these
treatments and the large spectrum of resins tested in this study (resins
with different properties and formulations from four manufacturers)
will widely support the use of SLA for producing molds for soft lithography.
We next explored the mechanisms responsible for PDMS curing inhibition
to notably understand how the post-treatment could prevent this inhibition.
Leaching phosphine oxide-based photo-initiator fragments were identified
as PDMS catalyst poisons, while unreacted monomers would promote PDMS
adhesion onto the 3D-printed molds through cross-linking reactions
during PDMS curing. UV post-curing alone further polymerizes the resin,
thereby limiting the risk of leaching monomers without yet avoiding
the curing inhibition. Combining it with thermal treatment, on the
one hand, allows for vaporizing the remaining photo-initiators out
of the 3D-printed structures and, on the other hand, promotes recombination
reactions between the photo-initiator fragments to yield high MW species
that remain trapped in the 3D-printed resin. This mechanism is likely
to be valid for resins using phosphine-oxide based photo-initiators
and silicone polymers such as PDMS using a Pt-based catalyst, as is
the case for Sylgard 184 and RTV 615.[12] Reducing leaching from 3D-printed objects has already been reported
to also improve their biocompatibility and the survival of cells cultured
in their direct vicinity.[31] While this
would require additional studies, our generic treatment is also likely
to significantly improve the biocompatibility of resins and support
their use to produce organ-on-a-chip models, directly using 3D printing.
Authors: J Cooper McDonald; Michael L Chabinyc; Steven J Metallo; Janelle R Anderson; Abraham D Stroock; George M Whitesides Journal: Anal Chem Date: 2002-04-01 Impact factor: 6.986
Authors: Hari Kalathil Balakrishnan; Faizan Badar; Egan H Doeven; James I Novak; Andrea Merenda; Ludovic F Dumée; Jennifer Loy; Rosanne M Guijt Journal: Anal Chem Date: 2020-12-02 Impact factor: 6.986
Authors: Max Schmallegger; Anna Eibel; Jan P Menzel; Anne-Marie Kelterer; Michal Zalibera; Christopher Barner-Kowollik; Hansjörg Grützmacher; Georg Gescheidt Journal: Chemistry Date: 2019-06-12 Impact factor: 5.236
Authors: Marcia de Almeida Monteiro Melo Ferraz; Heiko H W Henning; Pedro Ferreira da Costa; Jos Malda; Séverine Le Gac; Fabrice Bray; Majorie B M van Duursen; Jos F Brouwers; Chris H A van de Lest; Ingeborg Bertijn; Lisa Kraneburg; Peter L A M Vos; Tom A E Stout; Barend M Gadella Journal: Environ Sci Technol Lett Date: 2018-01-05
Authors: Caffiyar Mohamed Yousuff; Mohd Danish; Eric Tatt Wei Ho; Ismail Hussain Kamal Basha; Nor Hisham B Hamid Journal: Micromachines (Basel) Date: 2017-08-22 Impact factor: 2.891
Authors: Brian J O'Grady; Michael D Geuy; Hyosung Kim; Kylie M Balotin; Everett R Allchin; David C Florian; Neelansh N Bute; Taylor E Scott; Gregory B Lowen; Colin M Fricker; Matthew L Fitzgerald; Scott A Guelcher; John P Wikswo; Leon M Bellan; Ethan S Lippmann Journal: Lab Chip Date: 2021-12-07 Impact factor: 6.799
Authors: Elsbeth G B M Bossink; Anke R Vollertsen; Joshua T Loessberg-Zahl; Andries D van der Meer; Loes I Segerink; Mathieu Odijk Journal: Microsyst Nanoeng Date: 2022-05-23 Impact factor: 8.006
Authors: Dhanesh G Kasi; Mees N S de Graaf; Paul A Motreuil-Ragot; Jean-Phillipe M S Frimat; Michel D Ferrari; Pasqualina M Sarro; Massimo Mastrangeli; Arn M J M van den Maagdenberg; Christine L Mummery; Valeria V Orlova Journal: Micromachines (Basel) Date: 2021-12-29 Impact factor: 2.891