Microfluidic Chips Made With Shrinky Dinks 149
SoyChemist writes "When she started her job as a new professor at UC Merced, Michelle Khine was stuck without a clean room or semiconductor fabrication equipment, so she went MacGyver and started making Lab-on-a-Chip devices in her kitchen with Shrinky Dinks, a laser printer, and a toaster oven. She would print a negative image of the channels onto the polystyrene sheets and then shrink them with heat. The miniaturized pattern served as a perfect mold for forming rounded, narrow channels in PDMS — a clear, synthetic rubber."
Sometimes (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Sometimes people get butt-hurt. (Score:5, Insightful)
Anyone who knows anything about
Women can laugh at penis jokes too, ya know.
Misogyny it aint.
Karma Burn (Score:5, Informative)
To wit:
1) There was no information of any kind in that initial post. Unless you count "You're stupid!" as informational.
2) It led off with a spelling correction. Spelling corrections, especially when used in the context of determining IQ, are karma killers. With good reason - they contribute nothing and are designed to insult.
3) You invoked group-think. Accusing nerds on Slashdot is like accusing cats of being herd animals - it flies in the face of observation. Not to mention that you conveniently accused everyone who disagreed with you of group-think. That indicates that it is merely a cop-out to avoid facing the fact that you're plain wrong.
4) You brought an entirely irrelevant fact into the discussion - the user's sig.
5) Finally, your solution to your perceived problem is idiotic. IQ has nothing to do with whether guidelines are read or even adhered to. I suspect that you think that's an appropriate solution just because you scored above 100 on some IQ test, and think that that makes you special.
Here's something else: my post should be modded to -1 for being off-topic. Do I care? No. Why? Because I know that:
1) Karma is just a number that means nothing - people modded me up when I was posting at 1, and people modded me up when I had been modded down to -1.
2) On average, I contribute more than I flame. I know that a -1 mod here and there does nothing to my Karma.
Here's a suggestion: realize that your initial post was completely and utterly useless, and mods were correct in telling you so. Realize that the only way out of Karma hell is to contribute useful commentary. I suggest to start by reading the article, providing links in your posts, avoiding insults, etc.
Re: (Score:1, Offtopic)
here's his moderation:
Personally, I prefer moderations like this, as opposed to 100% troll, or even 100% insightful. Hell the other day I was modded troll into oblivion because I disagreed with the "group think of the moment". I don't care, even weirder it's really hard for me to understand why only a few people saw what I saw, that doesn't lead me to think anything was unfair, I just kept on pressing my views, and they weren't popular (shit I might even be
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
What a beautiful sig there be there.
SB
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Suggestions for more effective Meta-Moderation. (Score:4, Interesting)
* Make it clear to meta-moderators that their job is to judge whether the moderation was based on quality, not on purely emotional agreeal.
* Give moderators the option to enter a short reason why the posting is of high/low quality. For example:
"-1, factually wrong: $person was born 1970, not 1986"
"+1, poster is clearly an expert on the subject"
"+1, well-reasoned argument that changed my view on the subject"
"+1, hot grits joke" (j/k)
(You might ask: "why not write a reply instead in these cases?"
A posting does not replace moderation; moderation scores are needed for filtering. Moderation reasons are also expected to be shorter. Maybe the reasons should be publicly visible (but not the moderator name - to prevent metamod abuse)).
* Make Overrated and Underrated metamoderatable. Moderators should give reasons like "the posting is not bad, but is not a +5 since these arguments have been said and answered many times and the user was apparently just upvoted because he sounds confident/smart".
Sure, this is not watertight; we can't expect moderators to write a paper on the subject to justify their vote. But I suppose that a large majority of the agreeal vorters would not bother to fake a reason and that's good enough. Meta-moderation would also be more fun. Your thoughts?
Re: (Score:1)
You must be new here.
learn to fucking read (Score:5, Funny)
Who cares if she is a man or a woman? She is a person, like the rest of us.
makes semi-conductors in her kitchen and all she gets is penis jokes?
And she didn't make semiconductors, she made microfluidic devices. Yes, she is brilliant, you apparently are not.
Re: (Score:2)
Speak for yourself human.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Muahahaha!
Re:Sometimes (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Surely everyone knows God created women for our (men) entertainment, pleasure and labor.
right when you need it, too. (Score:5, Funny)
I hate when that happens.
Re:right when you need it, too. (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
"no, no, don't thank me, thank the Moon's gravitational pull"
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Watch out for Einstien (Score:5, Funny)
*obligitory family guy joke*
this story is a repeat (Score:4, Funny)
how is it a troll? (Score:3, Insightful)
thus a silly throw away joke. exactly how humor deprived are you?
I love MacGyver (Score:5, Funny)
Fact: On the 1st day, God created MACGYVER. On the 2nd day, God created knives and paperclips. On the 3rd day.. MACGYVER created everything else.
Fact: MACGYVER can invent 1000 different things using a ball of yarn and a pair of sunglasses. 999 of these things can kill a man. The remaining thing can kill a planet.
Fact: MACGYVER invented genocide using only blankets and smallpox.
Fact: The only thing that MACGYVER cannot produce with a soda can and an extension cord... is mercy.
Fact:One time, MACGYVER built a time machine out of an old refrigerator and a pocketwatch, and used it to travel to the ancient paradise of Atlantis. However, while there, he went on a drunken bender with with a magnifying glass and a book of matches. This area is now known as the Sahara.
Fact: Chuck Norris is an android built by MACGYVER in an attempt to find a worthy opponent.
Fact: Some crazy people claim that MACGYVER was just a TV character, played by Richard Dean Anderson. In actuality, Richard Dean Anderson was played by MACGYVER, and the show was a documentary, the events of which REALLY HAPPENED.
And the final Fact: Necessity is the mother of invention but... MACGYVER is the father.
Let me guess... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
(But, I wonder if he can invent an Anti-Chuck-Norris roundhouse kick...)
Obligatory (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Fact: On the fourth day, MACGYVER was making way too much noise and promptly got his ass kicked by Chuck Norris.
Selma, is that you? (nt) (Score:1)
Dingle berries, (Score:2)
So the world will end (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
covered in greygoo created in someone's kitchen with toys from Matel?
Somehow that seems strangely appropriate...
Lets pull out the ol' doomsday checklist and see.
Invocation of advanced science... nanotech, check
Involvment of large corporation... I think Matel counts, check
Occurs on convenient round base ten number (or base 5 for the mayan, myst and discordian fans)... well, doesn't say, so that's kind of a wash
Only thing I don't see how to work in is the kitchen angle.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Oh, that's easy: Bobby Flay will use it in an Iron Chef America episode (something with Ancho peppers is a good bet), where it will jump up and go on an apeshit rampage after a food critic downs it ("too salty").
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, that's easy: Bobby Flay will use it in an Iron Chef America episode (something with Ancho peppers is a good bet), where it will jump up and go on an apeshit rampage after a food critic downs it ("too salty").
Re: (Score:2)
Think of the children!
Forget it... (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
No problem: Red Food Coloring (#2) and a ballpoint pen should do it (see also the MacGyver list further up).
Re:Forget it... (Score:4, Funny)
The gravimetric distortions are only a problem if you miss the annual baryon sweeps. The real concern is chromometric distortions and temporal wakes.
And MacGuyver..
Funding? (Score:1, Insightful)
patented I hope... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
What I want to know, is if Shrinky Dinks shrink when heated, why isn't fusing the toner to the Dink making it shrink? I mean, if you use the wrong transparency film in a laser printer, it MELTS and makes a horrible mess. Why aren't the Dinkys Shrinky?
Patents and absence of shrink in printer (Score:5, Interesting)
From what I've learned (yes they now teach patents in some research class here around), the application of a process is included in the patent application. If you invent a new application of an ancient method you could try to apply for a new patent (...now we found you can also do that with it...), as long as nobody has published about this new usage.
In this cases : Sorry, too late ! Prof. Khine has already published the paper, so there's no way Shrinky Dink's creator could patent a new use of their product.
Beside, as pointed out by other
Beside a patent is only useful if you want to sell your method to the industry. In this case the industry already has photo lithography, which isn't expensive for them given their production scales, so they don't really need the "kitchen"-made technique.
Probably for the same reason the not-wrong transparency film don't melt :
Shrinky dinks probably happen to tolerate higher thermal energy before starting to change shape.
I mean they are supposed to be cooked in an oven in order to shrink. Not just somewhat heated.
According to the paper, they cooked the plastic sheets for 5min at 163C in the ovens, in order to achieve the desired shrinking. Probably the couple of seconds the sheets spends in contact with the laser drum don't transfer enough thermal energy (besides, this article [fsnet.co.uk] has also measured a lower temperature of 145 C, thus making the total heat exchange even lower inside the printer).
But probably, if there's a paper jam (or a plastic jam in this case) and the plastic sheets stay for several minutes against the heated drum, then probably you'll have to remove the jam using a magnifying glass and tweezers.
That prooves the hypothesis ! (Score:2)
Hey ! In fact that tends to prove my former hypothesis :
High end color printers are single-pass multi-color.
In low cost color laser printers, the sheet of paper goes several separate time through the printer (similar to a "duplex" mode) the colors are applied in separate passes for Blank, Cyan, Magenta and Yell
Re: (Score:2)
I read somewhere about a process (Score:4, Interesting)
messy Bio-diesel details (Score:3, Informative)
I am not sure about the methanol, but if I remember the wikipedia article, you can use a vegetable oil ( like canola) and lye to yank the organic acid off the oil. What you are left with is a fuel ( an ester) that burns clean, and lots and lots of glycerol.
Apparently, the glycerol can be used to make urethane foam, for insulation - I still don't quite know how that is supposed to work.
The reactor that you remember I think I saw on slashdot; by using a huge number of capillary tubes, the reaction area wa
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You read correctly; the article mentions a glass slide that you fuse the molded part onto. But wait! There's more!
You can make fluidic valves to control the mixing properties, which means you have a chemical reaction vessel with the possibility of feedback control. This opens up whole new avenues of possible research.
Since the system has two parts, you could make electrical circuits on the glass slide, perhaps by using tin oxide, a transparent conductor. I recollect an article, way back when, where a so
Next Week on Slashdot: DIY (Score:1)
Saving a lot of money (Score:5, Interesting)
Sure, the name "shrinky dinks" is funny, but being able to make these lab-on-a-chips affordably is a big deal.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A Challenge. (Score:1)
Re:A Challenge. (Score:4, Informative)
Stupid Toy (Score:4, Interesting)
As a kid I never understood the appeal of the Shrinky Dink as a toy. You draw on some plastic and then put it in the oven and it comes out smaller. Big whoop. Why not just draw it smaller to begin with.
But this is actually a functional (and cool technology) use/hack for the toy.
I tip my hat.
Why (Score:2)
I agree it's not that cool of a toy, but it does actually do something (somewhat) interesting.
In other news... (Score:4, Funny)
confidentiality agreements (Score:1)
Very cool article (Score:3, Interesting)
However this image:
http://www.rsc.org/ej/LC/2008/b711622e/b711622e-f4.gif [rsc.org]
Is quite impressive. It is a excellent demonstration of what you can build with these channels. Quite cool.
Now where can I find a hand-held corona discharger?
Re: (Score:2)
You can do surface mount reflow soldering (i.e. the same process an electronics factory uses to solder a PCB) with a toaster oven or even just an electric hotplate.
Coming Soon: advanced inks and printers (Score:4, Insightful)
I know nothing about this area of science, but holy cow! This simple technique already seems to accomplish so much, and to be so useful. Think what it will be when they've created advanced inks and molding materials to create smoother "walls" and which let you control the "shrink" factor more precisely! Imagine specially designed printers to enable chip printing-- even if it's just a more precise tray to hold the shrinky dink media.
This is terribly exciting. It puts microfluidic experimentation within the reach of any hobbyist, college class, or high school! Great breakthroughs will come of this, I just know it.
Link to Original Article (Score:2, Informative)
This story put a smile on my face (Score:2)
I knew it! (Score:2)
Oh Slashdot, I can read you like a book.
Anyone Else Joining The Club? (Score:1)
Using childhood toys for science and technology! (Score:1)
whitesides at harvard is the predecessor (Score:1)
perhaps someone else can give a good summary and comparision
will be overtaken by rapid prototyping (Score:1)
www.desktopfactory.com
these 3D printers - printers that print a layer of plastic, then another layer to make a solid 3 dimensional object - are just like other super high vol hardware: if it costs 5K this year, you will get 2X the performance for half the price next year - in 15 years, kids will come home from school and complain that there is no resin for the 3D
Re: (Score:2)
One of the kids made me a shuriken and a 3D tiger head (their logo) on one of these machines. Normally, they use it along with their CAD classes, though, not just to make something cool for the geeky English teacher who thinks the printer is cool as hell.
So, in some schools, the kids are already complaining when they run out of resin
Open Source Hardware (Score:2)
I wish I knew more about microfluidics. Does anyone know of some good examples of what microfluidic chips could be used for? I know they use them to save valuable reagents, or to create a more controlled environment for experiements, but how about some day to day applications?
I recall hearing a story on the radio recently about using microfluidic chips for detecting tuberculosis in the field. Essentially the chips cou
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
Re:Somethings tapping at the back of her head (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Actually, the most popular toy technology for
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
radio controlled dragonflies [youtube.com]
and radio controlled helicopters [youtube.com]
Now, if they put a couple of wireless cameras into those, that would really cool.
Re:Meanwhile (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
**WACK WACK WACK**
*obligitory family guy joke*
Truly, we have sunk that low.
SB
Re: (Score:1)
Dammit...yeah, I'm new here.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
From the first link - http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2007/12/macgyver-scienc.html [wired.com]
I think it was tagged such because
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
1) her favorite toy
2) a laser printer
3) etc...
Re: (Score:2)
I still get depressed every time I find a non-native English speaker that writes better than a native speaker. It happens more often than not, unfortunately. If you see a properly spelled and grammatically correct post on slashdot, I'd give you 2:1 odds that it wasn't posted by a native English speaker.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Wanna bet she made light saber out of that very laser printer? Or an FTL drive?