<p><em>"What Printer?"</em> Let's look at your options:</p>

<p><strong>FDM</strong> is the cheapest route into 3D printing, and may be cheap enough to buy just as a learning tool, as many of the concepts of 3D printing are fairly universal. It will not however likely have high enough dimensional accuracy for consistent 200 µm holes, and parts are not usually considered water tight (They may be most of the time, but pinholes are somewhat common).</p>

<p><strong>BinderJet</strong> binder jet is the cheaper of the options for printing with powder, where basically glue is deposited onto layers of powder to solidify a part. I have personally used one to create a sand mould to cast metal into without having to create a positive with which to make the mould (ie lost wax casting). It can also be used to print ceramics or metals that are then fired in an oven into a more solid part. In general the dimensional accuracy is going to depend on not only the precision of the glue deposition, but the input powder as well. It may be possible, but I've never seen a water tight part come out of a binder jet.</p>

<p><strong>SLM</strong> (SLS, DMLS, generally any metal printer with a laser (even sometimes an electron beam)) Can print quite high quality parts, but a 200 µm hole is pushing into the realm of difficult to achieve. Metal printers produce parts with a fairly rough surface (compared to a machined part), which is dependent on a lot of things, but primarily the input powder size distribution. Typical SLM printers use powder anywhere from 20 - 60 µm in diameter. With very small holes, you'll have to begin wondering about the likelihood that a hole will be sealed at some point by the random surface roughness exceeding the diameter of the hole. This also translates into a path with a lot of resistance, so pushing a fluid through it will require a lot of pressure. Again, I'm not in any sort of biological field, but I'm aware Titanium is pretty bio-compatible, and that is a *fairly commonly printed alloy (the current list of alloys that are pretty easy / standard to print isn't terribly long). Finally price: you can't afford it. I work with a relatively small (though somewhat high end) SLM tool at work, and I believe the final cost went up somewhere in the neighborhood of 500k.</p>

<p><strong>SLA</strong> will likely be your best option. I don't have any experience with bio-compatibility (I'm a metallurgist), but there are many uv curing resin systems out there that are made for SLA printing. This is also likely the only type of system that can meet your dimensional requirements (water tight, small features, clear material, etc.) as well as your price target. Nothing can replace doing the research on your own, but this would be my choice. As for which SLA... (Note I'm fairly biased in this opinion) I'd look into Formlabs and possibly in particular their clear dental resin.</p>

<p><strong>*PolyJet</strong> I don't know much about this one. It seems like a cross between SLA and FDM, but it seems likely to be out due to cost.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-07-20T05:01:42.993Z
what about a subtractive process?
300D7309EF17
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-07-20T15:24:04.917Z
@tedder42 I mean... this is the 3d printing SE not the cam / cnc SE. I don't know what the application is, but drilling a 200µm hole with a twist drill is likely not feasible beyond a couple millimeters deep.
Aaron
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-07-17T20:08:33.083Z
2018-07-17T20:08:33.083Z
Aaron
<p>I am looking to purchase a 3D printer for the fabrication of microfluidics.</p>

<p>I am looking for a printer that can print channels with less than 200&nbsp;µm cross-sections, preferably, can print optically transparent and biocompatible material, and costs less than $10,000. </p>

<p>Any ideas/recommendations? Could be any printer type (i.e. SLA, FDM, PolyJet).</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-07-16T14:28:48.180Z
I doubt that any extrusion system will handle dimensions that small.  Have you done any research to find what existing manufacturing houses use for microfluidic systems?
Carl Witthoft
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-07-16T14:42:40.343Z
REcommendation questions such as this are not well served on the stack: there is no best answer. However, I would like to recomend you to look at systems that are not filament based. SLA/SLS/DLMS for example. On the other hand: even the generous budget of 10 grand might be too little for a SLS/DLMS machine. I know of no medical rated FDM material that got clearance for internal use at the moment.
Trish
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-07-16T16:26:29.260Z
I operate a fairly small SLM machine at work, and I'm aware that it cost somewhere in the neighborhood of 500k. A 200µm hole is difficult but doable with SLM / DLMS, and restricting to bio-compatible is not going to make things easier or cheaper. I'm less familiar with SLA, but it seems like a better bet. your main problem would be getting the beam offset dialed in to get accurate holes, and finding a resin that's going to suit your bio-compatible requirement.
Aaron
<print-quality><3d-design><print-material><desktop-printer>
What printer should I consider for printing microfluidic channels?
Aniket Pant
# What printer should I consider for printing microfluidic channels?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2018-07-16)

I am looking to purchase a 3D printer for the fabrication of microfluidics.

I am looking for a printer that can print channels with less than 200 µm cross-sections, preferably, can print optically transparent and biocompatible material, and costs less than $10,000.

Any ideas/recommendations? Could be any printer type (i.e. SLA, FDM, PolyJet).

**Tags:** print-quality, 3d-design, print-material, desktop-printer
> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: I doubt that any extrusion system will handle dimensions that small.  Have you done any research to find what existing manufacturing houses use for microfluidic systems?  
> **username_2**: REcommendation questions such as this are not well served on the stack: there is no best answer. However, I would like to recomend you to look at systems that are not filament based. SLA/SLS/DLMS for example. On the other hand: even the generous budget of 10 grand might be too little for a SLS/DLMS machine. I know of no medical rated FDM material that got clearance for internal use at the moment.  
> **username_3**: I operate a fairly small SLM machine at work, and I'm aware that it cost somewhere in the neighborhood of 500k. A 200µm hole is difficult but doable with SLM / DLMS, and restricting to bio-compatible is not going to make things easier or cheaper. I'm less familiar with SLA, but it seems like a better bet. your main problem would be getting the beam offset dialed in to get accurate holes, and finding a resin that's going to suit your bio-compatible requirement.  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_3 on 2018-07-17. Score: 3

*"What Printer?"* Let's look at your options:

**FDM** is the cheapest route into 3D printing, and may be cheap enough to buy just as a learning tool, as many of the concepts of 3D printing are fairly universal. It will not however likely have high enough dimensional accuracy for consistent 200 µm holes, and parts are not usually considered water tight (They may be most of the time, but pinholes are somewhat common).

**BinderJet** binder jet is the cheaper of the options for printing with powder, where basically glue is deposited onto layers of powder to solidify a part. I have personally used one to create a sand mould to cast metal into without having to create a positive with which to make the mould (ie lost wax casting). It can also be used to print ceramics or metals that are then fired in an oven into a more solid part. In general the dimensional accuracy is going to depend on not only the precision of the glue deposition, but the input powder as well. It may be possible, but I've never seen a water tight part come out of a binder jet.

**SLM** (SLS, DMLS, generally any metal printer with a laser (even sometimes an electron beam)) Can print quite high quality parts, but a 200 µm hole is pushing into the realm of difficult to achieve. Metal printers produce parts with a fairly rough surface (compared to a machined part), which is dependent on a lot of things, but primarily the input powder size distribution. Typical SLM printers use powder anywhere from 20 - 60 µm in diameter. With very small holes, you'll have to begin wondering about the likelihood that a hole will be sealed at some point by the random surface roughness exceeding the diameter of the hole. This also translates into a path with a lot of resistance, so pushing a fluid through it will require a lot of pressure. Again, I'm not in any sort of biological field, but I'm aware Titanium is pretty bio-compatible, and that is a \*fairly commonly printed alloy (the current list of alloys that are pretty easy / standard to print isn't terribly long). Finally price: you can't afford it. I work with a relatively small (though somewhat high end) SLM tool at work, and I believe the final cost went up somewhere in the neighborhood of 500k.

**SLA** will likely be your best option. I don't have any experience with bio-compatibility (I'm a metallurgist), but there are many uv curing resin systems out there that are made for SLA printing. This is also likely the only type of system that can meet your dimensional requirements (water tight, small features, clear material, etc.) as well as your price target. Nothing can replace doing the research on your own, but this would be my choice. As for which SLA... (Note I'm fairly biased in this opinion) I'd look into Formlabs and possibly in particular their clear dental resin.

**\*PolyJet** I don't know much about this one. It seems like a cross between SLA and FDM, but it seems likely to be out due to cost.

> **Comments:**
> **username_4**: what about a subtractive process?  
> **username_3**: @tedder42 I mean... this is the 3d printing SE not the cam / cnc SE. I don't know what the application is, but drilling a 200µm hole with a twist drill is likely not feasible beyond a couple millimeters deep.  

---

