1 Overview of Inkjet-Based Micromanufacturing

1
1
Overview of Inkjet-Based Micromanufacturing
David Wallace
1.1
Introduction
Inkjet technology has come to prominence in the past decade as the dominant printer technology in the combined home and small office/home office
(SOHO) markets, and inkjet is now familiar to the general public. Also, in
the past decade, inkjet technology has become recognized in the technical
community as a highly capable tool for manufacturing, particularly micromanufacturing [1]. As an introduction to the more detailed discussions in the chapters
to follow, this chapter will, briefly, give a background on inkjet technology;
discuss fluid requirements and pattern formation fundamentals; discuss the
characteristics of microfabrication and the potential of inkjet as a tool; discuss
the breadth of applications being addressed with inkjet technology, including
a few specific examples; and discuss issues, challenges, and possible future
applications.
1.2
Inkjet Technology
Inkjet technology is not a single technology, but a family of very different technologies that have a similar function: the precise generation of free-flying fluid
droplets. Precise refers to the volume of the droplet, the time at which it is produced, the velocity with which it travels, and the direction of travel. The range
of diameter, velocity, and frequency of generation of the droplet obtained, along
with the precision, will vary considerably depending on the specific technology
employed. A complete discussion of the different inkjet technologies and their
relationship to each other is beyond the scope of this chapter and only a brief
overview is given below. Excellent overviews of the physics [2, 3] and practical applications [4] of inkjet are available for those interested in more detailed
reviews.
Inkjet-based Micromanufacturing, First Edition. Edited by J. G. Korvink, P. J. Smith, and D.-Y. Shin.
 2012 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA. Published 2012 by Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA.
2
1 Overview of Inkjet-Based Micromanufacturing
1.2.1
Continuous Mode Inkjet (CIJ) Technology
Repeatable drop formation from a cylinder of liquid was noted as early as 1833
by Savart [5] and described mathematically by Lord Rayleigh for inviscid jets [6,
7], and by Weber [8] for viscous jets. In continuous mode inkjet (CIJ) technology,
fluid under pressure is forced through an orifice, typically 50–80 µm in diameter,
and breaks up into uniform drops under the action of surface tension, by the
amplification of diameter perturbations [9, 10] or surface tension perturbations [11].
Piezoelectric actuators have been used as the source of diameter perturbations, but
microheaters have been used as the source of surface tension perturbations [12].
A drop breaks off from the jet in the presence of a varying electric field, and thus
acquires a charge. The charged drops are directed to their desired location, either
the catcher or one of several locations on the substrate, by a static electric field [13].
This type of system is generally referred to as ‘‘continuous’’ because drops are
continuously produced and their trajectories are varied by the amount of charge
applied. CIJ printing systems produce droplets that are approximately twice the
orifice diameter of the droplet generator, which is an important limitation in the
use of CIJ in micromanufacturing. Droplet generation rates for CIJ systems are
usually in the 80–100 kHz range, but systems with operating frequencies up to
1 MHz have been commercialized [14]. Droplet sizes can be as small as 20 µm in a
continuous system, but 150 µm is typical.
CIJ systems are currently in widespread use in product labeling of food and
medicines. They have high throughput capabilities, and are best suited for applications where they are in continual use. Very few CIJ systems are multicolor
(multifluid), but two-color systems are in use. CIJ systems require unused drops to
be recirculated or wasted, another limitation in using CIJ for micromanufacturing.
Applications where CIJ is used include Massachusetts Institute of Technology
(MIT’s) 3D printing rapid prototyping technology [15], metal jetting technology
[16], and medical diagnostic test strip production [17].
Figure 1.1 illustrates a schematic of a continuous inkjet printer and a jet of water
breaking up into 120 µm droplets at 20 kHz.
1.2.2
Demand Mode Inkjet Technology
In demand mode inkjet technology, a piezoelectric transducer, or heated resistor
that produces a bubble [18], creates pressure/velocity waves in a fluid, which starts
at essentially atmospheric pressure, and these waves propagate to produce a drop
at an orifice [19–21] or free surface [22]. Since a drop is created only when desired,
these types of systems are referred to as drop-on-demand or demand mode. Demand
mode systems are conceptually far less complex than continuous mode systems.
On the other hand, demand mode droplet generation requires the transducer to
deliver three or more orders of magnitude greater energy to produce a droplet,
compared to the continuous mode. Driven by the need for multiple orifices to
1.3 Fluid Requirements
Piezoelectric
transducer
Charging
electrode
Deflection plates
+V
Orifice
Pump
Charge
driver
Transducer
driver
Ink
reservoir
Gutter
Substrate
Data
Figure 1.1 Schematic of a continuous inkjet printer and a
jet of water breaking up into 120 µm droplets at 20 kHz.
meet the throughput requirement in printing applications, and constrained by the
transducer energy requirements, there are many ‘‘elegant’’ (i.e., complex) array
demand mode printhead designs [23–26].
Demand mode inkjet systems have been used primarily in desktop printers, and
now dominate the low-end printer market (HP’s DeskJets, Cannon’s Bubble Jets,
and Epson’s Stylus). Demand mode inkjet systems have no fluid recirculation requirement, and this makes their use as a general fluid microdispensing technology
more straightforward than continuous mode technology. Almost all of the results
discussed in this book have been obtained with demand mode systems. Figure 1.2
illustrates the schematic of a demand mode system and drops of an organic solvent
being formed at 4 kHz.
1.3
Fluid Requirements
The fluid property requirements for demand mode inkjet dispensing are viscosity
<∼40 cP, and surface tension >∼20 dyn/cm. Low viscosities usually lead to satellite
formation (formation of multiple drops when one is desired) and low damping of
post-drop oscillations, limiting the upper operating frequency. If the fluid is heated
or cooled, the critical properties are those at the operating temperature of the office,
3
4
1 Overview of Inkjet-Based Micromanufacturing
Piezoelectric
transducer
Piezo
driver
Orifice
Ink
~atmospheric
pressure
Substrate
Data
Figure 1.2 Schematic of a demand mode system and drops
of an organic solvent being formed at 4 kHz.
not room temperature. Higher viscosities can be tolerated in the fluid delivery
system if this does not create a pressure drop that limits the desired maximum
frequency due to restriction of the flow into the printhead. For high density fluids,
such as molten metals [27] (e.g., solders, tin, mercury, rubidium, and lithium), the
fluid properties should be converted to kinematic values to determine if the fluid
properties are acceptable.
Newtonian behavior is not strictly required, but non-Newtonian effects are
never beneficial. Viscoelastic behavior causes significant performance problems by
increasing the amount of deformation the fluid can withstand without breaking off
to form a drop [28].
Particle suspensions, such as pigmented inks, are acceptable as long as the
particle/agglomerate size and density do not cause the suspension to depart from
the fluid properties range given above. Particles that are >5% of the orifice diameter
(e.g., cells; [29]) will cause at least some instability in drop generation behavior, but
still may be acceptable in low concentrations.
The ‘‘window’’ of fluids and suspensions that can be dispensed using inkjet
technology has been enlarged by heating, cooling, stirring, wiping, purging,
preoscillating, diluting, and other methods. However, this window is unavoidably
narrowed as orifice diameter decreases, frequency increases, and the number of
jets in an array increases.
The diversity of fluids that have been dispensed using inkjet technology is
impressive, given the fluid property restrictions described above. Inks by themselves
represent a broad class of materials. Dye and pigment aqueous dispersions are the
most commonly used in conventional printing, volatile, and low-volatility solvent
inks are all in common use, as are UV-curing inks. Other materials that have been
dispensed using inkjet technology are shown in Table 1.1.
1.4 Pattern Formation: Fluid/Substrate Interaction
Table 1.1
Materials that have been deposited using inkjet technology.
Electronic/optical Biological fluids
materials
Organic solvents
Particle
suspensions
Other
Liquid metals
Fluxes
Photoresists
Epoxies
Polyimides
DNA
Nucleic acids
Amino acid
Cells
Proteins
Alcohols
Keytones
Aliphatics
Aromatics
Dipolar solvents
Pigments
Cells
Latex spheres
Metals
Teflon
Electroactive
polymers
Organometallics
Lipids
Phosphors
Sol-gels
Thermoplastics
Thermosets
Acrylics
Photographic
developer
Fuels
Biosorbable
polymers
Ferrites
Zeolyts
Aqueous
adhesives
Odorants
1.4
Pattern Formation: Fluid/Substrate Interaction
Except for the applications where inkjet technology is used to meter fluid, as in filing
a well or a region bounded by a nonwetting coating, inkjet deposition processes are
used to produce a pattern of material on a substrate. The interaction between the
fluid properties, jetting parameters (drop size, velocity, and frequency), substrate
properties, printing grid (dots per inch), and printing sequence (interleave, overprinting, sequence of fluid, etc.) is a multivariate optimization in the development
of all inkjet printing systems/applications. For the conventional inkjet case of liquid
ink on paper, the porosity of the paper and the low viscosity of the ink represented
a major challenge in the initial development of inkjet printers. Rapid spreading of
liquid ink through the fibers can cause the spot size to become much larger than
the drop size, decreasing the optical density of the spot and resulting in irregular
spots that degrade the quality of characters, lines, and so on. Ink formulations that
produce good print quality on a wide range of papers have been a cornerstone in
the wide acceptance of inkjet printers in the marketplace.
Most micromanufacturing applications of inkjet technology deposit liquid onto
nonporous substrates, similar to printing an overhead transparency. Control of
the spreading is essential if the desired resolution is to be obtained. Phase change
inks were developed for conventional inkjet printers for precisely this reason, since
they solidify quickly after impact. In micromanufacturing applications, solders for
electronic manufacturing [30] and thermoplastics for free-form fabrication [31] are
examples of phase change materials. The control of spreading by solidification is
a beneficial aspect of phase change materials if the goal is to limit spreading and
obtain the smallest spot for a given drop size. However, if the goal is deposition of
a uniform layer, solidification into a bump is a problem, not a feature.
5
6
1 Overview of Inkjet-Based Micromanufacturing
Many organic liquids, such as isopropanol, acetone, and acetonitrile, are of very
low viscosity, low contact angle/surface tension, and volatile. Their ability to wet
most surfaces and low viscosity allows these fluids to spread rapidly. As with a
phase change material’s lack of spreading, this is either a feature or a problem,
depending on the application. If one is trying to write a small conductive line using
an organometallic ink, or create a pixel in a light-emitting polymer display, it is
definitely a problem. In many cases, surface features, such as the wells commonly
used in flat panel displays, provide a barrier to spreading and help physically define
the feature size. In other cases, surface treatments, such as plasma cleaning or
application of a nonwetting coating, are used to control spreading [32].
Volatility of a solution with dissolved or suspended solids can cause operational
issues, and ink drying in the orifice is one of the most common failure modes with
office inkjet printers. In addition, volatility can cause nonuniform distribution of
the solid on the substrate after drying [33]. Solutions to this problem have been
many and diverse: reactive substrate, covalent binding of the solid to the substrate,
cosolvents that are lower volatility, UV or thermal cross-linking, and so on.
Pattern or image formation in its simplest implementation can be just the
selection of pixel (picture element) size and spacing, then using inkjet dispensing
to fill the desired pixels, ratering out the image as is done in a conventional
inkjet printer. However, even the lowest cost inkjet printers have complicated print
modes that are used to increase print quality. Rows of spots are interleaved to hide
coherent errors from a single jet, colors are printed so as not to bleed together in
wet state, multiple passes are made over an area to increase color saturation of the
printed area, and operating frequency is decreased for high-quality printing. All of
these methods, and more, have applicability to micromanufacturing applications
of inkjet.
1.5
Micromanufacturing
1.5.1
Introduction
Micromanufacturing today has evolved from microelectromechanical systems
(MEMS) fabrication technology, developed initially in the 1980s with the goal
of integrating electromechanical sensors and actuators with their conditioning
electronics. By adding silicon micromachining and deposition of metals and oxides
to silicon-based analog integrated circuit (IC) fabrication technology, very small
electromechanical sensors and actuators could be fabricated at very low cost and in
high volume [34, 35]. In addition, these MEMS-based devices were more robust and
reliable than their larger conventional counterparts. MEMS-based accelerometers
are the most widely used MEMS products. They have enabled the use of airbags
in automobiles and can currently be found in cell phones, computers, cameras,
golf clubs, skis, and, of course, video games. MEMS-based pressure transducers
1.5 Micromanufacturing
have also been in widespread use for decades, primarily in automobiles, airplanes,
process control equipment, and disposable biomedical sensors.
In most applications, the benefits of a high degree of system integration are readily apparent. The success of MEMS-based accelerometers and pressure sensors,
along with the general drive toward small, low-cost, high-volume products has led
to an explosion of process technologies that can be used in MEMS fabrication and
applications targeted by these process technologies. Inclusion of digital electronics
was a fairly obvious step. Expansion to optical emitters, detectors, and switches
has resulted in micro-optical electro-optical mechanical systems (MOEMS) [36].
Examples include micromirror devices that are used in televisions and projectors,
and solid-state laser devices that have enabled the growth of the telecommunication
and data communication industries [37]. Inclusion of biological functions has resulted in Bio-MEMS devices [38]. Lab-on-a-chip devices for point-of-care diagnostics
are one of the few examples of available Bio-MEMS products [39, 40], although a
large number of applications are being developed, including implantable sensors
(e.g., glucose) [41] and microneedle-based transdermal drug delivery devices [42].
Finally, by including fluid flow with thermal or piezoelectric actuators, many inkjet
printheads fall into the category of MEMS devices and inkjet printers have long
been ‘‘adopted’’ by analysts when reporting MEMS industry revenue figures [43].
Many optical devices now included in the MOEMS category do not have a mechanical function, being more properly categorized as electro-optics (EO) devices.
Other devices cited above have similar issues when it comes to categorization. This
illustrates the difficulty in using the term MEMS in any strict sense at this point in
time, since it has been broadened and generalized to refer to micromanufacturing
in general, partly as a result of its successes and familiarity. In this chapter, the
term ‘‘MEMS’’ is used in the loosest sense, referring to miniaturized devices and
systems that must be micromanufactured.
1.5.2
Limitations and Opportunities in Micromanufacturing
MEMS device fabrication methods grew out of the silicon-based semiconductor
industry, so most rely on photolithography. Photolithographic processes are particularly well suited for high-volume manufacturing of devices with high feature
density and low diversity of fabrication processes and fabricated features [44, 45].
The prime example is a dynamic random access memory (DRAM) device with repetition of the same features millions of times using a limited number of fabrication
processes. MEMS fabrication has successfully built on the huge microelectronics
equipment and technology base, adding the feature diversity required to create a
‘‘system’’ through a limited number of additional compatible processes. However,
photolithography and other ‘‘IC-like’’ fabrication processes are severely limited in
the types of materials that can be used. In addition, there are technical and cost
limitations that limit the number of ‘‘layers’’ that can be created in fabricating an
MEMS device.
7
8
1 Overview of Inkjet-Based Micromanufacturing
Materials limitations in conventional MEMS fabrication fall into two categories,
compatibility and cost. First, materials must be compatible with photolithography,
which means that they must survive the application, patterning, and removing
of photosensitive masking materials, and, in general, must be compatible with
the creation of one or more additional layers. Functional materials such as ones
that are biologically active, chemically active/receptive, or optically active (emitters
and receivers) are typically difficult or impossible to use in photolithographic or
other ‘‘IC-like’’ fabrication methods. Yet it is these types of materials that could
enable a broad range of new small integrated devices for medicine, security,
communications, and so on. Some of the most interesting materials are rare or
expensive and thus would be cost prohibitive to use in the current subtractive
processes employed in MEMS fabrication. Many biologically active materials fall
into this category.
Finally, there is an inherent conflict between the desire to increase the number of
functions in MEMS devices and the cost of each ‘‘layer’’ in a photolithographic or
other ‘‘IC-like’’ fabrication method. Even if the functional materials are compatible
with multiple layers of photolithography and are not particularly expensive, each
layer has a substantial total cost (equipment, labor, facility, materials, yield, testing,
etc.) associated with it. Thus, additional functions always have a strong cost
counterweight in MEMS device design based on current manufacturing methods.
1.5.3
Benefits of Inkjet in Microfabrication
Inkjet printing technology has a number of attributes that can overcome some of
the inherent limitations of photolithographically based microfabrication methods.
Since it is an additive method, material is only deposited where it is desired.
Usage of rare or expensive materials can thus be conserved. The net savings
can be significant for even moderately priced materials if the amount of area
required to be covered is small compared to the total area of the substrate (i.e.,
low feature density). In addition to cost savings because of low materials usage,
additive methods have little or no waste, so they are much more environmentally
friendly. In contrast, subtractive methods waste large amounts of the functional
material, plus the photosensitive masking material (if different) and the cleaning
and etching solvents.
Since inkjet is noncontact, interaction between different materials when they are
deposited is eliminated or greatly reduced, as is the requirement to consider each
material to be deposited as an expensive additional ‘‘layer.’’ Deposition can occur on
nonplanar surfaces, eliminating planarization steps that are sometimes required
in photolithography. Even very fragile or sensitive surfaces such as released layers
(thin structures not supported by any solid material underneath them) can be
printed onto using inkjet because of the extremely low inertial force exerted by
a deposited drop. Active layers (detector, emitter, biological, reactive, etc.) can be
deposited onto without degrading their function. Thick films can be created by
1.6 Examples of Inkjet in Micromanufacturing
overprinting the same location multiple times, and locally layered structures can
be created without having to process the entire substrate area.
Lastly, since inkjet is a fundamentally digital, data-driven process, the cost and
time associated with producing the masks required by photolithographically based
microfabrication methods is eliminated. This removes both the cost and turnaround
time associated with fixed tooling. The ability of inkjet to deposit onto individual dye
and partial wafers, and to perform parametric process development experiments
under digital control, can accelerate the development time for a microfabricated
device.
Several examples of the use of inkjet in micromanufacturing are discussed below
to illustrate the characteristics and issues of inkjet deposition discussed earlier.
1.6
Examples of Inkjet in Micromanufacturing
1.6.1
Chemical Sensors
Chemical sensors represent a fairly new and broad area of research and development
for MEMS devices, driven by the need for large numbers of low-cost sensors for
explosive, chemical warfare agents, drugs of abuse, industrial gases, residential
gases, and many others. A majority of these sensors use materials that are electrically
or photonically active, or more simply have surfaces that cause the molecules of
interest to temporarily adhere to them. Not surprisingly, most of these sensing
materials are ‘‘sensitive,’’ meaning delicate, and cannot be photolithographically
processed. Also, because they are sensitive, they are applied in the last or nearly
last fabrication process; typically, this is onto nonplanar, feature-rich surfaces that
can be very fragile. All these factors make MEMS chemical sensor manufacturing
an area that is broadly exploring the use of inkjet fabrication technology.
Chemoresistive materials, ones that change resistance when exposed to specific
molecules of interest, are one of the oldest and most broadly used sensing materials
classes used in MEMS sensor devices [46]. Recent developments in nanomaterials
and MEMS structures have expanded the number of materials and sensor structures
being developed [47]. An example of an MEMS chemoresistive sensor is one that is
being developed at Carnegie Mellon University to detect volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) in respirators, indicating end of life [48]. The basic sensor structure, shown
in Figure 1.3a, is a pair of spiral electrodes in a 250 µm circle that is in a 350 µm
diameter SU-8 well. Multiple sensing and reference elements, which, in general,
could contain multiple sensing materials, are incorporated on a 2.65 mm die that
also contains all the required control electronics, as shown in Figure 1.3b. The die
is assembled into a TO-5 package (Figure 1.3c), which is commonly used for optical
devices.
The sensing material, gold-thiolate nanoparticles, are suspended in a carrier
fluid (5–10 mg ml−1 ) and deposited onto the sensing area. Although not visible
9
10
(a)
1 Overview of Inkjet-Based Micromanufacturing
(b)
(c)
Figure 1.3 Carnegie Mellon chemoresistive
sensor: (a) sensing element configuration
showing 250 µm diameter dual electrode spiral in a 350 µm SU-8 well; (b) multiple sensing and reference elements on a 2.65 mm
(d)
die; (c) sensor device in a TO-5 package;
and (d) sensor element printed with 225
nominally 30 pl drops of solution containing
gold-thiolate nanoparticles. (Images courtesy
Carnegie Mellon University.)
in Figure 1.3a, 15 drops of nominally 30 pl volume have been deposited onto
the sensor using an inkjet device. Figure 1.3d shows the sensing area after 225
nominally 30 pl drops of solution have been deposited, producing an average film
thickness of 1.5 µm. It is interesting to note the use of two wetting ‘‘stops’’ in the
sensing area. The SU-8 well contains the initial fluid volume dispensed, preventing
undesired wetting onto other areas of the die. In addition, the fluid dewets from
the outer portion of the well during drying so that all of the particles are deposited
onto the electrode region. This self-centering behavior results in an impedance
variation of <10%.
The dispensing of the sensing material occurs not only on the singulated die but
also after it is assembled into the package. This effectively limits the sensing material
deposition method to additive dispensing methods, and the requirement to print
multiple sensors held in a fixture in a product would require a data-driven method
unless the fixture is of high precision (i.e., expensive). If a contact dispensing
method is used, throughput would be limited by the requirement for the dispenser
to make a vertical movement for each dispense.
Resonant MEMS structures detect a change in resonant frequency associated
with a change in the mass of the resonating structure due to the adsorption of
molecules of interest. Detection of changes in resonance can be accomplished to
great accuracy with well-known electronic circuitry that can be implemented into
integrated circuitry on a MEMS device. MEMS fabrication techniques can produce
extremely low-mass, high-Q resonant structures that allow detection of very low
concentrations of the molecules of interest [49].
1.6.2
Optical MEMS Devices
Refractive optical components in MEMS devices present a number of difficulties.
Refractive lens and waveguide features are highly three-dimensional, have high
spatial resolution requirements (location, diameter, and curvature), must be highly
transmissive, and, in general, should be able to tolerate solder reflow temperatures.
Diffractive optical components have been widely employed in MEMS devices
because their planar structure allows them to be fabricated using traditional
1.6 Examples of Inkjet in Micromanufacturing
Figure 1.4 SU-8 posts, 100 µm high and 125 µm in diameter, over VCSELs on a gallium arsenide wafer. The posts
are on 225 µm center-to-center spacing with polymer lenses
printed onto the posts, 22 × 18 pl drops per post. (Wafer
with posts courtesy Vixar Corp.)
MEMS processes. However, refractive optics have a higher performance than
diffractive optics, making their use in MEMS optical devices highly desirable. By
using prepolymer solutions that are cross-linked after deposition, it is possible
to formulate jettable polymeric solutions that have no solvents, cure into hard,
durable microlenses, and can tolerate reflow temperatures.
Fabrication of lenses onto MEMS devices at the wafer level has advantages
in both cost and throughput. Figure 1.4 shows a portion of a gallium arsenide
wafer (from Vixar Corporation) containing 125 µm diameter SU-8 posts on 225 µm
center-to-center spacing with polymer lenses printed onto the posts (22 drop at
18 pl each). Divergence angle measurements for vertical-cavity surface emitting
lasers (VCSELs) with and without lenses printed onto SU-8 indicated a decrease
in divergence angle from 11 to 4◦ . In addition to meeting optical performance
requirements, the lens and post-manufacturing processes must not degrade the
performance of the VCSEL in terms of threshold voltage and output power. Previous
measurements of these for VCSELs with lenses postfabricated using inkjet have
shown no degradation in these performance parameters [50]. The capability to print
variable lens height, by varying the number of drops, can be used to experimentally
determine the optimal lens height very rapidly during development, and can be
used in production to create lenses of different height on a single wafer and/or
device.
Released structures in MEMS are fabricated onto a sacrificial layer that is
subsequently removed, leaving the structure suspended over air (or vacuum).
They are frequently employed to allow the structure to move with relatively large
deflections. They are very fragile, making application of thick film materials directly
to released structures very difficult. Figure 1.5 shows a 100 µm diameter released
structure (oscillating micromirror), suspended by 10 µm width/thick supports,
onto which a polymer lens has been deposited without breaking or deforming the
11
12
1 Overview of Inkjet-Based Micromanufacturing
1.0 kV 10.6 mm ×450 SE(M) 3 /2 /04
(a)
66.7µm
(b)
Figure 1.5 A 100 µm diameter released structure (oscillating micromirror), suspended by 10 µm width/thick supports,
onto which a polymer lens has been deposited.
released structure. A nominally 50 pl (46 µm diameter) drop at 2 m s−1 was used
to form this lens, making the impact momentum ∼0.1 µN · s.
1.6.3
Bio-MEMS Devices
MEMS devices that are implantable in humans have both great potential and
significant challenges. Continuous monitoring and adjustment of biological functions has great potential for more effective monitoring and treatment regimens.
However, implantable MEMS devices must deal with biocompatibility and biofouling issues [51]. The implantable microelectrode from the University of Kentucky
shown in Figure 1.6 has four 20 × 60 µm electrochemical measurement sites on
Figure 1.6 Implantable (brain) microelectrode with four
20 × 60 µm electrochemical measurement sites on a ceramic substrate. All four sites have been coated with a glutamate oxidase enzyme and overcoated with gluteraldyhyde, a
fixative, both using inkjet printing. (Images courtesy the University of Kentucky Center for Microelectrode Technology.)
1.6 Examples of Inkjet in Micromanufacturing
a ceramic substrate that are used to measure brain activity [52]. All four sites in
Figure 1.6 have been coated with a glutamate oxidase enzyme and overcoated with
gluteraldyhyde, a fixative, both using inkjet printing. Since the enzyme coating is
thin and transparent, it is not visible in the figure. Currently, this type of probe
is used for research into neurological function and diseases such as Parkinson’s.
Future variants of this type of device could be used as an indwelling sensor in
humans, which would monitor and report brain function as part of an overall
treatment plan, similar to blood glucose measurement and insulin injection.
Delivery of drugs by implantable devices [53] is of as much interest as are implantable sensors and current research includes drug delivery for diabetes, cancers,
cardiac disease, and neurological disorders. The most widely used implantable drug
delivery device today is the drug-eluding stent, used to keep coronary arteries open
after an angioplasty procedure. The complex structure of a metal stent must allow
the device to collapse to travel through the blood vessels, then deploy (i.e., increase
in diameter) and lock at the desired location. To prevent tissue from growing over
the stent and blocking the artery again, drugs are embedded into the stent. This
requires placing the drug onto one side (only) of complex features 50–150 µm in
width. A number of companies are using inkjet for this process [54, 55]. Future
coated stents may contain multiple drugs and/or varying concentration with position, for example, placing more drug at the ends, where restenosis (reclosing of the
artery) occurs.
1.6.4
Assembly and Packaging
Assembly of MEMS devices presents challenges that are different from and, in general, more difficult than encountered in standard IC packaging. Difficulties include
(a)
(b)
Figure 1.7 (a) Top view of signal conditioning IC and flex circuit of disk drive
read head assembly. (b) Side view showing 80 µm electrical interconnect pads on
IC edge that interfaces with the flex circuit
(60 µm traces); solder has been dispensed
and partially reflowed into the corner formed
by the IC and flex using piezoelectric demand mode inkjet technology to dispense
droplets of molten solder.
13
14
1 Overview of Inkjet-Based Micromanufacturing
the inherent three-dimensionality of MEMS devices, fragile structures, hermetic
sealing, and so on. An example of a three-dimensional electrical interconnect is the
assembly of the signal conditioning IC to the flex circuit containing the read-write
head for a hard disk drive. Figure 1.7a shows a top view of the IC and flex circuit
and Figure 1.7b the side view. The IC has 80 µm electrical interconnect pads
on the edge that interfaces with the flex circuit, which has 60 µm traces. Solder
has been dispensed and partially reflowed into the corner formed by the IC and
flex piezoelectric demand mode inkjet technology to dispense droplets of molten
solder [56].
Most of the recent developments in printed electronics have focused on low-cost,
high-volume macroscale devices such as radiofrequency identification (RFID)
tags [57]. However, inkjet printing processes for conductors, dielectrics, resistors,
capacitors, inductors, antennae, organic transistors, batteries, fuels cells, and other
functional elements have been demonstrated and may have application to both
MEMS device manufacturing and packaging.
1.7
Conclusions
Inkjet printing technology has been described, including its use in several micromanufacturing applications. Inkjet methods have the potential to drastically
increase the range of functions in micromanufactured devices because of the additive, noncontact, data-driven nature of inkjet technology. These same characteristics
also can result in lower production cost and in less environmentally unfriendly
waste.
Acknowledgments
The author thanks the following for their valuable contributions: Donald Hayes,
Ting Chen, Mike Boldman, Virang Shah, David Silva, Bogdan Antohe, Royall Cox,
Rick Hoenigman, Lee Weiss, Peter Huettl, and Pooja Talauliker.
References
1. (2008) Proceedings, IS&T’s DF06, the
International Conference on Digital Fabrication Technologies, Society
for Imaging Science and Technology,
Pittsburg, PA.
2. Wijshoff, H. (2010) The dynamics of the
piezo inkjet printhead operation. Phys.
Rep., 49, 77–177.
3. Eggers, J. (1997) Non-linear dynamics
and breakup of free-surface flows. Rev.
Mod. Phys., 69 (3), 865–930.
4. Lee, E.R. (2003) Microdrop Generation,
CRC Press, New York.
5. Savart, F. (1833) Memoire sur la consti-
tution des veines liquides lancees par
des orifices circulaires en mince paroi.
Ann. Chim. Phys., 53, 337–386.
6. Rayleigh, J.W.S. (1879) On the instability
of jets. Proc. Lond. Math. Soc., 10 (4),
4–13.
7. Rayleigh, J.W.S. (1879) On the capillary
phenomena of jets. Proc. R. Soc., 29, 71.
References
8. Weber, C. (1931) Zum zerfall eines flus-
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
sigkeitsstrables. Z. Angew. Math. Mech.,
11 (136), 11.
Chaudhary, K.C., Redekopp, I.G., and
Maxworthy, T. (1979) The non-linear
capillary instability of a liquid jet.
J. Fluid Mech., 96 (II), 257–312.
Pimbley, W.T. (1984) Drop formation from a liquid jet: a linear
one-dimensional analysis considered
as a boundary value problem. IBM J.
Res. Dev., 29, 148–156.
Mashayek, F. and Ashgriz, N. (1995)
Nonlinear instability of liquid jets with
thermocapillarity. J. Fluid Mech., 283,
97.
Barbet, B., Atten, P., and
Soucemarianadin, A. (1997) Capillary
instability of a jet induced by surface
tension modulations. Proceedings of
IS&T’s NIP13, Society for Imaging Science and Technology, Springfield, VA,
p. 604.
Filmore, G.L., Buehnet, W.L., and West,
D.L. (1984) Drop Charging and deflection in an electrostatic ink jet printer.
IBM J. Res. Dev., 21, 37–47.
Hertz, H. and Simonsson, S.I. (1966)
Modulation by electrostatic dispersion.
US Patent 3, 416, 153.
Yoo, J., Cima, M., Sachs, E., and
Suresh, S. (1995) Fabrication and
microstructural control of advanced
ceramic components by three dimensional printing. Ceram. Eng. Sci. Proc.,
16 (5), 755–762.
Muntz, E.P., Orme, M., Pham-Van-Diep,
G., and Godin, R. (1997) An analysis of
precision, fly-through solder jet printing for DCA components. Proceedings,
ISHM ’97, Society for Imaging Science and Technology, Philadelphia, PA,
pp. 671–680.
Hayes, D.J., Wallace, D.B., VerLee, D.,
and Houseman, K. (1989) Apparatus
and process for reagent fluid dispensing
and printing. US Patent 4, 877, 745.
Aden, J.S., Bohorquez, J.H., Collins,
D.M., Crook, M.D., Garcia, A., and
Hess, U.E. (1994) The third generation hp thermal inkjet printhead.
Hewlett-Packard J., 45 (1), 41–45.
Bogy, D.B. and Talke, F.E. (1984) Experimental and theoretical study of
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
wave propagation phenomena in
drop-on-demand ink jet devices. IBM
J. Res. Dev., 29, 314–321.
Dijksman, J.F. (1984) Hydrodynamics
of small tubular pumps. J. Fluid Mech.,
139, 173–191.
Adams, R.L. and Roy, J. (1986) A one
dimensional numerical model of a
drop-on-demand ink jet. J. Appl. Mech.,
53, 193–197.
Elrod, S.A., Hadimioglu, B.,
Khuri-Yakub, B.T., Rawson, E.G.,
Richley, E., and Quate, C.F. (1989)
Nozzleless droplet formation with focused acoustic beams. J. Appl. Phys., 65
(9), 3441–3447.
Pies, J.R., Wallace, D.B., and Hayes, D.J.
(1993) High density ink jet print head.
US Patent 5, 235, 352.
Roy, J. and Moore, J.S. (1992)
Drop-on-demand ink jet print head.
US Patent 5, 087, 930.
Hoisington, P.A., Schaffer, R.R., and
Fischbeck, K.H. (1989) Ink jet array. US
Patent 4, 835, 554.
Usui, M. and Katakura, T. (1996) Actuator for an ink jet print head of the
layered type with offset linear arrays of
pressure generating chamber. US Patent
6, 033, 058.
Farrar, N.R., Brandt, D.C., Fomenkov,
I.V., Ershov, A.I., Bowering, N.R., Partlo,
W.N., Myers, D.W., Bykanov, A.N.,
Vaschenko, G.O., Khodykin, O.V.,
Hoffman, J.R., and Chrobak, C.P. (2009)
EUV laser produced plasma source
development. Microelectron. Eng., 86,
509–512.
De Gans, B.-J., Duineveld, P.C., and
Schubert, U.S. (2004) Inkjet printing
of polymers: state of the art and future developments. Adv. Mater., 16 (3),
203–213.
Rachel, E.S., Gough, J.E., and Derby, B.
(2008) Delivery of human fibroblast cells
by piezoelectric drop-on-demand inkjet
printing. Biomaterials, 29, 193–203.
Hayes, D.J., Wallace, D.B., Boldman,
M.T., and Marusak, R.M. (1993) Picoliter solder droplet dispensing.
Microcircuits Electron. Packag., 16 (3),
173–180.
Z-Corporation http://www.zcorp.com
(accessed October 1 2010).
15
16
1 Overview of Inkjet-Based Micromanufacturing
32. Brennan, T.M. (1995) Method and
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
apparatus for conducting an array of
chemical reactions on a support surface.
US Patent 5, 474, 796.
Deegan, R.D., Bakajin, O., DuPont, T.F.,
Huber, G., Nagel, S.R., and Witten,
T.A. (1997) Capillary flow as the cause
of ring stains from dried liquid drops.
Nature, 389, 827–829.
Kuehnel, W. and Sherman, S. (1994)
A surface micromachined silicon accelerometer with on-chip detection
circuitry. Sens. Actuators A, 45 (1),
7–16.
Tseng, A., Tang, W.C., Lee, Y.C.,
and Allen, J.J. (2000) NSF 2000
workshop on manufacturing of
micro-electro-mechanical systems. J.
Mater. Proc. Manuf. Sci., 8 (4), 292–360.
Liu, Y. (2002) Heterogeneous integration
of OE arrays with Si electronics and
microoptics. IEEE Trans. Adv. Pack., 25,
43–49.
Sampsell, J.B. (1993) An overview of
Texas instruments digital micromirror
device (dmd) and its application to projection displays. Soc. Inf. Display Int.
Symp. Digest Tech. Pap., 24, 1012–1015.
James, C.D., Okandan, M., Galambos,
P.C., and Seethambal, S.M. (2006) Surface micromachined dielectrophoretic
gates for the front-end device of a biodetection system;. J. Fluids Eng., 128 (1),
14–19.
Oosterbroek, E. and van den Berg, A.
(eds.) (2003) Lab-on-a-Chip: Miniaturized
Systems for (Bio) Chemical Analysis and
Synthesis, 2nd edn, Elsevier Science.
Daw, R. and Finkelstein, J. (eds.)
(2006) Nat. Insight: Lab Chip,
442 (7101).
Gough, D.A., Kumosa, L.S., Routh, T.L.,
Lin, J.T., and Lucisano, J.Y. (2010) Function of an implanted tissue glucose sensor for more than 1 year in animals. Sci.
Transl. Med., 2 (42), 53.
Kim, K. and Lee, J.-B. (2007) High
aspect ratio tapered hollow metallic
microneedle arrays with microfluidic
interconnector. Microsyst. Technol., 13
(3–4), 231–235.
Seto, S., Nakamura, H., Murata, M.,
and Morita, N. (2008) Thin film piezo
inkjet print head having matrix nozzle
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
arrangement using MEMS technology.
Proceedings of the Pan-Pacific Imaging
Conference ’08, Tokyo, Imagine Society
of Japan, pp. 52–55.
Elliott, D.J. (1989) Integrated Circuit Fabrication Technology, 2nd edn,
McGraw-Hill, New York.
Jaeger, R.C. (2002) Lithography, Introduction to Microelectronic Fabrication,
Prentice Hall.
Sakai, Y., Sadaoka, M., and Matsuguchi,
M. (1996) Humidity sensors based on
polymer thin films. Sens. Actuators B,
35, 85–90.
Bochenkov, V.E. and Sergeev, G.B.
(2007) Nanomaterials for sensors. Russ.
Chem. Rev., 76, 1084–1093.
Fedder, G.K., Bedair, S.S., Garg,
N., Greenblatt, J., Jin, R., Lambeth,
D.N., Lazarus, N., Santhanam, S.,
Schultz, L., Snyder, J.L., Weiss, L.E.,
and Wu, J. (2008) Jetted nanoparticle
chemical sensor circuits for respirator
end-of-service-life detection. Abstract
of the 12th International Meeting on
Chemical Sensors, Columbus OH.
Brand, O. (2005) CMOS-based resonant sensors. Proceedings of the IEEE
Sensors, Irvine, CA, pp. 129–132.
Hayes, D.J. and Chen, T. (2004) Next
generation optoelectronic components
enabled by direct write microprinting
technology. Proc. SPIE Def. Secur. Symp.
(Orlando FL), 5435 (83), 83–90.
Park, H. and Park, K. (1996) Biocompatibility issues of implantable drug
delivery systems. Pharm. Res., 13 (12),
1770–1776.
Day, B.K., Pomerleau, F., Burmeister,
J., Huettl, P.F., and Gerhardt, G.A.
(2006) Microelectrode array studies of
basal and potassium-evoked release of
l-glutamate in the anesthetized rat brain.
J. Neurochem., 96 (6), 1626–1635.
Staples, M., Daniel, K., Cima, M.J., and
Langer, R. (2006) Application of microand nano-electromechanical devices
to drug delivery. Pharm. Res., 23 (5),
847–863.
Tarcha, P.J., VerLee, D., Setesak, J., Hui,
H.-W., Antohe, B.V., Radulescu, D., and
Wallace, D. (2007) The application of
ink-jet technology for the coating and
References
loading of drug-eluting stents. Ann.
Biomed. Eng., 35 (10), 1791–1799.
55. Shekalim, A. and Shmulewitz, A.
(2003) Stent coating device. US
Patent 6, 645, 547.
56. Hayes, D.J. and Wallace, D.B. (1998)
Solder jet printing: wafer bumping and
CSP applications. Chip Scale Rev., 2 (4),
75–80.
57. Gamota, D., Brazis, P.,
Kalyanasundaram, K., and Zhang, J.
(2004) Printed Organic and Molecular
Electronics, Kluwer Academic Publishers,
New York.
17