9.7 Drawing the Physical Design
133
method symbolically represents all possible droplet sequences on the discrete
model and verifies whether there exists a droplet sequence executing the respective
experiment.
If the verification method proves that no droplet sequence exists which would
realize an experiment, the microfluidic network needs to be changed (cf. depicted
by the backward arrows in Fig. 9.1). For example, by removing bifurcations or by
changing the specification.
Example 9.6 For the running example, the verification method determines for all
three experiments respective droplet sequences. Therefore, this microfluidic network
is considered valid.
9.7 Drawing the Physical Design
Finally, the physical design (i.e. also called layout or mask) has to be drawn. This
physical design is usually a vector graphic, which is used for production (i.e. for
a mask production using a soft-lithography process, for 3D-printing, or for laserengraving). If the physical design requires meander channels, the method presented
in Chap. 5 can be used for automatically generating respective designs. Afterwards,
these meander designs can be integrated and connected in the overall design.
Example 9.7 For the physical design, designers commonly use a design tool
like AutoCAD, Solid Edge, or Inkscape. In the running example, the Meander
Designer tool proposed in Chap. 5 can be employed to automatically generate the
design of the delaying module t 1 . Furthermore, meanders can also be used to
realize dedicated channel resistances, which have been before determined in the
dimensioning task.
Overall, this chapter presented the first integrated design process for microfluidic
networks using passive droplet routing. Therefore, the methods from Part II and the
methods presented in this third part of the book are combined and, eventually, allow
to automate important tasks required to design a microfluidic network using passive
droplet routing.
133
method symbolically represents all possible droplet sequences on the discrete
model and verifies whether there exists a droplet sequence executing the respective
experiment.
If the verification method proves that no droplet sequence exists which would
realize an experiment, the microfluidic network needs to be changed (cf. depicted
by the backward arrows in Fig. 9.1). For example, by removing bifurcations or by
changing the specification.
Example 9.6 For the running example, the verification method determines for all
three experiments respective droplet sequences. Therefore, this microfluidic network
is considered valid.
9.7 Drawing the Physical Design
Finally, the physical design (i.e. also called layout or mask) has to be drawn. This
physical design is usually a vector graphic, which is used for production (i.e. for
a mask production using a soft-lithography process, for 3D-printing, or for laserengraving). If the physical design requires meander channels, the method presented
in Chap. 5 can be used for automatically generating respective designs. Afterwards,
these meander designs can be integrated and connected in the overall design.
Example 9.7 For the physical design, designers commonly use a design tool
like AutoCAD, Solid Edge, or Inkscape. In the running example, the Meander
Designer tool proposed in Chap. 5 can be employed to automatically generate the
design of the delaying module t 1 . Furthermore, meanders can also be used to
realize dedicated channel resistances, which have been before determined in the
dimensioning task.
Overall, this chapter presented the first integrated design process for microfluidic
networks using passive droplet routing. Therefore, the methods from Part II and the
methods presented in this third part of the book are combined and, eventually, allow
to automate important tasks required to design a microfluidic network using passive
droplet routing.