Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Technical University of Munich, Arcisstraße 21, 80333 München, Germany.
Software Competence Center Hagenberg GmbH (SCCH), Softwarepark 32a, 4232 Hagenberg, Austria.
Sensors (Basel). 2022 Jul 19;22(14):5392. doi: 10.3390/s22145392.
A microfluidic device, or a Lab-on-a-Chip (LoC), performs lab operations on the microscale through the manipulation of fluids. The design and fabrication of such devices usually is a tedious process, and auxiliary tools, such as simulators, can alleviate the necessary effort for the design process. Simulations of fluids exist in various forms and can be categorized according to how well they represent the underlying physics, into so-called abstraction levels. In this work, we consider simulation approaches in 1D, which are based on analytical solutions of simplified problems, and approaches in 2D and 3D, for which we use two different (CFD) methods-namely, the (FVM) and the (LBM). All these methods come with their pros and cons with respect to accuracy and required compute time, but unfortunately, most designers and researchers are not aware of the trade-off that can be made within the broad spectrum of available simulation approaches for microfluidics and end up choosing a simulation approach arbitrarily. We provide an overview of different simulation approaches as well as a case study of their performance to aid designers and researchers in their choice. To this end, we consider three representative use cases of pressure-driven and channel-based microfluidic devices (namely the non-Newtonian flow in a channel, the mixing of two fluids in a channel, and the behavior of droplets in channels). The considerations and evaluations raise the awareness and provide several insights for what simulation approaches can be utilized today when designing corresponding devices (and for what they cannot be utilized yet).
微流控芯片(Lab-on-a-Chip,LoC)通过对微尺度流体的操控实现实验室操作。此类设备的设计和制造通常是一个繁琐的过程,辅助工具(如模拟器)可以减轻设计过程中的必要工作量。流体模拟有多种形式,可以根据它们对基础物理的模拟程度进行分类,分为所谓的抽象层次。在这项工作中,我们考虑了一维的模拟方法,它们基于简化问题的解析解;以及二维和三维的模拟方法,对于后者,我们使用了两种不同的计算流体力学(CFD)方法——有限体积法(FVM)和格子玻尔兹曼方法(LBM)。所有这些方法在准确性和所需计算时间方面都有各自的优缺点,但不幸的是,大多数设计师和研究人员都没有意识到在微流控中广泛可用的模拟方法中可以进行权衡,最终会随意选择一种模拟方法。我们提供了不同模拟方法的概述以及性能的案例研究,以帮助设计师和研究人员在选择时做出明智的决策。为此,我们考虑了压力驱动和基于通道的微流控设备的三个代表性用例(即通道中非牛顿流、通道中两种流体的混合以及通道中液滴的行为)。这些考虑和评估提高了人们的认识,并为设计相应设备时可以利用哪些模拟方法以及哪些方法还不能利用提供了一些见解。