Microfluidics and Nanofluidics

, Volume 9, Issue 2–3, pp 551–558 | Cite as

Hydrodynamically driven docking of blocks for 3D fluidic assembly

  • Michael Kalontarov
  • Michael T. Tolley
  • Hod Lipson
  • David Erickson
Research Paper

Abstract

In this work we develop a method for fluid dynamically driven assembly in three dimensions and demonstrate its applicability to the development of programmable matter. Towards this end, we investigate docking of a single block onto a larger structure using detailed numerical simulations and experiments. Our simulation results show that a block whose degrees of freedom are limited is able to align parallel with the docking site, a necessary condition for successful assembly, whereas an unconfined block could not. Experiments with blocks that were designed with this approach confirmed alignment parallel with the docking site in 97% of trials. To generate alignment in the other two planes, we designed blocks that self-align due to geometric interactions. We also introduced a pulsating flow to increase the probability of aligned assembly. Using this strategy, a 54% successful (fully aligned) assembly rate was achieved.

Keywords

Programmable matter Self-assembly Microfluidics Reconfigurable systems 

Supplementary material

Online Resource 1

Block attraction, alignment, and rejection. A block is attracted to the pedestal. The block is aligned by pulsations of the sink flow and attaches on to the structure. The block can be rejected by the reversing the flow through the sink. Supplementary material 1 (MPG 2320 kb)

References

  1. Avital A, Zussman E (2006) Fluidic assembly of optical components. IEEE Trans Adv Packag 29(4):719–724CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bhalla N, Bentley PJ (2006) Working towards self-assembling robots at all scales. In: Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on autonomous robots and agents, Palmerson North, New ZealandGoogle Scholar
  3. Breivik J (2001) Self-organization of template-replicating polymers and the spontaneous rise of genetic informations. Entropy 3(4):273–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Castano A, Behar A, Will PM (2002) The Conro modules for reconfigurable robots. IEEE-ASME Trans Mechatronic 7(4):403–409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chung JH, Zheng W, Hatch TJ, Jacobs HO (2006) Programmable reconfigurable self-assembly: parallel heterogeneous integration of chip-scale components on planar and nonplanar surfaces. J Microelectromech Syst 15(3):457–464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chung SE, Park W, Shin S, Lee SA, Kwon S (2008) Guided and fluidic self-assembly of microstructures using railed microfluidic channels. Nat Mater 7(7):581–587CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dorigo M, Trianni V, Sahin E, Gross R, Labella TH, Baldassarre G, Nolfi S, Deneubourg JL, Mondada F, Floreano D, Gambardella LM (2004) Evolving self-organizing behaviors for a swarm-bot. Auton Robot 17(2–3):223–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gilpin K, Kotay K, Rus D, Vasilescu I (2008) Miche: modular shape formation by self-disassembly. Int J Robot Res 27(3–4):345–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gracias DH, Tien J, Breen TL, Hsu C, Whitesides GM (2000) Forming electrical networks in three dimensions by self-assembly. Science 289(5482):1170–1172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Griffith S, Goldwater D, Jacobson JM (2005) Robotics—self-replication from random parts. Nature 437(7059):636CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gross R, Dorigo M (2008) Self-assembly at the macroscopic scale. Proc IEEE 96(9):1490–1508CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Klavins E (2007) Programmable self-assembly. IEEE Control Syst Mag 27(4):43–56CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. Krishnan M, Tolley MT, Lipson H, Erickson D (2008) Increased robustness for fluidic self-assembly. Phys Fluids 20:1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Liddle JA, Cui Y, Alivisatos P (2004) Lithographically directed self-assembly of nanostructures. J Vac Sci Technol B 22(6):3409–3414CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Mastrangeli M, Abbasi S, Varel C, Van Hoof C, Celis JP, Bohringer KF (2009) Self-assembly from milli-to nanoscales: methods and applications. J Micromech Microeng 19:1–37Google Scholar
  16. Morris CJ, Parviz BA (2006) Self-assembly and characterization of Marangoni microfluidic actuators. J Micromech Microeng 16(5):972–980CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Penrose LS, Penrose R (1957) Self-reproducing analogue. Nature 179(4571):1183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Sharma R (2007) Thermally controlled fluidic self-assembly. Langmuir 23(12):6843–6849CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Srinivasan U, Liepmann D, Howe RT (2001) Microstructure to substrate self-assembly using capillary forces. J Microelectromech Syst 10(1):17–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Tolley MT, Krishnan M, Erickson D, Lipson H (2008) Dynamically programmable fluidic assembly. Appl Phys Lett 93:1–3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Tolley MT, Kalontarov M, Neubert J, Erickson D, Lipson H (2010) Stochastic modular robotic systems: a study of fluidic assembly strategies. IEEE Trans Robot (in press)Google Scholar
  22. White PJ, Kopanski K, Lipson H (2004) Stochastic self-reconfigurable cellular robotics. In: Proceedings of the 2004 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, Los Alomitos, CA. Accessed at http://ccsl.mae.cornell.edu/publications
  23. White P, Zykov V, Bongard J, Lipson H (2005) Three dimensional stochastic reconfiguration of modular robots. In: Proceedings of robotics science and systems, MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  24. Whitesides GM, Boncheva M (2002) Beyond molecules: self-assembly of mesoscopic and macroscopic components. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99(8):4769–4774CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael Kalontarov
    • 1
  • Michael T. Tolley
    • 1
  • Hod Lipson
    • 1
  • David Erickson
    • 1
  1. 1.Sibley School of Mechanical and Aerospace EngineeringCornell UniversityIthacaNew York

Personalised recommendations