Acoustic Metal Particle Focusing in a Round Glass Capillary
Acoustic Metal Particle Focusing in a Round Glass Capillary
M. S. Gerlt,1, a) A. Paeckel,1 A. Pavlic,1 P. Rohner,2 D. Poulikakos,2 and J. Dual1
1) Mechanics
and Experimental Dynamics, Department of Mechanical and Process Engineering,
ETH Zurich.
2) Laboratory of Thermodynamics in Emerging Technologies, Department of Mechanical and Process Engineering,
ETH Zurich.
arXiv:2105.11505v2 [physics.app-ph] 26 May 2021
(Dated: 27 October 2021)
Two-dimensional metal particle focusing is an essential task for various fabrication processes. While acoustofluidic
devices can manipulate particles in two dimensions, the production of these devices often demands a cleanroom environment. Therefore, acoustically excited glass capillaries present a cheap alternative to labour-intensive cleanroom
production. Here, we present 2D metal micro-particle focusing in a round glass capillary using bulk acoustic waves.
Excitation of the piezoelectric transducer at specific frequencies leads to mode shapes in the round capillary, concentrating particles towards the capillary centre. We experimentally investigate the particle linewidth for different particle
materials and concentrations. We demonstrate the focus of copper particles with ∼ 1 µm in diameter down to a line of
width 60.8 ± 7.0 µm and height 45.2 ± 9.3 µm, corresponding to a local concentration of 4.5 % v/v, which is 90 times
higher than the concentration of the initial solution. Through numerical analysis, we could obtain further insights into
the particle manipulation mechanism inside the capillary and predict the particle trajectories. We found that a transition
of the acoustic streaming pattern enables us to manipulate particles close to the critical particle radius. Finally, we used
our method to eject copper particles through a tapered round capillary with an opening of 25 µm in diameter, which
would not be possible without particle focusing. Our novel setup can be utilized for various applications, that otherwise
might suffer from abrasion, clogging and limited resolution.
I.
INTRODUCTION
Acoustophoresis, the manipulation of particles utilising
acoustic forces, is one of the most popular techniques for
particle manipulation because it is non-invasive, label-free,
and biocompatible.1 To a great extent, acoustofluidic devices
are based on microchannels fabricated in silicon or polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS).2 Despite the flexibility in design,
the production of silicon microchannels relies on expensive
and labour-intensive cleanroom procedures and, depending on
the resolution, PDMS microchannels require silicon stamps
produced in a cleanroom environment.3 Further, acoustic particle manipulation inside PDMS cavities usually requires interdigital transducers (IDTs), which need to be designed carefully and evaporated with high-end equipment.
An approach involving less expensive equipment and reduces manual labour is the application of glass capillaries in
combination with bulk acoustic waves. Here, a piezoelectric
element (piezo) is glued to an off the shelf glass capillary.
On excitation of the piezo with an AC signal, the capillary
can vibrate in specific modes that lead to beneficial acoustic potentials inside the capillary. This procedure has been
used for various applications such as biomedical analysis,4
blood trapping,5 seed particle trapping for sample washing,6
nanoparticle enrichment,7 and two dimensional concentration
of microparticles.8 Additionally, intensive numerical investigations have been carried out concerning acoustic particle manipulation inside glass capillaries.9–11
In this publication, we show, for the first time, two dimensional focusing of metal particles that are close to the
acoustofluidics’ theoretical radiation force driven manipula-
a) Electronic
mail:
[email protected]
tion size limit in common rectangular microfluidic channels.12
We characterised our device’s performance by analysing the
particle linewidth for different particle sizes, materials, flow
rates and concentrations. Our thorough numerical investigations regarding capillary displacement, Gor’kov potential, and
acoustic streaming reveal a prominent resonance frequency
of the capillary close to 1.75 MHz. Further, our simulations
disclose a local minimum in the average streaming velocity
while maintaining a high acoustic radiation force, explaining
our ability to focus particles to a narrow line.
Finally, we employed our setup for the stable ejection of
highly concentrated metal particles using a nozzle with an
opening diameter of 25 µm. Given that the nozzle’s aperture
is only ∼ 23 times bigger than the particle diameter, a continuous ejection without clogging would not be feasible without
sufficient particle focusing.
Our investigations and novel setup are relevant for a wide
variety of industrial applications that rely on particle ejection
out of small nozzles, including, e.g., metal 3D printing and
waterjet cutting.
II.
OPERATING PRINCIPLE
The acoustofluidic device consists of a round glass capillary
with two piezoelectric elements (piezos) attached to it (Fig.
1 (a)). Upon excitation of the piezos with frequency f , the
capillary starts to vibrate. When a suitable resonance of the
fluid cavity inside the capillary is excited, particles migrate
towards the centre of the capillary, forming a thin particle line
(Fig. 1 (c)). The force responsible for the particle migration
towards the centre of the capillary is called acoustic radiation
force (ARF). The ARF arises from the interactions between
the incident acoustic field and the acoustic field scattered at a
particle. For particles whose radius is smaller than the viscous
Acoustic Metal Particle Focusing in a Round Glass Capillary
2
FIG. 1. Design and working principle of two dimensional particle focusing in a round glass capillary. (a) Sketch of the design. (b)
Photograph of the acoustofluidic device with a 10 mm scale bar. (c) Micrograph series of two dimensional focusing with 5 µm diameter
fluorescent polystyrene particles from side and top view. The particles were pumped through the device at a flow rate of 100 µL min−1 . The
piezoelectric elements were excited at 1.67 MHz with 20 VPP . The initial polystyrene concentration was 0.5 % volume to volume ratio (v/v).
Scale bars corresponding to 0.5 mm
boundary layer thickness
δ=
with the Gor’kov potential
r
η
,
πρ0 f
(1)
with the density of the fluid at equilibrium ρ0 and the dynamic
viscosity η, viscous effects need to be considered when computing the ARF, since these could even lead to an inversion of
the stable particle positions.13,14 Here, we deal with particle
radii (r) just larger than the viscous boundary layer thickness,
namely r ∼ 0.58 µm > δ ∼ 0.44 µm, while the acoustic wavelength (λ ) is much bigger than the particle radius, meaning
that the inviscid ARF theory still offers a good approximation.
The ARF is, therefore, given as15
Frad = −∇U,
(2)
4
U = πr3
3
3
1 f1
2
f
hv
·
v
i
,
hp
i
−
ρ
0 2 1
1
2 c20 ρ0 1
4
(3)
with the incident acoustic pressure field p1 , the incident
acoustic velocity field v1 , the fluid speed of sound c0 , and
the monopole f1 and the dipole f2 scattering coefficients. hi
R
denotes time averaging hi = T1 tt11 +T dt with any point in
time t1 and the period of oscillation T = 1/ f .
Another nonlinear time-averaged effect that needs to be
considered in our system is acoustic streaming. The force
exerted on particles by acoustic streaming is the Stokes’
drag16,17
Fstr = 6πηr(vstr + v0 − vprt ),
(4)
Acoustic Metal Particle Focusing in a Round Glass Capillary
3
with the particle velocity vprt , the background flow v0 and the
streaming velocity vstr . The latter is usually determined using
numerical methods,9,13 which allow for the consideration of
arbitrary geometry. In our case, we employ the finite element
method (FEM) to compute the acoustic streaming field.
Due to the different scaling with the particle radius r of the
two forces, namely Frad (scales with r3 , Eq. 3) and Fstr (scales
with r, Eq. 4), a critical radius rc , which signals the transition between the ARF-dominated regime to the streamingdominated regime, can be derived:12
For the particle ejection experiments, glass nozzles were
fabricated by pulling thin-walled borosilicate glass capillaries (1 mm outer diameter, 0.75 mm inner diameter, TW100-4,
World Precision Instruments, Germany) using a pipette puller
(P-97, Sutter Instruments, USA) equipped with a 2.5 mm x
2.5 mm platinum/iridium box filament. The nozzle size was
tuned by varying the number of pulling cycles, which was
achieved by changing the velocity of the puller bars at which
the filament heating stops. Nozzle outer diameters in the range
from 10 µm − 50 µm were achieved by repetitive pulling cycles until the capillary separates into two identical nozzles.
The capillaries’ tips (nozzles) were dipped into a fluorophilic
polymer (Novec™ 1700, 3M™, Switzerland) to render it hydrophobic, enabling water ejection as a thin jet by avoiding
wetting of the nozzles’ surface, which would eventually lead
to droplet formation.
rc =
r
3ψ
δ,
2Φ
(5)
with the geometry dependent factor ψ = 83 for a standing wave
parallel to a planar wall 18 and the acoustic contrast factor Φ
valid for a 1-dimensional acoustic standing wave, which can
be written as:
1
1
1 5ρ̃ − 2
(6)
Φ = f1 + f2 =
− κ̃ ,
3
2
3 2ρ̃ + 2
in which relative compressibility κ̃ =
ρp
ρf
κp
κf
and equilibrium den-
reflect the ratios between particle ()p and fluid
sity ρ̃ =
()f properties. In case of PS particles dispersed in water
Φ ≈ 0.17 and for copper particles dispersed in water Φ ≈ 0.75.
In commonly used rectangular acoustofluidic channels, with
an excitation frequency of ∼ 1.75 MHz, the critical radius
evaluates at around 0.37 µm for a copper particle in water and
around 0.78 µm for a PS particle in water. Our system, however, appears to have a lower critical radius since particle focusing is feasible with r ∼ 0.5 µm for PS particles in water,
which might be based on the different channel geometry, leading to a different ψ.
As mentioned beforehand, the acoustic effects inside the
fluid cavity become significant when the system is close to a
resonance. The latter can be pinpointed
by the analysis of the
average acoustic energy density Eac , which is given as19
Eac =
1
V
Z
V
1
1
ρ0 hv1 · v1 i + κhp21 i dV,
2
2
(7)
with the fluid’s compressibility κ and volume V .
III.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A.
Device Fabrication
Two piezoelectric elements (10 mm length, 2 mm width,
1 mm thickness, Pz26, Meggitt Ferroperm, Denmark) were
glued to the bottom and side of a round glass capillary (0.5 mm
inner diameter, 1 mm outer diameter, 76 mm length, 1B1003, World Precision Instruments, Germany) using conductive
epoxy (H20E, Epoxy Technology, Switzerland). Copper cables (0.15 mm diameter) were attached to the piezo with conductive silver paste and glued to the capillary with instant glue
to increase the mechanical stability.
B.
Experimental Setup
Bulk acoustic wave (BAW) devices are based on the generation of ultrasonic standing waves in a fluid cavity. The waves
were coupled into the devices by exciting the piezoelectric elements with an AC signal. The signals were generated via
a wave generator (AFG-2225, GW INSTEK, Taiwan). The
impedance of the piezo varies with its excitation frequency.
Since the piezo voltage depends on its impedance, it was verified using an oscilloscope (UTD2025CL, Uni-Trend Technology, China). Water flow inside the capillary was controlled
by a syringe pump (neMESYS 290N, Cetoni, Germany). Two
syringes were used for the particle ejection experiments; one
containing metal particles diluted in distilled water and stabilised with Tween 20 and the other containing solely distilled
water. First, the capillary was filled with distilled water. Then,
the metal particle flow was slowly increased to achieve the desired concentration and flow rate. If the metal particles were
directly inserted into the syringe, the nozzle clogged immediately due to unavoidable particle clumps. A self-built syringe
mixer was utilised to increase the homogeneity of the ejection.
The mixer consists of five copper coils linearly arranged along
with the syringe, each controlled with a MOSFET (IRF540 nchannel, Infineon, Germany) and a micro-controller (Arduino
Nano, Arduino, USA). A cylindrical iron piece was used as a
stirrer by moving it up and down inside the syringe. This procedure was essential for copper particles since they sediment
much faster due to their higher density and then tend to form
big clumps inside the syringe, impeding a proper ejection.
For the optical visualisation, a self-built microscope kit
(Cerna®, Thorlabs, Germany) was utilised. A green LED
(M505L3, Thorlabs, Germany) excites the particles via a
dichroic mirror (MD515, Thorlabs, Germany). Before entering the camera (UI-3180CP, IDS Imaging Development
Systems GmbH, Germany), the light is filtered by an emission filter (MF535-22, Thorlabs, Germany). To visualise the
side of our glass capillary, individual parts from the company
Thorlabs were combined. A camera (UI-3180CP, IDS Imaging Development Systems GmbH, Germany) was connected
to a camera tube (WFA4100, Thorlabs, Germany), which is
attached to a filter cube housing (WFA2002, Thorlabs, Ger-
Acoustic Metal Particle Focusing in a Round Glass Capillary
4
FIG. 2. Experimental device characterisation. (a) Optical microscopy picture of PS5 particles diluted in water with 0.5 % v/v, focused with
an excitation frequency f = 1.74 MHz and Voltage V = 20 VPP at a flow rate of Q = 200 µL min−1 . The corresponding analysis of the particle
linewidth with the Matlab code described in section III D on the right side. Scale bar corresponds to 200 µm (b) Particle linewidth of PS5 and
Cu1 particles diluted in water with a concentration of 0.5 % v/v. The linewidth increases with increasing flow rate. The linewidth of PS5 and
Cu1 particles are comparable despite the difference in size due to the different acoustic contrast factor. (c) Particle linewidth for different initial
concentrations of Cu1. The linewidth increases with increasing initial concentration and flow rate.
many) with a filter cube (MDFM-MF2, Thorlabs, Germany)
carrying a dichroic mirror (MD499, Thorlabs, Germany) and
an emission filter (MF525-39, Thorlabs, Germany). The fluorescent filter sets were removed and two white LEDs were
added as background lighting for the top and side view to improve the visibility if metal particles were flown through the
capillary. A high-precision zoom housing (SM1ZM, Thorlabs, Germany), crucial for adjusting the focus, was mounted
to the filter cube housing with a combination of three parts
(CSA1003, ER1-P4, LCP02/M, Thorlabs, Germany). the particle focusing was observed 2 mm away from the capillaries’
exit to ensure a maximal time for the particles to focus. Due
to their long working distance, Mitutoyo objectives with a 5x
magnification were connected to the microscopes.
For the device characterization, green fluorescent
polystyrene (PS) particles (microParticles GmbH, Germany)
with 5.19 ± 0.14µm diameter (PS5) and 1.14 ± 0.04 µm diameter (PS1), and copper particles (Nanografi Nanotechnology,
Turkey) with 1.16 ± 0.61 µm diameter (Cu1) were used.The
initial concentration was achieved by diluting the particles in
distilled water. The local concentration after focusing was
determined by deriving the ratio of the inner diameter area
and the elliptical particle stream area and multiplying it with
the initial particle concentration.
C.
Numerical Model
A 2D numerical model of the cross-section of the device
(including piezo) was built in COMSOL Multiphysics version 5.4. After studying the device’s frequency response,
the capillary’s displacement as well as the Gor’kov potential
and streaming velocity close to the resonance frequency was
analysed exposing the highest acoustic energy density in the
system fres ≈ 1.75 MHz. Further, particle dynamics were assessed through the streaming velocity and the ARF, which was
computed from the Gor’kov potential (Eq. 2).
A user-controlled mesh with several mesh refinements was
chosen, especially at the interfaces between different domains,
to correctly incorporate streaming into our numerical model.
Please refer to Figure S-1 in the Supplemental Material at
[URL will be inserted by publisher] for a more detailed mesh
analysis. A frequency domain study was used to solve (I) the
Thermoviscous Acoustics interface applied to the water domain, (II) the Solid Mechanics interface applied to the capillary, glue and piezo domain, and (III) the Electrostatics interface applied to the piezo domain. Further, a stationary study
of the Creeping Flow interface applied to the water domain
was carried out using the acoustic fields from the frequency
domain study in the source terms of the streaming equations.
This study returns the streaming velocity field as a direct result. Finally, a time-dependent study of the Particle Tracing
for Fluid Flow interface was carried out by taking the acoustic
and streaming velocity fields into account. Please refer to the
Supplemental Material SI-1 at [URL will be inserted by publisher] for a more detailed description of the numerical model.
D.
Determination of the Particle Linewidth
A self-written Matlab script was used to analyse the device’s performance by estimating the width of the focused
particle line. The script takes a video as input and averages
20 frames to account for flow instabilities. After adjusting the
region of interest, a concentration profile is created by extracting all pixel brightness values in this region. The brightness
values along the flow direction are summed up to receive the
brightness distribution along the channel’s width. The brightness distribution is fitted with a Gaussian curve and the particle linewidth is determined with the fitted curve by measuring
the width of the Gaussian fit after two standard deviations, i.e.
∼ 70 % of the particles are within this region (see Fig. 2a).
The noise was significantly reduced by subtracting a reference
picture without any particles from the brightness distribution.
Acoustic Metal Particle Focusing in a Round Glass Capillary
5
FIG. 3. : Numerical analysis of the acoustofludic device. (a) Numerical model of the round capillary with a piezo attached to the bottom
via a glue layer with 20 µm thickness. (b) Mesh of a small area of the numerical model depicting all domains. (c) Frequency sweep from 1.73
to 1.77 MHz with steps of 0.1 kHz. At 1742.1 kHz a minimum in vstr can be found while the Eac remains at a moderate level. The capillary
average displacement magnitude (d), Gor’kov potential with white arrows (logarithmic scaling) as the ARF (e), and streaming patterns (f) at
this frequency indicate that particles are pushed towards the centre of the capillary.
IV.
A.
RESULTS & DISCUSSION
Experimental Device Characterisation
We experimentally investigated the acoustofluidic device’s
performance. First, we varied the excitation frequency and
chose the frequency that yielded the thinnest particle line by
visual inspection. A frequency between 1.67 − 1.78 MHz results in the best particle focusing, which is close to the resonance frequency of our numerical model, despite its simplicity (2D geometry). To qualitatively examine the ability
of our device to focus particles of different sizes and material
properties, we analysed the linewidth of the focused particles
by evaluating videos with a self-written Matlab code (Section
III D, Fig 2 (a)).
We measured the particle linewidth of polystyrene (PS) particles with 5.19 ± 0.14 µm (PS5) and 1.14 ± 0.04 µm (PS1) in
diameter and copper particles with 1.16 ± 0.61 µm (Cu1) in
diameter to characterise the device performance. The particles were dispensed in water with a concentration of 0.5 %
v/v and pumped through the device at flow rates in a range
of 5 µl min−1 (0.11 mm s−1 average velocity) to 900 µl min−1
(19.14 mm s−1 average velocity). Already at 20 VPP the acoustic radiation force in flow direction was strong enough to trap
particles close to the piezos below flow rates of 100 µl min−1
(2.13 mm s−1 average velocity). Therefore, we were not able
to analyse the linewidth below a flow rate of 100 µl min−1 for
PS5 and Cu1 particles. PS1 particles did not get trapped even
at low flow rates since the acoustic radiation force is approximately 125 times lower (Eq. 2). Despite the small size,
which would usually impede a focus of these particles using acoustic effects, we were able to focus the PS1 particles
at a flow rate of 5 µl min−1 to a line of width 80.6 ± 6.9 µm
(top view) and height 65.0 ± 3.9 µm (side view) - see Supplemental Material video 1 at [URL will be inserted by publisher]. The ability to focus below the critical radius might be
due to a minimum acoustic streaming velocity, discovered by
the numerical analysis (Fig. 3 (c)). At double the flow rate
(10 µl min−1 ), the linewidth of the PS1 particles drastically increased to 401.5 ± 19.9 µm (top view) and 277.6 ± 18.2 µm
(side view). Above the flow rate of 10 µl min−1 , no particle
focusing was observable anymore due to the too short focusing time.
Following the experimental focusing of PS1 particles, we
inserted the PS5 particles into the system. At a flow rate
of 100 µl min−1 , the PS5 particles could be focused down to
a line of width 62.6 ± 1.1 µm (top view) and height 59.5 ±
2.6 µm (side view), corresponding to a local concentration of
34 % v/v. With a linear increase of the flow rate, the linewidth
also increases linearly as the time available to manipulate
the particles inside the device is reduced. Even at a flow
rate of 900 µl min−1 , we were able to focus the PS5 particles
Acoustic Metal Particle Focusing in a Round Glass Capillary
6
FIG. 4. Numerical streaming patterns. Streaming patterns at (a) f = 1741.1 kHz, (b) f = 1742.1 kHz, and (c) f = 1743.1 kHz. The color
indicates the amplitude of the streaming velocity, while the arrows on the streamlines indicate the flow direction. The results are given for
20 VPP excitation of the piezo. The patterns reveal two transitions; first, from two dominant vortices in (a) to four dominant vortices in (b),
and second, from four dominant vortices in (b) to two dominant vortices in (c). In the transition, the two dominant vortices switched from the
lower vortices in (a) to the upper vortices in (c). The transitional state in (b) indicates the decrease in the overall maximal streaming velocity,
which is beneficial for the manipulation of sub-µm particles.
down to a line of width 439.6 ± 5.7 µm (top view) and height
325.2 ± 5.2 µm (side view).
Next, we inserted Cu1 particles into the device. Due to
significantly larger density and compressibility difference to
water(∼ 4.4x bigger acoustic contrast factor (Eq. 6)), copper
particles experience a larger ARF compared to the PS particle of the same size. This leads to similar particle linewidths
for Cu1 and PS5 particles despite their difference in size.
At a flow rate of 100 µl min−1 , the copper particles could be
focused down to a line of width 168.0 ± 9.4 µm (top view)
and height 169.1 ± 40.8 µm (side view), corresponding to a
local concentration of 4.4 % v/v - see Supplemental Material video 2 at [URL will be inserted by publisher]. Even at
high flow rates of 700 µl min−1 , we achieved a line of width
320.4 ± 4.2 µm (top view) and height 262.3 ± 6.4 µm (side
view). All particle linewidths for the tested flow rates and
particle materials are given in Fig. 2 (b).
Finally, we evaluated the influence of the initial copper particle concentration on the particle linewidth. We tested three
different concentrations (0.05 % v/v, 0.1 % v/v, and 0.5 % v/v)
and found an increase in particle linewidth for increasing flow
rate regardless of the concentration (Fig. 2 (c)). Additionally,
the particle linewidth increases for increasing initial particle
concentrations, which could be attributed to the maximal particle packing density and inter-particle effects. For an initial
concentration of 0.05 % v/v, we were able to focus the Cu1
particles into a line of width 60.8 ± 7.0 µm (top view) and
height 45.2 ± 9.3 µm (side view) at a flow rate of 100 µl min−1 ,
corresponding to a local concentration of 4.5 % v/v.
B.
Numerical Analysis of the Particle Manipulation
We utilised the numerical model described in Section III C
to study the underlying physical phenomena that lead to
two-dimensional particle focusing. A frequency sweep from
1 MHz to 2.5 MHz (0.1 kHz step) revealed a strong resonance
of the system at 1754.1 kHz, indicated by a peak in the av-
erage acoustic energy density (Eac ) and average streaming velocity (vstr ) (see Fig. 3 (c)). Even though the large acoustic energy density and the Gor’kov potential are favourable for particle focusing in the centre of the capillary, the strong acoustic streaming disturbs the ARF-driven focusing of small particles. We confirmed the undesirable influence of the acoustic
streaming by particle trajectory simulations, where the copper particles (r = 0.5 µm) end up being carried around with
the streaming vortices, which contradicts the experimentally
observed results. However, at a slightly lower frequency of
f = 1742.1 kHz, the vstr is reduced by a factor of 40 in magnitude in comparison to the vstr at the resonance frequency,
while the Eac is reduced by a factor of 3 and thus is still relatively high. Since the ARF is proportional to the acoustic
energy density, this off-peak frequency would be favourable
for the particle focusing. At f = 1742.1 kHz, the capillary exhibits displacements in the nm-range, as shown in Fig. 3 (d).
The Gor’kov potential in Fig. 3 (e) with maxima at the top
and bottom of the capillary and a minimum in the centre indicates the attraction of particles towards the z = 0 plane in
the glass capillary. The acoustic radiation force arrows in Fig.
3 (e) point towards the capillary centre, which confirms the
particles’ attraction towards the centre of the capillary. The
acoustic streaming field consists of 4 vortices that have a joint
point of zero velocity close to the centre of the capillary 3(f),
an observation that is beneficial for particle focusing.
The streaming velocity at f = 1742.1 kHz is low compared
to the streaming velocity at the nearby frequencies. This can
be attributed to the transition of the streaming pattern that appears to weaken the overall acoustic streaming (see Fig. 4).
Using particle trajectory simulations, we confirmed that the
influence of the acoustic streaming at f = 1742.1 kHz is reduced enough to yield the focusing of r = 2.5 µm PS and
r = 0.5 µm copper particles in the centre of the capillary after 500 ms (see Supplemental Material Figure S-2 at [URL
will be inserted by publisher]). Based on the range of flow
rates applied in the experiments, the particles spent between
1178 ms and 131 ms in the focusing region of two transduc-
Acoustic Metal Particle Focusing in a Round Glass Capillary
7
ers (20 mm), justifying the 500 ms observed in the numerical simulations (details in the Supplemental Material SI-2 at
[URL will be inserted by publisher]). Considering the threedimensional acoustic field in the experiments and the related
variability in the ARF and the streaming velocity field, the
simulations nicely fit our experimental results described in the
next section.
C.
Focused Metal Particle Ejection
For the precise ejection of focused metal particles, as e.g.
needed for metal 3D printing, a tapered round capillary is connected to the already characterised round glass capillary (particle focusing capillary) with a combination of silicone and
heat-shrink tubing (see Supplemental Material Figure S-3 at
[URL will be inserted by publisher]). We tested various nozzle diameters ranging from 10 µm − 50 µm. Nozzles with a diameter below 20 µm are clogging even at low initial Cu1 concentrations of 0.05 % v/v, regardless of prefocusing in the particle focusing capillary. As can be seen in Fig. 5 (b), also nozzles with 25 µm diameter clog within 10 s when Cu1 particles
with an initial concentration of 2 % v/v are flushed through
the system at a flow rate of 200 µl min−1 (4.25 mm s−1 average velocity) and the prefocusing system is turned off (see
Supplemental Material video 3 at [URL will be inserted by
publisher]). However, as shown in Fig. 5 (c), when the ultrasound of our particle focusing capillary is switched on using
an excitation frequency of 1.72 MHz, we were able to eject
Cu1 particles with an initial concentration of 2 % v/v at a flow
rate of 200 µl min−1 (4.25 mm s−1 average velocity) in a jetting mode (See Supplemental Material video 4 at [URL will
be inserted by publisher]). By utilising our prefocusing system, we were able to prevent the clogging of the 25 µm diameter nozzle for 1 ml of sample solution. The prefocused metal
particles are squeezed together in the nozzle resulting in a particle stream of below ∼ 4 µm in diameter and ejected with an
average velocity of ∼ 1.7 m s−1 . We tested this procedure repeatedly without exchanging the nozzle; hence we believe that
much larger volumes can be ejected without clogging the nozzle when utilising our system.
With the combination of our particle focusing capillary and
a tapered round capillary, we were able to prove that twodimensional particle focusing within a round glass capillary
can be utilised to impede the clogging of a thin nozzle.
V.
CONCLUSION & OUTLOOK
In this work, we showed for the first time two dimensional
focusing of micron-sized particles and their stable ejection
through an about twenty times larger nozzle.
We carried out numerical investigations to improve our understanding of two-dimensional particle focusing inside round
glass capillaries. We found an excitation frequency at which
the influence of the acoustic streaming is weak compared to
the acoustic radiation force, explaining our ability to focus
particles sized close to the theoretical minimum.
FIG. 5. Ejection of focused metal particles through a tapered
round capillary. (a) Photograph of a tapered round glass capillary with a nozzle diameter of 25 µm. Water with a flow rate of
200 µl min−1 is flushed through the system, leading to ejection in the
jetting mode. Scale bar corresponds to 5 mm. (b) Optical microscopy
image of a clogged tapered capillary with a nozzle diameter of 25 µm.
Cu1 particles with an initial concentration of 2 % v/v were pumped
through the system at a flow rate of 200 µl min−1 without prefocusing, leading to clogging of the nozzle within seconds. Scale bar corresponds to 250 µm. (c) Optical microscopy picture of a tapered capillary with a nozzle diameter of 25 µm while ejecting particles in the
jetting mode. Cu1 particles with an initial concentration of 2 % v/v
were flown through the system at a flow rate of 200 µl min−1 . The
particles were prefocused within our focusing capillary, which was
excited at a frequency of f = 1.72 MHz. Scale bars corresponds to
250 µm.
Through experimental evaluations, we were able to determine
our device’s performance. At a flow rate of 5 µl min−1 , we
were able to focus polystyrene particles with 1 µm in diameter
into a line with width 80.6 ± 6.9 µm and height 65.0 ± 3.9 µm.
Additionally, at a 20 times faster flow speed, we focused five
times bigger polystyrene particles into a line of similar size.
Copper particles with 1 µm in diameter were observed to behave similarly to 5 times bigger polystyrene particles due to
the significantly higher acoustic contrast.
Finally, we demonstrated the ejection of a 2 % v/v concentration of 1 µm copper particles through a nozzle of 25 µm diameter, which was unattainable without prior acoustic focusing.
With our novel approach, the reliability of systems that rely
Acoustic Metal Particle Focusing in a Round Glass Capillary
on particle ejection through a small nozzle and are subject to
abrasion could be significantly increased. Therefore, our investigations are expected to be relevant for a wide variety of
industrial applications including water jet cutting and metal
3D printing.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors would like to express their gratitude for funding by ETH Zurich. This work was funded by the program
of the Strategic Focus Area Advanced Manufacturing (SFAAM), a strategic initiative of the ETH Board. The project can
be found under the name "Powder Focusing". We thank Dr.
Nino Läubli for his valuable feedback and inputs.
Appendix A: Data availability statement
The data that supports the findings of this study are available within the article and its supplementary material. The
simulation model is available from the corresponding author
upon reasonable request.
Appendix B: Notes and references
1 T.
Laurell and A. Lenshof, eds., Microscale Acoustofluidics (The Royal Society of Chemistry, 2015) pp. P001–574.
2 M. Wu, A. Ozcelik, J. Rufo, Z. Wang, R. Fang, and T. Jun Huang,
“Acoustofluidic separation of cells and particles,” Microsystems & Nanoengineering 5, 32 (2019).
3 Y. Xia and G. M. Whitesides, “Soft lithography,” Annual Review of Materials Science 28, 153–184 (1998).
4 M. Wiklund, S. Nilsson, and H. M. Hertz, “Ultrasonic trapping in capillaries for trace-amount biomedical analysis,” Journal of Applied Physics 90,
421–426 (2001).
8
5 I.
Gralinski, S. Raymond, T. Alan, and A. Neild, “Continuous flow ultrasonic particle trapping in a glass capillary,” Journal of Applied Physics 115,
054505 (2014).
6 B. Hammarström, T. Laurell, and J. Nilsson, “Seed particle-enabled acoustic trapping of bacteria and nanoparticles in continuous flow systems,” Lab
Chip 12, 4296–4304 (2012).
7 Z. Mao, P. Li, M. Wu, H. Bachman, N. Mesyngier, X. Guo, S. Liu,
F. Costanzo, and T. J. Huang, “Enriching nanoparticles via acoustofluidics,” ACS Nano 11, 603–612 (2017).
8 J. Lei, F. Cheng, K. Li, and Z. Guo, “Two-dimensional concentration of
microparticles using bulk acousto-microfluidics,” Applied Physics Letters
116, 033104 (2020).
9 J. Lei, F. Cheng, and K. Li, “Numerical simulation of boundary-driven
acoustic streaming in microfluidic channels with circular cross-sections,”
Micromachines 11 (2020), 10.3390/mi11030240.
10 I. Gralinski, T. Alan, and A. Neild, “Non-contact acoustic trapping in circular cross-section glass capillaries: A numerical study,” The Journal of the
Acoustical Society of America 132, 2978–2987 (2012).
11 M. W. H. Ley and H. Bruus, “Three-dimensional numerical modeling of
acoustic trapping in glass capillaries,” Phys. Rev. Applied 8, 024020 (2017).
12 H. Bruus, “Acoustofluidics 10: Scaling laws in acoustophoresis,” Lab Chip
12, 1578–1586 (2012).
13 T. Baasch, A. Pavlic, and J. Dual, “Acoustic radiation force acting on a
heavy particle in a standing wave can be dominated by the acoustic microstreaming,” Phys. Rev. E 100, 061102 (2019).
14 A. Doinikov, “Acoustic radiation pressure on a rigid sphere in a viscous
fluid,” Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A: Mathematical
and Physical Sciences 447, 447–466 (1994).
15 L. Gor’kov, “On the forces acting on a small particle in an acoustical field in
an ideal fluid,” Phys.-Dokl. 6, 773–775 (1962), arXiv:arXiv:1011.1669v3.
16 W. L. M. Nyborg, “Acoustic streaming,” in Physical acoustics, Vol. 2 (Elsevier, 1965) pp. 265–331.
17 J. Lighthill, “Acoustic streaming,” Journal of sound and vibration 61, 391–
418 (1978).
18 P. B. Muller, R. Barnkob, M. J. H. Jensen, and H. Bruus, “A numerical
study of microparticle acoustophoresis driven by acoustic radiation forces
and streaming-induced drag forces,” Lab on a Chip 12, 4617 (2012).
19 A. D. Pierce, Acoustics : an introduction to its physical principles and applications, 3rd ed. (Springer International Publishing, Woodbury, 1991).
20 K. Olofsson, B. Hammarström, and M. Wiklund, “Acoustic separation of
living and dead cells using high density medium,” Lab on a Chip 20, 1981–
1990 (2020).
arXiv:2105.11505v2 [physics.app-ph] 26 May 2021
Acoustic metal particle focusing in a round glass
capillary
M. S. Gerlt, A. Paeckel, A. Pavlic, P. Rohner, D. Poulikakos, and J. Dual∗
E-mail:
[email protected]
1
Supporting Figures
2
Figure S-1: Mesh study. We introduced five mesh parameters reflecting different aspects of the mesh. (I) Maximal triangular element size inside the water-domain (max triang.
size water) given as fractions of the wavelength (λ/n). (II) Maximal element width at the
boundary between the glass- and water-domain given as fractions of the viscous boundary
layer thickness (δ/n). (III) Maximal triangular element size inside the glass-domain (max
triang. size glass) given as fractions of the wavelength (λ/n). (IV) Maximal triangular
element size inside the glue-domain (max triang. size glue) given as fractions of the wavelength (λ/n). (V) Maximal triangular element size inside the piezo-domain (max triang.
size piezo) given as fractions of the wavelength (λ/n). With Eac as the average energy
density in the water domain, cap disp as the average displacement magnitude of the glass
capillary, and vstr as the average streaming velocity in the water domain. The error is defined as Error = [1 − (x/xref )] · 100, with x representing one of the evaluated quantities
(Eac , cap disp, streaming) and xref representing the value at the finest mesh. We chose the
following mesh parameters for the simulations in this work, corresponding to an error below
1 % with respect to the finest mesh: max triang. size water λ/40 ≈ 21 µm, Element width
at glass-water interface δ/1 ≈ 0.4 µm, max triang. size glass λ/200 ≈ 16 µm, max triang.
size glue λ/1000 ≈ 3.2 µm, and max triang. size piezo λ/40 ≈ 80 µm. At a frequency of
f = 1742.1 kHz our mesh had 959891 degrees of freedom. The distribution of mesh elements
was as follows: (I) 1 % in the Water domain, (II) 80.5 % in the boundary layer between
water and glass, (III) 5.5 % in the capillary domain, 7 % in the glue domain, and 6 % in
the piezo domain. In the Thermoviscous Acoustics interface, we chose quadratic Lagrange
elements for the pressure and cubic Lagrange elements for the velocity. In the Creeping Flow
interface, we chose P3+P2 for the discretization of the velocity and pressure. The mesh is
generally converged at the chosen mesh parameters. However, if the regions of low streaming
velocity in the bulk of the fluid outside resonance are of interest, the element size in the bulk
of the fluid (I) needs to be reduced leading to a mesh with 1065620 degrees of freedom at
f = 1742.1 kHz.
3
Figure S-2: Numerical particle trajectories. Particle trajectories estimated at f =
1742.1 kHz for (a) PS particles with 5 µm in diameter and (b) copper particles with 1 µm in
diameter. The 36 Cu and Ps particles needed approximately 500 ms to reach the centre of the
capillary. The colour of trajectories indicates the particles speed. Due to a more prominent
influence of the acoustic radiation force on the Cu particles, the resulting trajectories point
more directly towards the capillary centre. In contrast, the PS particles first move towards
the z = 0 line and then continue to travel towards the centre with a slower velocity.
4
Figure S-3: Photograph of the Setup used for metal particle ejection. The syringe
pumps in the background of the picture are connected to the focusing capillary via PTFE
tubing. The ejection capillary is connected to the focusing capillary via silicone and heatshrink tubing. Scale bar corresponding to 2 cm.
5
Supporting Information
SI-1: COMSOL Model
We used the Solid Mechanics interface to model the solid components of the model (glass
and piezoelectric element). To account for damping, we used complex Lamé parameters in
combination with the isotropic Linear Elastic Material model. The piezoelectric element
was modeled as a Piezoelectric Material. Finally, a 5 µm thin elastic layer was introduced
at the interface between the piezoelectric element and glass to model the glue layer (spring
constant per unit area). Please refer to Table S-1 for all material parameters.
Table S-1: Table of material properties and damping factors.
Parameter
Water at 24 °C 1
Speed of sound
Density
Pyrex Glass 2
Density
Quality factor
Lamé parameters
Piezo Pz26 3
Density
Electric damping
Quality factor
Stiffness matrix
Coupling matrix
Permittivity tensor
Glue layer H20E 4
Quality factor
Spring constants
Symbol and value
Unit
c = 1497
ρwater = 997
[m s−1 ]
[kg m−3 ]
ρglass = 2240
Qglass = 2420
λ = 23.1 × 109 (1 + i/Qglass )
µ = 24.1 × 109 (1 + i/Qglass )
[kg m−3 ]
[kg m−3 ]
[N m−2 ]
[N m−2 ]
ρpiezo = 7700
tanδ = 0.003
Qpiezo = 100
cpiezo
= 0.965(1 + i/Qpiezo )Cij , with
ij
C11 = C22 = 155, C12 = 94.1
C13 = C23 = 79.9, C33 = 110
C44 = C55 = C66 = 27.3
epiezo
= (1 + i(1/(2Qpiezo ) − tanδ/2))Eij , with
ij
E31 = E32 = −5.48, E33 = 13.6
E24 = E15 = 9.55
ǫpiezo
= (1 − i(tanδ))Eij , with
ij
E11 = E22 = 929, E33 = 518
[kg m−3 ]
[–]
[–]
Qglue = 10
k11 = 2.06(1 + i/Qglue )/5 × 10−6
k22 = 8.94(1 + i/Qglue )/5 × 10−6
6
[GPa]
[GPa]
[GPa]
[C m−2 ]
[C m−2 ]
[C m−2 ]
[–]
[N m−2 ]
[N m−2 ]
To account for the piezoelectric effect, the Electrostatics interface was applied to the
piezoelectric element and coupled to the Solid Mechanics interface through the Piezoelectric
Effect Multiphysics interface. Charge conservation was implemented for the whole domain
and an electric potential amplitude of 10 V was applied to one side of the piezoelectric
element, resulting in a 20 V peak to peak excitation.
The water was modeled with the standard material parameters provided by the software.
For computing the acoustic fields inside the capillary, the Thermoviscous Acoustics interface
in its adiabatic form was applied to the water domain, and the Thermoviscous AcousticStructure Boundary interface was introduced to couple the Solid Mechanics interface and
the Thermoviscous Acoustics interface at the water-glass interface.
To simulate the acoustic streaming, we followed a procedure described by Muller et al., 5
resolving the streaming in the viscous boundary layer, as well as in the fluid bulk. We
implemented the equations of the acoustic streaming 6
η
∇ (∇·hv 2 i) = −ρ ∇· hv 1 v 1 i,
∇hp2 i − η∇2 hv 2 i − ηB +
3
(1)
ρ ∇· hv 2 i = − ∇· hρ1 v 1 i,
(2)
with the time-averaged second-order pressure hp2 i, the streaming velocity hv 2 i, the bulk
viscosity of the fluid ηB , and the acoustic fields that are resolved beforehand, with the
Thermoviscous Acoustics interface, namely the acoustic velocity v 1 and the acoustic density
ρ1 . The terms combining the acoustic fields (subscript 1) in equations 1 and 2 act as source
terms for the streaming. In addition, following Baasch et al., 7 the negative Stokes drift
v SD
2
=−
Z
v 1 dt · ∇ v 1
(3)
is applied at the water-glass interface to enforce the no-slip boundary condition at the second
order while accounting for the first-order (acoustic) oscillations of the interface. To imple-
7
ment the described formulation in COMSOL, the Creeping Flow interface was assigned to
the water domain. Source terms were enforced through Volume Forces across the domain,
while the negative Stokes drift was applied through a Wall boundary condition. Finally, the
second-order pressure field was constrained by setting a Pressure Point Constraint to zero
at an arbitrary point of the domain.
For each simulation, two studies were carried out. First a Frequency Domain study of Solid
Mechanics, Thermoviscous Acoustics, Electrostatics, Piezoelectric Effect, and Thermoviscous Acoustic-Structure Boundary interfaces revealed the acoustic response of the system.
Subsequently, a Stationary study of the modified Creeping Flow interface was used to find
the acoustic streaming inside the water domain while taking the solutions of the Frequency
Domain study into account.
SI-2: Particle trajectories
Particle trajectories were simulated within COMSOL, employing the Particle Tracing for
Fluid Flow interface. Particles were specified through density and diameter. Two forces
were taken into account in calculation of particle trajectories, namely, the Stokes drag
F str = 6πηr(hv 2 i − v prt ),
(4)
due to the particle velocity v prt relative to the acoustic streaming velocity hv 2 i, and the
acoustic radiation force
F rad = −∇U,
(5)
with the Gor’kov potential U . 8 The streaming velocity and the acoustic radiation force were
carried on from the previous studies, while the trajectories themselves were evaluated with
a Time Dependent study. Particles were released at t = 0 s from a 6 × 6 grid of particles
with 100 × r spacing for particles with a radius of r = 1 µm, and 20 × r spacing for particles
with a radius of r = 2.5 µm.
8
The time that an individual particle spent in the focusing region of 20 mm, along the two
piezoelectric transducers, was estimated assuming a Poiseuille flow in the capillary with a
circular cross-section. Under these assumptions, the velocity in the centre of capillary along
its axis follows as 9
vP =
2Q
,
πa2
(6)
with the inner radius of capillary a and the flow rate Q. Based on the minimal and maximal
flow rates in experiments, 100 µL min−1 and 900 µL min−1 , the velocity in the centre of the
capillary follows as 0.0170 m s−1 and 0.1528 m s−1 , respectively. The maximal and minimal
times for particle focusing resulting from these velocities follow as 1178 ms and 131 ms,
respectively.
References
(1) Grosso, V. A. D.; Mader, C. W. Speed of Sound in Pure Water. The Journal of the
Acoustical Society of America 1972, 52, 1442–1446.
(2) Selfridge, A. Approximate Material Properties in Isotropic Materials. IEEE Transactions
on Sonics and Ultrasonics 1985, 32, 381–394.
(3) MeggittFerroperm, Properties of Pz26. https://www.meggittferroperm.com accessed:
2021-05-21,
(4) Epotek, properties of H20E. https://www.epotek.com/ accessed: 2021-05-21,
(5) Muller, P. B.; Barnkob, R.; Jensen, M. J. H.; Bruus, H. A numerical study of microparticle acoustophoresis driven by acoustic radiation forces and streaming-induced drag
forces. Lab Chip 2012, 12, 4617–4627.
(6) Lighthill, J. Acoustic streaming. Journal of sound and vibration 1978, 61, 391–418.
9
(7) Baasch, T.; Pavlic, A.; Dual, J. Acoustic radiation force acting on a heavy particle in
a standing wave can be dominated by the acoustic microstreaming. Physical Review E
2019, 100, 061102.
(8) Gor’kov, L. On the forces acting on a small particle in an acoustical field in an ideal
fluid. Phys.-Dokl. 1962, 6, 773–775.
(9) Bruus, H. Theoretical microfluidics; Oxford university press Oxford, 2008; Vol. 18.
10