Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41470475›Full record

ArticleMicromachines2025

Wall Deformation and Minimum Thickness Analysis in Micro-Milled PMMA Microfluidic Devices: A Comparative Study of Milling Strategies.

Ferah Sucularlı, Ülke Şimşek

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Micromachines, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Ferah SucularlıASELSAN Inc., Radar Electronic Warfare Systems (REHİS), Ankara 06370, Türkiye.ORCID 0000-0002-1819-8540
Ülke ŞimşekRoketsan Missiles Industries Inc., Ankara 06780, Türkiye.ORCID 0000-0001-7733-076X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) is widely used in microfluidic device fabrication due to its chemical resistance, low cost, optical transparency, and manufacturing compatibility. However, limited research exists on wall deformations and the minimum achievable wall thickness between machined channels in PMMA via micro-milling. As microfluidic devices require tightly spaced features, identifying the minimum machinable wall thickness is essential for miniaturization and multifunctional integration, enabling rapid and reproducible biomedical testing. This study presents experimental data and finite element modeling on wall deformation characteristics-wall deviation angle, average wall thickness, and minimum machinable wall thickness-between micro-milled PMMA channels. Micro end-milling was performed with varying feed rates, wall thicknesses (50 μm, 100 μm, 150 μm), and milling strategies (direct, radial, axial depth). ANOVA was used to assess parameter influence, and finite element modeling simulated wall bending under the radial depth strategy. Results show that wall thickness, feed rate, and milling strategy significantly affect wall deviation and thickness. Experimental and simulation data revealed consistent trends: 50 μm walls showed cracking, base fractures, and geometric deviations, while 100 μm and 150 μm walls retained structural integrity. A minimum wall thickness of 150 μm is necessary to ensure reliable sealing in microfluidic devices.

Indexed as

average wall thicknessmicro-millingmilling strategyminimum wall thicknessPMMAwall deviation angle

Identifiers

PMID41470475
PMCPMC12734954

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.