Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Reliability Testing of 3D-Printed Electromechanical Scanning Devices

  • Published:
Journal of Electronic Testing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Recent advances in the field of stereolithography based manufacturing, have led to a number of 3D-printed sensor and actuator devices, as a cost-effective and low fabrication complexity alternative to micro-electro-mechanical counterparts. Yet the reliability of such 3D-printed dynamic structures have yet to be explored. Here we perform reliability tests and analysis of a selected 3D-printed actuator, namely an electromechanical scanner. The scanner is targeted towards scanning incoming light onto the target, which is particularly useful for barcoding, display, and opto-medical tissue imaging applications. We monitor the deviations in the fundamental mechanical resonance, scan-line, and the quality factor on a number of scanners having different device thicknesses, for a total duration of 5 days (corresponding to 20–80 million cycles, depending on the device operating frequency). A total of 9 scanning devices, having 10 mm × 10 mm die size were tested, with a highlight on device-device variability, as well as the effect of device thickness itself. An average standard deviation of < ~%10 (with respect to the mean) was observed for all tested parameters among scanners of the same type (an indicator device to device variability), while an average standard deviation of less than about 10 percent (with respect to the mean) was observed for all parameters for the duration of the entire test (as an indicator of device reliability), for a total optical scan angle of 5 degrees.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Connally JA, Brown SB (1992) Slow crack growth in single-crystal silicon. Science 256(5063):1537–1539

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Heinrich SM, Boudjiet MT, Thuau D, Poulin P, Ayela C, Dufour I (2014) Development of analytical models of T- and U-shaped cantilever-based MEMS devices for sensing and energy harvesting applications. In: IEEE SENSORS 2014 Proceedings pp. 1648–1651

  3. Hod Lipson MK (2013) Fabricated the new world of 3D printing. John Wiley & Sons, Inc,1st Ed, no 1, pp 1–5

  4. Holmström STS, Baran U, Urey H (2014) MEMS laser scanners: a review. J Microelectromech Syst 23(2):259–275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Hoy CL, Durr NJ, Ben-Yakar A (2011) Fast-updating and nonrepeating Lissajous image reconstruction method for capturing increased dynamic information. Appl Opt 50(16):2376–2382

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Huang Y, Sai Sarathi Vasan A, Doraiswami R, Osterman M, Pecht M (2012) MEMS reliability review. IEEE Trans Device Mater Reliab 12(2):482–493

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Ishiguro Y, Poupyrev I (2014) 3D printed interactive speakers. Proc 32nd Annu ACM Conf Hum factors Comput Syst - CHI ‘14, pp. 1733–1742

  8. Lulec SZ, Sagiroglu C, Mostafazadeh A, Ermek E, Timurdogan E, Leblebici Y, and Urey H (2012) Simultaneous self-sustained actuation and parallel readout with MEMS cantilever sensor array. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Int Conf Micro Electro Mech Syst (MEMS) pp. 644–647

  9. MacDonald E, Wicker R (2016) Multiprocess 3D printing for increasing component functionality. Science 353(6307):aaf2093

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Peele BN, Wallin TJ, Zhao H, Shepherd RF (2015) 3D printing antagonistic systems of artificial muscle using projection stereolithography. Bioinspir Biomim 10(5):55003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Qiu Z and Piyawattanametha W (2015) MEMS-based medical Endomicroscopes. IEEE J Sel Top Quantum Electron 21(4)

  12. Sakai M, Tabata O (2007) Reliability of MEMS testing of materials and devices

  13. Savas J, Khayatzadeh R, Civitci F, Gokdel YD, Ferhanoglu O (2018) Towards fully 3D-printed miniaturized confocal imager. Opt Eng 57(4):41402

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Senturia SD (2001) Microsyst Design 49(0)

  15. Shemelya C, Cedillos F, Aguilera E, Maestas E, Ramos J, Espalin D, Muse D, Wicker R, MacDonald E (2013) 3D printed capacitive sensors. In: IEEE SENSORS 2013 - proceedings

  16. Stratasys (2014) “PolyJet Materials Data Sheet.” [Online]. Available: http://usglobalimages.stratasys.com/

  17. Urey H, Holmstrom S, Yalcinkaya AD (2008) Electromagnetically actuated FR4 scanners. IEEE Photon Technol Lett 20(1):30–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Willis K, Brockmeyer E, Hudson S, Poupyrev I (2012) Printed optics: 3D printing of embedded optical elements for interactive devices. Proc 25th Annu ACM Symp User interface Softw Technol - UIST ‘12, pp. 589–598

  19. Wu S-Y, Yang C, Hsu W, Lin L (2015) 3D-printed microelectronics for integrated circuitry and passive wireless sensors. Microsyst Nanoeng 1:15013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Yelten MB, Franzon PD, Steer MB (2011) Surrogate-model-based analysis of analog circuits -part I: variability analysis. IEEE Trans Device Mater Reliab 11(3):458–465

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Young WC, Budynas RG Roark’s formulas for stress and strain. Library (Lond) 7:2002, 832 no 7th Edition

Download references

Acknowledgment

The authors would like to thank Ahmet Turan Talas from Boğaziçi University Life Sciences Center for his support in manufacturing all 3D printed parts.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Electronics and Communication Eng, Istanbul Technical University, Maslak, 34469, Istanbul, Turkey

    B. Mert Gönültaş, Janset Savaş, Ramin Khayatzadeh, Sacid Aygün, Fehmi Çivitci, M. Berke Yelten & Onur Ferhanoğlu

  2. Electrical and Electronics Eng, Istanbul Bilgi University, Eyüp, 34060, Istanbul, Turkey

    Janset Savaş & Y. Dağhan Gökdel

  3. Knight Cancer Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, 2730 SW Moody Ave, Portland, OR, 97201, USA

    Fehmi Çivitci

Authors
  1. B. Mert Gönültaş
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Janset Savaş
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ramin Khayatzadeh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sacid Aygün
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  5. Fehmi Çivitci
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  6. Y. Dağhan Gökdel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  7. M. Berke Yelten
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  8. Onur Ferhanoğlu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Onur Ferhanoğlu.

Additional information

Responsible Editor: M. Barragan and K. Huang

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mert Gönültaş, B., Savaş, J., Khayatzadeh, R. et al. Reliability Testing of 3D-Printed Electromechanical Scanning Devices. J Electron Test 34, 363–370 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10836-018-5722-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10836-018-5722-0

Keywords