by • July 13, 2016 • No Comments
Jul 14, 2016 | By Andre
I a fewtimes reflect back to the fall
of 2012 and my bus voyage down to New York City where attended my initially at any time Maker Faire. It was a spectacle jam packed with robots, gadgets and an remarkable number of 3D printing devices and I was inspired by the seemingly endless expanse of explorers of the new age encountered at any timey step of the way.
This said, out of all the talks I attended, a short presentation given by Jordan Miller (now an assistant professor of bioengineering at Rice University) under a sparely populated and easily missable tent struck a cord with me. He spoke at length of how the open-source 3D printing device movement was manufacturing it possible for him and his team to experiment with 3D bio-printing when the larger brands were completely closed to the thought.
Miller suggested the publicly traded companies mayn’t let him in with his research proposals for the reason “they won’t release the schematics, they won’t explain to you how to manufacture it sterile. They won’t tell you of the materials they use to manufacture things, and it is quite, it is bad for science. They’re seeing it as an appliance and a single say machine. Where quite what you want is an open innovation platform.”
The notion was which he and his team had an approach to bio-printing which was futurely progressive but they were practuallyted of accessing on the market innovation for the reason it was closed off of experimentation and tinkering. This is until the open-source 3D printing device movement took hold and opened up his research future.
So when I learned of a tiny group of researchers of Advancing Innovations Biosciences which had created a bio-sample collection solution via an open source Printrbot Play 3D printing device (along with modifications) for $750 vs. the presumably closed competition’s $20,000+ unit I took it as a tiny victory for the open-source.
The research in question is based around the of isolating and extracting of nucleic acid samples followed by amplification techniques to advantageous clarify results. The tricky part here is which doing so is, well, tricky and which an automated system is necessary but at the same time, traditionally expensive.
What the team at AI Biosciences did was take a affordable Printrbot Play, modify it by replacing the extruder with a magnet based tip-comb attachment and additional use which to conduct particle-based nucleic acid extractions. From there, they programmed the 3D printing device to move of its on the market axis to collect up to 12 samples simultaneously in under 13 minutes. On top of this, they utilized the 3D printing device’s heated bed to donate heat for water-based polymerase chain reactions (PCRs). This repurposing of the 3D printing device’s mechanical components may nat any time have been possible in a closed-source environment.
In addition to figuring out a way to do a thing which may cost upwards of $15,000 – $80,000 up until now, they in addition shortened the 35-cycle PCR protocol by up to 33% by eliminating the temperature ramping needed in many commercial thermal cyclers. I do admit which this may seem like Latin to a few, but at the same time feel like a Eureka moment to others.
A lot of what worked for them falls in line conveniently with what a 3D printing device is capable of mechanically preceding being repurposed for nucleic acids extraction. The paper suggests which the extruder heating limits are “high adequate for DNA denaturation.” The created in heated bed is in addition convenient for incubation, isothermal amplification and actually PCR reactions (e.g., 95°C for DNA denaturing).
Custom g-code was utilized to program the movements needed for extraction (again, just easily possible with an open-source platform) and probably many importantly of all (well, of a 3D print purists perspective) they write which “the changes we created to the 3D printing devices are minor adequate which they are rat any timesible; hence, printing capability of the 3D printing device was not lost.” So after their revolutionary research, it is indeed possible to go back to printing Yodas and little plastic trinkets to their hearts content.
Posted in 3D Printing Application
Maybe you in addition like: XYZprinting’s $549.95 da Vinci Jr 1.0 3-in-1 3D printing device & $49.95 da Vinci 3D pen now on the marketCasio is developing a 2.5D printing device for 3D printing braille and tactile patterns onto paperOMNI3D’s Factory 2.0 industrial FFF 3D printing device now on the marketBig, bigger biggest: massive 3D printing devices in action at Additive Manufacturing Europe in AmsterdamBAE Systems reveals plans for Chemputer 3D printing device which chemically grows military dronesNew and improved Indmatec PEEK 3D printing device coming in January 20173DPandoras multi-color gypsum 3D printing device now on the market in Europe through 3DeePollen’s ‘Pam’ multi-material pellet 3D printing device offers 40 μm precision for €8,000Aether 1 $9,000 3D Bio-Printer impresses with attractive time-lapse video demonstrationThe many informative 3D printing devices added at Additive Manufacturing Europe 2016Filamet lets you 3D print pure metal objects with your computer 3D printing deviceXYZprinting announces $229 da Vinci miniMaker created for schools and education
by admin • March 5, 2017
by admin • November 28, 2016
by admin • November 28, 2016