Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
INTRODUCTION
In biomedical implants, material architecture inuences the local tissue response. Materials with small
bers and small pore spacing may help to reduce or
eliminate the brous capsule that typically surrounds
implanted medical devices. Results from several studies suggest that ber diameters less than 15 m and
inter-ber or pore spacing less than 60 m are favorable.1 6 It is difcult, however, to fabricate bro-porous meshes with small ber diameters and spacing,
without inducing occulation (aggregation of bers).
Achieving consistent ber diameters can also be problematic.
Electrospinning is a manufacturing means for making nonwoven, small-diameter, bro-porous materials. It has been used for various applications including
Correspondence to: J.E. Sanders; e-mail: isanders@u.
washington.edu
Contract grant sponsor: National Science Foundation Engineering Research Center Program; contract grant number:
EEC-9529161
2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Considerable research has been conducted, investigating the electrospinning phenomenon. Mathematical models have been developed to examine the Taylor
cone formation,14 15,21 polymer jet emergence,14 16 asymptotic decay,22 stabilities,17,23,24 and bending14,24 of
the jet. The dependence of surface features such as
beading and porosity on polymer, polymer concentrations, and process variables is also well investigated,12,2529 These studies are useful toward better
understanding of how electrospinning is achieved and
the material surface characteristics are generated.
It is reasonably well accepted in the literature that
the main parameters affecting mesh architectural features of interest in biomedical applications, ber diameter and inter-ber spacing, are the applied voltage
and the polymer viscosity,17,20,23,25,30 33 Polymer viscosity is typically controlled by adjusting the temperature of the melt. For most polymers, viscosity and
temperature are inversely related,34 However, the
strong dependence of ber diameter and inter-ber
spacing on voltage and polymer viscosity (inversely
related to temperature) is not quantitatively well supported. Further, in the few quantitative studies published, there are inconsistencies as to how ber diameter and inter-ber spacing, and features related to
them, are affected by applied voltage and polymer
viscosity. Increasing the voltage has been shown to
increase jet diameter35 and to increase polymer ow
rate16,17 and bending instability30,32,36; the latter two
features are correlated with ber diameter. However,
in other investigations, increasing the voltage was
shown to decrease the jet diameter,10,16,21,30,37,38 decrease the ber diameter,10,25 and enhance the alignment of the bers.8 Furthermore, Noris et al.27 noted
that ber diameter was independent of polymer solution concentration (related to viscosity), whereas others indicated that concentration had a major inuence
on ber diameter.32,33,35,39
We expect that it is the lack of control and consistency of other electrospinning manufacturing parameters in previous reports that explain the inconsistencies in the results. Part of the difculty is that the
practice of grounding the collection surface to the
lower electrode does not allow the manufacturing features to be independently controlled. An electrospinning system with the collection surface independent of
the electrodes is needed to systematically determine
the inuence of manufacturing features. Features expected of relevance would be those that induce the
greatest change in the electric eld magnitude and
direction; these include distance between the electrodes, distance from the nozzle to the collection surface, collection surface dielectric strength, and collection surface area. An important purpose of this
research was to conduct a sensitivity analysis of ber
diameter and inter-ber spacing to applied voltage,
polymer temperature, and other manufacturing pa-
111
rameters. This information is potentially useful toward design efforts to engineer meshes of specic
architectures for particular applications and toward
the design of a feedback-controlled electrospinning
manufacturing system. It was of further interest to
establish possible consistencies in ber diameter and
inter-ber spacing, using a well-controlled electrospinning device.
To conduct such sensitivity analysis, rst, a system
that allows control over all of these manufacturing
parameters simultaneously was needed. Systems previously described in the literature typically allowed
for precise control of the applied voltage, with only
gross estimates of polymer feed rate, viscosity, collection distance, or other features. Further, to eliminate
the inuence of solvent evaporation on the results, a
system that spun from a polymer melt was necessary.
The objective of this research was threefold: (1) to
develop an electrospinning system that allowed
closed-loop control of the following parameters: distance between the electrodes, distance from the nozzle
to the collection surface, applied voltage, temperature
of the melt (inversely related to the viscosity), collection surface dielectric strength, and collection surface
area; (2) to conduct a sensitivity analysis of ber diameter and inter-ber spacing to these electrospinning
manufacturing parameters; (3) to determine the consistency in inter-ber diameter and ber spacing that
can be achieved with this controlled electrospinning
system.
112
Figure 1. Custom electrospinning system. The electrospinning device consists of the polymer chamber (a), electrodes (b,c),
enclosure (d), collection surface (e), and three-axis translation stage (f). [Color gure can be viewed in the online issue, which
is available at www.interscience.wiley.com.]
monitored using platinum resistance temperature transducers (RTD) (model 1PT100KN815, Omega, Stamford, CT) embedded in the bottom of the chamber. A pressure control
valve (IP413 020, Omega) and a vacuum control valve
(PV104 5V, Omega) were connected to ports on the top of
the chamber, and pressure and vacuum sensors (PX142
030D5V, PX141 015V5V, Omega) were located in the lines
between the control and chamber ports. Temperature, pressure, and vacuum were controlled via closed-loop controllers as described later. The grounded electrode was positioned within the polymer melt chamber, extending out
through an upper port. Though typically the positive electrode is positioned within the melt, this practice was not
followed here because of the risk of arcing to the RTDs. A
stainless steel nozzle with a length to diameter ratio of 4.516
was positioned on the bottom of the chamber, so that the
polymer emerging from the chamber entered the enclosure.
The polymer chamber was mounted directly on top of the
polycarbonate enclosure, via high-temperature thermoplastic mounting brackets. The mounting brackets were designed in such a way that only the nozzle was exposed to the
interior of the enclosure. Iris ports on each side prevented
airow from affecting the electrospinning process, yet allowed easy entry into the enclosure. When assembled, the
polymer chamber was sealed, except for the inlets for pressure and vacuum control and the nozzle.
The positive electrode was mounted to a Delrin carriage
within the enclosure. The carriage was connected to a
0.8-mm lead screw so that the electrode distance from the
nozzle could be easily adjusted. A high-voltage power supply (RP-50 100, Del, Valhalla, NY), connected between the
positive and ground electrodes, provided a controllable potential difference from 0 to 50 kV.
The collection surface was mounted to an x-y-z stage
(404150XR, Parker Daedal, Harrison City, PA) via a polycarbonate arm that protruded into the enclosure through a port
in the rear. An accordion boot formed a seal between the
arm and the enclosure. All components within the enclosure
were constructed from dielectrics, with the exception of the
nozzle and the positive electrode.
Controller
A Labview (National Instruments, Austin TX) virtual instrument (VI) was used to control the temperature, voltage,
Calibration
To calibrate the temperature transducers, the polymer
chamber was lled with water or olive oil, and then, heated
using the band heaters via digital control from the computer.
The temperature inside the chamber was monitored using a
mercury thermometer. Thermometer values and corresponding transducer voltages were recorded with a calibration VI, while the temperature was increased to 100 or to
250C (for water and olive oil, respectively) and then decreased to room temperature. These data were used to estimate the duty cycle for the closed-loop controller.
Controlled parameters
In this electrospinning system, there were three classes of
variables to consider: the device-specic variables, the polymer-specic variables, and the collection surface-specic
variables. The primary device-specic variables were the
applied voltage (V), distance from the electrode to the nozzle
(De), nozzle length (NI), and nozzle diameter (Nd) (note: the
nozzle is usually referred to as capillary in the electrospinning literature). A consistent NI:Nd ratio of 4.5, considered
optimal based on previous research,16 was used. The only
polymer-specic variable considered for melt spinning was
the polymer viscosity. Viscosity of the melted polymer was
dependent on the melt temperature (T), and since temperature was easily controlled in this system, temperature was
used as the parameter, instead of viscosity. The collection
surface-specic variables were dielectric strength (DS) and
surface area (SA).
A separate experiment was conducted to determine
whether the viscosity indeed decreased when melt temperature increased. Polymer of 5.75 g was placed in a nozzleshaped chamber of 2 mm diameter and 11.73 mm length.
The nozzle was heated in the thermal-controlled melt chamber described earlier and brought up to a specied temperature225, 234, or 243C over a 15-min interval. Polymer
was collected for a 5-min interval and then weighed. Viscosity was calculated as the ratio of the shear stress at the
nozzle wall to the apparent shear rate at the nozzle wall:
a
P R4
L 2Q
113
TABLE I
Analyzed Parameter Values
Parameter
De (mm)
(mm/mm)
V (kV)
T (C)
DS (kV)
SA (mm2)
Analyzed Values
130
0.39
25
225
1
6082
150
0.53
30
234
54
15,394
170
0.66
35
243
84
190
210
126
air bubbles. Three trials were conducted at each temperature. A test statistic of 0.05 was used to make comparisons
between groups.
Unique to this device, the distance between the collected
bers and the nozzle was independent of the electrode position. Thus, the device-specic parameter of collection surface distance from the nozzle (Ds) was also considered. This
parameter was normalized to De for consistent comparison
with values of De (Ds/De ). For analysis of the electrospinning parameters of electrode distance (De), ratio of collection surface distance to electrode distance (), applied
voltage (V), and temperature (T), polystyrene Petri dishes
(100 mm diameter; 15 mm depth) were used for the collection surface. To determine the effect of the collection surface
dielectric strength (DS), additional tests were conducted
using Teon, Pyrex, and additional polystyrene Petri
dishes (0.8 mm thickness and 1.75 mm thickness). More tests
using 150 mm 15 mm polystyrene Petri dishes were
conducted to analyze the effect of collection surface area
(SA) on the end product mesh. Table I summarizes the
experimental parameters and the ranges over which they
were varied and analyzed. For most of the parameters, these
values also represent the range over which the electrospun
jet was stable enough to collect bers. The upper and lower
bounds for , V, and T were determined by systematically
changing the parameter within a 170-mm electrode spacing
range until a consistent mesh could no longer be collected.
The upper and lower bounds for De were established using
the upper and lower bounds for and systematically changing the De until a consistent mesh could no longer be collected.
The interactions between variables were assessed. All parameters other than those under study were held constant
for each of these evaluations: The ratio was varied at three
levels within ve levels of De. V was varied at three levels
within three levels of and three levels of De. T was varied
at three levels within three levels of . The collection surface
dielectric strength was varied at four levels within three
levels of . The collection surface area was varied at two
levels within three levels of .
The mass ow rate (MFR) was measured for a subset of
the test parameters. The subsets were as follows: measurements were made at ve levels of De, three levels of V, three
levels of , and two levels of SA. Thus, a total of 75 interactions were evaluated.
Mesh collection
To conduct the analysis, meshes were manufactured from
thermoplastic polyurethane (Estane 58315, Noveon, Cleve-
114
land, OH) while each parameter was varied. For the analysis
of the device-specic parameters, to assure that the temperature of the melt was consistent throughout testing, the
following protocol was used for each test. Approximately
5 g of polymer was placed in the electrospinning melt chamber and heated until a slow steady ow emerged from an
1-mm nozzle at atmospheric pressure (15 min). Once the
ow was steady, the nozzle tip was cleaned. When a fresh
droplet formed on the tip, voltage was applied between the
polymer drop and the positive electrode, electrospinning a
continuous ber from the nozzle. The continuous ber was
collected on a surface (inverted Petri dish) that was positioned between the nozzle and the positive electrode. To
analyze the polymer-specic parameter (related to polymer
viscosity), electrospinning was conducted at different polymer temperatures.
To ensure a consistent thickness of the sample, during
electrospinning, the collection surface was translated in the
horizontal plane in concentric circles with diameter decreasing at a rate of 5 mm/s. Fiber collection began at the outer
edge of the surface, and then, the circle diameter was decreased in 2-mm increments until the center of the surface
was reached. Fiber collection was continued, when the surface returned to the original position, in concentric circles of
increasing diameter. Average sample thickness was 0.3 mm.
To determine the MFR, bers were collected for 300 s, and
then, the sample mass was measured. Care was taken such
that all bers were collected on the surface, throughout the
tests. The MFR was the sample mass divided by 300 s.
Mesh analysis
Since the focus of this research was to produce predictable
and repeatable scaffolds for biomaterial and tissue engineering applications, an appropriate method needed to be developed to analyze the end product mesh. The properties of
the mesh of interest were the ber diameter and inter-ber
spacing. Samples of each manufactured test mesh were
mounted on 14-mm OD, 12-mm ID Teon frames, using
Titebond polyurethane glue (Franklin International, Columbus, OH). Care was taken to prevent straining the sample during the mounting process. The samples were embedded in dyed OCT (Tissue-Tek, Sakura, CA) and ash frozen.
The OCT was dyed to enhance the contrast between the
translucent OCT and the translucent polymer bers so as to
simplify image processing. For each sample, 20 consecutive,
5-m thick sections were taken perpendicular to the horizontal plane of the sample and placed on glass slides for
light microscopy analysis. At least 16 images from the rst,
last, and two intermediate sections from each sample series
were taken. The images were digitized using Image Pro
Plus (Media Cybernetics, Silver Spring, MD) and then
analyzed using custom algorithms written with the Image
Processing Toolbox in Matlab (Mathworks, Natick, MA).
To assess ber diameter, a semi-automated method was
used. The digitized images were imported, converted to
grayscale, and thresholded such that only the ber crosssections remained in the image. Specs resulting from inconsistencies in the embedding medium were removed. To
determine the appropriate threshold level for each image,
algorithms in the Matlab image processing toolbox were
RESULTS
Calibration
The x-y-z stage has a resolution of 98 m, a repeatability of 1.3 m, a positional accuracy of 21 m, and
a straight-line accuracy of 6.75 m/100 mm on all
three axes. The system had the capability of 60 mm/s
velocity with a maximum acceleration of 20 m/s2.
Total range of motion was 400 mm on all axes.
The performance of the temperature controller was
dependent on the processing temperature for the polymer of interest. Four melt temperatures (180, 225, 234,
and 243C) were evaluated in calibration testing. The
time to peak temperature ranged from 180 to 420 s,
steady-state error ranged from 0.10 to 0.79C, and
percent overshoot was between 0.10% and 1.03%. The
average full-scale output (FSO) error was 0.22% for all
temperatures evaluated.
The pressure controller for a step input from 0.0 to
103.0 kPa had a steady-state error of 6.0 kPa, a time to
peak of 5 s, and a percent overshoot of 0.01%. The
average FSO error for pressure control was 0.41% for
all tests conducted.
Parameterization
ANOVAs performed on all data revealed that there
was a signicant (p 0.05) effect for all the test parameters with respect to ber diameter and inter-ber
spacing. In addition, there was no apparent combination of parameters that would reduce the number
needed for predicting the ber diameter and interber spacing features of the end product. Here, parameters are expressed normalized to their maximum
tested values. The range of testing within a parameter
was limited by the stability of the electrically spun jet.
For the distance between electrodes (De), broporous
meshes outside of the indicated parameter range (Table I) could not be collected. Fibroporous meshes
could not be collected at voltages (V) less than 25 kV.
Voltages above 35 kV resulted in highly unstable jets,
which could only be collected at De 170 and
0.39. For all combinations of De and V, meshes could
be collected only within the range for indicated in
Table I. Temperatures below 225C resulted in polymer melts that were too viscous to spin, whereas
temperatures above 243C overheated the polymer.
The collection surface values were limited by the
availability of acceptable Petri dishes for ber collection. Data presented here are for the parameter combination, within each test variable, that had the greatest inuence on the ber diameter and inter-ber
spacing.
Viscosity testing at controlled temperatures showed
that viscosity decreased with increased temperature.
Viscosities at 225, 234, and 243C averaged 678.3
(149.9), 136.2 (35.2), and 53.8 (4.5) cP, respectively. The viscosity at 225C was signicantly higher
than that at 234 or 243C; the viscosity at 234C was
signicantly higher than that at 243C (p 0.05).
Contrary to the data reported in the literature, increasing the temperature (T) (which decreased the
viscosity) caused an increase in ber diameter [Fig.
2(a,b)]. A concave curve related ber diameter to applied voltage. Both temperature and applied voltage
had less effect on ber diameter compared with the
features of the collection surface, that is, dielectric
strength and surface area. The dielectric strength (DS)
and surface area (SA) had opposing effects. The diameter increased with increasing dielectric strength,
whereas the diameter decreased with increasing surface area. Fiber diameter was nonlinearly related to
distance from the nozzle (De), a parameter previously
investigated for its inuence on ber diameter.10,15
Inter-ber spacing increased with increasing temperature, but was not strongly dependent on applied
voltage [Fig. 3(a,b)]. The surface area of the collection
surface had the most signicant effect of all parameters tested, decreasing with inter-ber spacing. The
collection surface dielectric strengths effect was to
increase inter-ber spacing. Both distance between the
electrodes and the ratio between electrode distance
and collection surface distance exhibited nonlinear
trends with respect to inter-ber spacing.
The complexity of the interdependence of parameters is exemplied in Figure 4. Holding the electrode
distance constant and varying the collection surface to
electrode distance ratio resulted in three different
trends for the dependence of ber diameter on applied
voltage. Only the high ratio ( 0.66) showed a
strong relationship. The other two ratios ( 0.53 and
0.39) had a concave curve and a convex curve, respectively.
The average percent change of ber diameter and
115
Figure 2. (a,b) Fiber diameter dependence on manufacturing parameters voltage (V), temperature (T), ratio of collection surface distance from nozzle to distance between the
electrodes (), surface area (SA), dielectric strength (DS), and
distance between the electrodes (De).
116
Figure 3. (a,b) Inter-ber spacing dependence on manufacturing parameters voltage (V), temperature (T), ratio of collection surface distance from nozzle to distance between the
electrodes (), surface area (SA), dielectric strength (DS), and
distance between the electrodes (De).
Figure 5. Relative inuence of the six test parameters. Features of the collection surface, surface area and dielectric
strength, had the greatest inuence on ber diameter and
inter-ber spacing.
and V but not for DS. The inter-ber spacing correlated poorly with MFR for all three test parameters.
117
oped. A sensitivity analysis was conducted to determine the role of each feature toward ber diameter
and inter-ber spacing, two features of primary interest for biomedical application of electrospun meshes.
Such a system has the potential to provide an insight
into why there are conicting results in the literature
concerning parameter inuence on mesh morphology.
The system also allowed the repeatability in ber diameter and inter-ber spacing, under closed-loop control, to be evaluated.
The repeatability for ber diameter and inter-ber
spacing achieved with this system is far better than
that reported for other electrospinning systems to
date.8,10,17,30,32,33,42 44 This result is a reection of the
well-controlled manufacturing system used. Further,
the result here, all test parameters having a signicant
effect on ber diameter and inter-ber spacing, points
to the importance of system control in this application.
A lack of thorough system control may help to explain
discrepancies in the literature concerning how manufacturing parameters affect scaffold architecture.
A total of 75 interactions among parameters were
investigated here, and thus, the parameter space was
well-studied. However, to more thoroughly characterize the dependence of specic parameter sets on ber
diameter and inter-ber spacing and to thus generate
more data points for Figures 2 4, and 6, additional
studies would need to be carried out.
Fiber diameter range and inter-ber spacing range
depend on the polymer selected, the viscosity control
method (melting) used, and the collection surface material. Different selections, for example Poly(l-lactide,
-caprolactone) with a solvent, allow for smaller ber
diameter ranges,45 more consistent with those reported to reduce brous encapsulation in vivo.3
Contrary to the literature,10,25 in this investigation,
the ber diameter increased when the applied voltage
was increased. This discrepancy is an expected reection of the closed system used here, as opposed to the
open systems described in previous research. The type
of system affects the relationship between applied
voltage and MFR. It is a general consensus among
researchers that increasing the applied voltage increases the force on the polymer, which in turn deforms the droplet of polymer and initiates ber spinning. It has also been reported that increasing the
TABLE II
Correlations of Fiber Diameter and Inter-Fiber Spacing
with Mass Flow Rate with All Parameters
Except One Held Constant
Parameter not Held
Constant
Fiber Diameter
Inter-Fiber
Spacing
DS
V
0.97
0.21
0.84
0.39
0.06
0.35
118
119
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
References
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
120
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
Russ JC, Dehoff RT. Practical Stereology, 2nd ed. New York:
Kluwer Academic; 2000. p 127.
Underwood EE. Quantitative Stereology. Reading: AddisonWesley; 1970. p 148 188.
Lee KH, Kim HY, Khil MS, Ra YM, Lee DR. Characterization of
nano-structured poly(epsilon-caprolactone) nonwoven mats
via electrospinning. Polymer 2003;44:12871294.
Buer A, Ugbolue SC, Warner SB. Electrospinning and properties of some nanobers. Text Res J 2001;71:323328.
Theron SA, Zussman E, Yarin AL. Experimental investigation
of the governing parameters in the electrospinning of polymer
solutions. Polymer 2004;45:20172030.
Mitchell SB. Electrospinning controlled architecture scaffolds
for tissue engineering and the effect of scaffold mechanical
properties on collagen synthesis in tissue engineered mitral
valves. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Washington, 2004.
Mo XM, Xu CY, Kotaki M, Ramakrishna S. Electrospun P(LLACL) nanober: A biomimetic extracellular matrix for smooth
muscle cell and endothelial cell proliferation. Biomaterials
2004;25:18831890.
Boland ED, Wnek GE, Simpson DG, Pawlowski KJ, Bowlin GL.
Tailoring tissue engineering scaffolds using electrostatic processing techniques: A study of poly(glycolic acid) electrospinning. J Macromol Sci Pure Appl Chem 2001;38A:12311243.