Cross Reference to Related Applications This application claims the benefit of U. S.

Provisional Application No. 60/114,959, filed on January 5,1999, and U. S. Provisional Application No. 60/108,681, filed on November 16,1998.

Field of the Invention This disclosure relates to check valves, and more particularly, to check valves of the type having a deflectable membrane which is self-actuated when subject to forward fluid flow and closed when subject to a backward flow.

Background Check valves are passive devices that, by virtue of a deflectable element which functions as a diaphragm, open and close based on fluid flow direction, pressure and force therethrough. Such check valves are particularly useful in microfluidic systems, such as micro pumps, for directing fluid flow.

Ring mesas, cantilevers, and membranes fabricated from silicon, silicone, polyimide and metal have been used to form a deflectable valving element in check valves. In every micro-check-valve configuration, there is a valve seat and an orifice that is formed therein.

The valve seat is often made of potassium hydroxide (KOH)-etched trapezoidal structures on a silicon substrate. Many check valves use a two-piece bonded construction that requires greater packaging labor. A two-piece bonded construction, however, is characterized by higher withstand forward and backward fluid working pressures.

A micro check valve configuration must generally satisfy performance criteria established by the designer.

A number of criteria go into selecting and sizing a micro check valve. It is important to avoid excessive flow resistance which could lead to large pressure losses due to the micron-size property of the fluid directing orifice and the limited fluid passage property of the small gap between the deflectable valving element and the valve seat often.

In addition, the inherently small size of a micro valve attributes to stiction and surface tension effects between the valve seat and deflectable valving element.

Cracking pressure, the minimum pressure to open a check valve during forward fluid flow, is commonly used to gauge the stiction effect. A micro check valve should have low cracking pressure, low membrane-induced flow resistance, small reverse leakage and large operational reverse pressure characteristics. Ideally, a single chip construction is also preferable to enjoy the benefits of reduced packaging demands.

Summary The present disclosure describes a Parylene micro check valve and fabrication process therefore. The check valve includes a valve seat with a preferably roughened top surface to which a membrane cap is anchored by circumferentially-orientated twist-up tethers.

The micro check valve is found to exhibit low cracking pressure, high reverse pressure, low reverse flow leakage, and negligible membrane-induced flow resistance characteristics when used as a valve over a micro orifice through which flow liquid and gas fluids.

The invention takes advantage of BrF3 gas phase silicon etching and Parylene deposition to enable a low temperature fabrication process.

Brief Description of the Drawings These and other aspects will be described with reference to the drawings, in which: FIG. 1 shows a three-dimensional view of a micro check valve-in open and closed position-constructed with S-shaped twist-up tethers in accordance with the present disclosure; FIG. 2 shows a two-dimensional cross-sectional view of the micro check valve in FIG. 1; FIG. 3 shows the fabrication sequence of the micro check valve; FIG. 4 is provided to graphically explain fluid flow principles through a micro orifice; FIG. 5 shows a micro check valve construction with straight-arm tethers; FIG. 6 is a graph comparing membrane deflection properties between twist-up tether and straight-arm tether configurations; FIG. 7 is a graph of water flow characteristics in a valve with a 150 micron orifice; FIG. 8 is a graph of water flow characteristics in a valve with a 370 micron orifice; FIG. 9 is a further graph of nitrogen flow characteristics in a valve with a 150 micron orifice; and FIG. 10 is a yet further graph of nitrogen flow characteristics in a valve with a 370 micron orifice.

Description of the Preferred Embodiments Schematic illustrations and top view of a fabricated micro check valve 10 in accordance with a preferred embodiment is shown in Figs. 1 and 2. The micro check valve 10 includes a bulk micromachined valve seat 15, preferably a silicon support substrate, to which a deflectable Parylene membrane 17 is anchored. The deflectable membrane 17 includes a membrane cap 20 formed integral with S-shaped Parylene twist-up tethers 25 that self-align with respect to an orifice 30 formed in the valve seat 15.

While the illustrative embodiment is shown with four (4) circumferentially-orientated twist-up tethers, a fewer or greater number of tethers orientated in a number of different ways are also contemplated.

Under forward flow (valve open), the membrane cap 20 and twist-up tethers 25 rotate and twist up. Similarly, under reverse flow, the deflectable membrane 17 collapses, with the membrane cap sealing the orifice 30 and closing the valve.

The vertical displacement of the membrane cap 20 is a function of the length and shape of the tethers 25.

Because Parylene has a very low Young's modulus (-2.8 GPa) and the thickness of the S-shaped twist-up tethers 25 is on the order of microns, the twist-up tethers 25 exert a very small resistance to the lift of the membrane cap 20. The twist-up tethers 25 provide negligible resistance to vertical displacement in response to fluid flow through the orifice 30 exerted against the membrane cap 20.

Micro check valve 10 exhibits low cracking pressure, high reverse pressure, low reverse flow leakage, and negligible membrane-induced flow resistance. The robustness of a tethered micro check valve coupled with the simple to manufacture, single-chip construction, makes this valve device very desirable and economical to manufacture.

DEVICE FABRICATION The fabrication process of a polymer-based micro check valve 10 is shown in FIGs. 3A-3F.

Initially, a 1.5-pm thick silicon dioxide layer 50 is thermally grown on both surfaces 51,52 of a support substrate 55, preferably a silicon wafer, at 1,050°C. The silicon dioxide layer 50 on the bottom surface 51 of the wafer is patterned and etched by buffered hydrofluoric acid (BHF) to expose the silicon substrate (FIG. 3A).

During this etching process, the opposite (top) surface 52 of the wafer is protected by a photoresist. The wafer is then immersed into potassium hydroxide (KOH). The KOH etches the top surface 52 until about a 20-pm thick membrane of silicon is left. Any residual silicon dioxide is removed from the top surface using BHF, followed by a 3-minute bromine trifluoride (BrF3) gas phase etching to roughen the silicon substrate top surface 52. The roughened surface 56 is shown in FIG. 3B.

The wafer is then immersed into the 0.5% A-174 adhesion promoter for 20 minutes followed by a 15 to 30 second alcohol rinse. A 2-micron thick layer of a polymer material 58, preferably Parylene-C ("Parylene"), is deposited on only the top surface 52 of the wafer to form a first Parylene layer 58. The first Parylene layer 58 is then patterned using an oxygen plasma.

A 5-m thick sacrificial photoresist (AZ4400) layer 59 is then spun and patterned over an exposed portion of roughened surface 56 and portions of the patterned first Parylene layer 58 (FIG. 3C). The wafer is then hard baked at 120°C for 20 minutes to form smooth photoresist edges 60. The top of the wafer is then again etched in oxygen plasma (briefly) to clean and roughen the first Parylene layer 58 and photoresist layer 59 top surfaces.

Once roughened, a second polymer layer 65 (also preferably a Parylene polymer layer) with a thickness of more than 2pm is deposited over the top as shown in FIG.

3D. This is followed by a 0.1 m thick layer of aluminum (Al) 70 formed by evaporation. The Al layer 70 is patterned and used as a mask to etch the second Parylene layer 65 with oxygen plasma (FIG. 3E).

The silicon wafer is partially etched away at center portion 74, from underneath, using BrF3 This exposes the sacrificial photoresist layer 59 and defines orifice 30.

The wafer, which might include a plural number of micro check valves 10 fabricated all at the same time, is then diced. Photoresist etching in acetone (at room temperature) is then performed, followed by an alcohol and DI water rinse to remove any residual photoresist material (FIG. 3F). Upon completion, a micro check valve 10 as shown in FIG. 1 is thus formed.

The etching of the second Parylene layer is such as to form the S-shaped twist-up tethers 25 in such manner so they lay flat on the underlying roughened surface 56 of the support substrate when the valve is in the closed position, as shown in FIG. 1. The silicon support substrate constitutes the valve seat 15 of the micro check valve 10. The center portion 80 of the patterned second Parylene layer 65 constitutes the twist-up membrane cap 20 and rests, in a vertically displaceable manner, over the orifice 30.

Gas phase BrF3 etching, used to roughen the surface 56, is found to significantly reduce stiction and surface tension in the valve by minimizing the contact area between mating surfaces. The roughened surface 56 also enhances adhesion of the Parylene anchors constituted by twist-up tethers 25. Exposure to gas phase BrF3 under 1 Torr at room temperature generates 2 jum of roughness on a polished silicon surface.

For forward valve fluid-flow, the robustness of the tether anchors 25 determine the maximum pressure the check valve may withstand. This robustness is greatly improved: (i) by the roughening of the substrate surface; (ii) by the depositing of a first Parylene layer which is patterned after applying A-174 adhesion promoter to the substrate surface 56 (this step is necessary because the A-174 adhesion promoter dissolves the photoresist sacrificial layer if used afterwards); and (iii) by reflowing and hard baking the sacrificial photoresist layer to smooth the photoresist edges 60.

ANALYSIS OF ORIFICE FLOW This section addresses the analysis of liquid and gas flows through the micro valve 10. Such analysis is important for fundamental understanding of valve operations generally, and is important for optimizing the micro check valve design for a specific application.

The flow across an orifice in the absence of the membrane cap, as illustrated in Fig. 4, is first considered. Due to a pressure difference, a jet discharges from a reservoir (with pressure po) through an orifice (with area A) into the atmosphere (with pressure Palm). Upon exiting the orifice the jet first contracts to a minimum region (called the vena contracta), achieving a velocity ve. The jet then expands downstream. The area vena contracta is A, =OA, where <1 is a contraction coefficient and A is the area of the orifice.

For an incompressible fluid such as water, v, =2Aplp, where Ap=po-p,""and p is the fluid density. Here, we assume that =061, which holds for a slit orifice. Then, the volume flow rate can be calculated from Q=v"Ae (1) For a compressible fluid, the assumption of an isentropic flow leads to, where To is the absolute temperature in the reservoir, p is the fluid pressure at the vena contracta, R is the gas constant, and yis the ratio of the constant-pressure to constant-volume specific heats of the gas. The fluid density at the vena contracta is =(.)'(3) where po = polRTo is the gas density in the reservoir. To estimate the contraction coefficient, the following formula can be used, "4 7r+2 (p, lp.)'I' Although this expression only holds for a slit orifice, it yields a reasonable estimation in the case of a circular orifice. Finally, the mass flow rate is given by p, can next be determined from the following. It can be shown that pc = patm when patm / p0> > #* = (2/(γ+1))γ/(γ-1), and pc = #*p0 when patm / p0> # #*. The phenomenon in the latter case is called choking, where the jet velocity reaches the speed of sound (i. e., the Mach number equals unity), and the mass flow rate becomes linear with the absolute reservoir pressure.

In the presence of the membrane cap, the above analysis ceases to hold, unless the displacement of the cap from the orifice is sufficiently large. In this case the ambient pressure will still equal the atmospheric pressure, and the bare-orifice analysis may be used.

Testing shows that a tethered membrane cap introduces negligible flow resistance, and the preceding equations can be used to fit the experimental data. This will be demonstrated in the next section.

PERFORMANCE CHARACTERIZATION Tests were carried out to characterize structural rigidity and valve robustness of the micro check valve 10. The first test involved investigation of cracking pressure for the valve. Theoretically, the cracking pressure is a threshold value such that any applied pressure difference that is greater than this value will generate a flow rate. In practice, measured cracking pressures generally differ because of variations in measurement instrument sensitivities.

For the illustrative-embodiment micro check valve, a nitrogen flow is detected at a pressure reading of 0.5 kPa, which is also the sensitivity of the pressure measurement. It follows that the cracking pressure is less than 0.5 kPa for gases. However, when wetted prior to the testing, the valve was found to have a cracking pressure of 1 kPa (0.5 kPa). In a comparison with a smooth valve seat, a cracking pressure higher than 620 kPa was indicated. It can hence be concluded that the roughened top surface of the valve seat drastically reduces stiction and surface tension effects, and consequently lowers the cracking pressure.

A test was also performed to evaluate high reverse pressure and low reverse leakage characteristics realized with a tether valve configuration. For orifice sizes up to 370x370 Hm2 and a membrane thickness of 8 m, the valve was found to withstand 600 kPa of reverse pressure without any structural damage. The valve showed very low leakage under such reverse flow conditions. For valve orifice sizes in the range of 60x60 pm2 to 980x980 pm2, no leakage of nitrogen was detected, using a flow meter with a resolution of 0.2 ml/min, under reverse pressure up to 100 kPa.

Tests were also performed to measure membrane deflection and its implication on membrane-induced flow resistance. The membrane cap under test was anchored by four twist-up tethers (arms) as shown in the illustrative embodiment of FIG. 1. Results were compared to an experimental valve configuration comprised of a membrane cap anchored by three (3) straight arms 90, as shown in FIG. 5. The load deflection data of the two valves is shown in Fig. 6. It can be seen that deflection of the twist-up membrane is roughly four times as large as that of the straight-arm anchored membrane. Thus the twist-up tether design is advantageous because large membrane deflections generally allow a larger flow rate for a given pressure difference. This is further demonstrated by the following testing data.

The measured flow rate is plotted as a function of applied pressure difference for water flow (FIGs. 7 and 8) and nitrogen flow (FIGs. 9 and 10). Two orifice sizes were investigated: 150x150 m (FIGs. 7 and 9) and 370x370 Fm2 (FIGs. 8 and 10). Measurements are performed on a bare orifice (plotted in squares), as well as on an orifice with a twist-up tethered membrane (plotted with diamonds). It can be seen that for a given pressure difference, there is no appreciable difference in the flow rate with or without the membrane. In other words, the membrane induced no significant resistance compared with that caused by the orifice itself for both water and nitrogen flows. As mentioned in the analysis section, this phenomenon is due to the fact that the membrane is deflected a sufficient distance away from the valve seat such that the pressure at the orifice exit remains close to the atmospheric pressure. In the valve design of FIG.

5 having a straight-arm tethered membrane, the flow rate in the presence of the membrane, as shown with triangles in Fig. 7, is considerably smaller than the bare orifice data. From this can be deduced that the relatively large stiffness of the straight-arm tethers resulted in significant flow resistance by the membrane. We also conclude that the check valve with a twist-up membrane can be treated the same as the bare orifice in analytical analysis.

The fluid flow models presented in the analysis section are examined here with respect to the experimental data. In Figs. 7-10 are the theoretical predictions of flow characteristics (solid curves).

Compared with experimental results, it can be seen that the models correctly predict the trend of flow characteristics. Quantitatively, the models give a flow rate that is smaller than actually measured (off by 20- 30%).

Although only a few embodiments have been described in detail above, those having ordinary skill in the art will certainly understand that many modifications are possible in the preferred embodiment without departing from the teachings thereof.

All such modifications are intended to be encompassed within the following claims.