Surface Quality of Incoming Nitinol Wire Used to Manufacture Braided · PDF file ·...

1

Carolyn Lahti, R&D Materials Engineer

Surface Quality of Incoming Nitinol Wire Used to Manufacture Braided Implants

2

Carolyn Lahti, R&D Metallurgical Engineer at Boston Scientific Materials Testing, Analysis, and Characterization (MTAC)

B.S. in Materials Science and Engineering Michigan Technological University

MTAC •  In-house service lab •  Analyze a wide variety of products

–  Interventional Cardiology –  Peripheral Interventions

3

Nitinol Manufacturing Process

The Methods of Preparation of Ti-Ni-X Alloys and Their Forming Radim Kocich, Ivo Szurman and Miroslav Kursa (http://cdn.intechopen.com/pdfs-wm/44019.pdf)

Surface finishing: chemical etch,

EP, passivation, coating

Sent to customer

Supplier surface finishing techniques: •  Mechanical finish

•  Diamond draw (shiny polish) •  Sandblast (matte surface)

•  Chemical finish •  Etch/pickle •  Electropolish (EP)

•  Oxide surface •  Coating •  Plating

4

Importance of Surface Quality Surface quality influences performance

From Noll and Lipson, "Allowable Working Stresses", Society for Experimental Stress Analysis, Vol. III, no. 2, 1949

http://www.andersonmaterials.com/medical-devices.html

http://www.snipview.com/q/Dimensional_instruments http://sme.org/MEMagazine/Article.aspx?id=49609&taxid=1418!

Compromising factors

5

Goal of Study

Analyze the surface quality of incoming wire and EP material of nitinol wire •  Characterize and optimize EP

http://www.imaging-git.com/products/3d-laser-confocal-microscope-simplifies-surface-analysis

http://www.witec.de/products/raman/rise-raman-imaging-scanning-electron-microscopy/

6

Surface Roughness Measurements

Ra: arithmetic average of absolute surface roughness values Rp: maximum peak height Rv: maximum valley depth Rz: average distance between the highest peak and lowest valley in each sampling length

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/39/Mechanical_filtering_of_surface_finish_trace.svg

http://www.wisetool.com/surfacefinish.htm

Rz Rv

Rp

Ra

http://www.olympus-ims.com/en/metrology/ols4000/

7

Experimental Setup

Mechanical Finish

Chemical Etch Finish

Proprietary Finish

Supplier A Supplier C Supplier B

1

3 4

2

5

High purity nitinol wire

Nitinol wire

356 micron wire

25 micron material removal (radial)

50 micron material removal (radial)

8

SEM Images – Incoming Material

Mechanical Finish

Chemical Etch Finish

Proprietary Finish

Supplier A Supplier C Supplier B

356 micron wire

25 micron material removal (radial)

50 micron material removal (radial)

9

Material         Incoming  Surface  Condi4on   Observa4ons   Peak    

Rp  (μm)        Valley  Rv  (μm)        

Range  Rz  (μm)        

Mean  Ra  (μm)            

1   Mechanically  polished       Heavy  surface  scratching   11.89   8.70   20.59   2.16  

2   Mechanically  polished   Mostly  smooth   2.89   3.56   6.46   0.15  

3   Chemically  etched   Smooth  with  small  draw  lines   10.83   11.97   22.79   1.65  

4   Chemically  etched   Smooth  with  small  defects     8.57   10.08   18.65   1.59  

5   Proprietary  finish     Smooth  with  small  draw  lines   4.63   4.32   8.95   0.97  

Peak    (Rp)      

Valley    (Rp)  

Range    (Rz)    

Mean    (Ra)  

Surface Roughness – Incoming Material

10

SEM Images – 25 µm Material Removal

Mechanical Finish

Chemical Etch Finish

Proprietary Finish

Supplier A Supplier C Supplier B

356 micron wire

25 micron material removal (radial)

50 micron material removal (radial)

11

Surface Roughness – 25 µm Material Removal

Material         Incoming  Surface  Condi4on  

Incoming  Material  Observa4ons  

Peak    Rp  (μm)        

Valley  Rv  (μm)        

Range  Rz  (μm)        

Mean  Ra  (μm)            

1   Mechanically  polished       Heavy  surface  scratching  

2   Mechanically  polished   Mostly  smooth   0.60   0.54   1.15   0.24  

3   Chemically  etched   Smooth  with  small  draw  lines   0.54   0.46   1.01   0.17  

4   Chemically  etched   Smooth  with  small  defects     1.98   2.47   4.45   0.29  

5   Proprietary  finish     Smooth  with  small  draw  lines   0.73   0.53   1.27   0.20  

Peak    (Rp)      

Valley    (Rp)  

Range    (Rz)    

Mean    (Ra)  

12

SEM Images – 50 µm Material Removal

Mechanical Finish

Chemical Etch Finish

Proprietary Finish

Supplier A Supplier C Supplier B

356 micron wire

25 micron material removal (radial)

50 micron material removal (radial)

13

Surface Roughness – 50 µm Material Removal

Material         Incoming  Surface  Condi4on  

Incoming  Material  Observa4ons  

Peak    Rp  (μm)        

Valley  Rv  (μm)        

Range  Rz  (μm)        

Mean  Ra  (μm)            

1   Mechanically  polished       Heavy  surface  scratching   3.27   3.37   6.64   0.92  

2   Mechanically  polished   Mostly  smooth   1.10   0.88   1.98   0.26  

3   Chemically  etched   Smooth  with  small  draw  lines   0.69   1.12   1.81   0.21  

4   Chemically  etched   Smooth  with  small  defects     2.65   3.28   5.93   0.28  

5   Proprietary  finish     Smooth  with  small  draw  lines   2.45   1.70   4.15   0.21  

Peak    (Rp)      

Valley    (Rp)  

Range    (Rz)    

Mean    (Ra)  

14

Max Peak to Valley Distance

15

Mean Surface Roughness

16

Summary

•  Quantification of surface finish variation throughout a collection of suppliers was assessed via SEM and roughness measurements

•  Large variation in incoming surface quality observed across the different suppliers and incoming surface finishes

•  The same electropolishing process works for a broad range of nitinol materials and results in a smoother surface

•  Overall, incoming condition was less critical to the final EP condition •  However, incoming condition may be important to processing wire prior to

EP (i.e. winding wire over fixtures) •  Smoother surfaces from suppliers may allow for a reduction in material

removed during EP