Hi Mike,

Many thanks for a very thoughtful and comprehensive email. I am sure
it is not only beneficial for the original poster but also for us -
the general MEMS researchers.

Greetings,
Nam

On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 2:58 AM, Mike Whitson  wrote:
> On Apr 29, 2009, at 22:17, Sheng Zhang wrote:
>
>> I think job market for microfluidics is very limited...unless you want
>> to go to academia as your career.
>
>
> Really?  I will admit that I haven't looked hard at that subfield and don't
> have the most up-to-date information, but I had been under the impression
> that microfluidics were looking very promising for commercial biotech,
> especially in applications such as micro-PCR, combinatoric analysis, and
> other "lab-on-chip" biochemical devices where the ability to perform many
> parallel reactions on tiny volumes of fluid would be a huge benefit in speed
> and cost.  (Not going to shill for companies here, but a quick google search
> for "commercial microfluidic" yields a pretty rich list of products.)
>
> Also note that microfluidics can overlap with inkjet technology, which is
> seeing quite the surge in areas such as 3-D printing and nonlithographic
> planar microfab.
>
> On the other hand, it's certainly possible I'm overlooking problems in
> scale-up and manufacturability of these systems; that's certainly a
> perennial "gotcha" in this field which can prevent a device making the
> transition from PhD thesis to commercial product.
>
> To the original poster:
>
>> I'm now puzzled at choosing my graduate field especially at microfluidics
>> and power MEMS. It will be very nice if anyone can give me some advise on
>> the following questions:
>>
>> 1) How do mechanical engineers' work differentiate from others, especially
>> those in materials, chemistry and bioengineering? I find most of the
>> distinguished work was done by the latter. If I choose microfuidics as my
>> future career, will I be making a wise choice?
>
>
> I think the answer to this question depends on "what do you do with your
> time in grad school?"  Also, realize that it's very hard to make general
> statements about grad studies at all universities; there's huge variation
> from school to school.
>
> Right now, MEMS is a very interdisciplinary field.  For example, at MIT, we
> have people doing MEMS work based in the electrical engineering, mechanical
> engineering, materials science, bioengineering, biology, and aero/astro
> engineering.  (Off the top of my head; I may be missing some!)  I can't
> speak for how other schools are organized, but most of the people who end up
> doing MEMS here end up doing quite a bit of "cross-training" - even people
> in the EE department will have to learn mechanics if they want to be able to
> competently design moving parts, for example!  So on one level, no matter
> which department you end up studying in, you should have the opportunity to
> do cross-disciplinary studies if you want to.  However, your department will
> influence the "focus" of your work.  Here at MIT, for example, the
> mechanicals tend to focus more on complex micro-machines (micro-turbine,
> micro-positioning stages, etc.); the electricals tend to focus on fields
> like power MEMS and optical MEMS, and so on... but that's only a tendency,
> not a rule.  More relevant is the focus of each professor - if an EE
> professor wants to work on micro-gear trains, and can get grant funding to
> do it, that's what will happen.
>
> So most importantly: Don't necessarily think in terms of "what department?",
> but rather "what professors do I want to work with?"  You may find that your
> interests are best matched in the mech-E department of school X, but in the
> bioengineering department of school Y.
>
> To a certain extent, it also depends on what kind of work you want to do.
>  You mention "distinguished" work, but what does that actually mean?  Work
> like the MIT micro-turbine, or Sandia's incredible MEMS gear chains, is
> quite distinguished in the engineering fields, and falls squarely into the
> category of "mechanical engineers working on MEMS".  In contrast, a larger
> portion of the work coming out of the materials and chemistry fields will be
> in the science of micro/nanofabrication - growth, deposition, and etch
> techniques, active materials, and improved processes and materials for
> electronic manufacturing.  You'll see those people publishing techniques for
> nanowire growth, self-assembly, all kinds of work on, say, carbon nanotubes
> - but not as much on complex device design and fabrication.
>
> So, do you want to be a scientist, focusing more on fundamentals, or an
> engineer, focusing more on applications?  Both choices have plenty of
> opportunities, and there is plenty of overlap between the two, but it's
> worth thinking about which you think is a better match for you.
>
> Also, understand that your PhD doesn't have to define you for the rest of
> your life.  People can and do change focuses after a PhD - postdoc work is a
> common time to do that.  Obviously, that change can be made easier if you
> did some relevant work in school (say, while working on that microfluidics
> PhD you also happened to collaborate on some silicon-MEMS projects), but
> even if not, a good publication history and demonstrated ability to produce
> results will go a long way.
>
> Finally, one last crazy thought - if you think you might be interested in
> microfluidics or power MEMS, why not look for a project that combines the
> two?  Just found this with a quick lit search, I'm sure there are more:
>
> "A microfluidic-electric package for power MEMS generators"
>
> http://www.mems.gatech.edu/msmawebsite_2006/publications/publication_list_file
s/2008/A%20Microfluidic-Electric%20Package%20for%20Power%20MEMS%20Generators.pdf
>
> Good luck!
>