Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 159

Springer Theses

Recognizing Outstanding Ph.D. Research

Mehdi Moayyedian

Intelligent
Optimization of
Mold Design and
Process Parameters
in Injection Molding
Springer Theses

Recognizing Outstanding Ph.D. Research


Aims and Scope

The series “Springer Theses” brings together a selection of the very best Ph.D.
theses from around the world and across the physical sciences. Nominated and
endorsed by two recognized specialists, each published volume has been selected
for its scientific excellence and the high impact of its contents for the pertinent field
of research. For greater accessibility to non-specialists, the published versions
include an extended introduction, as well as a foreword by the student’s supervisor
explaining the special relevance of the work for the field. As a whole, the series will
provide a valuable resource both for newcomers to the research fields described,
and for other scientists seeking detailed background information on special
questions. Finally, it provides an accredited documentation of the valuable
contributions made by today’s younger generation of scientists.

Theses are accepted into the series by invited nomination only


and must fulfill all of the following criteria
• They must be written in good English.
• The topic should fall within the confines of Chemistry, Physics, Earth Sciences,
Engineering and related interdisciplinary fields such as Materials, Nanoscience,
Chemical Engineering, Complex Systems and Biophysics.
• The work reported in the thesis must represent a significant scientific advance.
• If the thesis includes previously published material, permission to reproduce this
must be gained from the respective copyright holder.
• They must have been examined and passed during the 12 months prior to
nomination.
• Each thesis should include a foreword by the supervisor outlining the signifi-
cance of its content.
• The theses should have a clearly defined structure including an introduction
accessible to scientists not expert in that particular field.

More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/8790


Mehdi Moayyedian

Intelligent Optimization
of Mold Design and Process
Parameters in Injection
Molding
Doctoral Thesis accepted by
University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia

123
Author Supervisor
Dr. Mehdi Moayyedian Prof. Kazem Abhary
School of Engineering School of Engineering
University of South Australia University of South Australia
Adelaide, SA, Australia Adelaide, SA, Australia

ISSN 2190-5053 ISSN 2190-5061 (electronic)


Springer Theses
ISBN 978-3-030-03355-2 ISBN 978-3-030-03356-9 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03356-9

Library of Congress Control Number: 2018960202

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019


This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part
of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations,
recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission
or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar
methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from
the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this
book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the
authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or
for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to
jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
I specially dedicate this thesis to my family
who have supported me throughout the entire
doctorate program
Supervisor’s Foreword

Among different technologies in the manufacturing of plastic products, injection


molding is the most significant technology which covers most of the industrial
applications. The main factors used to evaluate the quality of injected parts are part
design, material characteristics, mold design, and process parameters. Hence,
reliable design and optimization of injection molding process are essential.
Part design heavily depends on the customer requirements for which more than
17,000 plastic materials are used throughout the world; hence, part design and
material characteristics are not considered herein. Therefore, it is desirable to find
the effect of mold design and process parameters on injection molding to improve
the quality of injected parts leading to the reduction of scrap rate.
Dr. Mehdi Moayyedian’s thesis was mainly dedicated to understanding the
interrelationship of process parameters, mold design, and fabricated plastic parts
integrity during injection molding. Such knowledge can be used as the basis of
ways to improve the quality of injected parts. He designed some new runner and
gate geometries of different dimensions and employed predictive tools to study the
defects formation during injection molding. The possibility of the formation of a
range of molding defects including warpage, weld line, and short shot along with
moldability index was studied. He further attempted to identify the most influential
process parameters and mold design geometries on the integrity of fabricated plastic
parts by using a combination of simulation modeling tools and methods namely
SolidWorks, SolidWorks Plastic, Taguchi method, finite element analysis (FEM),
fuzzy logic method, analysis of variance (ANOVA), analytic hierarchy process
(AHP), Technique for Order Performance by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS),
fuzzy AHP (FAHP), and fuzzy TOPSIS (FTOPSIS). A strength of his work is the
application of these tools and methods in the last two chapters to solve a
multi-objective problem to determine the higher and highest moldability index by
considering three different common defects and five different geometric and process
parameters of three different levels.

vii
viii Supervisor’s Foreword

Dr. Moayyedian has demonstrated that he has gained significant knowledge and
experience in applying these tools in this research and demonstrated very good
agreements between (finite element) modeling and experimental results which
validated the robustness of his assumptions, methodology, and algorithm.

Adelaide, Australia Prof. Kazem Abhary


July 2018
Parts of this thesis have been published in the following articles

Journal papers
1. Moayyedian, M., Abhary, K. and Marian, R., Gate design and filling process
analysis of the cavity in injection molding process. Advances in Manufacturing,
pp. 1–11.
2. Moayyedian, M., Abhary, K. and Marian, R., Elliptical cross sectional shape of
runner system in injection mold design. International Journal of Plastics
Technology, pp. 1–16.
3. Moayyedian, M., Abhary, K. & Marian, R., 2017, ‘The analysis of short shot
possibility in injection molding’, International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing
Technology, pp. 1–13.
4. Moayyedian, M., Abhary, K. & Marian, R., 2016, ‘The Analysis of Defect
Prediction in Injection Molding’, International Journal of Mechanical, Aerospace,
Industrial, Mechatronic and Manufacturing Engineering, pp. 1819–1822.

Peer-reviewed conference papers


1. Moayyedian, M., Abhary, K. and Marian, R., 2015. Improved gate system for
scrap reduction in injection molding processes. Procedia Manufacturing, 2,
pp. 246–250.
2. Moayyedian, M., Abhary, K. and Marian, R., 2015. New Design Feature of
Mould in Injection Molding for Scrap Reduction. Procedia Manufacturing, 2,
pp. 241–245.

ix
Declaration

I hereby declare that this Ph.D. thesis entitled “The effect and intelligent opti-
mization of mold design and process parameters in injection molding” was carried
out by me for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy under the guidance and super-
vision of Prof. Kazem Abhary and Dr. Romeo Marian, School of Engineering,
University of South Australia. This thesis contains no material that has been sub-
mitted previously in whole or in part, for a degree or diploma in any university.
Except where otherwise indicated, this thesis is my own work.

Adelaide, Australia Mehdi Moayyedian


May 2017

xi
Acknowledgements

I would like to express my special appreciation and thanks to my supervisor


Prof. Kazem Abhary and my co-supervisor Dr. Romeo Marian, who have been
great and wonderful mentors for me. I would like to thank them for their priceless
advice and support and for allowing me to grow as a researcher under their
supervision. Without their guidance and persistent help, it would not have been
possible for this thesis to be started let alone to be finished.
I would like to thank the School of Engineering at the University of South
Australia (UniSA) for their assistance and support; to Ms. Elizabeth Csavas for
providing me a comfortable environment and supporting me through the seminars
and presentations; and to Ms. Sam Richards for always listening and giving me
advice for the trips and conference presentations. Also, I would like to thank
Ms. Hayley Byford for her valuable support and assistance during my Ph.D. study.
I would like to thank the Commonwealth Government of Australia for funding
me through the Australian Postgraduate Award (APA) scholarship.
My appreciation also extends to Dr. Monica Behrend and Dr. Judy Ford for
their support in running a number of workshops for Ph.D. students. These work-
shops enhanced my writing skills. I also appreciate the library staff for all their
support and effective advice.
I would like to thank the proofreader of my thesis, Mr. Mohsen Shariati, for his
endless support through the last 2 years of my research. I also like to thank
Mr. Masoud Ganji for his technical support during my research.
Finally, I would like to thank my family and friends in my home country for
their encouragement and endless support during my Ph.D. study.

xiii
Contents

1 Background and Research Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1


1.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 Mold Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.2.1 Gate Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.2.2 Runner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2.3 Cooling System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.3 Process Parameters in Injection Molding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.4 Common Plastic Defects in Injection Molding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.4.1 Shrinkage and Warpage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.4.2 Short Shot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.4.3 Sink Mark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.5 Motivation for Research in Injection Molding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1.6 Research Gap and Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1.7 Concluding Remarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2 Literature Review and Research Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.2 Injection Molding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.3 Common Plastic Defects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.3.1 Weld Line . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.3.2 Incompletely Filled Parts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
2.3.3 Over Sprayed Parts (Flashes) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
2.4 Review of Literature on Significant Factors in Injection
Molding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2.4.1 Material . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
2.4.2 Part Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
2.4.3 Mold Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2.4.4 Process Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

xv
xvi Contents

2.5 Mold Design and Process Parameters and Their Relation


with Different Plastic Defects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... 25
2.5.1 Mold Design and Defects in Injection Molding . . ....... 25
2.5.2 Process Parameters and Corresponding Defects
in Injection Molding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... 28
2.5.3 Optimization Tools and Process Parameters
in Injection Molding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
2.6 Thin Wall Technology in Injection Molding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
2.7 Research Gaps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
2.8 Research Objectives and Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
2.8.1 Research Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
2.8.2 Research Methodology and Thesis Structure . . . . . . . . . . . 38
2.9 Concluding Remarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
3 Modification of Cold Runner Design in Injection Molding
Processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ 45
3.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ 45
3.2 Literature on Injection Molding Process and Quality
Evaluation Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ 46
3.3 Methodology for the Design of the New Cross Section
of Runner in Injection Molding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
3.3.1 Design Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
3.3.2 Calculation Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
3.3.3 Simulation Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
3.4 Experimental Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
3.5 Concluding Remarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
4 Development of Gate Design and Filling Process Analysis
in Injection Molding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ 65
4.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ 65
4.2 Review of Literature on Injection Molding Process
and Quality Evaluation Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
4.3 Methodology for the Gate Type in Injection Molding . . . . . . . . . . 68
4.3.1 Design Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
4.3.2 Calculation Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
4.3.3 Simulation Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
4.4 Experimental Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
4.4.1 Mold Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
4.4.2 Selection of Process Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
4.4.3 Experimental Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
4.5 Scrap Evaluation by Taguchi Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
4.5.1 Selection of Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
Contents xvii

4.5.2 Selection of Orthogonal Array . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81


4.5.3 S/N Ratio Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
4.5.4 Analysis of Variance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
4.6 Concluding Remarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
5 The Analysis of Short Shot Possibility in Injection Molding
Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... 87
5.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... 87
5.2 Review of Literature on Short Shot Possibility and Other
Defects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... 88
5.3 A Framework for Developing a Method of Evaluation
for Short Shot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
5.3.1 Application of Taguchi Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
5.3.2 Process of Experiment Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
5.3.3 Simulation Modelling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
5.3.4 Statistical Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
5.4 Experimental Design and Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
5.4.1 Experimental Setup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
5.4.2 Parameter and Orthogonal Array Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
5.5 Concluding Remarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
6 Injection Molding Process Optimization Based on Fuzzy
Quality Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
6.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
6.2 Literature on Quality Factors in Injection Molding . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
6.2.1 Injection Molding Optimization Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
6.3 Proposed Methodology for the Quality Evaluation
in Injection Molding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
6.3.1 Problem Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
6.3.2 Application of Combined AHP and Taguchi Method . . . . . 116
6.3.3 Variable Weight Definition and Implementation . . . . . . . . 117
6.3.4 Taguchi Orthogonal Array . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
6.3.5 Topsis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
6.4 Simulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
6.5 Experimental Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
6.5.1 Mold Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
6.5.2 Orthogonal Array and Process Parameters
for Three Defects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128
6.6 Concluding Remarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135
xviii Contents

7 Conclusions and Recommendations for Further Work . . . . . . . . . . . 139


7.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139
7.2 Summary of the Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140
7.2.1 Development of Cold Runner Design in Injection
Molding Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140
7.2.2 Development of Gate Design and Filling Process
Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140
7.2.3 The Analysis of Short Shot Possibility in Injection
Molding Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141
7.2.4 Optimization of Injection Molding Based on Fuzzy
Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141
7.3 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141
7.4 Research Publications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143
7.5 Recommendations for Future Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143
7.5.1 New Features of Gate Design in Injection Molding . . . . . . 143
7.5.2 Significant Factors in Short-Shot Possibility Analysis . . . . 143
7.5.3 Possible Alternatives for Quality Evaluation
of Injection Molding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144
7.6 Final Word . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144
Author Biography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145
Abbreviations

ABS Acrylonitrile–butadiene–styrene
AHP Analytic hierarchy process
ANOVA Analysis of variance
CAD Computer-aided design
CAE Computer-aided engineering
CNC Computer numerical control
CT Cooling time
DMAIC Define, measure, analyze, improve and control
DOE Design of experiment
FAHP Fuzzy analytic hierarchy process
FEA Finite element analysis
FEM Finite element method
FNIS Fuzzy negative ideal solution
FPIS Fuzzy positive ideal solution
FTOPSIS Fuzzy technique for order performance by similarity to ideal solution
HDPE High-density polyethylene
LDPE Low-density polyethylene
MS Mean square
MSD Mean square deviation
MT Mold temperature
PC Percentage of contribution
PIM Plastic injection molding
PP Packing pressure
PP Polypropylene
PS Polystyrene
PT Packing time
PVC Polyvinyl chloride
RSM Response surface methodology

xix
xx Abbreviations

SCF Supercritical fluid


SN Signal to noise
SW Shrinkage and warpage
TOPSIS Technique for order performance by similarity to ideal solution
Symbols

S Total surface area of the product


C1 Empirical factor of wall thickness
d Gate diameter
C2 Empirical factor of different materials
DR Runner diameter
W Weight of the product
L Length of the runner
c_ Shear rate
Q_ Flow rate
g Viscosity of material
P Pressure drop
s Maximum shear stress
r Radius of runner
w Width of the gate
n Material constant
h Height of the gate
t Thickness of the injected part
F Total force
V Velocity in straight line
v1 Velocity distribution
H Gap between the plate
x2 Movement of the plate in shear rate
Yi Defect rate
N Total number of data points or experiments
dfT Total degree of freedom
dfA Degree of freedom of factor A
dfE Degree of freedom for error variance
SSA Sum of square of factor A
SST Total sum of square
SSE Sum of square for error variance

xxi
xxii Symbols

xi Value at different levels


nAi Number of levels
Ai Value at level i of factor A
MSA Mean square of factor A
MST Total mean square
MSE Mean square of error variance
FA Value of the F ratio of factor A
PC Percentage of contribution
A Gate type
B Filling time
C Part cooling time
D Pressure holding time
E Melt temperature
a Positive factor
b Negative factor
k Regular factor
Sj ðXj Þ P-dimensional variable weight profit vector
W Variable weight vector
s Variable weight state vector
w Constant weight vector
m Trial number of experiment
n Number of injection defects
~vij Normalized positive trial numbers
Aþ Fuzzy positive ideal solution
A Fuzzy negative ideal solution
di The distance of each alternative or experiments
QIi Quality index of the n alternative
~1
a Rating the seriousness (very low)
~2
a Rating the seriousness (low)
~3
a Rating the seriousness (medium)
~4
a Rating the seriousness (high)
~5
a Rating the seriousness (very high)
~
R Fuzzy relative matrix
~
V Varied weight fuzzy evaluation matrix
W~ Constant weight factor matrix
MIi Moldability index
D0 Diameter of injected parts before shrinkage
D00 Diameter of injected parts after shrinkage
KA Number of level for factor A
Chapter 1
Background and Research Scope

1.1 Introduction

One of the challenges for most of the manufacturing industries is to produce the
most complicated parts. In overcoming these challenges, one of the appropriate
manufacturing methods is mold making which facilitates to produce more than 70%
of the parts (Tang et al. 2007). Injection molding which has been around more than
seven decades is one of the most significant polymer processing operations in plastic
industry and approximately one-third of all plastics are converted into parts through
this process. It has helped producing plastic parts of complex-shapes and significant
potential benefits for the reduction of design and manufacturing lead times, good
dimensionality, and rapid design changes (Tang et al. 2007).
Khoshooee and Coates (1998), and Tsoi and Gao (1999) defined injection mold-
ing process as the succession of three processes, namely polymer melt production,
injection, and solidification. Firstly, the raw material is heated to its melting temper-
ature. Then, the melted polymer is injected into the cavity using high pressure via a
feeding system and finally, when filling of the cavity is nearly finished, the cavity is
kept at a constant pressure for the packing stage. Packing pressure is considered to
fill the remaining volume of the cavity.
The literature review indicated that different factors evaluate the quality of injected
parts, but there are four main factors which affect the injection molding process,
namely Part design, mold design, material and process parameters. The individual
effect and the interaction of these factors lead to different defects in injection molding
process such as non-uniform shrinkage, warpage, sink mark, weld line, and short shot
etc. Since the design of the part is based on customer requirements, obviously not all
of which can be considered in part design. Hence part design is not considered in this
research. So is the material type because it is not possible to conduct experiments on
more than 17,000 plastic materials used throughout the world (Rosato and Rosato
2012). The objective of this study is to determine the effect of mold design and process
parameters in injection molding to improve the quality of the injected parts. Different

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019 1


M. Moayyedian, Intelligent Optimization of Mold Design and Process Parameters
in Injection Molding, Springer Theses, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03356-9_1
2 1 Background and Research Scope

methods of improving the quality and optimization of injection molding processes


have been considered. Although researchers have conducted considerable research to
determine the cause of different defects in injection molding, still there are unknown
causes of defects related to mold design and process parameters. Hence, developing
an effective framework to determine the right process and design parameters of
mold tools to minimize the scrap rate and improve the quality of the injected part is
necessary.
The purpose of this introductory chapter is:
• To describe the mold design in injection molding and highlight all necessary design
parameters of mold tools.
• To briefly outline the significant process parameters which affect the injection
process and then clarify the significance of studying the process parameters in
injection molding.
• To describe the most common defects in injection molding related to mold design
and process parameters.
• To summarize the motivations that led to this research.
• To identify the research gap and scope of the research.

1.2 Mold Design

The first and definitely most significant factor in injection molding, after selecting
the appropriate material and product design, is the mold design to improve the man-
ufacturing process and minimize possible part defects. There are many mold design
parameters such as the type and shape of the gate and runner, sprue and all other
design features of mold tools. Normally, it is ideal to follow the standard rules in
mold design, but sometimes it may not be practical (Zhou 2013). Hence this part of
the research would concentrate on the most significant mold tool parameters whose
poor evaluation leads to part defects.

1.2.1 Gate Types

The first and probably most significant part of the mold design is the gate type or
orifice through which the molten plastic flows and enters the mold cavity. Usually,
the designers design the gate thinner and significantly narrower than the part to which
they connect as shown in Fig. 1.1. Packing factors, shrinkage, warpage, anisotropy,
and the stability of the part are affected by the gate type.
The position of the gate is another parameter affecting the material flow, part
shrinkage, and the dimensional stability of the part. The wrong positioning of the
gate affects the fiber orientation which in turn causes defects such as warpage and
weld lines. If a part is end-gated, Fig. 1.2, then the flow of the molten plastic along
1.2 Mold Design 3

Fig. 1.1 Simple schematic of gate, runner, and sprue (www.imoldmaking.com)

Fig. 1.2 Correct and incorrect position of the gate (Fischer 2003)

the gate is parallel to the long axis of the part leading to its uniform shrinkage, hence
reduction in the probability of warpage. While in side-gated part the flow of the
molten plastic along the gate is perpendicular to the long axis of the part and leads
to different defects.

1.2.2 Runner

The purpose of having a runner is to contribute to bringing the molten plastic into
the cavities (Zhou 2013). The sprue connected to the nozzle of the injection machine
distributes the plastic into runners, gates and then cavities. The right dimensions
of the runner would cause the minimum flow resistance leading to a reduction in
4 1 Background and Research Scope

Fig. 1.3 a Cooling system, b parallel cooling system and serial cooling system (Zhou 2013)

pressure drop and mechanical stress of molten plastic. Different runners have differ-
ent applications and the most popular one is cold and hot runners. In cold runners,
the melt flowing from sprue to the gate solidifies while the melt is being solidified
in the cavity. In contrast, a hot runner (which utilizes heater band insulated from the
chilled cavities) maintains molten plastic for the next injection even after the plastic
is solidified in the cavity. Multi-cavity molds, having a uniform filling and holding
pressure in all cavities, require a balanced runner system and uniform gates. If the
runner system is made too large, it results in unnecessary long cycles and large mate-
rial losses. On the other hand, if the system is too small, the filling of the cavity would
not be complete and large amount of pressure is lost. In addition, if the diameter of
each runner is smaller than the maximum thickness of the part, the runner freezes
before the part does which leads to an excessive shrinkage.

1.2.3 Cooling System

In injection molding, the injected part must be cooled to facilitate the ejection. In
multi-cavities, all cavities must be cooled with the same coolant flow rate, otherwise
the molded parts lose their accuracy. Rapid cooling leads to shortening the molding
cycle, whereas uniform cooling, a consequence of prevention in differential shrinkage
and internal stresses, has better effect on product quality. Hence, cooling system is an
essential mold feature requiring special attention in mold design as shown in Fig. 1.3
(Zhou 2013).

1.3 Process Parameters in Injection Molding

An acceptable molding process is the completion of all steps without any defects,
namely flash, sink mark, large dimension deviation, warpage, high residual stress,
unfavorable orientation, sticking in the mold, and poor mechanical properties
1.3 Process Parameters in Injection Molding 5

Fig. 1.4 Pressure decreases along the delivery system and the cavity (Zhou 2013)

(Zhou 2013). According to Zhou (2013) and Calhoun and Golmanavich (2002),
three main stages are considered in injection molding: filling, packing/holding, and
cooling. During the filling stage, the molten polymer fills the cavity to produce the
final shape of the product. During the packing/holding stage, extra material is forced
into the cavity and the pressure is raised to compensate the effect of decreasing the
temperature and increasing the crystallinity development. During the cooling stage,
cooling down of the polymer to solidify the injected part properly is necessary so that
the product is stable enough for ejection. After cooling and ejecting the part from
the mold, the mold is closed again ready for the next injection.
In filling stage, the filling of the cavity starts from the beginning until when the
machine is switched to holding pressure. Controlling the velocity of the injection
process in filling stage is facilitated by the screw to force the material into the cavity
with a given velocity profile. As shown in Fig. 1.4, the required injection pressure to
complete the filling stage is related to different factors such as material, mold design,
and process parameters.
There are different reasons to have higher injection pressure in some applications.
Firstly, when the wall thickness become thinner, it is much more difficult to force
the plastic into the cavity which results from high velocity and high flow resistance
of molten plastic through the cavity. Due to the fact that the cost of the material is
50–80% of the total cost, it makes sense to reduce the mass of the part as much as
possible (Zhou 2013). In addition, when the polymer becomes colder, the viscosity
becomes higher, causing difficulty in filling the cavity. It is easier for molten plastic
with higher temperature to fill the cavity; however, it requires more time to cool
6 1 Background and Research Scope

Fig. 1.5 Typical cavity pressure trace (Zhou 2013)

down. So, it is better to inject the material into the cavity with the lowest possible
temperature.
In packing/holding stage, after filling the cavity, the pressure is increased as shown
in Fig. 1.5. This stage includes both packing and holding phase. It includes the starting
or switchover point and the end point (the end of the holding pressure exerted by
the machine). The required time at this stage is affected by the material properties
and the cooling rate. During this stage, the material cools down and solidifies but
the material flow continues at the slower rate due to partial solidification, associated
shrinkage and any loss of the material in that specific volume.
Finally, in cooling stage, cooling start from the first stage of the injection, i.e.
filling, and continues until the ejection. Hence, the release of residual stresses affects
the shrinkage and warpage of the injected parts (Zhou 2013).

1.4 Common Plastic Defects in Injection Molding

Due to the complex interrelationship between the injected part and the mold tools, the
molding machine and process, it is really hard to recognize the origin of problems,
thus to take immediate action to rectify the situation. Consequently an instruction is
required to identify factors affecting the quality of injection molding parts like the
process, the machinery and the mold tools (Goodship 2004).
Molding defects are classified into different types the most significant of which
being shrinkage and warpage, sink mark, streaks, weld line, jetting, record grooves
effect, incompletely filled parts, over sprayed parts (flashes), Visible ejector marks,
and Entrapped air (blister formation) (Goodship 2004).
1.4 Common Plastic Defects in Injection Molding 7

1.4.1 Shrinkage and Warpage

The dimensional difference between the injected part and the cavity is called injec-
tion molding shrinkage (Pomerleau and Sanschagrin 2006). As the part dimensions
change and become smaller, its thickness reduces (Ozcelik et al. 2010). In injection
molding process, the production of parts with thin wall is challenging because the
molten plastic cannot easily fill the mold cavity.
Non-uniform shrinkage and warpage is considered as the process of non-uniform
change of the geometrical dimensions of plastic products which leads to a distortion
of their original form (Yang et al. 2002).
The most significant challenge in thin wall parts is to overcome warpage. It has
been acknowledged (Liao et al. 2004) that in determination of quality in injected
parts, the shrinkage and warpage are considered as main factors affecting quality of
the part. Similarly Yen et al. (2006) stated the significance of shrinkage and warpage
and claimed that the reduction of cost and time at design stage is resulted from the
right simulation of shrinkage and warpage in injection molding process.
Ahmad et al. (2009), Fisher (2003), and Toe (2001) explained that warpage and
internal stress level are related to a number of factors such as variety of materials,
part and mold design, tooling and process parameters, and manufacturing process.

1.4.2 Short Shot

Molded parts with incompletely developed visual profiles are called incompletely
filled parts (short shots). This kind of defect often appears far from the gate when
flow distances are long, or in thin walls (e.g. Ribs as shown in Fig. 1.6). Because of
insufficient mold venting, this defect can also occur in other areas (Goodship 2004).

1.4.3 Sink Mark

Sink marks occur during the cooling process if the thermal contraction (shrink-
age) of the molten plastic cannot be compensated in certain areas. If the outside

Fig. 1.6 Filling problems near thin ribs (Goodship 2004)


8 1 Background and Research Scope

Fig. 1.7 Molded parts with sink marks (Goodship 2004)

Fig. 1.8 a Sink marks due to wall thickness variations and b sink marks on the cylindrical core
whose temperature was not controlled correctly (Goodship 2004)

walls of the molded part are not stable enough, due to insufficient cooling, the
outmost layer of molten plastic is drawn inside by cooling stresses as shown in
Fig. 1.7 (Goodship 2004).
Three fundamental cases of sink mark are: slow solidification, short holding pres-
sure time, and lack of holding pressure transfer. In order to have optimum holding
pressure transfer the gate cross section should be the largest. To avoid premature
solidification of the sprue and gates they must be properly dimensioned. Sink marks
appear near material accumulation as depressions on the surface of the molded part
in the absence of a uniform shrinkage rate as shown in Fig. 1.8 (Goodship 2004).

1.5 Motivation for Research in Injection Molding

The objective of this study is to determine the effect of mold design and process
parameters in injection molding process to improve the quality of injected part by
evaluating different factors which leads to a number of defects. In injection molding,
due to the complexity of the process, different techniques are required to improve
the quality of injected part. Also when cold runners are used, reducing the scrap is
a significant issue for related industries. Thus, the first focus of this research is to
propose a new solution based on the evaluation of new features of mold design to
improve the quality of injected part and also to minimize the scrap rate of the process.
Due to the advancements in CAE (Computer Aided Engineering) technology,
simulation of the injection molding process is an influential tool to support engineers
and meet different challenges as a replacement for conventional method which is very
1.5 Motivation for Research in Injection Molding 9

expensive and time consuming (Shen et al. 2007). Hence, the second focus of this
research is to furnish a method via CAE to evaluate the possibility of short shot defect.
The evaluation of short shot is very complicated because of a number of geometric and
process parameters. Although the literature review shows some research conducted
on short shot evaluation in injection molding, yet there is no research on how to
predict the short shot defects before it happens. So, CAE techniques and statistical
method such as Taguchi method, S/N (Signal to Noise) ratio, and ANOVA (Analysis
of Variance) are combined together herein, using a new definition of short shot
evaluation, to examine the impact of the parameters on this phenomenon.
In injection molding process, there are a number of processes and geometric
parameters also affect the moldability of the injected part. Hence, instead of opti-
mization of single-objective process, multi-objective process is used to determine the
moldability index. Although different tools and their combinations were applied to
determine the best moldability index such as analytic hierarchy process (AHP), fuzzy
AHP (FAHP), the technique for the order performance by its similarity to the ideal
solution (TOPSIS) and fuzzy TOPSIS (FTOPSIS), there is no research on finding the
moldability indices closest to the best alternative. So another important focus of the
research is to study the optimization of multi-objective process in injection molding
using the combination of Taguchi method, FAHP and FTOPSIS to determine the
moldability indices closest to the best alternative. Applying the best alternative is
ideal for all industries but not always practical due to time, staff and material costs.
It should be noted that some better alternatives could be an acceptable substitute for
the best alternative. If the best alternative is not achievable, Taguchi method provides
other alternatives (associated with the highest moldability index) very close to the
best one.

1.6 Research Gap and Scope

As mentioned earlier in this chapter, designing new feature of mold design and
optimization of geometric and process parameters in injection molding offer many
advantages such as reducing the scrap of injected parts and increase the moldability of
injection process. In contrast, evaluating all parameters involved in injection molding
is complicated. Therefore, a solution is required.
Studies on how to define the new design features of mold tools in injection molding
are limited to three significant limitations. First, the research on design features of
gate and runner has not investigated any new cross sectional shape of runner and
gate for scrap reduction and quality improvement. Second, detecting the short shot
as one of the common defects in injection molding has been investigated ignoring
the evaluation of the possibility of short shot happening through the process. Third,
in optimization of multi-objective process, evaluating the best moldability index has
been investigated but better alternatives are yet to be determined as a substitute for
the best one.
10 1 Background and Research Scope

Therefore, the goal of this research is to fill the above research gaps by proposing
a new cross sectional shape of runner and gate to reduce the scrap and improve the
quality of injected parts, a new definition of short shot defect to predict its occurrence,
and also proposing a new methodology to increase the number of alternatives of
moldability index in injection molding. These are implemented as follows.
The new methodology for designing the new features of the mold is based on
the combination of advanced solution approaches such as simulation modelling with
Solid Woks Plastics and real case study (Chap. 3). Also, a new methodology is fur-
nished for gate modelling, combined with statistical tools and experimental method
(Chap. 4).
The methodology is expanded to determine the prediction of short shot occurrence
based on computer simulation modelling. Then statistical analysis tools are applied
to determine the most significant parameters which affect the system performance
validated by a case study (Chap. 5).
An optimization approach is developed to determine the best alternative and better
alternatives with higher moldability index using Taguchi, FAHP and TOPSIS verified
via a case study (Chap. 6).
The nature and contents of the research implied verification of different parts of
the work via individual case studies in Chaps. 3–6 rather than validation of the whole
achievements by one thorough case study.

1.7 Concluding Remarks

In this chapter, from four main factors (material, part design, mold design and process
parameters) process parameters and mold design were selected as significant factors
to be researched and the others were dismissed due to the above-mentioned reasons.
So the part design factor is not considered herein. Most of the common defects in
injection molding results from the runner and gate, and also process parameters the
most significant of which are determined through the proposed methodology.
Due to the complexity of the injection molding process, the developed approach
is divided into five chapters: (Chap. 2) identifying the current research limitations
in mold design and process parameters; (Chap. 3) developing the new methodology
for cold runner; (Chap. 4) developing the new methodology for gate improvement;
(Chap. 5) proposing a new definition for short shot possibility; (Chap. 6) developing
a new methodology for the optimization of geometric and process parameters based
on the multi-objective process to determine the best and better moldability index.
References 11

References

Ahmad, A. H., Leman, Z., Azmir, M. A., Muhamad, K. F., Harun, W. S. W., Juliawati, A., &
Alias, A. B. S. (2009). Optimization of warpage defect in injection moulding process using ABS
material. In Third Asia International Conference on Modelling & Simulation (pp. 470–474).
Calhoun, D. A. R., & Golmanavich, J. (2002). Plastics technician’s toolbox-extrusion-fundamental
skills and polymer science. In J. Ron & J. M. Fisher (Eds.), 2003 Handbook of molded part
shrinkage and warpage. Plastics Design Library.
Fischer, J. (2003). Handbook of molded part shrinkage and warpage. William Andrew.
Goodship, V. (2004). Troubleshooting injection moulding (Vol. 15). iSmithers Rapra Publishing.
Khoshooee, N., & Coates, P. D. (1998). Application of the Taguchi method for consistent polymer
melt production in injection moulding. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers,
Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture, 212(8), 611–620.
Liao, S. J., Chang, D. Y., Chen, H. J., Tsou, L. S., Ho, J. R., Yau, H. T., & Hsieh, W. H. (2004).
Optimal process conditions of shrinkage and warpage of thin-wall parts. Polymer Engineering
and Science, 44(5), 917–928.
Ozcelik, B., Ozbay, A., & Demirbas, E. (2010). Influence of injection parameters and mold materials
on mechanical properties of ABS in plastic injection molding. International Communications in
Heat and Mass Transfer, 37(9), 1359–1365.
Pomerleau, J., & Sanschagrin, B. (2006). Injection molding shrinkage of PP: experimental progress.
Polymer Engineering and Science, 46(9), 1275–1283.
Rosato, D. V., & Rosato, M. G. (2012). Injection molding handbook. Springer Science & Business
Media.
Shen, C., Wang, L., Cao, W., & Qian, L. (2007). Investigation of the effect of molding variables
on sink marks of plastic injection molded parts using taguchi DOE technique. Polymer-Plastics
Technology and Engineering, 46, 219–225.
Tang, S. H., Tan, Y. J., Sapuan, S. M., Sulaiman, S., Ismail, N., & Samin, R. (2007). The use
of Taguchi method in the design of plastic injection mould for reducing warpage. Journal of
Materials Processing Technology, 182(1–3), 418–426.
Toe, C. (2001). Shrinkage behavior and optimization of injection molded parts studied by the
Taguchi method. Polymer Engineering and Science, 41(5), 703–711.
Tsoi, H.-P., & Gao, F. (1999). Control of injection velocity using a fuzzy logic rule-based controller
for thermoplastics injection molding. Polymer Engineering and Science, 39(1), 3–17.
Yang, H.-J., Hwang, P.-J., & Lee, S.-H. (2002). A study on shrinkage compensation of the SLS
process by using the Taguchi method. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture,
42(11), 1203–1212.
Yen, C., Lin, J. C., Li, W., & Huang, M. F. (2006). An abductive neural network approach to the
design of runner dimensions for the minimization of warpage in injection mouldings. Journal of
Materials Processing Technology, 174(1–3), 22–28
Zhou, H. (2013). Computer modeling for injection molding. Wiley, Inc.
Chapter 2
Literature Review and Research
Objectives

2.1 Introduction

Injection molding is a significant manufacturing process which represents more than


70% of production among the components of consumer products (Tang et al. 2007).
Consequently, in the last decade significant attention has been paid to improve the
quality of products in injection molding industry. Four main factors, namely mold
design, part design, material; and process parameters, are significant in injection
molding to improve the quality of injected parts out of which mold design and process
parameters lead to different defects.
Although significant research effort evaluated the effect of mold design and pro-
cess parameters on the quality of injected parts, further studies are required to deter-
mine their degree of significance. As highlighted in Chap. 1, the concepts of mold
design and process parameters have the potential to introduce significant improve-
ments in injection molding technology. Based on this potential, the literature review
in this chapter is conducted on all approaches to produce quality parts in injection
molding technology, as well as the existing approaches which have evaluated the
effect of mold design and process parameters in injection molding. The overall pur-
poses of this chapter are as follows:
• To review the literature on injection molding process, common plastic defects,
mold design and process parameters in injection molding;
• To evaluate the limitations of conducted research on mold design and process
parameters;
• To determine the objectives of this research;
• To describe the research methodology to attain the research objectives.

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019 13


M. Moayyedian, Intelligent Optimization of Mold Design and Process Parameters
in Injection Molding, Springer Theses, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03356-9_2
14 2 Literature Review and Research Objectives

2.2 Injection Molding

Injection molding presents one of the most significant processes in mass production
of plastic parts of complex geometry (Altan 2010). The bottleneck in mold industry
is the reduction of design time and manufacturing lead times, good dimensionality,
overall quality and rapid design changes. It is also considered that injection molding
is one of the most significant polymer processing operations in plastic industry and
approximately one-third of all plastics are converted into injected parts. Good exam-
ples are injecting the products like computer monitor and mobile telephone cases,
with a thin shell feature.
Yin et al. (2011) state that Plastic Injection Molding (PIM) is an advanced tech-
nique to process plastic articles. It has been acknowledged by Subramanian et al.
(2005) and Zhang et al. (2009) that the application of injection molding process is
increasing significantly in many industries like packaging, aerospace and aviation,
building and construction, automotive and electronic productions. Injection molding
process is probably the most commonly used methods for producing plastic parts.
According to Khoshooee and Coates (1998) and Urval et al. (2008), injection
molding is a key polymer processing technology capable of high-accuracy net shap-
ing of high added value products in mass production. Similarly, control of injection-
molded product quality is the first priority for the industry. Injection molding is
defined as non-steady multivariable processing of non-linear time dependent mate-
rials. Khoshooee and Coates (1998) and Tsoi and Gao (1999) defined the injection
molding process as the succession of three processes, namely polymer melt produc-
tion, injection and solidification as shown in Fig. 2.1.

Fig. 2.1 Injection molding process represented as two sub-processes (Khoshooee and Coates 1998)
2.2 Injection Molding 15

Fig. 2.2 Typical stages in an injection-molding cycle (Khoshooee and Coates 1998)

According to Khoshooee and Coates (1998), solid polymer granules are melted
and pumped by a rotating screw, in a temperature-controlled barrel, then injected
into the mold cavity where it solidifies to form a product. The clamp closes, molten
polymer is injected into the cavity and pressure is required until the part has solidified
as shown in Fig. 2.2. The product stays inside the mold to cool during the time that
screw rotates and moves back to produce the melt for the next shot. At this stage, a
moderate pressure (screw-back pressure) is applied to the melt, causing the frictional
work done on the polymer and mixing of the melt. At the final stage, the clamp
opens and the solid product is ejected from the cavity via ejector system. Closing
of the mold clamp makes the beginning of the next cycle. Huang and Tai (2001)
and Khoshooee and Coates (1998) described the procedure of injection molding in
different steps. Firstly, the raw material is heated to its melting temperature. Then,
under high pressure the melted polymer is injected into the cavity via sprue, runner
and gate. When filling of the cavity is nearly finished, the cavity is kept at a constant
pressure for the packing stage. Packing pressure is considered to fill the remaining
volume of the cavity.
Also, Khoshooee and Coates (1998) and Ozcelik et al. (2010) stated that the qual-
ity of injected parts may be assessed by different factors like appearance, weight,
dimensional stability and mechanical properties. The product weight is the main
quality characteristic in injection molding process which affects the product dimen-
sional stability. The fluctuation in shot weight and melt cushion are plastic defects
caused by melt inconsistency which significantly change the product quality. For
instance, the variation in the cushion leads to a variation in the packing of the mold
and causing differences in residence time of polymer in the barrel from shot to shot.
Plastic injection molding (PIM) is one of the most significant production methods.
In spite of the fact that many people consider this method as a simple and common
manufacturing process, PIM is one of the more complex processes due to many
accurate adjustments it requires (An and Chen 2008).
Wu and Huang (2007), Choi and Im (1999), Lo et al. (2009), and Bickerton
and Abdullah (2003) asserted that the injection molding process has three phases,
namely filling, packing and cooling phases. In the filling stage, the polymer melt is
injected into the cavity through the sprue, runner and gate. In packing stage, additional
polymer melt is pushed into the cavity to compensate for the shrinkage, resulting
from cooling of the material via cooling channels of the mold tools. During these
16 2 Literature Review and Research Objectives

processes, because of the high pressure, temperature change, and the relaxation of
polymer chains, the residual stress is produced which result in shrinkage and warpage
of injected parts.
According to Liao and Hsieh (2004) due to competitive nature of 3C (computer,
communication device and consumer electronics) industries, demands for reducing
the research and development time, reduction in the size of the products, and better
accuracy in production are increasing every day.

2.3 Common Plastic Defects

Due to the complex interrelationship between the molded part and the mold tools,
the molding compound and the injection process, it is really hard to recognize the
origin of defects and thus to take immediate action to eliminate the defect. The guide
that follows aims to help with the practical work and to consider factors affecting the
quality of injection molding parts like the process, the machinery and the mold tools
is required (Goodship 2004). Molding defects are classified into different types the
most significant of which are weld line, jetting, record grooves effect, incompletely
filled parts, Over sprayed parts (flashes), Visible ejector marks, and Entrapped air
(blister formation). In order to eliminate these defects, good knowledge of the causes
of the defects is essential.

2.3.1 Weld Line

Weld lines are created when two or more melt flows meet. The rounded flow fronts
of the melt streams are flattened and bonded when touching each other. If tempera-
ture and pressure are not high enough, the corners of the flow fronts do not develop
entirely, and create a notch. Moreover, the flow fronts no longer melt together consis-
tently, possibly producing an optical and mechanical weak spot as shown in Fig. 2.3.
If molding compounds containing additives (e.g., color pigments) are used, strong
orientations of these additives near the weld line are possible. This leads to color
changes near the weld line. Notches are particularly visible on dark or transparent
parts with smooth, highly polished surfaces. Color changes are particularly visible on
parts with metallic pigments. Significant improvement is possible only when there is
a mold wall with high temperature. Increasing the mold wall temperature increases
the cycle time by approximately 2% per °C (Goodship 2004). The two main factors
which affect the strength of weld lines in an injected part are the part design and the
process parameters (Tosello et al. 2010; Wu and Liang 2005).
2.3 Common Plastic Defects 17

Fig. 2.3 a Flow fronts before touching each other fronts. b Stretching of the rounded flow and c
visible notch on the top and bottom side of a transparent part (Goodship 2004)

Fig. 2.4 Filling problems near thin ribs (Goodship 2004)

2.3.2 Incompletely Filled Parts

Injection molded parts with outer profiles which incompletely developed are called
incompletely filled parts (short shots). This kind of defect often appears far from
the gate if there are long flow distances, or on thin walls (e.g. Ribs as shown in
Fig. 2.4). Because of insufficient mold venting, this defect can also occur in other
areas (Goodship 2004).

2.3.3 Over Sprayed Parts (Flashes)

Flashes are usually created near sealing faces, venting channels or ejectors. They look
like a more or less developed film-like plastic edge. Fine flashes are not often suddenly
visible. Thick flashes on the other hand sometimes stick out several centimeters over
the nominal profile as shown in Fig. 2.5 (Goodship 2004).
18 2 Literature Review and Research Objectives

Fig. 2.5 Large areas over spraying (Goodship 2004)

2.4 Review of Literature on Significant Factors in Injection


Molding

Injection molding is a process where melted polymer is injected into a mold cavity
or cavities, packed under specific pressure, and cooled until it has solidified as shown
in Fig. 2.6. During this process, there are three steps: firstly, heating the polymer in
the injection unit and flow the molten polymer via pressure. Secondly, making the
polymer melt to fill the cavity and solidify and finally, opening the mold to eject the
injected part.
The mechanical properties and performance of the injected part are important
factors which evaluate the quality of the part. Manufacture of a plastic part is
related to the part design and material choice in the early stages. Mold design,
manufacturing process, and then injection molding process come next. Injection
molding is not only shaping the material into the final part but also includes the

Fig. 2.6 Injection molding process (Zhou 2013)


2.4 Review of Literature on Significant Factors in Injection Molding 19

material properties affecting the performance of the product. In other words, it is


important to know the details of the manufacturing process and all factors which
affect the quality of injected products. These factors are polymer properties and its
performance during molding, product design and its characteristics, mold design
and its configurations, and process conditions (Zhou 2013).

2.4.1 Material

The significant characteristic of plastics is related to their properties, namely low


density, wide range of mechanical properties, easy to process, low thermal/electrical
conductivity, high chemical resistance, and reusability. A wide variety of materi-
als, namely more than 17,000 plastic materials worldwide are available for injection
molding. Within the most common plastic families, there are five major thermoplas-
tic types that consist two-thirds of all thermoplastics, namely density polyethylene
(LDPE); polyvinyl chloride (PVC); high density polyethylene (HDPE); polypropy-
lene (PP); and polystyrene (PS) (Zhou 2013).

2.4.2 Part Design

In product design, the functional requirements along with moldability, productiv-


ity, and performance should be considered. Regardless of the material used, there
are certain basic design rules that should be observed in designing the part. Impor-
tant parameters in product design are described below in the following sub-section
(Harper 1999).
Wall Thickness
Figure 2.7 shows the relationship between part-wall thickness and mold shrinkage.
Increasing the wall thickness of a part has the same effect on shrinkage rate of the
part. In cooling stage, more time (slower cooling rate) is required and more stress
relaxation (stress reduction by having more relaxation of molten plastic) occurs.
If the material is semi-crystalline, then more crystals develop which also leads to
an increase in shrinkage. Also, if the wall of the part has different thicknesses, the
thickest wall would suffer from the most shrinkage and warpage (Fisher 2003).
Zhou (2013) maintains that in injection molding, uniform wall thickness is
strongly preferred. Thick sections near thin sections cool more slowly after the gates
are frozen. This leads to several defects in injection molding such as sink marks,
residual thermal stresses, warpage and variations in color or transparency. Thick-to-
thin wall transitions, if it is not possible to avoid, should be as gradual as possible
and not vary more than 3:1 in ratio as shown in Fig. 2.8. Hence, the minimum wall
thickness is required to reduce material cost and cooling time.
20 2 Literature Review and Research Objectives

Fig. 2.7 Relationship between wall thickness and mold shrinkage (Fisher 2003)

Fig. 2.8 Effects of adjoining thick/thin wall sections (Zhou 2013)

Ribs
Ribs serve two main purposes, namely improve the melt flow into sections like
corners, and increase flexural stiffness of the part (Zhou 2013).
Consideration of ribs in part design enhances the rigidity of the part, but increases
the cost and in many cases causes warpage of the part. Changing the contours of the
cavity and flow patterns as the plastic fills the cavity and variations in the thickness
of the injected part around the rib are two potential sources of ribbed-part plastic
defects (Fisher 2003).
Bosses and Cored Holes
Bosses are applied for mechanical fastener locations which provide cored holes
for pins and screws (Zhou 2013). Bosses like ribs cause problems. A boss with an
outside diameter two to three times the inside diameter is suitably strong for most
applications, but this may exceed the ratio of boss-wall thickness to the thickness
of the attached wall; this leads to high stresses. Because of the additional mass of
material at any juncture of boss-wall, direct connection of a boss to a wall must be
avoided. A better design separates the boss from the wall and ties it to the wall with
a relatively thin rib, as shown in Fig. 2.9 (Fisher 2003).
2.4 Review of Literature on Significant Factors in Injection Molding 21

Fig. 2.9 Recommended


boss design (Fisher 2003)

2.4.3 Mold Design

After designing the part and selection of appropriate material, the next step is the
mold design to facilitate the manufacturing process and minimize possible injection
molding defects. There are many parameters to determine for the mold design. Nor-
mally, it is better to follow the guide lines, but sometimes, it may be better if a guide
line is ignored and an alternative way is selected based on the expertise (Zhou 2013).
Hence, this section considers the most significant parameters in designing the mold
tools, whose poor design leads to a number of defects for the injected parts.
Gate Types
The first and probably most important parameter in mold design is the gate type or
orifice through which the molten plastic flows to fill the mold cavity. Usually, the
designers consider the gate thinner and significantly narrower than the part to which
it connects as shown in Fig. 2.10. Packing factors, shrinkage, warpage, anisotropy,
and the stability of the part are related to the gate type (Fisher 2003).
Runner
The main purpose of a runner is to transfer the molten plastic from sprue to all cavities
via the gate. There are different cross sectional shapes for runner each of which has
different applications (Pye 1989; Zhen-Yong et al. 2000) (Fig. 2.11). The designer
22 2 Literature Review and Research Objectives

Fig. 2.10 Simple schematic of gate, runner, and sprue (www.imoldmaking.com)

round semi-circular square

rectangular Trapezoidal Modified Trapezoidal

Polygon
Fig. 2.11 Different cross sectional geometry of runner

should evaluate different factors for selecting the right cross-section of the runner
for a specific part. The most popular and most efficient cross-section of a runner for
Two-plate mold tools is of round shape. For Three-plate mold tools, the trapezoidal
and modified trapezoidal are the best options if the runner is to be manufactured only
in one half of the mold, but still they are not acceptable due to the fact that the gate
cannot be positioned in line with the central flow stream of the runner. Different cross-
sections of a runner have different effects on injection molding (Goodship 2004).
The purpose of having a runner is to facilitate the flow of molten plastic into
the cavities. The sprue connected to the nozzle of the injection machine distributes
the melt into runners, gates and then individual cavities. The most popular runners
are cold and hot runners. In a cold runner, the melt flowing from sprue to the gate
2.4 Review of Literature on Significant Factors in Injection Molding 23

Fig. 2.12 Balance runner system for multi-cavities (www.imoldmaking.com)

solidifies while the melt in the cavity is solidifying; but in a hot runner (which utilizes
heater band insulated from the chilled cavity or cavities), the runner maintains molten
plastic for the next injection even after the plastic is solidified in the cavity. Multi-
cavity molds, having a uniform filling and holding pressure in all cavities require
a balanced runner and uniform gates as shown in Fig. 2.12. Long runners result
in unnecessary long cycles and considerable material losses. On the other hand, if
runner size is too small, the cavity would not be completely filled and considerable
amount of pressure would be lost. In addition, if the runner diameter is smaller than
the maximum thickness of the part, the runner freezes before the part does. This leads
to an excessive shrinkage (Zhou 2013).
Cooling System
Having an optimum and efficient design for cooling system enhances the cost-
efficiency of the process (Dimla et al. 2005). More than 70% of the injection process
time is related to cooling cycle (Pirc et al. 2009). In injection molding, the injected
part must be cooled to facilitate the ejection stage. In multi-cavities, all cavities must
be cooled with the same coolant flow rate, otherwise the molded parts lose the dimen-
sional accuracy (Zhou 2013). Cooling may happen slowly by letting the heat dissipate
into the mold and then environment which is not suitable for large production. Rapid
cooling shortens the molding cycle followed by differential shrinkage and internal
stress, in contrast with the uniform cooling which results in better product quality
(Agazzi et al. 2010). Hence, cooling systems, namely parallel and serial as shown
in Fig. 2.13 are essential mold features requiring special attention in mold design
(Zhou 2013).

2.4.4 Process Parameters

According to Zhou (2013) and Calhoun and Golmanavich (2002), injection mold-
ing consist of three main stages: filling, packing/holding, and cooling as shown in
Fig. 2.14. During the filling stage, the hot polymer fills the cavity to produce the final
shape of the product. During the packing/holding stage, extra material is forced into
24 2 Literature Review and Research Objectives

Fig. 2.13 Parallel cooling system and serial cooling system (Zhou 2013)

Fig. 2.14 A typical example of an injection molding cycle (Zhou 2013)

the cavity and the pressure is raised to compensate the negative effect of decreasing
the temperature due to the cooling and also increasing the crystallinity development.
During the cooling stage the polymer solidifies so that the product is stable and ready
enough for ejection after which the mold is closed again, ready for the next injection.
As shown in Fig. 2.15, the required injection pressure to complete the filling stage
is related to different factors namely material, mold design (sprue, runner and gate),
and process parameters.
There are different reasons to have higher injection pressure, namely it is much
more difficult to force the plastic into the cavity of thinner wall which result from
high velocity and high flow resistance of molten plastic, and higher viscosity through
2.4 Review of Literature on Significant Factors in Injection Molding 25

Fig. 2.15 Pressure decreases along the delivery system and the cavity (Zhou 2013)

the cooling stage. In packing/holding stage, the pressure is increased based on the
material properties and cooling time. Finally, in cooling stage, the release of residual
stresses are the main reasons of shrinkage and warpage of the injected part (Zhou
2013). Hence, filling time, filling pressure, holding or packing time, packing pressure
and cooling time are process parameters which are related to different stages of
injection process.

2.5 Mold Design and Process Parameters and Their


Relation with Different Plastic Defects

2.5.1 Mold Design and Defects in Injection Molding

Mold design has an essential effect on the quality of the injected part. In mold
design, different factors should be considered. According to Dai et al. (2002), the
melted granules fill the cavity through the gate. The gate type is one of the significant
parameters in injection molding. The main purposes of the gates are to increase the
temperature (by increasing the velocity of molten plastic) and shear rate leading
to reduction of the melt viscosity; also to control its flow rate, and to allow rapid
freezing of polymer at the end of the injection process which result from rapid cooling
26 2 Literature Review and Research Objectives

Fig. 2.16 1-Pin-gate, 2-twin gate, 3-sprue, 4-runner (Dai et al. 2002)

of the gate walls. In addition, the design of the gate affects the mechanical properties,
dimensional stability, and appearance of final product.
It has been demonstrated by Viana and Cunha (2002) that after the injection
of a box shaped part, a central weld-line develops on its major surface due to the
wrong gating options, namely a hot runner with two pin point gates. So selection of
appropriate gates or runners is an essential in mold design.
Figure 2.16 demonstrates an improved pin-gate with two orifices instead of one
in normal pin-gate sharing the same runner, that create a stable melt flow and all
interaction between two streams of melt which can cause 10% improvement in tensile
strength and Young’s modulus (Dai et al. 2002).
Yen et al. (2006) maintained that there are a number of process parameters which
can affect the accuracy and the quality of plastic parts in injection molding process
such as filling speed, injection pressure, melt temperature, holding pressure, cooling
system and the selection of the injection gate. The main function of runner and gate is
to deliver the molten polymer into the cavity. Erosion of the runner which can entrap
the cavity by the molten polymer is the result of rapid rate of the filling. Hence, the
diameter and the length of the runner and gate, Fig. 2.17, are control parameters
which must be considered in determining the right size of runner and gate.
Xie et al. (2014) demonstrated that the undersized rectangular gate has many
adverse effects on the filling behavior and residual stress of molded part meaning
that larger gates lead to faster filling of the cavity and less residual stress.
Rutkauskas and Bargelis (2007) stated that the geometry and size of the gate
affects the quality of the injected part. Also, tuning the gate’s geometry optimally
minimizes the flow-generated defects such as warpage and non-uniform shrinkage
in injection molding (Bikas et al. 2002).
According to Oroszlány and Kovács (2010) different gating does not affect part
deformation or shrinkage of injected part in manufacturing of implants from ther-
moplastic materials.
Gokey and Harris (2004) presented that the main purposes of the gate are (a) to
transfer the molten plastic into the cavities (b) to have a control over the melt flow
both in filling and packing stages (c) to freeze the polymer at the end of injection
which leads to the withdrawal of the screw.
2.5 Mold Design and Process Parameters and Their Relation 27

Fig. 2.17 Runner and gate diameters (Yen et al. 2006)

Proper design of the runner and gate leads to an efficacious injection molding
process with minimum plastic defects (Lee and Lin 2006), and, location of the weld
line can be determined by runner resizing (Zhai et al. 2006).
In thin wall technology one of the common defects is warpage (Huang and Tai
2001). It has resulted from the process parameters and gate dimension. The filling
rate which is related to gate dimension controls the flow process in the cavity and
changes the average shrinkage of the parts in thin wall technology which leads to
changes in warpage rate.
According to Kima et al. (2003) plastic defects such as short shot happen in an
injected part which results from inappropriate selection of gate location. Appropriate
gate location leads to a better resin flow and shorter time hesitancy. Finally, the
mechanical properties and dimensional stability of the injected part are improved as
well.
Dai et al. (2002) stated that the gate is a significant design component which
should be as small as possible to avoid the excess material removal, and a visible
blemish on the injected part.
28 2 Literature Review and Research Objectives

2.5.2 Process Parameters and Corresponding Defects


in Injection Molding

Injection molding process parameters like injection temperature, mold temperature,


and injection time determine the quality and cost of parts (Guoa et al. 2014; Zhao
et al. 2010). According to Erzurumlu and Ozcelik (2006), during the design and
manufacturing of thin shell thermoplastic parts, sink mark index according to the
process conditions is usually considered. The level of sink mark index is related to
injection molding process parameters. Ozcelik and Erzurumlu (2006) named sink
mark as depressions on the surface of molded parts. Although these depressions
are quite small, they are often visible due to light reflection from the part surface in
different directions. One of the reasons of sink index in plastic products is the presence
of rib that leads to shrinkage during the molding process. Similarly, Mathivanan
and Parthasarathy (2009) states that sink mark can be considered as an unwanted
depression or dimple on the surface of the plastic part, resulting from localized
shrinkage. The formation of sink marks in plastic products is due to the flaws which
reduce the success of the injection molding technology (Shen et al. 2007). Also, it
has been established that in injection molding process, when the hot melt injects into
the cavity, a thin skin around the hot melt under the surface is formed, resulting from
contact with the cold mold wall.
Another common defect in injection molding process is weld line. According to
Li et al. (2007), when melt lines converged by two or more than two melts, weld
lines occur. Usually, weld lines result from the products with a through hole or multi
gates for injecting the materials (Mekhilef et al. 1995). Weld lines has effects on the
strength of the products and also appearance of the products. The tensile strength
and the impact strength of the products reduce when wild lines are existed in injected
part and the visible lines join on the external surface of the products. For most of
the injected products, weld lines are not acceptable. Hence, in product design, mold
design, and processing conditions setting, they are considered as the last factor in
terms of priority.
Li et al. (2007) states that when adjusting the location of gates for changing
the location of weld lines is not possible, a good solution is to adjust processing
parameters. Similarly, Deng et al. (2008) acknowledge that one of the most common
defects in injection molding process is weld lines. If the flow fronts didn’t inter-
diffuse enough before they cooled, a line, notch, or color change occurs.
Weld lines decrease the strength and appearance quality of injected part. Different
process parameters such as melt temperature, injection speed, and injection pressure
and mold design parameters such as gate design lead to weld lines in an injected part
(Deng et al. 2008; Li et al. 2007). A number of reasons lead to weld lines such as
multiple injection gates, usage of inserts in the molding, the existence of holes, and
other part geometric characteristics which can split the melt flow and then merge
again. The consequences of weld lines are considered in the following:
2.5 Mold Design and Process Parameters and Their Relation 29

• A plastic part is structurally weak at the location of weld lines, especially when
they are close to holes, causing reduction in lifetime of the part.
• Weld lines are not reasonable visually, causing an appearance issue.
Short shot is another common defect in injection molding. The formation of short
shot on the injected part is one of the defects which eliminate the overall success
of the injection molding process. There are different physical causes for incomplete
filling such as small shot volume, venting problems, insufficient injection pressure,
low injection speed, wrong temperature control in mold and so on. The effects of
process parameters and geometric parameters on the formation of short shot on the
injected parts need to be understood in order to control the process parameters to
reduce the flaw (Goodship 2004).
The reasons behind short shot are very complicated and numerous (Goodship
2004; Huang and Tai 2001; Oktem et al. 2007). In general, a short shot happens
when insufficient material which was injected into the mold cannot fill the cavity
properly (Kitayama et al. 2014). It is resulted from wrong plastic material selection,
incorrect processing parameters, incorrect mold design, and part design.
Hence, it is of critical significance to successfully control the factors of influence
during the injection molding process, resulting from the complexity of melt flow
process in mold cavity (Goodship 2004; Li et al. 2014).

2.5.3 Optimization Tools and Process Parameters in Injection


Molding

Taguchi method is the most common tool for improving the quality in injection
molding industry based on process parameters evaluation (Amer et al. 2013; Yang
et al. 2008). According to Tang et al. (2007) a mold which produces a thin plate
reduces the warpage problem by using Taguchi experimental design. According to
the number of factors and their levels in Table 2.1, L9 orthogonal array of Taguchi
is selected as shown in Table 2.2.
The Taguchi experimental design indicated that the optimum parameters which
minimize the warepage defect are melt temperature (240 °C), filling time (0.5 s),
packing pressure (90%) and packing time (0.6 s), and melt temperature is the most
significant parameter.

Table 2.1 Different factors in different levels (Tang et al. 2007)


Factor Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
Melt temperature, A (°C) 240 265 290
Filling time, B (s) 0.1 0.3 0.5
Packing pressure, C (%) 60 75 90
Packing time, D (s) 0.6 0.8 1.0
30 2 Literature Review and Research Objectives

Table 2.2 L9 orthogonal Trials Column no


array (Tang et al. 2007)
A B C D
1 1 1 1 1
2 1 2 2 2
3 1 3 3 3
4 2 1 2 3
5 2 2 3 1
6 2 3 1 2
7 3 1 3 2
8 3 2 1 3
9 3 3 2 1

Ahmad et al. (2009) claims that in analyzing the warpage defect, based on Taguchi
method and ANOVA, to optimize the processing parameters, the optimum level of
selected parameters are packing pressure at 375 MPa, mold temperature at 40 °C,
melt temperature at 200 °C and packing time at 1 s; and all process parameters turn
out to be significant.
Taguchi optimization method is also used for optimization of surface quality for
decreasing surface roughness of mold tools of 7075-T6 aluminum material during
machining (Oktem et al. 2005). The process parameters are feed, cutting speed,
axial-radial depth of cut, and machining tolerance. Using Taguchi method, a regres-
sion analysis is considered to determine the fitness of data based on full factorial
design. Taguchi orthogonal array, signal-to-noise (S/N) ratio, and analysis of vari-
ance (ANOVA) are considered to determine the optimal levels and the effects of
the process parameters on surface roughness. In the multiple regression analysis, R2
was 0.906 which shows that the roughness data measured from the experiments are
acceptable enough to build the other prediction regression models. The results of anal-
ysis of variance demonstrate the effect of process parameters on surface roughness,
namely 96.035% for machining tolerance, 2.512% for radial depth of cut, 1.537%
for axial depth of cuts, 0.177% for feed, and 0.092% for cutting speed shows the
effectiveness of Taguchi method.
It has been acknowledged by Wang and Fu (2008) that Taguchi method is useful
in biomedical application as well such as micro-needles used for biomedical appli-
cations like skin prick, blood collections, and drug delivery whose dimensions are
623 µm in length, 203 µm in width, and 106 µm in thickness. In order to achieve
optimal micro-needle quality, Taguchi method is used where the selected factors are
melt temperature (A), mold temperature (B), injection speed (C), and pressure hold-
ing speed (D). L9 orthogonal array based on Taguchi method was selected for three
experimental set of data. According to S/N ratio response-chart, Fig. 2.18, it is clear
that factor A has the biggest effect on quality; factor B is the next, followed by factor
C; i.e. factor D has the least impact on quality.
2.5 Mold Design and Process Parameters and Their Relation 31

Fig. 2.18 Response chart


(Wang and Fu 2008)

In conclusion, the optimal combination of factors is A1 , B2 , C1 , D1 which are melt


temperature at 200 °C, mold temperature at 50 °C, injection speed at 150 mm/s, and
pressure holding speed at 5 mm/s.
According to Chen et al. (1997), in automobile industry, Chen et al. (1997), the
optimization of automobile bumper was considered to reduce silver streaks on the
surface of the product where a number of factors were chosen and the experiment
was conducted for L12 orthogonal array to identify the significant factors. The result
demonstrates that the main factors which were related to the generation of silver
streaks are mold temperature, filling time, and the injection rate.
According to Kramschuster et al. (2006) the effect of process parameters on
shrinkage and warpage of a box-shaped part using conventional and micro-cellular
injection molding can be considered using two sets of fractional factorial design
of experiments, as a result of which three best combinations of parameter setting
leading to minimum shrinkage, warpage, predicted average shrinkage and warpage
are shown in Tables 2.3 and 2.4 respectively. According to this analysis supercritical
fluid (SCF) content (nitrogen in this case in terms of SCF dosage time) and injection
speed were the most significant factors affecting the shrinkage and warpage (SW)
of micro-cellular injection molded parts, whereas in conventional molding, the most
significant factors were packing pressure and packing time.

Table 2.3 Three best combinations of parameter settings for obtaining minimum shrinkage and
warpage (Kramschuster et al. 2006)
Hold time Cooling Injection Hold Max. barrel Chiller SW (mm)
(s) time (s) speed pressure temp. (°C) temp. (°C)
(mm s−1 ) (bar)
6 20 Not 600 Not 40 0.727
significant significant
6 35 Not 600 Not 20 0.760
significant significant
6 20 Not 600 Not 20 0.768
significant significant
32 2 Literature Review and Research Objectives

Table 2.4 Three best combinations of parameter settings for obtaining minimum shrinkage and
warpage (Kramschuster et al. 2006)
SCF dosage Shot Max. barrel Injection Chiller Cooling SW (mm)
time (s) volume temp. (°C) speed temp. (°C) time (s)
(cm3 ) (mm s−1 )
7 51 230 120 40 Not 0.077
significant
7 51 230 120 20 Not 0.092
significant
7 51 205 40 20 Not 0.096
significant

Fig. 2.19 a The optimized warpage analysis result and b the final product (Yin et al. 2011)

Yin et al. (2011) applied back propagation neural network on process parameters
mold temperature, melt temperature, packing pressure, packing time and cooling
time to minimize the warpage of a glove box cap using finite element simulations
along with Taguchi method.
It was proved that the prediction system of the Neural Network has the ability
to calculate the warpage of the plastic part within an error range of 2%. The final
part is shown in Fig. 2.19. Similarly, in surface quality, it was established by Liu
and Chang (2000) that Taguchi method is an appropriate tool to optimize the surface
quality of gas assisted injection molded composites where unacceptable mold design
and process parameters lead to increase of the surface roughness. Table 2.5 shows
different parameters used in optimization of surface quality via Taguchi method using
an L18 orthogonal array as a result of which melt temperature and the gas injection
delay time turned out to be the significant parameters.
Oktem et al. (2007) and Huang and Tai (2001) applied Taguchi method to a thin
shell part to find the optimum level of process parameters. They demonstrated that
Taguchi method is feasible enough to solve the warpage and shrinkage problem.
Taguchi robust design method was also considered as a successful tool in finding the
optimal process control for the fabrication of thin walled parts (Urval et al. 2008;
Yousef et al. 2013).
2.5 Mold Design and Process Parameters and Their Relation 33

Table 2.5 Three levels of different factors (Liu and Chang 2000)
Factors Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
Melt temperature 280 290 300
Mold temperature 80 90 100
Melt filling speed 70 80 90
Melt filling pressure 80 110 140
Short shot size 41.5 42.5 43.5
Gas injection pressure 45 60 75
Gas injection delay time 6 7 8

In the past few decades, researchers have employed various methods of optimiza-
tion in injection molding for reducing defect rates. Neural network was employed and
lead to significant reduction in warpage and shrinkage rate (Lotti et al. 2002; Yen et al.
2006; Yin et al. 2011). Shrinkage optimization plays the main role in determining
the final dimension of injected parts where Taguchi identifies the best level of each
process parameters for minimum non-uniform shrinkage (Modraka and Mandulakb
2013; Pomerleau and Sanschagrin 2006; Toe 2001). For reducing the shrinkage
and warpage in thin wall product, experimental design of Taguchi determines the
optimum set of significant parameters (Huang and Tai 2001; Liao et al. 2004).
Neural networks avoids any shortcoming in the application of conventional meth-
ods such as trial-and-error (Chen et al. 2008; Dang 2013). The combination of sta-
tistical tools such as ANOVA and Taguchi and numerical modelling with neural
network determines the optimal parameter settings (Chen et al. 2014; Cheng et al.
2012; Jui-Ming and Wang 2002).
Two other methods used to determine the significant parameters are Fuzzy logic
method and technique for order performance by its similarity to ideal solution
(TOPSIS) method. TOPSIS was initially developed by Hwang and Yoon (1981)
which uses both quantitative and qualitative factors (Ekmekçioğlu et al. 2010).
When the information is uncertain TOPSIS is combined with fuzzy logic called
(FTOPSIS). In injection molding process, an automated resetting of process param-
eters using fuzzy logic is applied to decrease the defects (He et al. 1998). Weld
line is one of the plastic defects which decrease mechanical properties of injected
parts. Fuzzy theory is proposed to control the number and location of weld lines
(Chen et al. 2008).
Analytic hierarchy process (AHP), initially developed by Saaty (1980), is another
tool which can effectively evaluate the significance of parameters. AHP consists of
three main stages, namely constructing a pair-wise comparison matrix, synthesizing
judgments, and checking for consistency (Vaidya and Kumar 2006; Amiri 2010).
Although AHP has been successfully applied to solve different problems in different
applications, it suffers from some limitations (Patil and Kant 2014). Also, like
TOPSIS it is incapable of handling decision problems which include uncertain
34 2 Literature Review and Research Objectives

information. In occasions like this, the combination of AHP and fuzzy theory, called
fuzzy AHP (FAHP) is used (Torfi et al. 2010). The integration of FAHP and TOPSIS is
very effective for multi objective evaluation of moldability index (Cheng et al. 2008).

2.6 Thin Wall Technology in Injection Molding

Chiang and Chang (2007) and Song et al. (2007) state that injected parts such as
cell phone cover are intended to be thin, light and small. Thin wall technology
serves to produce such parts (Liao et al. 2004). High competition between electronic
industries encourages continuous reduction of size and increase of the accuracy of
injected parts. In order to create more space inside the thin-walled housing parts their
thickness should be reduced to 1 mm or less (Liao and Hsieh 2004).
In injection molding, different parameters are involved such as filling, packing,
cooling, opening the mold cavity, injecting and closing the mold cavity in analyzing
of shrinkage and warpage (Chiang and Chang 2007). The selection of appropriate
process parameters becomes difficult when the wall thickness of plastic parts is
reduced (Song et al. 2007). Huang and Tai (2001) maintain that as the thickness of
molded part reduces below 2 mm, the ratio of skin-layer cooling rate to that of the
core layer increases leading to shear stress of the part which may in turn contribute
to warpage.
Minimizing the manufacturing cost of injected parts is the first and definitely most
significant factor in related industries (Ho et al. 2005). Today, cell phones in terms
of dimensions are getting smaller and their durability is important for consumers.
The most significant problem in injected thin-walled part is the absence of desired
shape and dimensions. A solution to this problem can be achieved by choosing the
right plastic material and injection parameters. The analysis of best gate location and
the finite element mesh of the model are shown in Figs. 2.20 and 2.21 respectively
(Ozcelik and Sonat 2009).
According to Huang and Tai (2001) and Chiang and Chang (2007) mold tempera-
ture, packing time, packing pressure and cooling time are the most effective process
parameters related to packing stage. In Ultra-thin walled plastic parts, higher melt
temperature and injection pressure are considered as significant parameters (Song
et al. 2007).
Optical lenses are very important injected parts in optical information technology
market (Kwak et al. 2005) where the quality of molded lenses is determined by mold-
ing parameters. Manufacturing of plastic optical lenses require high-precision tech-
niques. Otherwise the injection process leads to profile deformation, resulting from
different cooling speed of polymer solidification inside the cavity (Meza et al. 2013).
Yang et al. (2011) evaluated the refractive index variation in injection molding of
optical lenses under different levels of packing pressure by utilizing a sensor based
metrology system. The experimental results demonstrate that refractive index is the
result of density variation, which in turn is resulted from variation in shrinkage rate,
2.6 Thin Wall Technology in Injection Molding 35

Fig. 2.20 Best gate location analysis result (Ozcelik and Sonat 2009)

Fig. 2.21 Finite element


mesh of the model and the
gate location

is the indicative of considerable amount of variation of packing pressure during the


injection process.
Another defect in injection molding of optical lenses is warpage which consists
of the warpage of reference plane related to the thickness of housing wall, and
warpage resulted from the variation in shrinkage. Increasing the thickness of ribs
and reduction in other wall thicknesses minimize the warpage of reference plane,
Fig. 2.22. it should be noted that the factors leading to the shrinkage variation are
plentiful such as material properties, part design, processing parameters, and mold
design (Subramanian et al. 2005).
According to Lih et al. (2002), unlike numerical prediction computer simulation
has significant capability in handling different aspects of injection molding. But the
integration of these two can help engineers to come up with optimal part design and
identify process parameters much more effectively.
In design and manufacture of mold tools, different uncontrollable factors affect
the quality of injected parts which is improved by employing six sigma (Kazmer et al.
2004; Westerdale 2006). Six sigma approach applied by Lo et al. (2009) increased
the upper process capability index Cpu from 0.57 to 1.75 which means nearly 0.07
36 2 Literature Review and Research Objectives

Fig. 2.22 Schematic illustration of reference plane XYZ and diagonal ribs X1, X2 and X3 (Sub-
ramanian et al. 2005)

Fig. 2.23 a Photo of cavity plate for optical lenses and b drawing of optical lens with pertinent
dimensions (Lo et al. 2009)

defects per million; and ANOVA and S/N ratio revealed that the most significant
parameters determining the surface accuracy of products are packing pressure, melt
temperature, injection pressure, and packing time (Fig. 2.23).
In addition to warpage and shrinkage of optical lenses, other elements that
determine the quality of optical lenses are light transmission, surface waviness and
surface finish. The most significant parameters which affect the surface waviness
are melt temperature, mold temperature, injection pressure, and packing pressure
(Tsai et al. 2009).
2.7 Research Gaps 37

2.7 Research Gaps

Based on the thorough literature review in Sects. 2.3, 2.4, and 2.5, substantial limi-
tations were identified as follows:
• Runner in mold design: although many papers studied the effect of process param-
eters in injection molding, a few of them concentrated on runner design. Hence,
further research is required to evaluate the effect of runner design more compre-
hensively.
• Gate in mold design: based on the literature review, a few papers considered the
effect of gate design in injection molding process, but no researcher considered
the effect of gate cross-section which is an objective of this research.
• Plastic defects analysis: although there are a number of papers which evaluated
different process parameters for the analysis of different plastic defects in injection
molding, there is no research on prediction of these plastic defects such as short
shot defect before it happens.
• Optimization tools in injection molding: a number of research studies attempted
to optimize the process via different methods and tools such as Taguchi method,
numerical method, analytic hierarchy process (AHP), fuzzy AHP (FAHP), the
technique for the order performance by its similarity to the ideal solution (TOPSIS)
and fuzzy TOPSIS (FTOPSIS). This research applies a more powerful tool by
combining Taguchi method and FAHP and FTOPSIS which facilitate to generate
more feasible solution to the problem.

2.8 Research Objectives and Methodology

2.8.1 Research Objectives

The first objective is to define and validate new runner geometry, i.e. cross section,
to reduce the scrap rate and increase the quality of injected part in cold runner
technology.
The second objective is to define a new geometrical gate-feature, i.e. cross section,
causing the least internal and external defects of injected parts leading to scrap
reduction.
The third objective is to define and validate a new evaluation concept for a most
common defect in injection molding, namely short shot. The proposed concept deter-
mines the possibility of short shot before it happens and evaluates the related signif-
icant parameters.
38 2 Literature Review and Research Objectives

The fourth objective is to optimize the multi-objective problem in injection mold-


ing to determine the acceptable high moldability indices.

2.8.2 Research Methodology and Thesis Structure

The research methodology includes four stages corresponding to the research objec-
tives explained in the previous section as follows:
Stage 1: Development of cold runner design
The purpose of this sage is to propose a new runner-geometry which leads to mini-
mal scrap, lines up with the central flow stream of the gate, fill the cavities leaving
minimum defects, and facilitate the easier ejection of the part from mold tools. The
corresponding methodology consists of: design, calculation, simulation, and experi-
mental modules. The design module proposes a new runner-geometry, namely ellip-
tical, by comparing its efficiency, internal and external defects, and scrap reduction
with those of round runners. In calculation module, the dimensions of the elliptical
runner are determined on the basis of empirical data. In simulation module, different
analysis of SolidWorks Plastic in conjunction with FEM such as analysis of different
defects and pressure drop are employed to compare the feasibility of the elliptical
and round runners, and consequently justify the superiority of the former. Finally,
the experimental module validates the simulation results via a real case study. The
detailed framework for this methodology is explained in Chap. 3.
Stage 2: Development of gate design
The purpose of this stage is to propose and validate a new gate-geometry, i.e. an
improved edge gate, in comparison with the current one.
A corresponding methodology consists of four modules: design, calculation, sim-
ulation, and experimental modules. In design module, the quality of the injected part,
internal and external defects, and scrap reduction are evaluated and compared for
the improved and current edge gate. Calculation module determines the dimensions
of the improved and current edge gate. In simulation module, different analysis of
SolidWorks Plastic in conjunction with FEM such as analysis of different defects and
pressure drop are employed to compare the feasibility of the improved and current
edge gates, and consequently justify the superiority of the former. Finally, the exper-
imental module validates the simulation results via a real case study. The details of
proposed methodology are presented in Chap. 4.
Stage 3: The analysis of short shot possibility
In this stage, the possibility of short shot defect is determined by evaluating related
process and geometric parameters before the short shot happens.
A corresponding methodology consists of three modules: modelling, simulation,
and experimental modules. In modelling module, the sprue, the runner and gate are
designed for the specific application. In simulation module, different simulations
2.8 Research Objectives and Methodology 39

are conducted via SolidWorks Plastics to evaluate related process and geometric
parameters. Also statistical tools such as Taguchi, S/N ratio, and ANOVA are applied
to determine the significance of selected parameters. Finally, a real case study justifies
the simulation results. The detailed framework for this methodology is presented in
Chap. 5.
Stage 4: Optimization of process parameters
In this stage the optimization of the process parameters in multi-objective injection
process is implemented via integration of Taguchi with FAHP and TOPSIS to deter-
mine the acceptable high moldability indices. The proposed method consists of four
modules: problem description; application of FAHP with Taguchi; TOPSIS for the
calculation of varied weight and determination of moldability indices.
In problem description module, three common plastic defects namely short shot
possibility, shrinkage and warpage are taken into consideration via FAHP along with
Taguchi method to rate the seriousness of each defect. The simulated results are
evaluated by SolidWorks plastic for 18 experiments using Taguchi method based
on L18 orthogonal array; the initial weight of each plastic defect is calculated via
FAHP. In the third module TOPSIS is applied on three different defects to rank the
above-mentioned 18 experiments based on their deviation from the ideal solution.
Finally, in the fourth module moldability indices are calculated. Finally, a real case
study justifies the simulation results. The detailed framework for this methodology
is presented in Chap. 6. For the details of the thesis structure refer to the Table of
Contents.

2.9 Concluding Remarks

The literature of injection molding in manufacturing system was reviewed in this


chapter based on which four significant parameters which determine the quality of
injected parts, namely mold design, part design, material, and process parameters
were identified. This literature reviews also revealed that there has not been enough
research on process parameters, optimization of injection process, and the effect of
mold design. This is due to the fact that the high number of geometric and process
parameters makes the optimization process very complicated.
Four limitations in the existing literature review were detected. First, the effect
of other runner geometries (e.g. elliptical) on the scrap rate reduction was ignored.
Second, the modification of edge gate to reduce the rate of internal and external
defects was not investigated. Third, plastic defect detection was investigated only
after they happen through the process, but not before, to prevent them. Fourth, in
optimization of injection molding process, only the best moldability index was eval-
uated, but no other alternatives close enough. The methodology proposed herein is
to fill the research gaps identified in this research.
40 2 Literature Review and Research Objectives

References

Agazzi, A., Sobotka, V., Goff, R. L., Garcia, D., & Jarny, Y. (2010). A methodology for the design
of effective cooling system in injection moulding. International Journal of Material Forming,
3(1), 13–16.
Ahmad, A. H., Leman, Z., Azmir, M. A., Muhamad, K. F., Harun, W. S. W, Juliawati, A., & Alias, A.
B. S. (2009). Optimization of warpage defect in injection moulding process using ABS material.
In Third Asia International Conference on Modelling & Simulation (pp. 470−474).
Amiri, M. P. (2010). Project selection for oil-fields development by using the AHP and fuzzy
TOPSIS methods. Expert Systems with Applications, 37(9), 6218–6224.
Altan, M. (2010) Reducing shrinkage in injection moldings via the Taguchi, ANOVA and neural
network methods. Materials and Design, 31, 599–604.
Amer, Y., Moayyedian, M., Hajiabolhasani, Z., & Moayyedian, L. (2013). Improving injection
moulding processes using experimental design. World Academy of Science, Engineering and
Technology, 75, 3–28.
An, C.-C., & Chen, R.-H. (2008). The experimental study on the defects occurrence of SL mold in
injection molding. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 201(1–3), 706–709.
Bickerton, S., & Abdullah, M. Z. (2003). Modeling and evaluation of the filling stage of injec-
tion/compression moulding. Composites Science and Technology, 63(10), 1359–1375.
Bikas, A., Pantelelis, N., & Kanarachos, A. (2002). Computational tools for the optimal design of
the injection moulding process. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 122(1), 112–126.
Calhoun, D. A. R., & Golmanavich, J. (2002). Plastics technician’s toolbox-extrusion-fundamental
skills and polymer science. Ron Jon.
Chen, R. S., Lee, H. H., & Yu, C. Y. (1997). Application of Taguchi’s method on the optimal pro-
cess design of an injection molded PC/PBT automobile bumper. Composite Structures, 39(3–4),
209–214.
Chen, W., Wang, M., Fu, G., & Chen, C. (2008). Optimization of plastic injection molding pro-
cess via Taguchi’s parameter design method, BPNN, and DFP. In Proceedings of the Seventh
International Conference on Machine Learning and Cybernetics, Kunming (pp. 3315–3321).
IEEE.
Chen, W.-C., Liou, P.-H., & Chou, S.-C. (2014). An integrated parameter optimization system
for MIMO plastic injection molding using soft computing. International Journal of Advanced
Manufacturing Technology, 73(9–12), 1465–1474.
Chen, M.-Y., Tzeng, H.-W., Chen, Y.-C., & Chen, S.-C. (2008). The application of fuzzy theory for
the control of weld line positions in injection-molded part. ISA Transactions, 47(1), 119–126.
Cheng, J., Liu, Z., & Tan, J. (2012). Multiobjective optimization of injection molding parameters
based on soft computing and variable complexity method. International Journal of Advanced
Manufacturing Technology, 66(5–8), 907–916.
Cheng, J., Feng, Y., Tan, J., & Wei, W. (2008). Optimization of injection mold based on fuzzy
moldability evaluation. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 208(1–3), 222–228.
Chiang, K.-T., & Chang, F.-P. (2007). Analysis of shrinkage and warpage in an injection-molded
part with a thin shell feature using the response surface methodology. International Journal of
Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 35(5–6), 468–479.
Choi, D.-S., & Im, Y.-T. (1999). Prediction of shrinkage and warpage in consideration of residual
stress in integrated simulation of injection molding. Composite Structures, 47(1–4), 655–665.
Dai, W., Liu, P., & Wang, X. (2002). An approved mold pin gate and its flow pattern in the cavity.
Journal of Injection Moulding Technology, 6(2), 115–119.
Dang, X.-P. (2013). General frameworks for optimization of plastic injection molding process
parameters. Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory,41.
Deng, Y.-M., Zheng, D., Sun, B.-S., & Zhong, H.-D. (2008). Injection molding optimization for min-
imizing the defects of weld lines. Polymer-Plastics Technology and Engineering, 47(9), 943–952.
References 41

Dimla, D. E., Camilotto, M., & Miani, F. (2005). Design and optimisation of conformal cooling
channels in injection moulding tools. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 164–165,
1294–1300.
Ekmekçioğlu, M., Kaya, T., & Kahraman, C. (2010). Fuzzy multicriteria disposal method and site
selection for municipal solid waste. Waste Management, 30(8–9), 1729–1736.
Erzurumlu, T., & Ozcelik, B. (2006). Minimization of warpage and sink index in injection-molded
thermoplastic parts using Taguchi optimization method. Materials and Design, 27(10), 853–861.
Fisher, J.M. (2003). Handbook of molded part shrinkage and warpage. Plastics design library.
Goodship, V. (2004). Troubleshooting injection moulding (Vol. 15). iSmithers Rapra Publishing.
Gokey, J., & Harris, T. (2004). An investigation into the gate location and its effects on product
quality in injection molding. In: Annual technical conference—ANTEC, Conference Proceedings.
Society of Plastics Engineers, Chicago
Guoa, W., Maoa, H., & Bei Lia, X. G. (2014). Influence of processing parameters on molding
process in microcellular injection molding. In 11th International Conference on Technology of
Plasticity, ICTP 2014, 19–24 October 2014 (pp. 670–675). Nagoya, Japan: Nagoya Congress
Center.
Harper, C. A. (1999). Modern plastics handbook. Lowell: University of Massachusetts.
He, W., Zhang, Y. F., Lee, K. S., Fuh, J. Y. H., & Nee, A. Y. C. (1998). Automated process
parameter resetting for injection moulding: a fuzzy-neuro approach. Journal of Intelligent Man-
ufacturing,9(1), 17–27.
Ho, J., Chu, K., & Mok, C. (2005). Minimizing manufacturing costs for thin injection molded
plastic components. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 26(5–6),
517–526.
Huang, M.-C., & Tai, C.-C. (2001). The effective factors in the warpage problem of an injection-
molded part with a thin shell feature. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 110(1), 1–9.
Jui-Ming, L., & Wang, P.-J. (2002). Self-learning control for injection molding based on neural
networks optimization. Journal of Injection Molding Technology, 6(1), 58–71.
Kazmer, D., Lotti, C., Bretas, R. E. S., & Zhu, L. (2004). Tuning and control of dimensional
consistency in molded products. Advances in Polymer Technology, 23(3), 163–175.
Khoshooee, N., & Coates, P. D. (1998). Application of the Taguchi method for consistent.
Kima, H. S., Sonb, J. S., & Imc, Y. T. (2003). Gate location design in injection molding of an
automobile junction box with integral hinges. Journal Mater Process Technology,140, 110–115.
Kitayama, S., Onuki, R., & Yamazaki, K. (2014). Warpage reduction with variable pressure profile
in plastic injection molding via sequential approximate optimization. International Journal of
Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 72(5–8), 827–838.
Kramschuster, A., Cavitt, R., Ermer, D., Chen, Z. B., & Turng, L.-S. (2006). Effect of processing
conditions on shrinkage and warpage and morphology of injection moulded parts using micro-
cellular injection moulding. Plastics, Rubber and Composites, 35(5), 198–209.
Kwak, T. S., Suzuki, T., Bae, W. B., Uehara, Y., & Ohmoria, H. (2005). Application of neural
network and computer simulation to improve surface profile of injection molding optic lens.
Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 170(1–2), 24–31.
Lee, K. S., & Lin, J. C. (2006). Design of the runner and gating system parameters for a multi-cavity
injection mould using FEM and neural network. International Journal Of Advanced Manufac-
turing Technology, 27, 1089–1096.
Li, H., Guo, Z., & Li, D. (2007). Reducing the effects of weldlines on appearance of plastic products
by Taguchi experimental method. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology,
32(9–10), 927–931.
Li, X.-P., Zhao, G.-Q., & Yang, C. (2014). Effect of mold temperature on motion behavior of short
glass fibers in injection molding process. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing
Technology, 73(5–8), 639–645.
Liao, S. J., & Hsieh, W. H. (2004). Shrinkage and warpage prediction of injection-molded thin-wall
parts using artificial neural networks. Polymer Engineering & Science, 44(11), 2029–2040.
42 2 Literature Review and Research Objectives

Liao, S. J., Chang, D. Y., Chen, H. J., Tsou, L. S., Ho, J. R., Yau, H. T., et al. (2004). Optimal
process conditions of shrinkage and warpage of thin-wall parts. Polymer Engineering & Science,
44(5), 917–928.
Lih, S. T., Peic, M., & Bradley, D. K. (2002). Process simulation and optimization for injection
molding-experimental verifications and field applications. Journal of Injection Molding Technol-
ogy, 6(2), 143–155.
Liu, S.-J., & Chang, J.-H. (2000). Application of the Taguchi method to optimize the surface quality
of gas assistant injection molding composites. Journal of Reinforced Plastics and Composites,
19(17), 1352–1362.
Lo, W. C., Tsai, K. M., & Hsieh, C. Y. (2009). Six sigma approach to improve surface precision of
optical lenses in the injection-molding process. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing
Technology, 41(9–10), 885–896.
Lotti, C., Ueki, M. M., & Bretas, R. E. S. (2002). Prediction of the shrinkage of injection molded iPP
plaques using artificial neural networks. Journal of Injection Molding Technology, 6(3), 157–176.
Mathivanan, D., & Parthasarathy, N. S. (2009). Prediction of sink depths using nonlinear modeling
of injection molding variables. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology,
43(7–8), 654–663.
Mekhilef, N., Ait-Kadi, A., & Ajji, A. (1995). Weld lines in injection-moulded immiscible blends:
model predictions and experimental results. Polymer, 36(10), 2033–2042.
Meza, O., Vega, E., & Pérez, E. (2013). Influential factors on the outer lens color in an indus-
trial injection molding process. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology,
66(1–4), 455–460.
Modraka, V., & Mandulakb, J. (2013). Exploration of impact of technological parameters on surface
gloss of plastic parts. In 8th CIRP Conference on Intelligent Computation in Manufacturing
Engineering.
Oktem, H., Erzurumlu, T., & Col, M. (2005). A study of the Taguchi optimization method for
surface roughness in finish milling of mold surfaces. International of Advanced Manufacturing
Technology, 28(7–8), 694–700.
Oktem, H., Erzurumlu, T., & Uzman, I. (2007). Application of Taguchi optimization technique
in determining plastic injection molding process parameters for a thin-shell part. Materials and
Design, 28(4), 1271–1278.
Oroszlány, Á., & Kovács, J. G. (2010). Gate type influence on thermal characteristics of injection
molded biodegradable interference screws for ACL reconstruction. International Communica-
tions in Heat and Mass Transfer, 37, 766–769.
Ozcelik, B., & Erzurumlu, T. (2006). Comparison of the warpage optimization in the plastic injec-
tion molding using ANOVA, neural network model and genetic algorithm. Journal of materials
processing technology, 171(3), 437–445.
Ozcelik, B., & Sonat, I. (2009). Warpage and structural analysis of thin shell plastic in the plastic
injection molding. Materials and Design, 30(2), 367–375.
Ozcelik, B., Ozbay, A., & Demirbas, E. (2010). Influence of injection parameters and mold materials
on mechanical properties of ABS in plastic injection molding. International Communications in
Heat and Mass Transfer, 37(9), 1359–1365.
Patil, S. K. & Kant, R. (2014). A fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS framework for ranking the solutions of
Knowledge Management adoption in Supply Chain to overcome its barriers. Expert Systems with
Applications, 41(2), 679–693.
Pirc, N., Schmidt, F., Mongeau, M., Bugarin, F., & Chinesta, F. (2009). Optimization of 3D cooling
channels in injection molding using DRBEM and model reduction. International Journal of
Material Forming, 2(1), 271–274.
Pomerleau, J., & Sanschagrin, B. (2006). Injection molding shrinkage of PP: experimental progress.
Polymer Engineering & Science, 46(9), 1275–1283.
Pye, R. G. W. (1989). Injection mould design: A textbook for the novice and a design manual for
the thermoplastice industry. Harlow, Essex England: Longman Scientific & Technical.
References 43

Rutkauskas, Ž., & Bargelis, A. (2007). Knowledge–based method for gate and cold runner definition
in injection mold design. Mechanics, 66(4), 49–54.
Saaty, T. L. (1980). The analytical hierarchy process, planning, priority. Resource Allocation. RWS
Publications, USA.
Shen, C., Wang, L., Cao, W., & Qian, L. (2007). Investigation of the effect of molding variables
on sink marks of plastic injection molded parts using Taguchi DOE technique. Polymer-Plastics
Technology and Engineering, 46(3), 219–225.
Song, M. C., Liu, Z., Wang, M. J., Yu, T. M., & Zhao, D. Y. (2007). Research on effects of injection
process parameters on the molding process for ultra-thin wall plastic parts. Journal of Materials
Processing Technology, 187, 668–671.
Subramanian, N. R., Tingyu, L., & Seng, Y. A. (2005). Optimizing warpage analysis for an optical
housing. Mechatronics, 15(1), 111–127.
Tang, S. H., Tan, Y. J., Sapuan, S. M., Sulaiman, S., Ismail, N., & Samin, R. (2007). The use
of Taguchi method in the design of plastic injection mould for reducing warpage. Journal of
Materials Processing Technology, 182(1–3), 418–426.
Toe, C. (2001). Shrinkage behavior and optimization of injection molded parts studied by the
Taguchi Method. Polymer Engineering & Science, 41(5), 703–711.
Torfi, F., Farahani, R. Z. & Rezapour, S. (2010). Fuzzy AHP to determine the relative weights of
evaluation criteria and Fuzzy TOPSIS to rank the alternatives. Applied Soft Computing, 10(2),
520–528.
Tosello, G., Gava, A., Hansen, H. N., & Lucchetta, G. (2010). Study of process parameters effect on
the filling phase of micro-injection moulding using weld lines as flow markers. The International
Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 47(1–4), 81–97.
Tsai, K.-M., Hsieh, C.-Y., & Lo, W.-C. (2009). A study of the effects of process parameters for injec-
tion molding on surface quality of optical lenses. Journal of Materials Processing Technology,
209(7), 3469–3477.
Tsoi, H.-P., & Gao, F. (1999). Control of injection velocity using a fuzzy logic ru le-based controller
for thermoplastics injection molding. Polymer Engineering & Science, 39(1), 3–17.
Urval, R., Lee, S., Atre, S. V., Park, S.-J., & German, R. M. (2008). Optimisation of process con-
ditions in powder injection moulding of microsystem components using a robust design method:
Part I. Primary design parameters. Powder Metallurgy, 51(2), 133–142.
Vaidya, O. S., & Kumar, S. (2006). Analytic hierarchy process: an overview of applications. Euro-
pean Journal of operational research, 169(1), 1–29.
Viana, J. C., & Cunha, A. M. (2002). The impact behavior of weld-lines in injection molding.
Journal of Injection Molding Technology, 6(4), 259–271.
Wang, M.-W., & Fu, G.-L. (2008). Optimal molding parameter design of PLA micro lancet needles
using Taguchi method (pp. 2731–2735).
Westerdale, S. (2006). Multivariate process analysis utilizing six sigma methodologies for the
prediction of injection molded part quality. University of Massachusetts Lowell.
Wu, C.-H., & Huang, Y.-J. (2007). The influence of cavity deformation on the shrinkage and
warpage of an injection-molded part. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Tech-
nology, 32(11–12), 1144–1154.
Wu, C. H., & Liang, W. J. (2005). Effects of geometry and injection-molding parameters on weld-
line strength. Polymer Engineering & Science, 45(7), 1021–1030.
Xie, P., Guo, F., Jiao, Z., Ding, Y., & Yang, W. (2014). Effect of gate size on the melt filling behavior
and residual stress of injection molded parts, Materials and Design, 53, 366–372.
Yang, C., Su, L., Huang, C., Huang, H. X., Castro, J. M., & Yi, A. Y. (2011). Effect of packing pres-
sure on refractive index variation in injection molding of precision plastic optical lens. Advances
in Polymer Technology, 30(1), 51–61.
Yang, Y. K., Shie, J. R., Liao, H. T., Wen, J. L., & Yang, R. T. (2008). A study of Taguchi and design
of experiments method in injection molding process for polypropylene components. Journal of
Reinforced Plastics and Composites, 27(8), 819–834.
44 2 Literature Review and Research Objectives

Yen, C., Lin, J. C., Li, W., & Huang, M. F. (2006). An abductive neural network approach to the
design of runner dimensions for the minimization of warpage in injection mouldings. Journal of
Materials Processing Technology, 174(1–3), 22–28.
Yin, F., Maoa, H., Hua, L., Guo, W., & Shu, M. (2011). Back propagation neural network modeling
for warpage prediction and optimization of plastic products during injection molding. Materials
and Design, 32(4), 1844–1850.
Yousef, A., Mehdi, M., Zeinab, H., & Lida, M. (2013). Reducing warpage in injection moulding
processes using Taguchi method approach: ANOVA. In Proceedings of the IASTED International
Conference, Engineering and Applied Science (pp. 227–232). ACTA Press.
Zhai, M., Lam, Y. C., & Au, C. K. (2006). Runner sizing and weld line positioning for plastics
injection moulding with multiple gates. Engineering with Computers, 21(3), 218–224.
Zhang, Y., Deng, Y.-M., & Sun, B.-S. (2009). Injection molding warpage optimization based
on a mode-pursuing sampling method. Polymer-Plastics Technology and Engineering, 48(7),
767–774.
Zhao, P., Zhou, H., Li, Y., & Li, D. (2010). Process parameters optimization of injection molding
using a fast strip analysis as a surrogate model. The International Journal of Advanced Manu-
facturing Technology, 49(9–12), 949–959.
Zhen-Yong, Z., Zheng-Chao, G., & Jiao-Ying, S. (2000). Research on integrated design techniques
for injection mold runner system. Journal of Computer Aided Design & Computer Graphics,
12(1), 6–10.
Zhou, H. (2013). Computer modeling for injection molding. Wiley, Inc.
Chapter 3
Modification of Cold Runner Design
in Injection Molding Processes

3.1 Introduction

The past century has observed the rapid increase of plastics and their proliferation
into all markets. According to world consumption of raw materials by weight, plas-
tic is the highest in comparison with other old materials such as aluminum, steel,
rubber, copper, and zinc. It has resulted from specific properties and lower produc-
tion cost of plastics (Salimi et al. 2013; Zhou 2013). Injection molding is one of the
most significant processes for manufacturing of plastic products and approximately
one-third of all plastics are converted into parts via injection molding (Tang et al.
2006). The application of the injection molding process is increasing significantly in
many industries like packaging, aerospace and aviation, building and construction,
automotive parts, household articles and so on (Altan 2010; Tang et al. 2006; Zhou
2013). Three fundamental operations in injection molding are: (1) plastic granules
are converted into a melt; (2) molten plastic is injected into the mold cavity or cavi-
ties under pressure via sprue, runner and gate systems and (3) mold tools are opened
to eject the parts from the cavity (Dai et al. 2002; Hassan et al. 2010; Zhou 2013).
Due to the complexity of this process, different techniques are required to mini-
mize the scrap and improve the quality of the injected parts. The quality in injection
molding depends on material characteristics, mold design, part design and process
parameters (Altan 2010; Khoshooee and Coates 1998; Mok et al. 2001; Ni 2002).
As mentioned in Chap. 1, wrong design of mold components is one of the sources
of defects in injection molding. Accordingly, one of the objectives of this research is
to propose the new cross section of runner in injection molding to reduce the scrap
and improve the quality of injected parts. To achieve this, the following steps have
to be accomplished
• Critical review of the relevant literature of injection molding and the evaluation
of runner geometry which leads to the minimization of scrap and the quality
evaluation of injected parts.

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019 45


M. Moayyedian, Intelligent Optimization of Mold Design and Process Parameters
in Injection Molding, Springer Theses, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03356-9_3
46 3 Modification of Cold Runner Design in Injection Molding Processes

• Development of a new methodology for cold runner in injection molding. The


proposed methodology is based on evaluation of the new cross section of runner
for scrap reduction and quality improvement.

3.2 Literature on Injection Molding Process and Quality


Evaluation Factors

Four main factors determining the quality of injected parts, namely part design,
mold design, process parameters, and material characteristics are selected for the
analysis of runner in injection molding. Part design heavily depends on customer
requirements and more than 17,000 plastic materials are used throughout the world.
Therefore, these factors are not included in this research. In mold design, the main
purpose of a runner is to transfer the molten plastic from sprue to all cavities via
the gate. There are different cross sectional shapes for runner each of which has
different applications (Pye 1989; Zhen-Yong et al. 2000) (see Fig. 3.1). There are
different techniques in designing the runner in injection molding technology. Also,
the integration of different techniques optimizes the design process (Zhen-Yong et al.
2000). The designer should evaluate different factors for selecting the right geometry
of the runner for a specific product. The most popular shape of runner for Two-plate
mold tools is round shape which provides the highest efficiency (Pye 1989). For three-
plate mold tools, the trapezoidal and modified trapezoidal are the best selections if
the runner is to be manufactured only in one half of the mold but still they are not
acceptable. This is due to the fact that the gate which cannot be positioned in line
with the central flow stream (Goodship 2004). Hence, various cross-sectional area of
a runner can be considered to regulate the flow leading to a better injection process.
In this section, a brief overview of relevant studies in mold design is presented.
This literature review also provides important key points for the development of a
conceptual methodology for defining the new cross section of runner in injection
molding.
Tsai (2013) proposed that one of the factors which determine the quality of injected
parts is the runner which is a connection line between sprue and gates.
Calhoun and Golmanavich (2002) presented that in cold runner, the main source
of scrap is from runner and gate after de-gating. Hence, different factors have been
evaluated for runner design to demonstrate the significance of runner in injection
molding, namely (a) smaller runner size to minimize the scrap; (b) easy ejection
from mold tools and removal from molded parts; and (c) filling the cavity quickly
with minimum defects.
Ni (2002) stated that the design and location of runner and gate affect the shrinkage
and warpage rate of the injected parts; and according to Ozcelik and Erzurumlu (2006)
different cross sectional shapes of runner can be chosen based on the products design.
Beaumont (2004) defines a runner as a channel between the injection molding
machine and the cavities to deliver the molten plastic. Also it refers to the portion of
3.2 Literature on Injection Molding Process and Quality Evaluation Factors 47

molten plastic from the initial point of sprue to the end point where it enters to the
gate. The potential for a runner to affect the size, shape, and mechanical properties
of the injected parts is high.
The main objectives of a runner are:
• Delivery of molten plastic to the desired gating location.
• Minimization of excess material which reduces the regrind, scrap and handling.
• Provision of identical melt conditions to the cavities.
The delivery of molten plastic starts from the injection machine nozzle and ends
in the mold cavities via sprue, runner, and gate. Each of these regions has its own
significance. These components affect the injection process, namely the ability to fill
and pack the cavity, the cycle time, and also the mechanical properties of the injected
parts. The overall cycle time for one injection process is a significant parameter
which is affected by the cooling time of sprue and runner.
Jones (2008) identifies three fundamental parameters in the runner design as cross
sectional shape, diameter, and cavity layout. There are seven types of cross sectional
shapes available for the runner for different applications as shown in Fig. 3.1.
Goodship (2004) maintained that in injection molding, the most common cross
sectional shape for runner is round shape. In selecting the round shape for specific

round semi-circular square

Modified Trapezoidal
rectangular Trapezoidal

Polygon
Fig. 3.1 Different cross sectional shape of runner
48 3 Modification of Cold Runner Design in Injection Molding Processes

part design, three main elements are (a) smaller runner size to minimize the scrap;
(b) easy ejection from mold tools; (c) filling the cavity quickly with minimum sink
mark, weld lines and no short shot.
Fischer (2003) proposed that ejecting a runner from the cavity with rectangular,
square, and polygon shape is challenging due to their sharp corners. If an engineer
cannot determine the appropriate cross sectional shape of runner, pressure drops
which leads to incomplete filling of cavities and high level of heat transfer to mold
walls. Yen et al. (2006) stated that the shape and the length of the channel are
significant for achieving the optimal flow and consequently products with fewer
defects.
Based on the previous studies, four key points can be extracted:
• Most of the defects in injection molding are related to mold design, specially the
geometry of feeding system which includes the runner.
• Most of the above studies have shown that the geometry of runner critically affects
the quality of plastic parts such as the appearance and mechanical properties.
• Round cross section of runner has the highest efficiency in comparison with other
cross sections like rectangular or trapezoidal.
• Scrap reduction is the key point of the studies reviewed in this chapter.
This chapter attempts to use the key points mentioned above to develop a method-
ology for designing the new cross section of runner in injection molding. Therefore,
the proposed methodology includes the following: a new cross sectional shape of
runner is introduced and compared with round cross section; the calculation of new
design is presented; the flow analysis of molten plastic is simulated via SolidWorks
Plastic and Finite Element Method (FEM); the experiments are conducted to validate
the simulation results.

3.3 Methodology for the Design of the New Cross Section


of Runner in Injection Molding

The main purpose of this chapter is to investigate a new geometry of runner which
leads to scrap reduction, positioning in line with the central flow stream of gate, filling
the cavities with minimum defects, and easier ejection of parts from mold tools.
For this purpose, elliptical cross section is taken under investigation and accurately
compared with round cross section of runner.
The proposed methodology, Fig. 3.2, consist of four main modules as follows:
• Design module: evaluates the new cross section of runner from different aspects,
namely efficiency, internal and external defects, and scrap reduction
• Calculation module: determines the right size of runner with new cross section for
a specific application.
3.3 Methodology for the Design of the New Cross Section … 49

Step 1: Design module


Comparison between new and current geometries
of runner

Step 2: Calculation module

Calculation of runner for two cross sections

Step 3: Simulation module Step 4: Experimental module

Defect analysis for two cross Validation of simulation result


sections of runner via via designing and manufacturing
SolidWorks Plastic of mould tools and injection test

Step 5: Output

Scrap reduction in injection molding

Fig. 3.2 The proposed methodology

• Simulation module: evaluates the new cross section of runner via different analysis
of SolidWorks Plastic such as the analysis of different defects, pressure drop, and
the feasibility of the new cross section.
• Experimental module: helps validate the simulation result.
50 3 Modification of Cold Runner Design in Injection Molding Processes

3.3.1 Design Module

To demonstrate the significance of elliptical cross section, the best existing cross
sections to compare with are rectangular and square shape. There are three different

ratios of width/length ( ab ) in designing the rectangular runner (Pye 1989) (Fig. 3.3).
Rectangular runner with different ratios is chosen based on the part design. Lower
scrap rate of runner and easier ejection from mold tools are among the advantages
of rectangular shape over square shape. Pressure drop is one of the disadvantages
of this cross section which happens by decreasing the width of the square, due to
changes in flow parameters and Reynolds number (Pye 1989).
The comparison between the ratios of circular and elliptical cross is similar to
those of square and rectangular cross section. As shown in Fig. 3.4, D is the diameter
of circle and a and b are the major axis and minor axis of ellipse respectively. a is
constant and b changes based on different industrial applications (Fig. 3.4) as it
leads to further reduction in scrap, easier ejection of parts from the cavity, and
further reduction in cycle time. Hence, proposing different ratio of ab depends on
many parameters of part design including size and thickness.
Advantages of an elliptical runner over different cross sections of runner are as
follows:
1. Reduction in scrap: the size and volume of runner are the root causes of product
scrap. Hence an elliptical runner leads to less scrap in comparison with round
runner (Pye 1989).
2. Easier ejection of parts from the cavity: elliptical runner, after cooling process
has less contact surface with mold walls, compared to round shape, which leads
to easier ejection of the injected parts from the cavity.
3. Cycle time reduction: the elliptical runner requires less amount of molten plastic;
hence the cycle time which includes the injection and cooling phase time is
reduced.

square cross section


rectangular cross section with ( ratio of 1/2

rectangular cross section with ( ratio of 1/4 rectangular cross section with ( ratio of 1/6

Fig. 3.3 Comparison between square and rectangular cross sections


3.3 Methodology for the Design of the New Cross Section … 51

circular cross section elliptical cross section with b=0.9a

elliptical cross section with b=0.8a elliptical cross section with b=0.7a

Fig. 3.4 Comparison between round and elliptical shape of runner

4. Central flow stream of gate with runner: the central flow stream of elliptical
runner lines up with that of most of the gate designs.

3.3.2 Calculation Module

Different rules are considered for runner cross section such as rapid filling of the
cavity, easier ejection and easier removal from the injected parts, smaller runner size
to minimize the scrap (Jones 2008; Knepper 2004; Zhai et al. 2006).
The gate diameter is determined by Eq. 3.1 (Jones 2008).

d  c1 c2 S
4
(3.1)

where S = total surface area of the product in mm2 , c1 and c2 are empirical factors as
described in Table 3.1. For most of the industrial applications, this method provides
a reasonable result for gate size (Jones 2008).
For the determination of runner diameter for products up to 200 g weight
and 3 mm thickness, Eq. 3.2 is applied (Pye 1989; Selvaraj and Venkataramaiahb
2013).
52 3 Modification of Cold Runner Design in Injection Molding Processes

Table 3.1 Empirical factors for c1 and c2 (Pye 1989)


Value of c1 and c2 based on material and wall thickness
Wall 0.75 1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2
thickness
(mm)
Value of c1 0.178 0.206 0.230 0.242 0.272 0.294
Value of c2 0.8 (Nylon) 0.9 (PVC) 0.6 (PE, PS) 0.7 (PC, PP)

√ √
w× 4 L
D (3.2)
3.7
where w is the weight of the product and L is the length of the runner.
The calculation of runner and gate dimension is significant to be accurate accord-
ing to the following reasons (Rosato and Rosato 2000):
1. Large runner and gate require longer chilling which can prolong the operation
cycle.
2. The increased weight of a large runner subtracted from the available machine
capacity (in terms of the grains per stroke) can be utilized by injecting it into
the cavities and the plasticizing capacity of the heating cylinder in kilograms per
hour.
3. Large runners produce more scrap, which must be grounded and reprocessed. It
leads to higher operation cost and an increase possibility of contamination.
4. In two plate’s mold which has more than eight cavities, the projected area of
the runner adds significantly to the projected area of the cavity which leads to
reduction of the effective clamping force available.
One of the main defects in injection molding is short shot which happens when the
dimensions and geometry of runner are not evaluated correctly. This study evaluates
the runner with an elliptical cross section for two thin round plates with diameter of
100 mm and thickness of 1 mm. When short shot is eliminated for injected parts,
it is possible to apply the new cross section for different part design with different
thicknesses.
The first step is to calculate the gate diameter of each cavity of 1 mm thickness and
100 mm diameter). The reason for having two round parts with thickness of 1 mm is
to facilitate the evaluation of the effect of elliptical cross section on injected parts with
more than 1 mm thickness. According to Eq. 3.1 and Table 3.1, the following factors
should be evaluated. The selected material for this calculation is polypropylene (PP).
1. S = total surface area of the product (mm2 ).
2. Values of c2 according to selected material.
3. Thickness of product (mm).
 √ 
d  0.7 × 0.206 × 7853  1.35 mm
4
3.3 Methodology for the Design of the New Cross Section … 53

The second step is to calculate the runner diameter. According to Eq. 3.2, the
following factors should be evaluated:
1. Weight of injected part according to selected material (gram).
2. Length of the runner (mm).
√ √
20.68 × 4 26
D  2.80
3.7
Finally, the diameter of circular cross section is 2.8 mm. For an elliptical cross
section, by considering the major axis a as a constant and the minor axis b as a
variable, there will be different ratio of ab for runner diameters in different applications
which needs to be determined.
To overcome the pressure drop as the molten plastic travels through the machine
nozzle, sprue, runner, and gate, the impact of the machine nozzle and pressure
losses need to be evaluated. To ensure that the calculation for the round cross
section is correct, another parameter to evaluate is the maximum pressure drop
along the length of the runner. The runner length is considered to be safe if it is
calculated based on maximum pressure drop of 70 MPa throughout the runner. It
means that if the calculated pressure drop for the runner is lower than the max-
imum pressure drop, the runner dimension is satisfactory (Jones 2008). For most
of the injection molding processes, Eqs. 3.3, 3.4 and 3.5 give a satisfactory result
(Jones 2008; SolidWorks 2013).

4 Q̇
γ̇  (3.3)
πr 3
τ  ηγ̇ (3.4)
2τ L
P (3.5)
r

where γ̇ is shear rate, Q̇ is flow rate, η is viscosity of material at melt temperature,


P is the pressure drop, τ is the maximum shear stress based on the material, L is the
length of the runner, and r is the radius of the runner. The maximum shear stress for
polypropylene is 0.25 MPa (Jones 2008).

2 × 0.25 × 130 × 10−3


P  46.42 MPa
1.40 × 10−3

As the result is well below the maximum pressure drop of 70 MPa, the runner
length is satisfactory. The result for elliptical cross section is also satisfactory based
on the size of the minor Axis (0.8a) as shown in the following

2 × 0.25 × 130 × 10−3


P  58.03 MPa
1.12 × 10−3
54 3 Modification of Cold Runner Design in Injection Molding Processes

The result for 0.6a is not satisfactory as the pressure drop is higher than the
maximum pressure drop for the injected part. The pressure drop calculation is not
to determine the best cross section. It is only to ensure that the pressure drop for the
new cross section is lower than the critical point which is 70 MPa.

2 × 0.25 × 130 × 10−3


P  77.4 MPa
0.84 × 10−3

3.3.3 Simulation Module

After designing two circular parts as two samples for this application, the next step
is to simulate the injection process via SolidWorks Plastic. For the simulation, the
injection system is needs to be defined. Hence, designing the sprue, runner and gate
with consideration of prior calculations should be taken into account (Fig. 3.5).
To ensure that the analysis results are accurate, FEM is used by selecting triangular
mesh (Fig. 3.6) made of polypropylene (PP). Different sizes were evaluated for the
surface mesh. For two circular parts, the surface mesh with element size of 1 mm
is selected. For the injection system (which consists of critical parts, namely sprue,
runner and gate), smaller sizes of mesh are considered. Hence, mesh refinement is
conducted with element size of 0.3 mm for sprue and runner and 0.2 mm for the gate
for both elliptical and round cross sections. The total length of the runner and gate
of the two circular parts with the diameter of 100 mm is 28 mm and the sprue has
60 mm length with draft angle 1.5°.
The next stage is to set up appropriate process parameters. For this setup, filling
time is 0.59 s, melt temperature is 230 °C, mold temperature is 50 °C, pressure holding
time is 2.04 s, and pure cooling time is 3.9 s. The geometry and dimension of the
injection system which includes sprue, runner and gate, have significant effects on
operation cycle time, cooling time, and different defects, namely sink marks, short
shot etc. (Mathivanan and Parthasarathy 2009). The feasibility of the new cross

Fig. 3.5 Samples of injection system with sprue, runner and gate
3.3 Methodology for the Design of the New Cross Section … 55

Fig. 3.6 FEA for elliptical cross section

section of the runner is evaluated via simulation. Different analyses are considered,
namely ease of fill, filling time analysis, sink mark analysis; and injection pressure
at the end of injection process. As shown in Fig. 3.7, ease of fill for the elliptical
cross section is in the green area which is considered as the most acceptable level of
the ease of filling the cavities.
One of the common defect in injection molding is short shot which hap-
pens in thin wall parts or far from the gate if there are long flow distances
(Goodship 2004). According to the simulation results, these parts can be success-
fully filled and even the filling time for an elliptical cross section as shown in
Fig. 3.8a is lower than that of the round cross section of runner (see Fig. 3.8b).
Although this difference is 0.0001 s it must be noted that for injecting parts with
thick wall thickness and bigger size, filling time is one of the parameters which
determine the final cost of the injected part. The bigger size of the runner, the more

Fig. 3.7 Easy filling of injected parts with elliptical cross section
56 3 Modification of Cold Runner Design in Injection Molding Processes

Fig. 3.8 a Filling time for elliptical cross section b filling time for round cross section

injection time requires filling the runner. For bigger injected parts, the size of the run-
ner becomes bigger which leads to an increase in total filling time and cooling time
(Calhoun and Golmanavich 2002).
Another factor to evaluate is the analysis of flow front central temperature which
represents the flow front temperature at every region of the injected parts to ensure
the new cross section of runner does not affect other factors. Based on the simulation
results, the flow front central temperature in every region of the injected parts is
230.15 °C for the elliptical cross section (Fig. 3.9a), same for a round cross section
(Fig. 3.9b). Hence, the possibility of short shot in the cavities for an elliptical cross
section runner is low.
Another common defect related to the runner’s dimensions and geometry is sink
marks. Sink marks are the depression on the surface of the molded plastic parts
which happen during the plastic cooling process (Goodship 2004). If the diameter
of runner is too small, the cavities do not fill properly and this leads to internal
stresses in the injected parts. When the runner is too small the pressure losses happen
through the runner leading to sink marks due to sealing off the runner before the
injected parts is packed out properly (Calhoun and Golmanavich 2002). Therefore,

Fig. 3.9 a Flow front central temperature for elliptical cross section b flow front central temperature
for round cross section
3.3 Methodology for the Design of the New Cross Section … 57

sink marks analysis in designing the runner is necessary. No sink marks were evident
in the injected parts of both elliptical and round cross sections except for the sprue
(Fig. 3.10). The surface quality of sprue and runner are not significant as they are
considered as scrap at the end of the injection process.
Weld lines and meld lines are two common defects in plastic industry which lead
to weakening or breaking of injected parts. The meeting angle (θ) of the two counters
of molten plastic is used to differentiate the weld and meld lines. If θ is less than 135°,
it is considered to be a weld line, otherwise it is a meld line (Ananthanarayanan et al.
2008; SolidWorks 2013). The weld and meld lines analyses of two cross sections are
conducted as shown in Figs. 3.11 and 3.12 respectively. They do not exist in injected
parts of elliptical cross section of runner. It should be noted that meld and weld lines
for runner and sprue, are not important as these zones are not considering as critical.
As shown in Fig. 3.11, the new cross section does not have any meld line because
the maximum meeting angle of two counters is less than 135°, whereas the meeting
angle for round cross section is more than 135° as shown in Fig. 3.12.
Another analysis which is necessary to conduct is the injection pressure analy-
sis. Based on the simulation, these parts can be successfully filled with injection

Fig. 3.10 Sinks mark simulation for a elliptical cross section and b round cross section

Fig. 3.11 Weld and meld lines analysis for elliptical runner
58 3 Modification of Cold Runner Design in Injection Molding Processes

Fig. 3.12 Weld and meld lines analysis for round runner

Fig. 3.13 Injection pressure


for both round and elliptical
cross sections of runner

pressure of 42 MPa and clamp force of 19.65 tons. The injection pressure is less than
the satisfactory 66% of the maximum injection pressure limit (based on the selected
injection machine whose maximum injection pressure is 100 MPa) as shown in
Fig. 3.13 (SolidWorks 2013). It can be seen that injection pressure for a round cross
section is 40 MPa which is close to that of an elliptical cross section. Hence, by
changing the round cross section to the elliptical cross section, the required injec-
tion pressure for injecting the materials into the cavities does not exceed from the
maximum inlet pressure of the machine.

3.4 Experimental Module

A commercial injection molding granule polypropylene (PP) was employed to pro-


duce two circular plates which have 100 mm of diameter and 1 mm thickness. The
material properties are listed in Table 3.2 (material library of SolidWorks plastic
3.4 Experimental Module 59

2014). Drilling machine, CNC (Computer Numerical Control) milling machine and
grinding machine were used to fabricate the mold tools and fully electric horizontal-
plastic-injection machine—Poolad-Bch series—was employed for the experiments.
Mold design
There are different design concepts in fabrication of mold tools. In this study, a
two-plate mold of one parting line with double cavities with an injection system
and without an ejector pin was employed. The mold tools were made of steel—AISI
1045—with surface hardness of 56 HRC. The runners with an elliptical cross section,
gate, and sprue bush were allocated in the cavity plate after grinding (Fig. 3.14a) and
before (Fig. 3.14b).
In designing the mold tools, another element to be considered is the cooling system
which leads to the solidification of plastic parts. Based on the design of plastic parts,
the design for the cooling system varies. For this experiment a circular cooling system
of cavity plate was selected (see Fig. 3.15).

Table 3.2 Material Melt temperature 230 °C


properties of PP
Max melt temperature 280 °C
Min melt temperature 200 °C
Mold temperature 50 °C
Melt flow rate 20 cm3 /10 min
Max shear stress 250,000 Pa

Fig. 3.14 a Cavity plate with elliptical cross section of runner after grinding b cavity plate with
elliptical cross section of runner before grinding
60 3 Modification of Cold Runner Design in Injection Molding Processes

Fig. 3.15 Cooling systems of cavity plate for solidification of injected parts

Fig. 3.16 Air vents to avoid the air trap in injected parts

Air vents were also considered in fabrication of the mold tools whose function is
to release the air trapped in the cavity after closing the mold tools; otherwise short
shot happens. Each cavity has its own air vent (see Fig. 3.16).
Process parameter selection
Process parameters of filling time, melt temperature, mold temperature, pressure
holding time and pure cooling time are needed to be set at correct levels which depend
on the processing guide of the selected material and injection molding machine.
Table 3.3 demonstrates the level of each parameter for the injection process.
Experimental results
After setting up the mold tools and injection machine based on different process
parameters, the next step is to evaluate the effect of the elliptical cross section of
the runner on the injection process. To investigate the effectiveness of an elliptical
3.4 Experimental Module 61

Table 3.3 Level of each Factor Level


process parameters for
injection Filling time (s) 0.59
Melt temperature (°C) 230
Mold temperature (°C) 50
Pressure holding time (s) 2.04
Pure cooling time (s) 3.9

runner, the significance of filling the cavities and injection process had to be tested.
The result of short shot analysis (Fig. 3.17) shows that two cavities with elliptical
runners are filled with no short shot (i.e. completely).
When the injection pressure is higher than the maximum inlet pressure, and the
filling time is higher than the input parameter (filling time) of the injection machine,
short shot happens. A most significant outcome of these experiments was that, in
comparison with simulation results, the cavities filled properly even with lower inlet
pressure and filling time. The comparison of the simulation results and experimental
results is shown in Table 3.4. The margin-error for predicted and actual inlet pressure
and filling time, calculated from Eq. 3.6, are 7.36% and 3.38% respectively which
demonstrate the robustness of the elliptical cross section.

Fig. 3.17 Final injected parts with elliptical cross section

Table 3.4 Comparison of simulation and experimental result based on process parameters
Process parameter Simulation result Experimental result Margin error (%)
Inlet pressure 42.1 MPa 39 MPa 7.36
Filling time 0.59 s 0.57 s 3.38
62 3 Modification of Cold Runner Design in Injection Molding Processes

(Experimental test − Simulation)


Margin Error(%)  × 100 (3.6)
Simulation
The significant novelty of the outcome of this research is that designing elliptical
runner leads to reduction of scrap rate and cooling time, and achieving easier ejection
of the injected parts from the cavity. The cooling time for a round cross section is 4 s
per injection and for the elliptical cross section is 3.9 s per injection. Based on the
size of the minor Axis (0.8a) for elliptical cross section in comparison with round
cross section (a), and the comparison of cooling time for two different cross sections,
it can be extracted that the elliptical cross section in comparison with round cross
section has 20% reduction in scrap ( 0.8a
a
) and 2.5% reduction in cooling time ( 3.9
4
).

3.5 Concluding Remarks

A new cross section of runner (elliptical) in injection molding was developed with the
objective of scrap reduction, cooling time reduction, easier ejection of runner from
the cavity, and having central flow stream of gate with runner. The corresponding
methodology was divided into four main modules, namely design module, calculation
module, simulation module, and experiments module. An experiment was conducted
by injecting two circular plates of 1 mm thickness and the results were verified by
simulation confirming the robustness of the proposed design of process parameters
filling time, melt temperature, mold temperature, pressure holding time and pure
cooling time for which the margin error for inlet pressure and filling time were
7.36% and 3.38% respectively. It was also demonstrated that an elliptical runner in
comparison with a round cross section leads to 20% reduction in scrap rate and 2.5%
reduction in cooling time, and easier ejection of runner from the cavity.

References

Altan, M. (2010). Reducing shrinkage in injection moldings via the Taguchi, ANOVA and neural
network methods. Materials and Design, 31(1), 599–604.
Ananthanarayanan, A., Gupta S. K., & Bruck, H. A. (2008). Mechanical characterization of cold
weld-lines and meld lines in mesoscopic revolute joints for bioinspired structures. In Proceedings
of the XIth International Congress and Exposition.
Beaumont, J. P. (2004). Runner and Gating Design Handbook: tools for Successful Injection Mold-
ing.
Calhoun, D. A. R., & Golmanavich, J. (2002). Plastics technician’s toolbox-extrusion-fundamental
skills and polymer science, Ron Jon.
Dai, W., Liu, P., & Wang, X. (2002). An improved mold pin gate and its flow pattern in the cavity.
Journal of Injection Moulding Technology, 6(2), 115–119.
Fischer, J. (2003). Handbook of Molded Part Shrinkage and Warpage (Plastics Design Library).
William Andrew Pub, NY.
Goodship, V. (2004). Troubleshooting injection moulding (Vol. 15). iSmithers Rapra Publishing.
References 63

Hassan, H., Regnier, N., Pujos, C., Arquis, E., & Defaye, G. (2010). Modeling the effect of cooling
system on the shrinkage and temperature of the polymer by injection molding. Applied Thermal
Engineering, 30(13), 1547–1557.
Jones, P. (2008). Mould design guide.
Khoshooee, N., & Coates, P. D. (1998). Application of the Taguchi method for consistent polymer
melt production in injection moulding. Polymer Science and Technology, 212(8), 611–620.
Knepper, P. C. (2004). The effects of runner diameter on packing of a plastic part with injec-
tion molding. In ANTEC 2004—Annual Technical Conference Proceedings, Society of Plastics
Engineers.
Mathivanan, D., & Parthasarathy, N. S. (2009). Prediction of sink depths using nonlinear modeling
of injection molding variables. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology,
43(7–8), 654–663.
Mok, C. K., Chin, K. S., & Ho, J. K. L. (2001). An interactive knowledge-based cad system for
mould design in injection moulding processes. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing
Technology, 17(1), 27–38.
Ni, S. (2002). Reducing shrinkage and warpage for printer parts by injection molding simulation
analysis. Journal of Injection Molding Technology, 6(3), 177–186.
Ozcelik, B., & Erzurumlu, T. (2006). Comparison of the warpage optimization in the plastic injec-
tion molding using ANOVA, neural network model and genetic algorithm. Journal of materials
processing technology, 171(3), 437–445.
Pye, R. G. W. (1989). Injection mould design: a textbook for the novice and a design manual for
the thermoplastice industry. Harlow, Essex England: Longman Scientific & Technical.
Rosato, D., & Rosato, M. (2000). Injection molding handbook.
Selvaraj, S., & Venkataramaiahb, P. (2013). Design and fabrication of an injection moulding tool for
cam bush with baffle cooling channel and submarine gate. Procedia Engineering, 64, 1310–1319.
Salimi, A., Subasi, M., Buldu, L., & Karatas, C. (2013). Prediction of flow length in injection mold-
ing for engineering plastics by fuzzy logic under different processing conditions. Iran Polymer
Journal, 22(1), 33–41.
SolidWorks (2013). SolidWorks plastic.
Tang, S. H., Kong, Y. M., Sapuan, S. M., Samin, R., & Sulaiman, S. (2006). Design and thermal
analysis of plastic injection mould. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 171(2), 259–267.
Tsai, K. -M. (2013). Runner design to improve quality of plastic optical lens. The International
Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 66, 523–536.
Yen, C., Lin, J. C., Li, W., & Huang, M. F. (2006). An abductive neural network approach to the
design of runner dimensions for the minimization of warpage in injection mouldings. Journal of
Materials Processing Technology, 174(1–3), 22–28.
Zhai, M., Lam, Y. C., & Au, C. K. (2006). Runner sizing and weld line positioning for plastics
injection moulding with multiple gates. Engineering with Computers, 21(3), 218–224.
Zhen-Yong, Z., Zheng-Chao, G., & Jiao-Ying, S. (2000). Research on integrated design techniques
for injection mold runner system. Journal of Computer Aided Design and Computer Graphics,
12(1), 6–10.
Zhou, H. (2013). Computer modeling for injection molding. Wiley, Inc.
Chapter 4
Development of Gate Design and Filling
Process Analysis in Injection Molding

4.1 Introduction

Injection molding is one of the significant processes in industry. It has high man-
ufacturing rate, short product cycle, low percentage of scrap and can easily mold
complicated shapes (Lee and Lin 2006). Injection molding process has different
applications in many industries like packaging, aerospace and aviation, building
and construction, automotive parts, household articles and so on (Altan 2010; Tang
et al. 2006; Zhou 2013). Because of the complexity of injection molding process,
different techniques are required to minimize the scrap and improve the quality of
injected parts. The quality depends on material characteristics, mold design and pro-
cess parameters (Altan 2010; Khoshooee and Coates 1998; Mok et al. 2001; Ni
2002). As mentioned in Chap. 2, one of the sources of defects in injection molding
is the design of mold tools such as the design of the runner and gate. Accordingly,
the objective of this part of the research is to propose a new cross section of gate in
mold tools to reduce the scrap and improve the quality of injected parts. To achieve
this, the following steps must be accomplished
• Review of the applicable literature of injection molding technology and the eval-
uation of different gate cross-sections which lead to the minimization of scrap by
minimizing the internal and external defects.
• Development of a new methodology for gate type in injection molding technology.
The proposed methodology is based on evaluation of a new gate cross-section in
injection molding for scrap reduction and quality improvement.

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019 65


M. Moayyedian, Intelligent Optimization of Mold Design and Process Parameters
in Injection Molding, Springer Theses, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03356-9_4
66 4 Development of Gate Design and Filling Process Analysis …

4.2 Review of Literature on Injection Molding Process


and Quality Evaluation Factors

Injection molding is a key polymer processing technology when the requirement is


to make a part from a thermoplastic material with high dimensional stability and
accuracy (Oroszlány and Kovács 2010). Four main factors determining the quality
of injected parts, namely part design, mold design, process parameters, and material
characteristics, are used for the analysis of gate cross section. Part design heavily
depends on customer requirements for which more than 17,000 plastic materials are
used throughout the world; hence these factors were not included in this research.
In mold design, the main purpose of a gate is to transfer the molten plastic from
sprue to all cavities via the runner. There are different gate geometries with different
applications (Pye 1989; Zhen-Yong et al. 2000). Nine common gates are depicted
in Fig. 4.1 and, for selecting the right gate for a specific product; a designer should
evaluate different related factors.
In this section, an overview of related studies on gates in mold design is presented.
This literature review also describes the necessary key elements for the development
of a conceptual methodology for defining a new gate cross-section in mold design.
Xie et al. (2014) showed the undersized rectangular gate has many adverse effects
on the filling behavior and residual stress of molded parts. Also larger gates lead to
faster, filling of the cavity and smaller residual stresses.
Rutkauskas and Bargelis (2007) demonstrated that two factors which determine
the quality of injected part are the type and size of the gate. Oroszlány and Kovács
(2010) proved that different gate types do not affect part deformation or shrinkage
of injected parts in manufacturing of implants of thermoplastic materials, although
some differences are demonstrated in quality of injected parts.
Gokey and Harris (2004) demonstrated that the main purposes of a gate are (a) to
transfer the molten plastic into the cavities (b) to have a control over the melt flow
both in filling and packing stages and (c) to freeze the polymer at the end of injection
leading to the withdrawal of the screw.
Lee and Lin (2006) confirmed that the design of the runner and gate is one of
the significant factors in mold design which leads to an efficient injection molding
process with minimum plastic defects.
Huang and Tai (2001) acknowledged that, in thin wall technology one of the
common defects is warpage which results from the process parameters and gate
dimensions. The filling rate which is related to gate dimensions controls the flow
process in the cavity and changes the average shrinkage of the parts.
Kima et al. (2003) and Kim et al. (2002) determined that plastic defects such
as short shot or premature failure happen in an injected part which results from
inappropriate selection of gate locations. Appropriate gate location leads to achieving
a better resin flow and shorter hesitation time. Finally, the mechanical properties and
dimensional stability of the injected parts are improved as well.
Jones (2008) proposed that different rules are evaluated for gate type, namely
(a) smaller gate size to minimize the scrap; (b) easier ejection from mold tools and
4.2 Review of Literature on Injection Molding 67

Sprue gate Pin gate Spoke gate

Disk gate Edge gate Fan gate

Tab gate Tunnel gate Banana gate

Fig. 4.1 Different geometry design of gate system

de-gating; (c) central flow stream of gate with runner to reduce the internal and
external defects.
Dai et al. (2002) demonstrated that the gate or the initial entry point of molten
plastic into the cavities is a significant parameter for engineers to evaluate in mold
design; it should be as small as possible to avoid the excess material removal and
visible blemish of the injected parts.
Four key points can be extracted from the previous studies:
• The quality of injected parts is affected by mold design, specially the geometry of
feeding system including the gate.
• The type, design, and the location of the gate critically affect the quality of injected
parts including the dimensional, mechanical, and cosmetic properties.
• The literature review in this Chapter shows that the size of the gate is one of the
significant parameters which should be as small as possible to avoid excessive
material removal and visible blemish on the part.
68 4 Development of Gate Design and Filling Process Analysis …

• Reduction in different type of plastic defects is the main target in injection molding
design.
This chapter is to propose a methodology for designing a new gate cross-section
based on the above-mentioned dot points considering the following too:
• The new gate cross-section is introduced and compared with one of the common
one is called edge gate.
• The calculation of new design is presented; the flow analysis of molten plastic is
simulated via SolidWorks Plastic and Finite Element Method (FEM).
• The experiment is conducted to validate the simulation results.

4.3 Methodology for the Gate Type in Injection Molding

The aim of this Chapter is to develop a new gate cross-section in injection molding
which can lead an increase in the quality of injected parts, namely the dimensional,
mechanical, cosmetic properties, and be as small as possible to avoid excessive
material removal and visible blemish on the part. Also, reduction of different internal
and external defects, namely short shot, weld lines, and sink marks, is aimed herein.
The proposed methodology consists of four main modules as shown in Fig. 4.2 and
described below:
• Design module: evaluate the new cross section of an improved edge gate and
compare with the current edge gate from different aspects such as the quality of
injected parts, internal and external defects, and scrap reduction.
• Calculation module: define the right dimension of gate for modified and current
edge gate.
• Simulation module: evaluate the new cross section of an improved edge gate in
comparison with current edge gate analyzed with SolidWorks Plastic for different
defects, namely pressure drop, and the feasibility of the new cross section along
with FEM to improve the accuracy of simulation results.
• Experimental module: helps validate the simulation results via designing and man-
ufacturing of mold tools and also employment of statistical evaluation to determine
the significant parameters which affect the quality of injected parts.

4.3.1 Design Module

The main purpose of a gate is to transfer the molten plastic from the runner to the
cavities. The most basic type of the gate is an edge gate which has rectangular cross
section (Fig. 4.3). An improved edge gate removes the corners of rectangular cross
section of current edge gate. As shown in Fig. 4.4, a modified edge gate is of elliptical
cross section. Filling process of an improved edge gate is different from that of the
4.3 Methodology for the Gate Type in Injection Molding 69

Step 1: Design module


Comparison between modified and current
geometries

Step 2: Calculation module


Calculation of modified and current edge gate

Step 3: Simulation Step 4: Experimental

Validation of simulation result


Defect analysis for modified
via designing and
and current edge gate via
manufacturing of mould tools
SolidWorks Plastic
and injection test

Step 5: Output

Scrap reduction in injection molding

Fig. 4.2 Structural design of the proposed methodology

current edge gate. Also, de-gating of an improved edge gate is easier than that of the
current edge gate. It has resulted from replacing the rectangular cross section with
elliptical cross section.

4.3.2 Calculation Module

In this experiment Eqs. 4.1 and 4.2 (Pye 1989) are used to calculate the dimensions
of the current edge gate for each of the cavities of 1 mm thickness and 100 mm
diameter. The width and the height of the edge gate would be taken as the major and
70 4 Development of Gate Design and Filling Process Analysis …

Fig. 4.3 Current edge gate with runner

Fig. 4.4 a Cross section of an edge gate b current edge gate c cross section of modified edge gate
and d modified edge gate

minor axes of the replaced elliptical gate respectively. The runner and gate length in
total is 280 mm and the sprue is of 60 mm length with draft angle 1.5°. The width
of the gate

c2 S
w (4.1)
30
4.3 Methodology for the Gate Type in Injection Molding 71

where S is the area of part’s top surface in mm2 , and c2 is the material constant. For
different applications, this method provides a reasonable result for the gate width.
The height of the gate

h  c2 t (4.2)

where c2 is the material constant and t is the thickness of the injected parts.
To use Eqs. 4.1 and 4.2,
1. S  πr 2  π × 502  7855 mm2 .
2. c2  0.7 for polypropylene (PP) used herein (Table 3.1 of Chap. 3).
3. t  1 mm.

0.7 × 7855
w  2.06 mm
30

h  0.7 × 1  0.7 mm

Hence, the major and minor axis of the elliptical gate is 2.06 mm and 0.7 mm
respectively.

4.3.3 Simulation Module

After designing two circular parts as two samples for this application, the next step
is to simulate the part via SolidWorks plastic for which, the injection system, i.e. the
sprue, runner and gate should be obtained (Fig. 4.5).
To ensure that the analysis results are accurate, FEM was used by selecting trian-
gular mesh as shown in Fig. 4.6 made of polypropylene (P.P). A mesh convergence
study was applied and different sizes were evaluated for the surface mesh with tri-
angular elements. Finally, the surface mesh with element size of 1 mm was chosen
as the best result for the injected parts. For the injection system (which consists of

Fig. 4.5 Samples of injection with sprue, runner and gate


72 4 Development of Gate Design and Filling Process Analysis …

Fig. 4.6 Finite element analyses for an improved edge gate

critical parts, namely sprue, runner and gate), element size of 0.3 mm for sprue and
runner and 0.2 mm for the gate were used for both elliptical and rectangular cross
sections.
The next stage is to set up appropriate process parameters. For this setup, filling
time is 0.55 s, melt temperature is 230 °C, mold temperature is 50 °C, pressure
holding time is 1.97 s, and pure cooling time is 3.56 s based on material library
of SolidWorks plastic 2014, injected material, injection machine, simulation advice,
and human expert. The geometry and size of injection system are the factors affecting
the operation cycle time, cooling time which lead to different plastic defects, namely
sink marks and short shot. After running the simulation, the main factors to evaluate
if the improved edge gate is acceptable in terms of the new cross section and size,
are ease of fill, filling time analysis, sink marks analysis, and injection pressure at
the end of filling. As shown in Fig. 4.7, ease of fill for an improved edge gate is the
green area which is at the most satisfactory level (SolidWorks plastic 2014).
Filling time is another factor to ensure that by proposing the modified edge gate
as a replacement of current edge gate, the filling time does not increase. Based on
the simulation via SolidWorks plastics, no difference in filling time was observed for
edge gate and modified edge gate. Hence, it was concluded that the modified edge
gate does not negatively influence filling time, as shown in Fig. 4.8.
Another quality evaluation for the injected parts is the weld and meld lines
analysis. Weld lines is one of the common defects in the plastic industry which
leads to weakening or breaking of the injected parts. Weld lines can be formed when
two flow fronts meet due to multi-gate molds or inserts (Ozcelik 2011). To differen-
tiate between the weld lines and meld lines, the meeting angle (θ) of the two counters
of molten plastic is important. If θ is less than 135° it is considered to be a weld
line, otherwise it is a meld line (Ananthanarayanan et al. 2008; SolidWorks 2013).
The weld and meld line analyses of the modified edge gate and current edge gate
are shown in Figs. 4.9 and 4.10 respectively where there are no weld or meld line
associated with modified edge gate except the interface of sprue and runner, the zones
4.3 Methodology for the Gate Type in Injection Molding 73

Fig. 4.7 Easy filling of injected parts with an improved edge gate

Fig. 4.8 a Filling time for current edge gate b filling time for modified edge gate

which not considered as critical. As for the current edge gate the weld and meld line
are at the interface of gate and the injected parts which is considered as an internal
defect.
Another defects related to the gate type and runner dimension is sink mark. Sink
mark is the depression on the surface of the injection molded plastic occurring due
to the shrinkage of material during the plastic cooling process (Goodship 2004). As
shown in Fig. 4.11, there is sink mark on the side surface of injected parts with current
edge gate. Based on the weld line analysis it is clear that in current edge gate the weld
and meld line are at the interface of gate and the injected parts. It has resulted from
the turbulence of molten plastic when the flow fronts meet each other. In modified
edge gate, there is no sink mark on the side surface of injected parts which results
from a smooth flow of molten plastic into the cavities by removing the sharp corners
of current edge gate.
Shear rate and shear stress are two main parameters which change the quality of
injected parts. Before the evaluation of shear rate and shear stress for the samples,
some parameters need to be defined.
74 4 Development of Gate Design and Filling Process Analysis …

Fig. 4.9 Weld lines and meld lines analysis for current edge gate

Fig. 4.10 Weld lines and meld lines analysis for the improved edge gate

Fig. 4.11 a Sink mark simulation for current edge gate b sink mark simulation for modified edge
gate
4.3 Methodology for the Gate Type in Injection Molding 75

Fig. 4.12 Simple shear flows between parallel plates (Pye 1989)

Viscosity: The melt’s inner resistance to flow processes is defined as the viscosity
of the melts. In injection molding the flow process involves the shear of the melt
which result from the contact surface of melt and the cavity surface. The distribution
of velocity is given by Eq. 4.3 (Zhou 2013).
V
v1  x2 (4.3)
H
As shown in Fig. 4.12, one of the two parallel plates is fixed, while the other
moves in a straight line with a velocity V (Zhou 2013).
The shear rate is calculated by Eq. 4.4 which presents the difference in velocity
between the upper and lower side of the volume element in relation to its thickness.
If V is constant, then the shear rate remains steady as:
dν1 V
γ̇   (4.4)
d x2 H

Shear stress τ another parameter to evaluate is as defined in mechanics of materials


F
τ (4.5)
A
where F is the total force required to move the upper plate and A represent the surface
area of the plate in contact with the liquid.
The ratio of shear stress τ to shear rate γ̇ is defined as viscosity in Eq. 4.6.
τ
η (4.6)
γ̇

In injection molding, the shear rate in gate is the highest in comparison with that
of in the runner and cavity. So, local flow rate and shear rates continuously change
during the filling stage of injection process based on the channel depth and the cross
section of flow (Zhou 2013). The shear rate and the shear stress for the current edge
gate and modified edge gate were determined via SolidWorks plastic as shown in
Figs. 4.13 and 4.14 respectively.
76 4 Development of Gate Design and Filling Process Analysis …

Fig. 4.13 Shear rate analyses for a current edge gate and b modified edge gate

Fig. 4.14 Shear stress analyses for a current edge gate and b modified edge gate

The corners of current edge gate increase the turbulence of molten plastic which
in turn leads to an increase in shear rate and shear stress, and finally reduction in
mechanical properties of the injected parts. In constant, modified edge gate causes a
smooth motion of molten plastic into the cavities with minimum shear stress.
Another factor to evaluate is the flow velocity distribution for both gates to ensure
the uniform flow of molten plastic into the cavities. As shown in Fig. 4.15, the
flow velocity distributions for current and modified edge gates are 15.0556 cm/s and
27.6465 cm/s respectively. It is acceptable that in modified edge gate by removing
the sharp corner of current edge gate, the size of the gate becomes smaller and the
velocity of molten plastic into the cavities is increased.
Another parameter to be evaluated for both gate cross sections is the packing
pressure near the gate and also far away from it. The exertion of pressure on the
cavity during the packing stage is controlled by the reciprocating screw. It is clear
that the speed of molten plastic in modified edge gate is higher than that of the
current edge gate. Because of the equal filling time for both gate cross sections, the
packing pressure at the end of the filling in modified edge gate does not affect the
injected parts while in the current edge gate the packing pressure is higher as shown
in Fig. 4.16 which leads to damages in the injection machine and the formation of
different plastic defects such as flashes.
4.3 Methodology for the Gate Type in Injection Molding 77

Fig. 4.15 Flow velocity distributions for a current edge gate and b modified edge gate

Fig. 4.16 Packing pressure at the end of filling for a current edge gate and b modified edge gate

Fig. 4.17 Injection pressure 50


Maximum Inlet Pressure

limit for current edge and


improved edge gate 40
30
Edge gate
(Mpa)

20
10 Modified edge
gate
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6
Time (Sec)

Another parameter which is necessary to investigate for the determination of the


right size and the new cross section of modified edge gate is the injection pressure.
According to the simulation, this part can be successfully filled with injection pressure
of 46.3 MPa and clamp force of 20.23 Tone. The injection pressure is less than the
satisfactory 66% of the maximum injection pressure limit as shown in Fig. 4.17
(SolidWorks 2013). Hence, the possibility of short shot for the injected parts is
low. The injection pressure for current edge gate is 44.85 MPa and clamp force of
19.98 Tone.
78 4 Development of Gate Design and Filling Process Analysis …

4.4 Experimental Module

The parts selected for the injection process were two circular plates of 100 mm
diameter and 1 mm thickness. Drilling machine, CNC (Computer Numerical Control)
milling machine and grinding machine were used to fabricate the mold tools. The
selected material for the injection was Polypropylene and the injection machine for
data collection was Poolad-Bch series.

4.4.1 Mold Design

Based on different applications, different concepts in manufacturing of mold tools


were allocated, namely Two-plate and Three-plate. According to the geometry of
injected parts and the feeding system which includes the runner and gate, Two-
plate mold with two cavities without ejector pin was manufactured with steel—AISI
1045—with surface hardness 56 HRC. The manufacturing of two modified edge
gates for two cavities was carried out (Fig. 4.18).

4.4.2 Selection of Process Parameters

To ensure that other parameters do not affect the quality of injected parts, setting the
process parameters on a right level is needed. The right level determination is related
to different factors, namely selected geometry for injected parts, injected material,
injection machine, simulation advice, and human expert. Process parameters of filling

Fig. 4.18 a Cavity plate with modified edge gate and cooling channel before grinding b final cavity
plate after grinding
4.4 Experimental Module 79

Table 4.1 Process Factor Right level


parameters and their right
levels for the injection process Filling time (s) 0.59
Melt temperature (°C) 230
Mold temperature (°C) 50
Pressure holding time (s) 2.04
Pure cooling time (s) 3.89

time, melt temperature; mold temperature, pressure holding time, and pure cooling
time are needed to be set at right levels as shown in Table 4.1 (SolidWorks 2013).

4.4.3 Experimental Results

To study the modified edge gate in comparison with current edge gate different
analyses related to gate selection were applied such as short shot and sink marks
analysis. Two cavities with modified edge gate were filled properly and there was no
short shot defect for the modified edge gate. Also the appearance of different samples
demonstrated that there was no flash in the injected parts with modified edge gate.
Pye (1989) states that gates and runners with sharp corners lead to different stresses
related to the flow of molten plastic near the gate or the interface of gate and the
injected parts. The modified edge gate did not have any sharp corners unlike current
edge gate and also it has a central flow with runner which all together leads to
a uniform flow of molten plastic into the cavities to reduce the scrap of injected
parts. The parts with modified edge gate were evaluated at the right level of input
parameters as shown in Fig. 4.19 in which no short shot or flashes were detected.
Also, it is obvious that the contact area of modified edge gate of elliptical cross
section is easier to cut, and it is smaller than that of the current edge gate leading
less visible blemishes, hence less scrap rates (injected parts with high level of visible
blemishes are considered as scrap). As it can be seen in Fig. 4.20, the parts with
current edge gate have flashes at the edge of the parts.

4.5 Scrap Evaluation by Taguchi Method

To determine the scrap rate of injected parts, the mold tools with both current and
modified edge gate were considered for data collection and Taguchi method which
includes selection of orthogonal array, signal to noise ratio (S/N ratio), and analysis
of variance (ANOVA) was applied to determine the significant parameters affecting
scraps.
80 4 Development of Gate Design and Filling Process Analysis …

Fig. 4.19 Injected part with modified edge gate in right level of each parameter

Fig. 4.20 Injected part with


current edge gate in right
levels of each parameter

4.5.1 Selection of Factors

Selected geometric and process parameters are shown in Table 4.2.


4.5 Scrap Evaluation by Taguchi Method 81

Table 4.2 Selected factors with different levels


Parameters Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
Gate type, A 1 2 –
Filling time, B (s) 0.2 0.6 1
Part cooling time, C (s) 3 3.9 5
Pressure holding time, D (s) 1 2 3
Melt temperature, E (°C) 200 230 280

4.5.2 Selection of Orthogonal Array

According to the number of parameters and chosen levels, L18 orthogonal array was
considered as shown in Table 4.3.

4.5.3 S/N Ratio Approach

The S/N ratio evaluates the deviation of quality characteristic from the desired value.
The S/N ratio applies the average values of selected objective to convert the experi-

Table 4.3 L18 orthogonal array [20]


Experiment A B C D E
1 1 1 1 1 1
2 1 1 2 2 2
3 1 1 3 3 3
4 1 2 1 1 2
5 1 2 2 2 3
6 1 2 3 3 1
7 1 3 1 2 1
8 1 3 2 3 2
9 1 3 3 1 3
10 2 1 1 3 3
11 2 1 2 1 1
12 2 1 3 2 2
13 2 2 1 2 3
14 2 2 2 3 1
15 2 2 3 1 2
16 2 3 1 3 2
17 2 3 2 1 3
18 2 3 3 2 1
82 4 Development of Gate Design and Filling Process Analysis …

mental result into the value which is feasible for the evaluation characteristic of an
optimum parameter analysis. S/N ratio is of three categories, namely the nominal-
the better, the smaller the better and the higher the better. Since the objective is to
reduce the scrap in injection molding via optimum level of selected parameters, the
smaller the better quality characteristic satisfies the requirement, and it is defined in
Eq. 4.7.
The Mean Square Deviation (MSD) for the smaller the better quality characteristic
can be stated by Eqs. 4.7 and 4.8 (Tang et al. 2007)
1 2
MSD  Yi (4.7)
n
S
 −10 log M S D (4.8)
N
where Y i is the value of scrap rate (the ratio of approved parts to the rejected parts)
and n is the total number of data points. The calculated scrap rates and S/N ratio are
shown in Table 4.4. From the data in Table 4.4, the average S/N ratios are calculated
as shown in Table 4.5 to determine the optimal levels of four process parameters and
one geometric parameter. Based on the orthogonal array (L18), Table 4.4, for each
trial number, 10 samples (of common parameters A, B, C, D, and E) were injected
(total of 180 samples) and the scrap rates were determined. Out of 18 trial number,
trial numbers 1 to 9 are for modified edge gate and 10 to 18 are for current edge gate.
The scrap rate for 180 parts was evaluated as shown in Fig. 4.21. There is 16.6%
scrap rate for modified edge gate and 56.6% scrap rate for current edge gate, i.e. 40%
reduction in scrap which is due to the following advantages of modified edge gate:
• Easier de-gating of the injected parts with minimum visible blemish.
• Reduction in different internal and external defects, namely sink marks, weld line
or meld line, and flashes (as a result of removing the sharp corners of current edge
gate).
• Having a smooth flow of molten plastic into the cavities.

Fig. 4.21 Scrap rate for 0.7


both modified and current
edge gate 0.6
0.5
Scrap Rate

0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17
Trial Number
4.5 Scrap Evaluation by Taguchi Method 83

Table 4.4 Scrap rate and S/N ratio for 18 trial numbers
Experiment A B (s) C (s) D (s) E (°C) Scrap rate S/N
1 1 0.2 3 1 200 0.2 13.979
2 1 0.2 3.9 2 230 0.2 13.979
3 1 0.2 5 3 280 0.1 20
4 1 0.6 3 1 230 0.2 13.979
5 1 0.6 3.9 2 280 0.2 13.979
6 1 0.6 5 3 200 0.2 13.979
7 1 1 3 2 200 0.2 13.979
8 1 1 3.9 3 230 0.1 20
9 1 1 5 1 280 0.1 20
10 2 0.2 3 3 280 0.6 4.436
11 2 0.2 3.9 1 200 0.7 3.098
12 2 0.2 5 2 230 0.5 6.02
13 2 0.6 3 2 280 0.5 6.02
14 2 0.6 3.9 3 200 0.5 6.02
15 2 0.6 5 1 230 0.5 6.02
16 2 1 3 3 230 0.6 4.436
17 2 1 3.9 1 280 0.6 4.436
18 2 1 5 2 200 0.6 4.436

Table 4.5 Response table of S/N ratio


Gate type (A) Filling time Part cooling Pressure Melt
(B) time (C) holding time temperature
(D) (E)
Level 1 15.986 10.252 9.472 10.252 9.248
Level 2 4.992 10 10.252 9.736 10.739
Level 3 – 11.215 11.742 11.478 11.478
|T| 10.994 0.962 1.490 −1.226 2.230

From the S/N response Table 4.5, it can be concluded that the larger value of T
demonstrate the significance of each parameter in increasing the scrap rate through
the injection process out of which T is the highest. Other parameters have very
low contribution to the increase of scrap rate. So the optimum set of parameters,
corresponding to the highest value of S/N ratio is A1 , B3 , C3 , D3 , and E3 .

4.5.4 Analysis of Variance

The scrap rate in Table 4.4 was analyzed via Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and
the percentage of contribution (PC) for each parameter was determined as shown
in Table 4.6. ANOVA computes the quantities; namely degree of freedom (f), sum
84 4 Development of Gate Design and Filling Process Analysis …

Table 4.6 Analysis of variance for different parameters


Facto f SS MS F PC (%)
A 1 543.9721 543.9721 122.4278 86.9620
B 2 4.9327 2.4663 0.5550 0.7885
C 2 15.9764 7.9882 1.7978 2.5540
D 2 9.6182 4.8091 1.0823 1.5376
E 2 15.4827 7.7413 1.7422 2.4751
Error 8 35.5456 4.4432 – –
Total 17 625.5279 36.7957 – –

of squares (SS), Mean Square (MS), F-statistic (F), and percentage of contribution
(PC). From Table 4.6 the percentage weigh of gate type was found to be the most
influential parameter with a contribution of 86.96%, and the contribution of other
parameters, namely filling time, part cooling time, pressure holding time and melt
temperature to be very low. Using the data in Table 4.6 in conjunction with F-
distribution statistic table, the F0.05, f, Total  F0.05, 1, 17  4.45 for 1 − 0.05  95%
confidence level. Based on F-statistic  122.4278 > 4.45 for the gate type, it is clear
that gate type is the most significant parameter contributing to the increase of scrap
rate.

4.6 Concluding Remarks

In this chapter, a new methodology for the design of a new cross section (elliptical)
of an edge gate in injection molding was developed with the objective of easier de-
gating from the injected parts with less visible blemish, defect reduction, namely
sink marks, weld lines and meld lines, better contact surface between the gate and
the injected parts hence reducing the scrap. The developed methodology consists of
four main modules, namely design introduction, design calculation, simulation, and
experiments through which elliptical gate was developed and verified via simulation
and experiments by considering filling time, melt temperature, mold temperature,
pressure holding time and pure cooling time as process parameters and gate type as
a geometric parameter.
The experiment, along with simulation and Taguchi method verified that, in com-
parison with current edge gate, the modified edge gate has less internal and external
defects, namely sink marks, weld and meld lines leads to easier de-gating from the
injected parts and 40% reduction in scrape rate. Also, the percentage of contribution
in creating different plastic defects was related to the gate type (current edge gate)
as a significant factor via Taguchi method and ANOVA.
References 85

References

Altan, M. (2010). Reducing shrinkage in injection moldings via the Taguchi, ANOVA and neural
network methods. Materials and Design, 31(1), 599–604.
Ananthanarayanan, A., Gupta, S. K., & Bruck, H. A. (2008). Mechanical characterization of cold
weld-lines and meld lines in mesoscopic revolute joints for bioinspired structures. In Proceedings
of the XIth International Congress and Exposition.
Dai, W., Liu, P., & Wang, X. (2002). An improved mold pin gate and its flow pattern in the cavity.
Journal of Injection Moulding Technology, 6(2), 115–119.
Goodship, V. (2004). Troubleshooting injection moulding (Vol. 15). iSmithers Rapra Publishing.
Gokey, J., & Harris, T. (2004). An investigation into the gate location and its effects on product
quality in injection molding. In ANTEC conference proceedings, Society of Plastics Engineers.
3, 3920–3924.
Huang, M. -C., & Tai, C. -C. (2001). The effective factors in the warpage problem of an injection-
molded part with a thin shell feature. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 110, 1–9.
Jones, P. (2008). The Mould Design Guide. Smithers Rapra Technology Limited.
Khoshooee, N., & Coates, P. D. (1998). Application of the Taguchi method for consistent polymer
melt production in injection moulding. Polymer Science and Technology, 212(8), 611–620.
Kim, B. Y., Nam, G. J., & Lee, J. W. (2002). Optimization of filling process in RTM using a genetic
algorithm and experimental design method. Polymer Composites, 23(1), 72–86.
Kima, H. S., Sonb, J. S., & Imc, Y. T. (2003). Gate location design in injection molding of an
automobile junction box with integral hinges. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 140,
110–115.
Lee, K. S., & Lin, J. C. (2006). Design of the runner and gating system parameters for a multi-cavity
injection mould using FEM and neural network. International Journal of Advanced Manufactur-
ing Technology, 27(11–12), 1089–1096.
Mok, C. K., Chin, K. S., & Ho, J. K. L. (2001). An interactive knowledge-based CAD system for
mould design in injection moulding processes. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing
Technology, 17(1), 27–38.
Ni, S. (2002). Reducing shrinkage and warpage for printer parts by injection molding simulation
analysis. Journal of Injection Molding Technology, 6(3), 177–186.
Oroszlány, Á., & Kovács, J. G. (2010). Gate type influence on thermal characteristics of injection
molded biodegradable interference screws for ACL reconstruction. International Communica-
tions in Heat and Mass Transfer, 37(7), 766–769.
Ozcelik, B. (2011). Optimization of injection parameters for mechanical properties of specimens
with weld line of polypropylene using Taguchi method. International Communications in Heat
and Mass Transfer, 38(8), 1067–1072.
Pye, R. G. W. (1989). Injection mould design: a textbook for the novice and a design manual for
the thermoplastice industry. Harlow, Essex England: Longman Scientific & Technical.
Rutkauskas, Ž., & Bargelis, A. (2007). Knowledge–based method for gate and cold runner definition
in injection mold design. Mechanics, 66(4), 49–54.
SolidWorks (2013). SolidWorks Plastic.
Tang, S. H., Kong, Y. M., Sapuan, S. M., Samin, R., & Sulaiman, S. (2006). Design and thermal
analysis of plastic injection mould. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 171(2), 259–267.
Tang, S. H., Tan, Y. J., Sapuan, S. M., Sulaiman, S., Ismail, N., & Samin, R. (2007). The use
of Taguchi method in the design of plastic injection mould for reducing warpage. Journal of
Materials Processing Technology, 182(1–3), 418–426.
Xie, P., Guo, F., Jiao, Z., Ding, Y., & Yang, W. (2014). Effect of gate size on the melt filling behaviour
and residual stress of injection molded parts. Materials and Design, 53, 366–372.
Zhen-Yong, Z., Zheng-Chao, G., & Jiao-Ying, S. (2000). Research on integrated design techniques
for injection mold runner system. Journal of Computer Aided Design and Computer Graphics,
12(1), 6–10.
Zhou, H. (2013). Computer modeling for injection molding. Wiley, Inc.
Chapter 5
The Analysis of Short Shot Possibility
in Injection Molding Process

5.1 Introduction

The most significant process for manufacturing the plastic is injection molding.
Injection molding is considered for mass production of the complex geometry of
plastic products which requires accurate dimensions (Shen et al. 2007). One of the
key points of this industry is the advantages such as short product cycles, good
mechanical properties, low cost, and light weight (Oktem et al. 2007). The final
quality of an injected part is related to different factors which are part design, mold
design, material and process parameters (Chen et al. 2014; Mok et al. 2001; Modrak
et al. 2013). Injection molding process is unstable repeated work, consisting of filling,
packing and cooling phases. During the filling stage, a hot polymer melts quickly
to fill the cold cavity. During the packing stage, the pressure of molten plastic for
injection is increased to ensure that the cavity is filled properly. Finally, during the
cooling stage, the molten plastic cools down and solidifies adequately so that the
final product is stable for ejection from the cavity (Zhou 2013; Chiang and Chang
2007; Hassan 2013; Zhao et al. 2014).
Different factors cause different defects of the products like warpage, weld line
and sink mark during the manufacturing process, but short shot causes the most
serious defects of plastic parts. The evaluation of short shot in injection molding is
very complicated (Oktem et al. 2007; Goodship 2004; Huang and Tai 2001). When
insufficient material inters the mold cavity, short shot will happen (Kitayama et al.
2014). It is caused by different factors such as wrong plastic material selection,
incorrect processing parameters, incorrect mold design, and part design. Hence,
because of the complexity of melt flow process, it is critically significant to have
control over the factors of influence during the injection molding process (Goodship
2004; Li et al. 2014)

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019 87


M. Moayyedian, Intelligent Optimization of Mold Design and Process Parameters
in Injection Molding, Springer Theses, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03356-9_5
88 5 The Analysis of Short Shot Possibility …

In this chapter, different process and geometric parameters for reducing the pos-
sibility of short shot defect in injection molding will be evaluated. To make sure
that other factors such as the size of runner and the gate system do not affect the
simulation and experimental result, the selection of right size for runner and gate
system is conducted via simulation and manufacturing process for mold tools. New
definition for short shot analysis is proposed which will be considered via simulation
and experiments for 18 trial numbers. This approach will address the quality evalua-
tion of injected parts in Chaps. 3 and 4 which were based on geometric parameters of
runner and gate system only. In this chapter, both geometric and process parameters
for a specific plastic defect will be evaluated. In order to handle the complexity of
proposed method of evaluation, this chapter intends to:
Review the literature on short shot defects and all significant factors which lead to
short shot in injection molding.
Developing a new approach for the evaluation of short shot possibility. This approach
is based on computer simulation modelling and Taguchi method.
It also demonstrates the applicability of the developed approach via realistic experi-
ments.

5.2 Review of Literature on Short Shot Possibility


and Other Defects

The formation of short shot on the injected part is one of the defects which eliminate
the overall success of the injection molding process. There are different physical
causes for incomplete filling such as small shot volume, venting problems, insuf-
ficient injection pressure, low injection speed, wrong temperature control in mold
and so on. The effects of process conditions and geometric parameters on the forma-
tion of short shot on the injected parts need to be understood in order to control the
processing conditions to reduce the flaw (Goodship 2004; Knepper 2006).
Different defects of the products like warpage, weld line and sink mark are caused
by many factors during the manufacturing process, but short shot causes the most
highly defects of plastic parts in terms of the quality. The reasons behind short shot in
injection molding are very complicated and numerous (Oktem et al. 2007; Goodship
2004; Huang and Tai 2001).
In general, a short shot will happen when insufficient material which was injected
into the mold, cannot fill the cavity properly (Kitayama et al. 2014). It is because
of wrong plastic material selection, incorrect processing parameters, incorrect mold
design, and part design. Hence, it is of critical significance to successfully control
the factors of influence during the injection molding process, resulting from the
complexity of melt flow process in the mold cavity (Goodship 2004; Li et al. 2014).
5.2 Review of Literature on Short Shot Possibility and Other Defects 89

Weld lines will decrease the strength and appearance quality of injected part.
Different process parameters such as melt temperature, injection speed, and injection
pressure and mold design parameters such as gate design will lead to weld lines in
an injected part (Li et al. 2007; Deng et al. 2008).
Sink marks is another defect which reduces the final quality of the injected part.
Obtaining optimum process condition and mold design to reduce sink marks, is the
key point to improve the part quality (Shen et al. 2007; Erzurumlu and Ozcelik 2006).
Injection molding process is a nonlinear and multivariable procedure. Conven-
tional trial-and-error method may improve the part quality, but it is so expensive and
time consuming (Shen et al. 2007).
Based on the previous studies, three key points can be extracted:
• Most of the defects in injection molding are related to both geometric and process
parameters.
• The evaluation of short shot possibility is very complicated which results from a
number of process and geometric parameters.
• The conventional methods to improve the final quality of the injected part are very
expensive and time consuming.

5.3 A Framework for Developing a Method of Evaluation


for Short Shot

Among 4 essential factors, namely mold design, part design, material, and process
parameters, process parameters and mold design are clearly the essential factors
which lead to different defects in injection molding therefore they are selected herein
for the analysis of short shot possibility. Materials and part design are ignored simply
because it is not possible to do research on the application of all plastic materials
(more than 17,000 in the world) in injection molding and consider all customer
requirements.
With the advancements in Computer Aided Engineering (CAE) technology, simu-
lation of the injection molding process is now an influential tool to support engineers,
and meets these challenges as a replacement for conventional method. In this chapter,
the CAE technique and Taguchi method are jointly employed to examine the impact
of different parameters on short shot index of injected part to reduce its short shot.
Also, orthogonal array experiment of L18 is selected to find the optimum levels
of process conditions and geometric parameters and evaluate their significance in
reducing the possibility of short shot for two thin shell plastic samples via the Signal
to Noise ratio (S/N) and Analysis of Variance (ANOVA).
90 5 The Analysis of Short Shot Possibility …

5.3.1 Application of Taguchi Method

Taguchi techniques were established by Taguchi and Konishi. The Taguchi method
is a comprehensive quality strategy that conducts minimal number of experiments
using orthogonal array and forms robustness into a process during its design stage
(Shen et al. 2007; Oktem et al. 2007; Yang and El-Haik 2009). An orthogonal array
makes the independent mathematical assessment of the effect of all factors possible.
Hence, design of experiment (DOE) is a reasonable method to decrease the number
of numerical experiments and also acquires enough information which is used in real
experiments (Shen et al. 2007). Taguchi is a technique to predict the significant and
insignificant variables and also optimum level of the design variables by running a
series of experiments.
In Taguchi method, system design using the scientific and engineering information
required for producing the part is the target; tolerance design, the evaluation and
analysis of tolerances for optimum combination of process parameters are the key
point; and for determination of optimum levels of process parameters to improve
the quality characteristics, parameter design is significant (Oktem et al. 2007). In
this section, parameter design is employed to attain the optimum levels of process
parameters which in turn lead to a reduction of short shot possibility during the
production of thin-shell plastic part.
An effectual way to evaluate the effect of a number of factors all together is
to utilize the orthogonal arrays to organize matrix experiments (Shen et al. 2007).
According to the selected orthogonal array, Taguchi technique decreases the number
of experiments which leads to a reduction in time and cost. This special design of
orthogonal array covers the whole parameters with a small number of experiments
and allocates control parameters and design variables to the columns of an array
and transfers the integers in the array columns into the real setting of parameters
(Shen et al. 2007; Oktem et al. 2007). Taguchi proposes S/N ratio to determine the
quality characteristics considered for any problems in engineering design. S/N ratio
has three categories: the smaller the better, the nominal the best, and the higher the
better (Oktem et al. 2007). In this chapter, the smaller the better quality characteristic
is selected to reduce short shot defect through the optimal level of each process and
geometric parameters. Also, analysis of variance (ANOVA) is applied to evaluate
the effect rate of process and geometric parameters on short shot for an injected part.
Hence, the optimum level of each parameter is determined.

5.3.2 Process of Experiment Design

Selection of factors: There are several process and geometric possible factors which
can affect short shot defects in a thin plate sample. These factors are filling time,
cooling time, pressure holding time, melt temperature, mold temperature, gate geom-
etry, material type, and part design (Goodship 2004). Since the design of the part is
5.3 A Framework for Developing a Method of Evaluation for Short Shot 91

Table 5.1 Three levels of selected parameters


Parameters Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
Gate type, A 1 2 –
Filling time, B (s) 0.2 0.6 1
Part cooling time, C (s) 3 3.9 5
Pressure holding time, D (s) 1 2 3
Melt temperature, E (°C) 200 230 280

based on customer requirement, it is not possible to cover all issues in part design.
So the part design factor is not considered herein. So is the material type factor
because more than 17,000 plastic materials are used throughout the world, therefore
is not possible to conduct experiments on all of them. As a result, five parameters
were selected which are filling time, part cooling time, pressure holding time, melt
temperature, and gate type.
Selection of factor levels: There are three levels of the selected factors, each of
which is considered using Taguchi method. The reason for selecting three levels (low,
medium, high) instead of two levels (low, high) is due to the fact that three levels of
each factor give more accurate results in comparison to two levels. Different levels
of selected parameters are shown in Table 5.1.
Selection of orthogonal array: According to the number of parameters and levels
which have been chosen, L18 orthogonal array is selected as shown in Table 5.2.

5.3.3 Simulation Modelling

After designing two circular parts as two samples for this application, the next step
is to simulate the selected parts via SolidWorks plastic. For simulation, defining the
right injection system is necessary. Hence, designing the sprue, runner and gate based
on two circular parts with 100 mm diameter and 1 mm thickness should be considered
as shown in Fig. 5.1. The reason for having two round parts with the thickness of
1 mm is to eliminate short shot defect in a critical condition. Also, as mentioned
before, one of the selected parameters for this study is the gate type. Finally, the
round gate and the modified edge gate are evaluated via SolidWorks Plastics and
experiments.
In order for the result to be accurate, finite element analysis is applied to the solid
models via triangular finite elements as shown in Fig. 5.2. The selected material for
injection is polypropylene (P.P). Different sizes have been evaluated for the shell
mesh and injection system. Finally, triangle size 1 mm is selected for the shell mesh
of the injected part and for the injection system which includes sprue, runner and
gate, smaller mesh size was applied. Hence, triangle sizes 0.3 mm for sprue and
runner and triangle 0.2 mm for gate was selected.
92 5 The Analysis of Short Shot Possibility …

Table 5.2 L18 orthogonal array


Experiment A B C D E
1 1 1 1 1 1
2 1 1 2 2 2
3 1 1 3 3 3
4 1 2 1 1 2
5 1 2 2 2 3
6 1 2 3 3 1
7 1 3 1 2 1
8 1 3 2 3 2
9 1 3 3 1 3
10 2 1 1 3 3
11 2 1 2 1 1
12 2 1 3 2 2
13 2 2 1 2 3
14 2 2 2 3 1
15 2 2 3 1 2
16 2 3 1 3 2
17 2 3 2 1 3
18 2 3 3 2 1

Fig. 5.1 3D design of plastic part with sprue, runner and gate system

The simulation process is taking place by considering all the parameters into
SolidWorks Plastics as shown in Table 5.3. There are 18 experiments with different
combinations of five parameters.

5.3.4 Statistical Analysis

S/N ratio approach: The S/N ratio evaluates the quality characteristic which is devi-
ated from the desired value. The S/N ratio applies the average values to convert the
experimental result into the value which is feasible for the evaluation characteristic
5.3 A Framework for Developing a Method of Evaluation for Short Shot 93

Fig. 5.2 Finite element analyses for 3D part design

Table 5.3 Different level of parameters based on L18 orthogonal array


Experiment Gate type Filling time Part cooling Pressure Melt
time holding time temperature
1 1 0.2 3 1 200
2 1 0.2 3.9 2 230
3 1 0.2 5 3 280
4 1 0.6 3 1 230
5 1 0.6 3.9 2 280
6 1 0.6 5 3 200
7 1 1 3 2 200
8 1 1 3.9 3 230
9 1 1 5 1 280
10 2 0.2 3 3 280
11 2 0.2 3.9 1 200
12 2 0.2 5 2 230
13 2 0.6 3 2 280
14 2 0.6 3.9 3 200
15 2 0.6 5 1 230
16 2 1 3 3 230
17 2 1 3.9 1 280
18 2 1 5 2 200

of an optimum parameter analysis. S/N ratio has three categories. The nominal-the
best, the smaller-the better, and the higher-the better (Yang and El-Haik 2009; Ahmad
et al. 2009). Since the objective of this study is to reduce the short shot defect in
injection molding via optimum level of each parameters, the smaller-the better qual-
ity characteristic has been selected which is defined by Eqs. 5.1 and 5.2 (Yang and
El-Haik 2009).
94 5 The Analysis of Short Shot Possibility …

S N  −10 log(MSD) (5.1)

The MSD for the smaller the better quality characteristic can be stated by:


n
MSD  1/N yi2 (5.2)
i1

where yi is the value of short shot defect for that specific test and N is the total number
of data points. The proposed method is to calculate the short shot possibility which
equals the ratio of simulated inlet pressure to maximum inlet pressure for a specific
injection machine as shown in Eq. 5.3. The maximum injection pressure for selected
injection machine is 100 MPa. By increasing the ratio, the possibility of short shot
defect increases. Hence, the smaller the ratio the better is the objective of this study.
The calculated results for short shot defect and S/N ratio have been determined and
tabulated in Table 5.4.
Simulated inlet pressure
Possibility of short shot  (5.3)
Maximum inlet pressure

Table 5.4 Results of experiments


Experiment A B (s) C (s) D (s) E (°C) Simulated inlet S/N
(Type) pressure/maximum
inlet pressure (MPa)
1 1 0.2 3 1 200 0.5651 4.957
2 1 0.2 3.9 2 230 0.4848 6.288
3 1 0.2 5 3 280 0.394 8.090
4 1 0.6 3 1 230 0.4185 7.566
5 1 0.6 3.9 2 280 0.3405 9.357
6 1 0.6 5 3 200 0.4879 6.233
7 1 1 3 2 200 0.4738 6.488
8 1 1 3.9 3 230 0.4068 7.812
9 1 1 5 1 280 0.3306 9.613
10 2 0.2 3 3 280 0.4249 7.434
11 2 0.2 3.9 1 200 0.6105 4.286
12 2 0.2 5 2 230 0.5216 5.653
13 2 0.6 3 2 280 0.3628 8.806
14 2 0.6 3.9 3 200 0.5212 5.659
15 2 0.6 5 1 230 0.4469 6.995
16 2 1 3 3 230 0.4308 7.314
17 2 1 3.9 1 280 0.3503 9.111
18 2 1 5 2 200 0.5014 5.996
5.3 A Framework for Developing a Method of Evaluation for Short Shot 95

From the data in Table 5.4, the average S/N ratio for response table can be calcu-
lated as shown in Table 5.5. Also, Fig. 5.3 is plotted using S/N response Table 5.5 for
the possibility of short shot to determine the optimal levels of four process parameters
and one geometric parameter.
18 trials of simulation were taken into account and the result being presented
in Table 5.4. The response table of S/N ratio and S/N diagram in Table 5.5 and
Fig. 5.3 were created respectively. From the S/N response Table 5.5, it can be inferred
that the larger the value of T, the more is the significance of each parameter in
affecting short shot defect. Based on Table 5.1, the selected parameters are melt
temperature (E), filling time (B), and gate type (A) followed by part cooling time (C),
and pressure holding time (D). The optimum set of parameters can be evaluated from
the S/N response diagram in Fig. 5.3 by selecting the highest level of S/N for each
parameter. The result is a combination of A1 , B3 , C3 , D2 , and E3 . As mentioned before,
by increasing the ratio of simulated inlet pressure to maximum inlet pressure, the
possibility of short shot is increased. By using these sets of parameters in SolidWorks
Plastics simulation, the ratio of simulated inlet pressure to maximum inlet pressure is
0.3306. The minimum short shot possibility as shown in Table 5.4 is for trial number
9. Hence, the new set of parameters (A1 , B3 , C3 , D2 , and E3 ) has the lowest possibility
of short shot for the injected parts.

Table 5.5 Response table of S/N ratio


Gate type Filling time Part cooling Pressure Melt
time holding time temperature
Level 1 7.378 6.118 7.094 7.088 5.603
Level 2 6.806 7.436 7.086 7.098 6.938
Level 3 – 7.722 7.097 7.090 8.735
|T| 0.572 1.604 0.011 0.009 3.132

Fig. 5.3 S/N ratio response diagram based on simulation result


96 5 The Analysis of Short Shot Possibility …

Analysis of Variance (ANOVA): ANOVA can be used to determine the percentage


of contribution (PC) for each factor. The largest value of PC indicates the most
significant factor affecting the system performance. The PC of scheduling factors
can be calculated as follows:
(1) Degree of freedom: The total degree of freedom (dfT ), the degree of freedom of
factor A (df A ), and the degree of freedom for error variance (df E ) are as follows:

dfT  (N − 1) (5.4)

df A  (K A − 1) (5.5)

  
df E  dfT − dffactor (5.6)

where: N is the total number of experiments and K A is the number of level for
factor A.
(2) Sum of squares: The sum of the square of factor A (SS A ), the total sum of
square (SST ) and the sum of the square for error variance (SS E ) are calculated
as follows:
 2
KA  2  N
x
Ai i1 i
SS A  − (5.7)
i1
n Ai N

 2
N

N
i1 xi
SST  xi2 − (5.8)
i1
N

  
SS E  SST − SSfactor (5.9)

where: xi is a value at level (1, 2, … N ).


n Ai is the number of levels and Ai is a value at level i of factor A.
(3) Mean squares: The mean square of factor A (MS A ), the total mean square (MST )
and the mean square of error variance (MS E ) are
SS A SST SS E
MS A  , MST  , MS E  (5.10)
df A dfT df E

(4) F-ratio: The value of the F-ratio of factor A (FA ) is calculated using the fol-
lowing equation:
MS A
FA  (5.11)
MS E
5.3 A Framework for Developing a Method of Evaluation for Short Shot 97

Table 5.6 ANOVA table


Factor f SS MS F PC (%)
A 1 1.473472 1.473472 629.3379 3.690974
B 2 8.785992 4.392996 1876.302 22.00847
C 2 0.000412 0.000206 0.088009 0.001032
D 2 0.000328 0.000164 0.070141 0.000823
E 2 29.64202 14.82101 6330.234 74.25178
Pool error 8 0.01873 0.033651 – –
Total 17 39.92096 2.348292 – –

(5) PC: the percentage of contribution for factor A is calculated using the following
equation:
SS A
PC A  × 100% (5.12)
SST

The short shot data in Table 5.4 were analyzed via Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)
and the significance rate of factors were evaluated by PC as shown in Table 5.6.
ANOVA computes the quantities such as degree of freedom (f), sum of squares (SS),
Mean Square (MS), F-statistic (F), and percentage of contribution (PC). It is clear
that significant factors in comparison with response Table 5.5 were mostly the same.
The percentage weigh of Melt temperature was the most influential factor with a
contribution of 74.25%, followed by filling time at 22.008% and gate type at 3.69%.
The contribution of, part cooling time and pressure holding time is very low in
comparison with melt temperature, filling time and gate type.
The lowest possibility of short shot in Table 5.4 is for trial number 5, 9 and 17.
Based on the PC of each factor which is evaluated via Analysis of Variance, it is
clear that the reason for having the lowest possibility of short shot in trial number 5,
9 and 17, is because of B and E as significant parameters. Although the PC of C and
D is very low in comparison with A, B and E, the optimum level of each parameter
which leads to a reduction in short shot possibility based on response Table 5.5, is
A1 , B3 , C3 , D2 , and E3.
The most significant factors which increase the possibility of short shot are
melt temperature and filling time followed by gate type based on the percentage of
contribution. By referring to the F-distribution statistic table, the F0.05, 1, 17 = 4.45
for evaluating the level of significant factor that equal to 0.05 (or 95% confidence
level). Gate type (A) [F-statistic  629.3379 > 4.45], filling time (B) [F-statistic 
1876.302 > 4.45], and melt temperature (E) [F-statistic  6330.234 > 4.45] demon-
strates that three factors were significant to the short shot possibility. The simulated
inlet pressure for trial number 5, 9 and 17 is shown in Figs. 5.4, 5.5, and 5.6
respectively.
98 5 The Analysis of Short Shot Possibility …

Fig. 5.4 Pressure at the end of the filling stage for trial number 5

Fig. 5.5 Pressure at the end of the filling stage for trial number 9

In trial number 1 and 11, it is clear that the reason for having highest possibility
of short shot is because of B and E being at minimum level. Hence, any decrease in
filling time and melt temperature increase the simulated inlet pressure which leads
to an increase in possibility of short shot as shown in Figs. 5.7 and 5.8.
5.3 A Framework for Developing a Method of Evaluation for Short Shot 99

Fig. 5.6 Pressure at the end of the filling stage for trial number 17

Fig. 5.7 Simulated inlet pressures for trial number 1


100 5 The Analysis of Short Shot Possibility …

Fig. 5.8 Simulated inlet pressures for trial number 11

Fig. 5.9 a Ease of fill with minimum level of each parameter. b Ease of fill with 10% lowers than
minimum level of each parameter

Reduction in level of different parameters from their minimum levels leads to


difficulty in filling the cavities and finally short shot defect. As shown in Fig. 5.9a,
ease of filling analysis for trial number 11 is still in green area which is in its most
acceptable level. By reducing the minimum level of each process parameter to 20%
for trial number 11, ease of filling analysis is in red area as shown in Fig. 5.9b. The
red zone indicates the difficulty of filling the cavities for that zone which increases
the possibility of short shot from 0.56 to 0.70 for trial number 11.
5.4 Experimental Design and Results 101

Table 5.7 Material Melt temperature 230 °C


properties of commercial
polypropylene Max melt temperature 280 °C
Min melt temperature 200 °C
Mod temperature 50 °C
Melt flow rate 20 cm3 /10 min
Max shear stress 250,000 pa

5.4 Experimental Design and Results

5.4.1 Experimental Setup

Molding machine and materials: Injection molding machine is required for the
injection of plastic product. For selecting the injection machine, it is important to
determine the size of the top clamping plate and bottom clamping plate of mold tools.
So, based on the need for this research, the injection machine-Poolad-Bch series
and plastic material PP (polypropylene) were selected.

Part geometry and mold design: Since this study is evaluating the effect of different
parameters which affect the short shot possibility in injection molding, a round plate
plastic part of 100 mm diameter and 1 mm thickness was designed. Some preparations
were important to consider for the experiment. In manufacturing the mold tools, CNC
(computer numerical control) milling machine, grinding machine, drilling machine
are the main machines to fabricate different components of the mold tools namely top
clamping plate, core and cavity plates, side plates, and bottom clamping plate. Other
components of the mold tools such as sprue bush, and guide bush were purchased
separately. Material characteristics are listed in Table 5.7 and Maximum inlet pressure
for the selected injection machine is 100 MPa.

Mold design: Based on different concept in manufacturing the mold tools, a two-
plate mold with two cavities and one parting line with runner, gate, and sprue system
but without ejector system was manufactured. The material for manufacturing core
and cavity is steel CK45 with surface hardness 56 HRC. Two cavity plates with two
different gate designs were manufactured as shown in Fig. 5.10a, b. Provision was
made for air vent as it is also important to release the air from the cavity after closing
the mold.
102 5 The Analysis of Short Shot Possibility …

Fig. 5.10 a Cavity plate with round gate and air vent. b Cavity plate with modified Edge gate

Fig. 5.11 a Cooling system of cavity plate for solidification of injected part. b Fixed cavity plate
on selected injection machine

Cooling of the injected part happens when the molten plastic is injected into the
cavity. For final cooling before the ejection of injected part from the cavity, cooling
system is a need. The design and mechanism of cooling system is related to the
design of the injected parts. Based on two circular plates, the cooling system has
been manufactured as shown in Fig. 5.11a. Also different components of mold tool
namely core and cavity should be fixed on selected injection machine as shown in
Fig. 5.11b.

5.4.2 Parameter and Orthogonal Array Selection

Based on the plastic defect and simulation result, five different parameters were
chosen in these experiments. Filling time, part cooling time, pressure holding time,
and melt temperature were selected as process parameters, and gate type as geometric
5.4 Experimental Design and Results 103

Table 5.8 Determination of S/N ratio based on L18 orthogonal array


Experiment A B (s) C (s) D (s) E (°C) Simulated inlet S/N
(Type) pressure/maximum
inlet pressure (MPa)
1 1 0.2 3 1 200 0.56 5.036
2 1 0.2 3.9 2 230 0.46 6.744
3 1 0.2 5 3 280 0.38 8.404
4 1 0.6 3 1 230 0.40 7.958
5 1 0.6 3.9 2 280 0.32 9.897
6 1 0.6 5 3 200 0.475 6.466
7 1 1 3 2 200 0.460 6.744
8 1 1 3.9 3 230 0.415 7.639
9 1 1 5 1 280 0.320 9.897
10 2 0.2 3 3 280 0.415 7.639
11 2 0.2 3.9 1 200 0.59 4.582
12 2 0.2 5 2 230 0.51 5.848
13 2 0.6 3 2 280 0.355 8.995
14 2 0.6 3.9 3 200 0.51 5.848
15 2 0.6 5 1 230 0.43 7.330
16 2 1 3 3 230 0.42 7.535
17 2 1 3.9 1 280 0.34 9.370
18 2 1 5 2 200 0.49 6.196

parameter. Finally, based on the number of parameters and the number of levels, L18
orthogonal array was used to evaluate the short shot defects in the injected parts.
Also S/N ratio with the definition of the smaller the better was selected.

Data collection for evaluation of short shot possibility: 18 trials were conducted
via the injection machine and the S/N ratio based on the result of short shot pos-
sibility was determined as shown in Table 5.8.
A few samples from 18 different trial numbers of injection process are shown in
Fig. 5.12.
Based on the S/N ratio from Table 5.8, the average S/N ratio for response table is
calculated as shown in Table 5.9.
The optimal levels of four process parameters and one geometric parameter for
short shot defect is plotted as shown in Fig. 5.13 using S/N response Table 5.9.
Finally, the significant parameters which increase the possibility of short shot are
melt temperature (E), filling time (B), and gate type (A). Part cooling time (C) and
pressure holding time (D) have lowest PC among the other geometrical and process
parameters. The optimum set of parameters can be evaluated from the S/N response
diagram by selecting the highest level of S/N for each parameter. The optimum result
is a combination of A1 , B3 , C3 , D2 , and E3 .
104 5 The Analysis of Short Shot Possibility …

Fig. 5.12 Injected samples from trial numbers 1, 9, 11, and 17

Table 5.9 Response table of S/N ratio


A B C D E
Level 1 7.643135686 6.376001 7.318228 7.362675 5.812474
Level 2 7.038529874 7.749431 7.347143 7.404466 7.176154
Level 3 0 7.897066 7.357127 7.255357 9.03387
Difference 0.604605812 1.521065 0.009984 0.107318 3.221396

Fig. 5.13 S/N ratio response diagram based on experimental result


5.4 Experimental Design and Results 105

Fig. 5.14 Short shot defect by reduction in level of a filling time. b Pressure holding time. c Melt
temperature

As mentioned before, using different parameters at levels less than minimum


levels leads to difficulty in filling the cavities and finally short shot defect. As shown
in Fig. 5.14, by reducing the minimum level of each process parameter to 10% for
trial number 11, the possibility of short shot increased and short shot happened for
the selected part. Uncontrollable factors in experiments lead to a small difference
with corresponding ones from simulation, but both simulation results in Table 5.4
and experimental results in Table 5.8 validate the ratio of the possibility of short shot
for the injected parts.

Analysis of variance: Based on Table 5.8 and the Analysis of Variance (ANOVA),
the significance of each parameter is evaluated by the percentage of contribution
(PC) as shown in Table 5.10. The largest value of PC demonstrates the most signif-
icant parameter affecting the injection molding process. The procedure of ANOVA
consists of four stages to obtain the contributing scheduling factors: degree of free-
dom (f), sum of squares (SS), mean of squares (MS), F-statistic (F), and percentage
of contribution (PC). All the ANOVA results are based on the calculations using
Eqs. 5.7−5.12. The percentage weight of Melt temperature was the most influential
factor with a contribution of 75.04%, followed by filling time at 20.19% and gate
type at 3.93%. The contribution of part cooling time and pressure holding time is very
106 5 The Analysis of Short Shot Possibility …

Table 5.10 Analysis of variance


Factor f SS MS F PC (%)
A 1 1.645298 1.645298 48.89257 3.934471
B 2 8.445624 4.222812 125.4874 20.19638
C 2 0.004911 0.002456 0.072976 0.011745
D 2 0.070701 0.03535 1.050491 0.16907
E 2 31.38177 15.69089 466.2789 75.04456
Pool error 8 0.26921 0.033651 – –
Total 17 41.81752 2.459854 – –

low in comparison with melt temperature, filling time, and gate type. By referring
to the F-distribution statistic Table 5.10, the F0.05, 1, 17  4.45 for evaluating the level
of significant factor that equal to 0.05 (or 95% confidence level). Gate type (A) [F-
statistic  48.89257 > 4.45], filling time (B) [F-statistic  125.4874 > 4.45], and melt
temperature (E) [F-statistic  466.2789 > 4.45] demonstrates that three factors were
significant to the short shot possibility. The following is a sample calculation, using
ANOVA equations.

Degree of freedom:

dfT  (N − 1)  (18 − 1)  17

dfSR  (K SR − 1)  (2 − 1)  1, for factor ( A)

  
df E  dfT − dffactor  (17 − (8 + 1 + 2 + 2 + 2 + 2))  0

Sum of squares:




SST  5.0362 + 6.7442 + . . . + 6.1962
[(5.036) + (6.744) + . . . + (6.196)]2
−  41.81
18

(5.036 + 6.744 + 8.404 + 7.958 + 9.897 + 6.466 + 6.744 + 7.639 + 9.897)2
SSSR 
9

(7.639 + 4.582 + 5.848 + 8.995 + 5.848 + 7.330 + 7.535 + 9.370 + 6.196)2
+
9
[5.036 + 6.744 + . . . + 6.196]2
−  1.645
18
5.4 Experimental Design and Results 107

SS E  (41.817 − (1.645 + 8.445 + 0.004 + 0.070 + 31.38 + 0.269))  0

Mean squares:
41.817
MST 
17

1.645
MSSR   0.822
2
Percentage of contribution:
1.645
PCSR  × 100  3.934%
41.817
Finally, Tables 5.11 and 5.12 compare the experiments and simulation results in
terms of PC and optimal level of each parameter. It is clear that PC for simulation
result is very close to the experiments. Also, the optimal level of each parameter for
experiments and simulation results are the same. The error margin was calculated by
using the following equation:
(Experimental Test − Simulation)
Margin Error (%) × 100 (5.13)
Simulation

Table 5.11 Percentage of contribution (significant factors)


Experimental result (%) Simulation result (%) Error margin (%)
Gate type 3.934471 3.690974 6.59
Filling time 20.19638 22.00847 8.23
Melt temperature 75.04456 74.25178 1.067

Table 5.12 Optimal level of each parameter for experimental and simulation result
Experimental result Simulation result
Gate type Type 1 Type 1
Filling time 1s 1s
Pressure holding time 2s 2s
Part cooling time 5s 5s
Melt temperature 280 °C 280 °C
108 5 The Analysis of Short Shot Possibility …

5.5 Concluding Remarks

The combination of simulation with Taguchi experimental design method offers


an efficient and easy approach to determine the significant factors which affect the
possibility of short shot in injection molding. The proposed approach for the analysis
of short shot possibility based on process and geometric parameters was applied in
order to reduce the short shot possibility in injection molding. The analysis of short
shot possibility was conducted via SolidWorks Plastics and Finite Element method
(FEM). L18 orthogonal array of Taguchi for different levels of each factor was used
based on simulation result. The significant level of each parameter was evaluated via
ANOVA and S/N ratio. To validate the proposed method, the experimental set up
was conducted for the injected parts.
Based on the simulation results, experiments and also the statistical analysis of
results, the following conclusions can be drawn:
The significance rate of each parameter in both experimental and simulation result
was very close together which signifies the robustness of proposed method in evalu-
ation of short shot possibility. Melt temperature was the most influential factor with
a contribution of 74.25 and 75.04%, and filling time with a contribution of 22 and
20.19% followed by gate type with a contribution of 3.69 and 3.93% for simula-
tion and experimental results respectively. The percentage of contribution for part
cooling time and pressure holding time is very low in comparison with that of melt
temperature, filling time and gate type which did not consider as significant factors.
By referring to the F-distribution statistic table of experiments, the F0.05, 1,
17  4.45 for evaluating the level of significant factor that equal to 0.05 (or 95%
confidence level). Gate type (A) [F-statistic  48.89257 > 4.45], filling time (B) [F-
statistic  125.4874 > 4.45], and melt temperature (E) [F-statistic  466.2789 > 4.45]
demonstrates that three factors were significant to the short shot possibility. By refer-
ring to the F-distribution statistic table of simulation results, the F0.05, 1, 17  4.45
for evaluating the level of significant factor that equal to 0.05 (or 95% confidence
level). Gate type (A) [F-statistic  629.3379 > 4.45], filling time (B) [F-statistic 
1876.302 > 4.45], and melt temperature (E) [F-statistic  6330.234 > 4.45] demon-
strates the robustness of proposed method based on response Table 5.5, the optimum
level of each parameter which leads to reduction in possibility of short shot are gate
type at level 1, filling time at level 3, part cooling time at level 3, pressure holding time
at level 2, and melt temperature at level 3. Filling time and melt temperature were
significant factors which affect short shot possibility in injection molding process.

References

Ahmad, A. H., Leman, Z., Azmir, M. A., Muhamad, K. F., Harun, W. S. W., Juliawati, A., &
Alias, A. B. S. (2009). Optimization of warpage defect in injection moulding process using ABS
material. Third Asia International Conference on Modelling & Simulation, pp. 470–474.
References 109

Chen, W.-C., Liou, P.-H., & Chou, S.-C. (2014). An integrated parameter optimization system
for MIMO plastic injection molding using soft computing. International Journal of Advanced
Manufacturing Technology, 73(9–12), 1465–1474.
Chiang, K.-T., & Chang, F.-P. (2007). Analysis of shrinkage and warpage in an injection-molded
part with a thin shell feature using the response surface methodology. International Journal of
Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 35(5–6), 468–479.
Deng, Y.-M., Zheng, D., Sun, B.-S., & Zhong, H.-D. (2008). Injection molding optimization for min-
imizing the defects of weld lines. Polymer-Plastics Technology and Engineering, 47(9), 943–952.
Erzurumlu, T., & Ozcelik, B. (2006). Minimization of warpage and sink index in injection-molded
thermoplastic parts using Taguchi optimization method. Materials and Design, 27(10), 853–861.
Goodship, V. (2004). Troubleshooting injection moulding (Vol. 15). iSmithers Rapra Publishing.
Hassan, H. (2013). An experimental work on the effect of injection molding parameters on the cavity
pressure and product weight. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology,
67(1–4), 675–686.
Huang, M.-C., & Tai, C.-C. (2001). The effective factors in the warpage problem of an injection-
molded part with a thin shell feature. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 110(1), 1–9.
Kitayama, S., Onuki, R., & Yamazaki, K. (2014). Warpage reduction with variable pressure profile
in plastic injection molding via sequential approximate optimization. International Journal of
Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 72(5–8), 827–838.
Knepper, P. (2006). Optimizing The Injection Molding Process. University Of Massachusetts Lowell.
Li, H., Guo, Z., & Li, D. (2007). Reducing the effects of weld lines on appearance of plastic products
by Taguchi experimental method. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology,
32(9–10), 927–931.
Li, X.-P., Zhao, G.-Q., & Yang, C. (2014). Effect of mold temperature on motion behavior of short
glass fibers in injection molding process. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing
Technology, 73(5–8), 639–645.
Modrak, V., Mandulak, J., & Marton, D. (2013). Investigation of the influence of technological
parameters on surface color of plastic parts. nternational Journal of Advanced Manufacturing
Technology, 69(5–8), 1757–1764.
Modraka, V., & Mandulakb, J. (2013). Exploration of impact of technological parameters on surface
gloss of plastic parts. In 8th CIRP Conference on Intelligent Computation in Manufacturing
Engineering.
Mok, C. K., Chin, K. S., & Ho, J. K. L. (2001). An interactive knowledge-based CAD system for
mold design in injection moulding processes. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing
Technology, 17(1), 27–38.
Oktem, H., Erzurumlu, T., & Uzman, I. (2007). Application of Taguchi optimization technique
in determining plastic injection molding process parameters for a thin-shell part. Materials and
Design, 28(4), 1271–1278.
Shen, C., Wang, L., Cao, W., & Qian, L. (2007). Investigation of the effect of molding variables
on sink marks of plastic injection molded parts using Taguchi DOE technique. Polymer-Plastics
Technology and Engineering, 46(3), 219–225.
Xu, B., & Rui, Z. (2014). Moldflow-based optimization design of gating system in injection mold
for automobile bumper. Advanced Materials Research.
Yang, K., & El-Haik, B. S. (2009). Design for six sigma: a roadmap for product development.
McGraw-Hill Companies.
Zhao, P., Zhou, H., He, Y., Cai, K., & Fu, J. (2014). A non-destructive online method for monitoring
the injection molding process by collecting and analysing machine running data. International
Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 72, 765–777.
Zhou, H. (2013). Computer modeling for injection molding. Wiley, Inc.
Chapter 6
Injection Molding Process Optimization
Based on Fuzzy Quality Evaluation

6.1 Introduction

In Chap. 5, the proposed approach was designed to optimize single-objective problem


on the possibility of short shot defects in injection molding. The aim of this Chapter
is to extend that approach to optimize a multi-objective problem in injection molding.
In order to achieve this objective, the following two steps are accomplished.
• Critical review of the relevant literature on quality factors in injection molding,
the use of the most well-known methods in the optimization of injection process,
and then focus on the recent methods which evaluate different criteria for quality
evaluation.
• Development of a new optimization approach to multi-objective problems of pro-
cess conditions in injection molding.
Then verification of new approach developed in this chapter will then be con-
ducted, using a case study.

6.2 Literature on Quality Factors in Injection Molding

One of the most significant operations in polymer processing industry is plastic injec-
tion molding for fabricating plastic products with complex shapes, high precision
and low cost (Ozcelik et al. 2012; Shi et al. 2013). Injection process consists of
three main stages namely: filling, packing/holding, and cooling. At filling stage, the
molten plastic fills the cavities via sprue, runner and gate system rapidly. During
the packing/holding stage, the pressure increases to compensate shrinkage due to

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019 111


M. Moayyedian, Intelligent Optimization of Mold Design and Process Parameters
in Injection Molding, Springer Theses, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03356-9_6
112 6 Injection Molding Process Optimization …

temperature decrease and crystallinity development which leads to an increase in


density. Finally, at cooling stage, the molten plastic solidifies then the injected parts
become ready for ejection (Xu et al. 2014; Zhou 2013).
Four factors which determine the final quality of injected parts are part design,
mold design, material and process parameters such as injection temperature, mold
temperature, and injection time which directly influence production cost and its
quality. Wrong setting of process parameters clearly leads to different defects in final
products such as warpage which reduces the mechanical properties of injected parts
(Kramschuster et al. 2006; Xu et al. 2014; Zhao et al. 2010, 2014). Another parameter
which determines the melt injection rate and has significant effect on molded part
quality such as shrinkage, warpage, and impact strength is injection velocity (Tsoi and
Gao 1999). In manufacturing optical lenses, process parameters will affect quality
characteristics like light transmission, surface waviness, and surface finish which
lead to an increase in scrap rate (Lo et al. 2009; Tsai et al. 2009). Also, in micro-
injection molding and ultra-thin wall plastic parts, other factors which determine the
final quality of injected parts are process parameters at filling stage such as melt and
mold temperature, injection speed and pressure, and packing pressure (Song et al.
2007; Tosello et al. 2010).
Another factor which determines the quality of injected parts is mold design. One
of the main criteria in mold design is the size and geometry of the runner and gate
(Moayyedian et al. 2015a, 2015b). The runner delivers the molten plastic from sprue
to the gate which is the first orifice through which the materials are injected into the
cavities. Investigations have proved that the undersized gates have opposing effects
on the filling behavior and residual stress of the injected parts; i.e. bigger gates fill
the cavity faster leading to lower residual stress (Xie et al. 2014). In designing the
runner, wrong geometry or size will change the material properties of the molten
plastic which result in imbalanced injection of materials into the cavities. So if the
temperature distribution inside the cavity is not uniform, it will increase the possibility
of warpage of, and residual stress in the injected parts (Tsai 2013). The gate type
is a most important factor in mold design. In thin-wall technology, a gate at each
side of the injected part is a suitable replacement of a single gate at one side of
the part. It leads to higher shear rate distribution and then higher melt temperature
and reduces the viscosity of molten plastic leading to filling the cavities properly
(Shen et al. 2008). The gate location in mold design is another important factor
which affects the quality of injected parts. A number of defects such as short shot,
premature failure, and warpage can occur after unacceptable selection of the gate
location which leads to longer injection time and unacceptable resin flow through
the injection. The right location of the gate leads to minimum time for complete
solidification of injected parts and minimum solidification during the filling stage
(Hassan et al. 2009; Kima et al. 2003; Li et al. 2007). Cooling system in mold design
is another factor which affects the quality of injected parts. Investigations show that
6.2 Literature on Quality Factors in Injection Molding 113

the position of the cooling system leads to changes in the shrinkage rate and the
temperature of final product (Hassan et al. 2010). Also, wrong selection of cooling
system will increase the total injection time which in turn affects the manufacturing
cost (Dimla et al. 2005).

6.2.1 Injection Molding Optimization Tools

In the last few decades, researchers have employed various methods of optimiza-
tion in injection molding for reducing defect rates. Warpage and shrinkage are two
common defects in injection molding. To reduce the warpage and shrinkage rate,
neural network has been applied (Lotti et al. 2002; Yin et al. 2011). Taguchi method
is another method employed for improving the quality of injected parts. In determin-
ing the final dimension of injected parts, shrinkage optimization plays the main role.
Taguchi method identifies the best level of each process parameter for minimum non-
uniform shrinkage of injected parts (Pomerleau and Sanschagrin 2006; Toe 2001).
For reducing the shrinkage and warpage in thin wall product, Taguchi experimental
design determines the optimum set of effective factors in injection molding (Huang
and Tai 2001; Liao et al. 2004). Two other methods which determine the effec-
tive factors in increasing the quality of injection molding are Fuzzy logic method
and technique for order performance by its similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS). In
injection molding, an automated process parameters resetting via fuzzy logic method
is identified to decrease the observed defects (He et al. 1998). Weld line is one of the
plastic defects which decrease the mechanical properties of injected parts. To have
a control over the weld lines locations in an injected parts and also a decrease in
simulation time, fuzzy logic theory is proposed (Chen et al. 2008). Automatically
resetting the process parameters based on different conditions during the injection
process leads to a better product quality is a capability of the application of fuzzy
logic method in injection molding (He et al. 1998). In general, fuzzy logic is one
of the tools used in advanced manufacturing technology to determine high levels of
quality and performance by reducing different plastic defects such as short shot and
sink mark (Maldonado et al. 2013; Suwannasri and Sirovetnukul 2013). TOPSIS was
initially developed by Hwang and Yoon (1981). It is an easy method to use with the
advantage of having both quantitative and qualitative criteria through the evaluation
process (Ekmekçioğlu et al. 2010). Multi-criteria decision making is the process
of determining the best option from all of the feasible alternatives (Saghafian and
Hejazi 2005). TOPSIS is not a good tool to use when the information is uncertain.
To overcome this, TOPSIS is combined with fuzzy logic which is called (FTOPSIS).
Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) is another method used in design of injection
molding to effectively evaluate the significance of each parameter. AHP was initially
developed by Saaty (1980) which has three main stages namely: constructing a
114 6 Injection Molding Process Optimization …

pair-wise comparison matrix; synthesizing judgments; and checking for consistency


(Vaidya and Kumar 2006; Amiri 2010). Although AHP has been successfully applied
to solve different problems in different applications, it suffers from some weaknesses
such as limitations in applications (Patil and Kant 2014). Also AHP has no ability
to handle decision problems when there is an uncertainty in information (Torfi et al.
2010). To enable AHP for this purpose it is combined with fuzzy theory, called fuzzy
AHP (FAHP). Also, the integration of FAHP with TOPSIS or AHP with FTOPSIS
for evaluating the quality of injected parts has been considered. To evaluate the
moldability of injected parts, integration of FAHP with TOPSIS is proposed to find
the best setting of process parameters which are of the highest level of moldability
as defined in (Cheng et al. 2008).
Based on the literature review, it can be stated that although the integration of
FAHP with TOPSIS and AHP with FTOPSIS are useful methods for quality eval-
uation of injection molding, they are unable to cover all significant alternatives,
resulting from limited number of selected parameters and levels. However, to the
best of the author’s knowledge, there is no published work using Taguchi with FAHP
and TOPSIS or Taguchi with AHP and FTOPSIS in injection molding technology.
This Chapter attempts to develop a new approach based on Taguchi with FAHP and
TOPSIS for quality evaluation of injection molding process. The main advantage of
the proposed method is to increase the number of alternatives which in turn increases
the moldability of the final product in injection molding.
The mold design and process parameters are two main factors which have the most
contribution in related defects of the injected parts. Hence the best set of process
and geometric parameters will be determined to eliminate the related defects in
injected parts. Two different types of gates are selected as geometrical parameters
namely: round gate and modified edge gate. Modified edge gate with elliptical cross
section was investigated in Chap. 4. Warpage, shrinkage, and short shot possibility
are considered as three objectives and filling time, part cooling time, pressure holding
time, and melt temperature as process parameters and round gate and modified edge
gate as geometric parameters.

6.3 Proposed Methodology for the Quality Evaluation


in Injection Molding

A comprehensive methodology is developed herein by applying FAHP along with


TOPSIS and Taguchi whose aim is to optimize multi-objective process in injection
molding to determine the best alternatives with the higher moldability. To address the
6.3 Proposed Methodology for the Quality Evaluation in Injection Molding 115

Fig. 6.1 Simplified flow


1 Problem Description
chart of the developed
approach
Multi-objective Optimisation via fuzzy evaluation

2
Application of AHP with Taguchi

AHP for initial weight Taguchi method to


calculation increase the significant
trial numbers

3 TOPSIS

Calculation of varied weight

4
Analysis of the Results

Moldability index

above aim, the proposed methodology consists of four phases: problem description;
application of FAHP with Taguchi; TOPSIS for the calculation of the varied weight
and analysis of the results, as shown in Fig. 6.1 and described as follows.

6.3.1 Problem Description

The number of internal and external defects in injected parts will identify their
degree of quality. Filling, packing/holding, and cooling are three main stages in
injection molding. At the filling stage, the molten plastic fills the cavities. During
the packing/holding stage, the pressure increases to compensate the material and
finally, at cooling stage the molten plastic is solidified (Zhou 2013). Three common
defects which reduce the quality of injected parts are short shot possibility, shrinkage,
and warpage as shown in Fig. 6.2, all of which are related to geometric and process
parameters. Short shot happens at filling stage, shrinkage happens at packing/holding
116 6 Injection Molding Process Optimization …

Fig. 6.2 Criteria for quality


evaluation Part quality

Step1 Step 2 Step 3


Short shot Shrinkage Warpage

Fig. 6.3 Triangular


membership function for the
weightiness of short shot
possibility, shrinkage and
warpage

Table 6.1 Triplet description Linguistic variables Fuzzy rating Triple description
of linguistic variables for
evaluation of defect Very high α̃5 (0.75, 1, 1)
weightiness High α̃4 (0.5, 0.75, 1)
Medium α̃3 (0.25, 0.5, 0.75)
Low α̃2 (0, 0.25, 0.5)
Very low α̃1 (0, 0, 0.25)

stage which is affected by wrong geometrical parameters such as cavity size, and
finally warpage happens at cooling stage. Wrong design feature of cooling system
or wrong setting of process parameters leads to warpage at cooling stage.
For rating the seriousness of each defect of the injected parts, a fuzzy evaluation is
applied by defining five different levels, namely α̃1 , α̃2 , α̃3 , α̃4 , α̃5 . The seriousness
of each defect is determined by using linguistic terms very low, low, medium, high,
and very high as shown in Fig. 6.3. Also, for rating the seriousness of defects,
triangular membership functions with their triplet descriptions are used as shown in
Fig. 6.3 and Table 6.1 respectively (Cheng et al. 2008; He et al. 1998; Xu 2007).

6.3.2 Application of Combined AHP and Taguchi Method

For the allocation of variable weights, a variable weight profit vector is used to adjust
the weights of the selected parameters to determine the product quality. Through
this process, serous defects will be punished by adjusting negative parameters and
slight defects are rewarded by adjusting positive parameters. This waythe level of
punishment and reward is controllable (Cheng et al. 2008).
6.3 Proposed Methodology for the Quality Evaluation in Injection Molding 117
       
The vector S Xj  {s1 x j , s2 x j , . . . , s p x j } is called as p-dimensional vari-
able weight profit vector:

⎪ λ1 α x j  α̃1




⎪ α x j  α̃2

  ⎨
sj xj  1 x j  α̃3 (6.1)



⎪ β x j  α̃4



⎩ λ α x  α̃
2 j 5

where j ∈ {1, 2 . . . , n} . α, β and λ are considered as positive factor, negative factor,


and regulative factor respectively.

6.3.3 Variable Weight Definition and Implementation

The initial weights of all parameters are allocated through the analytic hierarchy
process (AHP). Firstly, the weight of each parameter is calculated on the basis of the
relation between the defects and their related steps as shown in Fig. 6.2. The variable
weight vector W is the normalized product of constant weight factor w (Table 6.4)
and variable weight state vector s. which is shown in Eq. 6.2.
 
  wjsj xj
Wj xj  n  . (6.2)

wk sk x j
k1

6.3.4 Taguchi Orthogonal Array

The Taguchi method is a strategy to minimize the number of experiments using dif-
ferent orthogonal arrays and creating robustness for different industrial applications.
Taguchi method decreases the number of experiments which leads to reduction in
time and cost (Oktem et al. 2007; Yang and El-Haik 2009). In this research, the
combination of Taguchi with other tools considers moldability indices of injected
parts. Five different geometric and process parameters in three different levels are
selected as shown in Table 6.2. Also, based on the number of parameters and the
number of levels, L18 orthogonal array is selected as shown in Table 6.3.
118 6 Injection Molding Process Optimization …

Table 6.2 Geometric and process parameters in threvels


Parameters Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
Gate type, A 1 2 –
Filling time, B (s) 0.2 0.6 1
Part cooling time, C (s) 3 3.9 5
Pressure holding time, D (s) 1 2 3
Melt temperature, E (°C) 200 230 280

Table 6.3 L18 orthogonal array


Trial number A B C D E
1 1 1 1 1 1
2 1 1 2 2 2
3 1 1 3 3 3
4 1 2 1 1 2
5 1 2 2 2 3
6 1 2 3 3 1
7 1 3 1 2 1
8 1 3 2 3 2
9 1 3 3 1 3
10 2 1 1 3 3
11 2 1 2 1 1
12 2 1 3 2 2
13 2 2 1 2 3
14 2 2 2 3 1
15 2 2 3 1 2
16 2 3 1 3 2
17 2 3 2 1 3
18 2 3 3 2 1

6.3.5 Topsis

This study considers m trials of experiments and n different injection defects for
quality evaluation. The first step is the evaluation of initial weight of selected defects
via analytic hierarchy process. The next step is consideration of fuzzy relative matrix
based on the seriousness of possible plastic defects which R̃  [r̃i j ]m×n . Then the
varied weight of each criterion can be considered by Eqs. 6.1 and 6.2. Finally, the
varied weighted fuzzy evaluation matrix is reflected by Eq. 6.3
6.3 Proposed Methodology for the Quality Evaluation in Injection Molding 119

Ṽ  [ṽi j ]m×n i  1, 2, . . . , m j  1, 2, . . . , n (6.3)

where
 
ṽi j  r̃i j × W j  ri j1 W j , ri j2 W j , ri j3 W j

TOPSIS is chosen to rank the order of 18 experiments each of which should have
the shortest distance from the positive ideal solution and be farthest from the negative
ideal solution. Based on the weighted normalized fuzzy decision matrix, it is obvious
that the elements ṽi j of normalized positive triangle numbers and their range belong
to the close interval [0, 1]. Hence, the definition for fuzzy positive ideal solution
(FPIS) and fuzzy negative ideal solution (FNIS) is as follow
 
A+  ṽ1+ , ṽ2+ , . . . , ṽn+ (6.4)
 
A−  ṽ1− , ṽ2− , . . . , ṽn− (6.5)

where
   

ṽ+j  v +j , v +j , v +j , v+j  max vi+j , ṽ−j  v −j , v −j , v −j , and v−j  min vi−j

The distance of each alternative or experiment based on orthogonal array can be


calculated by


n
 
di+  d ṽi j , ṽ +j , ∀i  1, 2, . . . , m (6.6)
j1

n

di−  d ṽi j , ṽ −j , ∀i  1, 2, . . . , m (6.7)


j1

where

     
d ṽi j , ṽ ±j  [1/3( vi j1 − v11
± 2 ± 2
+ vi j2 − v12 ± 2 0.5
+ vi j3 − v13 )] (6.8)

Finally the moldability index of the n alternatives can be calculated as follow


120 6 Injection Molding Process Optimization …

di+
M Ii  i  1, 2, . . . , m. (6.9)
di+ + di−

6.4 Simulation

Two circular parts of 100 mm diameter and 1 mm thickness were designed via
SolidWorks, as shown in Fig. 6.4, with a feeding system consisting of sprue, runner
and gate. 1 mm thickness is chosen to facilitate the evaluation of defects in a critical
condition and the round shape of injected parts is to get rid of the effects of any
corner or busses. To ensure that other factors do not affect the simulation results, the
calculation of sprue, runner, and gate was conducted based on the geometry, size, and
selected material of injected parts. Since gate type leads to short shot and shrinkage,
two ideal gates based on selected geometry were proposed as geometric parameters
and are shown in Fig. 6.5.
For the simulation, SolidWorks plastic was used. To evaluate the accuracy of the
results, Finite Element Analysis (FEA) was conducted with shell (triangles) mesh
as shown in Fig. 6.6. For the injected part the selected material was polypropylene
(PP) and the element thickness chosen for its surface mesh was 1 mm. The mesh
refinement was done with element size of 0.3 mm for sprue and runner and 0.2 mm
for the gate.
The analysis of short shot possibility is conducted via SolidWorks plastic. Short
shot happens far from the gate locations or on thin wall products. It also happens as a
result of insufficient venting (Goodship 2004). In analyzing the short shot possibility
(the ratio of simulated inlet pressure to maximum inlet pressure), different factors are
evaluated to prevent short shot before it happens. The minimum possibility of short

Fig. 6.4 3D design of plastic parts with sprue, runner and gate
6.4 Simulation 121

Fig. 6.5 Sprue and runner with a round gate and b modified edge gate

Fig. 6.6 Finite element analyses for 3D part design

shot is related to trial number 9 shown in Fig. 6.7a and the maximum possibility of
short shot is related to trial number 11 shown in Fig. 6.7b. By increasing the filling
time, part cooling time and melt temperature to their highest level, the possibility
of short shot decreases as shown in trial number 9. In contrast, in trial number 11,
filling time, part cooling time and melt temperature reach their minimum level that
leads to a high level of short shot possibility.
Another consideration in this research is the analysis of shrinkage. It refers to the
difference between the linear dimensions of the cavity and that of the injected parts
at room temperature(Fisher 2003). As shown in Fig. 6.8a, the lowest and the highest
shrinkage rate of injected parts is related to trial number 18 and trial number 10
respectively shown in Fig. 6.8b. From the simulation result (Fig. 6.8), any increase
in filling time and part cooling time decreases the shrinkage rate and any increase in
melt temperature increases the shrinkage rate.
The last defect to be analyzed for quality purposes is warpage analysis. It refers
to a distortion of the original design of the injected parts which results from different
shrinkage rate (Fisher 2003). As shown in Fig. 6.9a, the minimum warpage is related
to trial 11 and the maximum warpage is related to trial 17 as shown in Fig. 6.9b. It
is clear that by increasing the melt temperature and filling time based on Table 6.3,
the warpage rate of injected parts increases. The warpage analysis is based on the
122 6 Injection Molding Process Optimization …

Fig. 6.7 Injected parts with a minimum possibility of short shot b maximum possibility of short
shot

Fig. 6.8 Injected parts with a minimum shrinkage and b maximum shrinkage

Fig. 6.9 Injected parts with a minimum warpage of trial number 11 and b maximum warpage of
trial number 17

average temperature at the end of filling stage which is the average melt temperature
of the two surfaces of a shell mesh. If the temperature distribution between the two
surfaces is not uniform, warpage may happen.
6.4 Simulation 123

Table 6.4 Calculation of initial weights


S1 S2 S3 Initial weight
Step weight 0.5 0.2 0.3
Short shot 1 0.5
Volume shrinkage 1 0.2
Warpage 1 0.3

The injection molding results are evaluated via SolidWorks plastic for 18 exper-
iments based on Taguchi and L18orthogonal array. Three plastic defects, namely
short shot possibility, shrinkage and warpage are considered to determine the best
trial number related to the lowest level of defects of the injected parts. The initial
weight of each plastic defect is calculated via AHP as shown in Table 6.4 based on
their classification demonstrated in Fig. 6.2.
Fuzzy logic rating for three different types of defects identified in flow analysis
via SolidWorks plastic is conducted for 18 trial numbers. Based on their seriousness,
different levels of fuzzy rating are considered as triangular fuzzy numbers as shown
in Table 6.5.

Table 6.5 Fuzzy rating of 18 trials based on 3 plastic defects


Trial Short shot Shrinkage Warpage
number
1 α̃4 (0.5, 0.75, 1) α̃2 (0, 0.25, 0.5) α̃1 (0, 0, 0.25)
2 α̃3 (0.25, 0.5, 0.75) α̃3 (0.25, 0.5, 0.75) α̃1 (0, 0, 0.25)
3 α̃2 (0, 0.25, 0.5) α̃5 (0.75, 1, 1) α̃1 (0, 0, 0.25)
4 α̃3 (0.25, 0.5, 0.75) α̃3 (0.25, 0.5, 0.75) α̃2 (0, 0.25, 0.5)
5 α̃2 (0, 0.25, 0.5) α̃5 (0.75, 1, 1) α̃3 (0.25, 0.5, 0.75)
6 α̃3 (0.25, 0.5, 0.75) α̃2 (0, 0.25, 0.5) α̃2 (0, 0.25, 0.5)
7 α̃3 (0.25, 0.5, 0.75) α̃2 (0, 0.25, 0.5) α̃3 (0.25, 0.5, 0.75)
8 α̃3 (0.25, 0.5, 0.75) α̃3 (0.25, 0.5, 0.75) α̃4 (0.5, 0.75, 1)
9 α̃2 (0, 0.25, 0.5) α̃5 (0.75, 1, 1) α̃4 (0.5, 0.75, 1)
10 α̃3 (0.25, 0.5, 0.75) α̃5 (0.75, 1, 1) α̃1 (0, 0, 0.25)
11 α̃5 (0.75, 1, 0.25) α̃2 (0, 0.25, 0.5) α̃1 (0, 0, 0.25)
12 α̃4 (0.5, 0.75, 1) α̃3 (0.25, 0.5, 0.75) α̃1 (0, 0, 0.25)
13 α̃2 (0, 0.25, 0.5) α̃5 (0.75, 1, 1) α̃3 (0.25, 0.5, 0.75)
14 α̃4 (0.5, 0.75, 1) α̃2 (0, 0.25, 0.5) α̃3 (0.25, 0.5, 0.75)
15 α̃3 (0.25, 0.5, 0.75) α̃3 (0.25, 0.5, 0.75) α̃4 (0.5, 0.75, 1)
16 α̃3 (0.25, 0.5, 0.75) α̃3 (0.25, 0.5, 0.75) α̃4 (0.5, 0.75, 1)
17 α̃3 (0.25, 0.5, 0.75) α̃5 (0.75, 1, 1) α̃5 (0.75, 1, 1)
18 α̃2 (0, 0.25, 0.5) α̃2 (0, 0.25, 0.5) α̃4 (0.5, 0.75, 1)
124 6 Injection Molding Process Optimization …

Table 6.6 Calculation of varied weight based on variable weight profit factor
Trial Short shot Volume shrinkage Warpage
number
j xj s j (x j ) W j (x j ) x j s j (x j ) W j (x j ) x j s j (x j ) W j (x j )
1 α̃4 1.25 0.4347 α̃2 1.25 0.1739 α̃1 1.875 0.3913
2 α̃3 1 0.3960 α̃3 1 0.1584 α̃1 1.875 0.4455
3 α̃2 1.25 0.4 α̃5 1.875 0.24 α̃1 1.875 0.36
4 α̃3 1 0.4651 α̃3 1 0.1860 α̃2 1.25 0.3488
5 α̃2 1.25 0.4807 α̃5 1.875 0.2884 α̃3 1 0.2307
6 α̃3 1 0.45 α̃2 1.25 0.22 α̃2 1.25 0.33
7 α̃3 1 0.4761 α̃2 1.25 0.2380 α̃3 1 0.2857
8 α̃3 1 0.4651 α̃3 1 0.1860 α̃4 1.25 0.3488
9 α̃2 1.25 0.45 α̃5 1.875 0.27 α̃4 1.25 0.27
10 α̃3 1 0.3478 α̃5 1.875 0.2608 α̃1 1.875 0.3913
11 α̃5 1. 875 0.5357 α̃2 1.25 0.1428 α̃1 1.875 0.3214
12 α̃4 1.25 0.4504 α̃3 1 0.1441 α̃1 1.875 0.4054
13 α̃2 1.25 0.4807 α̃5 1.875 0.2884 α̃3 1 0.2307
14 α̃4 1.25 0.5319 α̃2 1.25 0.2127 α̃3 1 0.2553
15 α̃3 1 0.4651 α̃3 1 0.1860 α̃4 1.25 0.3488
16 α̃3 1 0.4651 α̃3 1 0.1860 α̃4 1.25 0.3488
17 α̃3 1 0.3478 α̃5 1.875 0.2608 α̃5 1.875 0.3913
18 α̃2 1.25 0.5 α̃2 1.25 0.2 α̃4 1.25 0.3

Based on expert’s knowledge, let’s consider α  β  1.25, λ1  λ2  1.5, the


varied weight of each defects is calculated in Table 6.6 via Eqs. 6.1 and 6.2. Then
fuzzy logic is used to evaluate the results of 18 trials for three different defects as
shown in Table 6.7 based on Eq. 6.3. Finally, as shown in Table 6.8, the moldability
index is calculated for 18 trial numbers based on Eq. 6.8. Hence, trial number 2
has the highest moldability index A most significant potential of combining Taguchi
with fuzzy logic method and TOPSIS is to have more alternatives of moldability
index. Trial 3 and 6 are of high moldability index and can be applied if setting the
paramers for trial 2 is not possible in terms of injected parts, material, variable cost,
and injection machine.
For example, the varied weight of short shot for trial 1 based on Eq. 6.2 is calculated
as:
0.5 × 1.25
 0.4347
0.5 × 1.25 + 0.3 × 1.25 + 0.2 × 1.875
6.4 Simulation 125

Table 6.7 Fuzzy evaluating results of 18 trials based on simulation


Trial Short shot Volume shrinkage Warpage
number
1 (0.2173, 0.3260, 0.4347) (0, 0.0434, 0.0869) (0, 0, 0.0978)
2 (0.0990, 0.1980, 0.2970) (0.0396, 0.0792, 0.1188) (0, 0, 0.1113)
3 (0, 0.1, 0.2) (0.18, 0.24, 0.24) (0, 0, 0.09)
4 (0.1162, 0.2325, 0.3488) (0.0465, 0.093, 0.1395) (0, 0.0872, 0.1744)
5 (0, 0.1201, 0.2403) (0.2163, 0.2884, 0.2884) (0.0576, 0.1153, 0.1730)
6 (0.1, 0.2, 0.3) (0, 0.055, 0.11) (0, 0.0825, 0.165)
7 (0.1190, 0.2380, 0.3571) (0, 0.0595, 0.119) (0.0714, 0.142, 0.2142)
8 (0.1162, 0.2325, 0.3488) (0.0465, 0.093, 0.1395) (0.1744, 0.2616, 0.3488)
9 (0, 0.1136, 0.2272) (0.02025, 0.27, 0.27) (0.135, 0.2025, 0.27)
10 (0.0869, 0.1739, 0.2608) (0.1956, 0.2608, 0.2608) (0, 0, 0.0978)
11 (0.4017, 0.5357, 0.5357) (0, 0.0357, 0.0714) (0, 0, 0.0803)
12 (0.2252, 0.3378, 0.4504) (0.0360, 0.0720, 0.1080) (0, 0, 0.1013)
13 (0, 0.1201, 0.2403) (0.2163, 0.2884, 0.2884) (0.0576, 0.1153, 0.1730)
14 (0.2659, 0.3989, 0.5319) (0, 0.0531, 0.1063) (0.0638, 0.1276, 0.1914)
15 (0.1162, 0.2325, 0.3488) (0.0465, 0.093, 0.1395) (0.1744, 0.2616, 0.3488)
16 (0.1162, 0.2325, 0.3488) (0.0465, 0.093, 0.1395) (0.1744, 0.2616, 0.3488)
17 (0.0869, 0.1739, 0.2608) (0.1956, 0.2608, 0.2608) (0.2934, 0.3913, 0.3913)
18 (0, 0.125, 0.25) (0, 0.05, 0.1) (0.15, 0.225, 0.3)

For instance, for trial 1, the fuzzy evaluating result for short shot defect based on
Eq. 6.3 is calculated as:

(0.5, 0.75, 1) × 0.4347  (0.2173, 0.3260, 0.4347)

As an example, the FPIS for short shot, shrinkage and warpage of 18 trials based
on Eq. 6.4 are 0.5357, 0.2884, and 0.3913 respectively which are the highest level of
fuzzy evaluation on Table 6.7. Also, FNIS for short shot, shrinkage and warpage of
18 trials based on Eq. 6.5 is 0, 0, and 0 which are the lowest level of fuzzy evaluation
on Table 6.7.
The distance of each alternative or experiment based on orthogonal array can be
calculated based on Eq. 6.8:
+
dshrinkage  ([1/3((0 − 0.2884)2 + (0.0434 − 0.2884)2 + (0.0869 − 0.2884)2 )]0.5  0.2474

+ 2 2 2 0.5  0.3616
dwar page  ([1/3((0 − 0.3913) + (0 − 0.3913) + (0.0978 − 0.3913) )]
126 6 Injection Molding Process Optimization …

Table 6.8 Moldability indices of 18 trials based on simulation


Trial number di+ di− di+ + di− MI i
1 0.8368 0.4504 1.2872 0.6500
2 0.9169 0.3637 1.2806 0.71600
3 0.8810 0.4028 1.2839 0.6862
4 0.8290 0.4642 1.2932 0.6410
5 0.7485 0.5462 1.2948 0.5780
6 0.8777 0.4205 1.2982 0.6760
7 0.8023 0.4882 1.2905 0.6216
8 0.6646 0.6227 1.2874 0.5162
9 0.6815 0.6046 1.2861 0.5299
10 0.7884 0.4853 1.2738 0.6189
11 0.6981 0.5875 1.2857 0.5430
12 0.7972 0.4864 1.2836 0.6210
13 0.7485 0.5462 1.2948 0.5780
14 0.6825 0.6199 1.3025 0.5240
15 0.6646 0.6227 1.2874 0.5162
16 0.6646 0.6227 1.2874 0.5162
17 0.4833 0.7905 1.2738 0.3794
18 0.8422 0.4591 1.3013 0.6472

+ 2 2 2 0.5  0.2276
dshor tshot  ([1/3((0.2173 − 0.5357) + (0.3260 − 0.5357) + (0.4347 − 0.5357) )]

So the distance of trial 1 is calculated as:

d1+  0.2474 + 0.3616 + 0.2276 ∼


 0.8368


dshrinkage  ([1/3((0 − 0)2 + (0 − 0.0434)2 + (0 − 0.0869)2 )]0.5  0.0561


page  ([1/3((0 − 0) + (0 − 0) + (0 − 0.0978) )]  0.0564
2 2 2 0.5
dwar


tshot  ([1/3((0 − 0.2173) + (0 − 0.3260) + (0 − 0.4347) )]  0.3378
2 2 2 0.5
dshor

So the distance of trial 1 is calculated as:


6.4 Simulation 127

d1−  0.2474 + 0.3616 + 0.2276 ∼


 0.4504

Finally, the moldability index for trial 1 based on Eq. 6.9 is calculated as:
0.8368
M I1   0.6500
1.2872

6.5 Experimental Module

In this research, different components of mold tools were designed via SolidWorks,
namely cavity, core, base plate, and pillar. CNC (Computer Numerical Control)
milling machine, grinding machine, and drilling machine were used to fabricate
the mold tools. Other components of mold tools such as spring or guide bars were
purchased independently. The two circular parts were polypropylene and injection
machine Poolad-Bch series was used for these experiments. The core and cavity of
mold tools were made of steel AISI 1045 with surface hardness of 56 HRC. The
material characteristics of the selected material for the injection process are shown
in Table 6.9.

6.5.1 Mold Design

A two-plate mold with two cavities and one parting line with a runner, gate, and
sprue were used for injection of selected parts. Ejector system affects the warpage
rate of injected parts. To ensure that other factors do not affect the quality of injected
parts, the ejector system was ignored. Two cavity plates with two different gate type,
namely semi-round gate and modified edge gate were manufactured as shown in
Figs. 6.10a, b respectively. For releasing the air from the cavities during the injection
process, provision was made for the air vent as shown in Fig. 6.10a.

Table 6.9 Material Melt temperature 230 °C


characteristic of selected
polypropylene for the Max melt temperature 280 °C
injection process Min melt temperature 200 °C
Mold temperature 50 °C
Melt flow rate 20 cm3 /10 min
Max shear stress 250,000 Pa
128 6 Injection Molding Process Optimization …

Fig. 6.10 Cavity plates with a semi round gate and b modified edge gate

Table 6.10 Geometric and process parameters in three levels


Parameters Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
Gate type, A 1 2 –
Filling time, B (s) 0.2 0.6 1
Part cooling time, C (s) 3 3.9 5
Pressure holding time, D (s) 1 2 3
Melt temperature, E (°C) 200 230 280

6.5.2 Orthogonal Array and Process Parameters for Three


Defects

The selected orthogonal array for this experiment is L18, i.e. with 18 trial num-
bers, based on the number of geometric and process parameters and their levels
as shown in Table 6.11. Gate type is a geometric parameter and filling time, part
cooling time, pressure holding time, and melt temperature are process parameters
as shown in Table 6.10. There are three plastic defects for this experiment, namely
short shot possibility, shrinkage, and warpage, each one of them was evaluated for
each experiment as indicated in Table 6.11.
The minimum and maximum short shot possibility happened in trial number 9
and 11 respectively as shown in Fig. 6.11. Experimental results match with that of
the simulation ones. For the evaluation of short shot possibility, was conducted based
on, simulated and maximum inlet pressure
Parameters of any level less than their corresponding minimum levels (level 1,
Table 6.10) lead to difficulty in filling the cavities which in turn leads to short shot
defect through the injection process. As shown in Fig. 6.12, reduction of the level of
each process parameter of trial 11–10% below the minimum led to a short shot.
6.5 Experimental Module 129

Table 6.11 L18 orthogonal array


Experiment A B C D E
1 1 1 1 1 1
2 1 1 2 2 2
3 1 1 3 3 3
4 1 2 1 1 2
5 1 2 2 2 3
6 1 2 3 3 1
7 1 3 1 2 1
8 1 3 2 3 2
9 1 3 3 1 3
10 2 1 1 3 3
11 2 1 2 1 1
12 2 1 3 2 2
13 2 2 1 2 3
14 2 2 2 3 1
15 2 2 3 1 2
16 2 3 1 3 2
17 2 3 2 1 3
18 2 3 3 2 1

Fig. 6.11 Short shot possibility for trial number 9 and 11

The shrinkage of injected parts for all trials was calculated from: shrinkage =
(D /D − 1) where D and D represents the diameter of injected parts after and
before shrinkage respectively. The filling time and part cooling time for trial 18 is at
the highest level, whereas these parameters for trial 10 are at the lowest level. Hence,
the minimum and maximum shrinkage is for trial 18 and 10 (Table 6.12) and shown
in Figs. 6.13a, b respectively.
After injecting different samples of 18 trials, the warpage test was conducted
from: h − ta  z where h is the maximum height of the plate, t a is the average
plate thickness and z is the deflection of the part as shown in Fig. 6.14 (Amer et al.
130 6 Injection Molding Process Optimization …

Fig. 6.12 Short shot defect by reduction in level of a filling time b pressure holding time c melt
temperature

Fig. 6.13 a Minimum shrinkage rate and b maximum shrinkage rate

2013). Warpage analysis was conducted for 18 trials as shown in Table 6.12. The
filling time and melt temperature for trial 11 is at the highest level, whereas these
parameters for trial 17 are at the lowest level. Hence, the minimum and maximum
warpage happened in trial number 11 and 17 as shown in Fig. 6.15a, b respectively.
6.5 Experimental Module 131

Table 6.12 defects Trial number Short shot Shrinkage rate Warpage
determination of 18 trials
based on experiment 1 0.5651 0.014 0.55
2 0.4848 0.019 0.38
3 0.394 0.025 0.4
4 0.4185 0.018 0.9
5 0.3405 0.023 0.68
6 0.4879 0.017 0.4
7 0.4738 0.017 0.52
8 0.4068 0.021 0.54
9 0.3306 0.024 0.95
10 0.4249 0.024 0.4
11 0.6105 0.016 0.65
12 0.5216 0.022 0.68
13 0.3628 0.022 0.5
14 0.5212 0.022 0.62
15 0.4469 0.024 0.92
16 0.4308 0.022 0.9
17 0.3503 0.024 1.08
18 0.5014 0.016 0.68

Fig. 6.14 Warpage evaluations for the injected parts

Triangular Fuzzy rating of three different defects was conducted for 18 trial num-
bers based on the experiments as shown in Table 6.13; and their moldability index are
shown in Table 6.14. It can be seen that trial number 2 is of the highest moldability
index and trial number 3 and 6 are of high moldability indices which means they are
acceptable alternatives to trial 2 if setting the parameters, material, injected parts,
variable cost, or injection machine for trial number 2 is not possible.
Figure 6.16 compares experimental and simulation results which are the same
for trial 2, 5, 6, 7, and 9 and very close for the rest of trials. The proposed method
determines a number of alternatives of high moldability index; in this case 10 alter-
natives of moldability index between 0.6 and 1 from simulation and 5 alternatives of
index between 0.6 and 1 from the experiment. Figure 6.17 show the trial number 2
132 6 Injection Molding Process Optimization …

Fig. 6.15 a Minimum warpage and b maximum warpage

Table 6.13 Fuzzy evaluating results of 18 trials based on experiments


Trial Short shot Shrinkage Warpage
number
1 α̃4 (0.5, 0.75, 1) α̃1 (0, 0, 0.25) α̃3 (0.25, 0.5, 0.75)
2 α̃3 (0.25, 0.5, 0.75) α̃3 (0.25, 0.5, 0.75) α̃1 (0, 0, 0.25)
3 α̃2 (0, 0.25, 0.5) α̃5 (0.75, 1, 1) α̃2 (0, 0.25, 0.5)
4 α̃3 (0.25, 0.5, 0.75) α̃3 (0.25, 0.5, 0.75) α̃4 (0.5, 0.75, 1)
5 α̃2 (0, 0.25, 0.5) α̃5 (0.75, 1, 1) α̃3 (0.25, 0.5, 0.75)
6 α̃3 (0.25, 0.5, 0.75) α̃2 (0, 0.25, 0.5) α̃2 (0, 0.25, 0.5)
7 α̃3 (0.25, 0.5, 0.75) α̃2 (0, 0.25, 0.5) α̃3 (0.25, 0.5, 0.75)
8 α̃3 (0.25, 0.5, 0.75) α̃4 (0.5, 0.75, 1) α̃3 (0.25, 0.5, 0.75)
9 α̃2 (0, 0.25, 0.5) α̃5 (0.75, 1, 1) α̃4 (0.5, 0.75, 1)
10 α̃3 (0.25, 0.5, 0.75) α̃5 (0.75, 1, 1) α̃2 (0, 0.25, 0.5)
11 α̃5 (0.75, 1, 0.25) α̃2 (0, 0.25, 0.5) α̃3 (0.25, 0.5, 0.75)
12 α̃4 (0.5, 0.75, 1) α̃4 (0.5, 0.75, 1) α̃3 (0.25, 0.5, 0.75)
13 α̃2 (0, 0.25, 0.5) α̃4 (0.5, 0.75, 1) α̃3 (0.25, 0.5, 0.75)
14 α̃4 (0.5, 0.75, 1) α̃4 (0.5, 0.75, 1) α̃3 (0.25, 0.5, 0.75)
15 α̃3 (0.25, 0.5, 0.75) α̃5 (0.75, 1, 1) α̃4 (0.5, 0.75, 1)
16 α̃3 (0.25, 0.5, 0.75) α̃4 (0.5, 0.75, 1) α̃4 (0.5, 0.75, 1)
17 α̃2 (0, 0.25, 0.5) α̃5 (0.75, 1, 1) α̃5 (0.75, 1, 1)
18 α̃4 (0.5, 0.75, 1) α̃2 (0, 0.25, 0.5) α̃3 (0.25, 0.5, 0.75)

and 6 are the highest moldability index without any plastic defects. The percentage
differences between simulation and the experiments are shown in Fig. 6.18
6.5 Experimental Module 133

Table 6.14 Moldability indices of 18 mold schemes based on experiments


Trial number di+ di− di+ + di− MI i
1 0.7136 0.5743 1.2879 0.5541
2 0.9169 0.3637 1.2806 0.7160
3 0.8274 0.4671 1.2945 0.6391
4 0.6646 0.6227 1.2874 0.5162
5 0.7485 0.5462 1.2948 0.5780
6 0.8777 0.4205 1.2982 0.6760
7 0.8023 0.4882 1.2905 0.6216
8 0.6996 0.5841 1.2837 0.5449
9 0.6815 0.6046 1.2861 0.5299
10 0.7309 0.5551 1.2861 0.5683
11 0.5714 0.7147 1.2862 0.4442
12 0.6068 0.6810 1.2879 0.4712
13 0.7999 0.5039 1.3038 0.6135
14 0.5793 0.7166 1.2960 0.4470
15 0.5855 0.6942 1.2797 0.4575
16 0.6192 0.6668 1.2861 0.4815
17 0.5689 0.7149 1.2838 0.4431
18 0.6811 0.6152 1.2964 0.5254

0.8

0.7

0.6
Moldability Index

0.5

0.4 simulation
experiments
0.3

0.2

0.1

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Trial Number

Fig. 6.16 Comparison of experiments and simulation results


134 6 Injection Molding Process Optimization …

Fig. 6.17 Injected part for


trial 2 and 6

30
simulation and experiments (%)
Percentage difference between

25

20

15

10

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Trial Number

Fig. 6.18 Percentage difference between simulation and experiments

6.6 Concluding Remarks

Combination of Taguchi and FAHP with TOPSIS facilitated an efficient approach


to determine the higher and highest moldability index. Taguchi method helps obtain
higher moldability index if the highest one is not achievable. Three common defects
were considered to determine the moldability index. The proposed method was
applied using five different geometric and process parameters in three different
levels. For rating the seriousness of each defect, a fuzzy logic evaluation was made
by defining five levels. The initial weight of three defects was allocated through the
analytic hierarchy process (AHP). L18 orthogonal array of Taguchi was selected to
evaluate the quality of all possible alternatives for quality evaluation. TOPSIS was
6.6 Concluding Remarks 135

used to rank 18 experiments. Finally, simulation results obtained via Finite Element
Modelling of two circular flat plates of 1 mm thickness were verified by experimental
results.
Based on the simulation and experimental results, and also the optimization tools,
the following conclusions can be drawn:
• The moldability index in both simulation and experimental results are very similar
which demonstrates the robustness of the proposed methodology. The highest
moldability index is related to trial number 2 for both simulation and experimental
result. The moldability index for trial number 2, 5, 6, 7, and 9 is the same for both
simulation and experimental results and the rest of 18 trials are very close to each
other in terms of quality evaluation.
• The novelty of proposed method is to determine a number of alternatives with
high moldability index. Hence, instead of having one trial number with the highest
moldability index, there are 10 alternatives with high moldability index between
0.6 and 1 for simulation results and 5 alternatives with high moldability index
between 0.6 and 1 for experimental results.

References

Amer, Y., Moayyedian, M., Hajiabolhasani, Z., & Moayyedian, L. (2013). Improving injection
moulding processes using experimental design. World Academy of Science, Engineering and
Technology, 75, 3–28.
Amiri, M. P. (2010). Project selection for oil-fields development by using the AHP and fuzzy
TOPSIS methods. Expert Systems with Applications, 37(9), 6218–6224.
Chen, M.-Y., Tzeng, H.-W., Chen, Y.-C., & Chen, S.-C. (2008). The application of fuzzy theory for
the control of weld line positions in injection-molded part. ISA Transactions, 47(1), 119–126.
Cheng, J., Feng, Y., Tan, J., & Wei, W. (2008). Optimization of injection mold based on fuzzy
moldability evaluation. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 208(1–3), 222–228.
Dimla, D. E., Camilotto, M., & Miani, F. (2005). Design and optimisation of conformal cooling
channels in injection moulding tools. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 164–165,
1294–1300.
Fisher, J. M. (2003). Handbook of molded part shrinkage and warpage. Plastics Design Library.
Goodship, V. (2004). Troubleshooting injection moulding (Vol. 15). iSmithers Rapra Publishing.
Hassan, H., Regnier, N., & Defaye, G. (2009). A 3D study on the effect of gate location on the
cooling of polymer by injection molding. International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow, 30(6),
1218–1229.
Hassan, H., Regnier, N., Pujos, C., Arquis, E., & Defaye, G. (2010). Modeling the effect of cooling
system on the shrinkage and temperature of the polymer by injection molding. Applied Thermal
Engineering, 30(13), 1547–1557.
He, W., Zhang, Y. F., Lee, K. S., Fuh, J. Y. H., & Nee, A. Y. C. (1998). Automated process parameter
resetting for injection moulding: a fuzzy-neuro approach. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing,
9(1), 17–27.
Huang, M.-C., & Tai, C.-C. (2001). The effective factors in the warpage problem of an injection-
molded part with a thin shell feature. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 110(1), 1–9.
Hwang, C. L., & Yoon, K. (1981). Methods for multiple attribute decision making. In Multiple
attribute decision making (pp. 58–191). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
136 6 Injection Molding Process Optimization …

Kima, H. S., Sonb, J. S., & Imc, Y. T. (2003). Gate location design in injection molding of an auto-
mobile junction box with integral hinges. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 140(1),
110–115.
Kramschuster, A., Cavitt, R., Ermer, D., Chen, Z. B., & Turng, L.-S. (2006). Effect of processing
conditions on shrinkage and warpage and morphology of injection moulded parts using micro-
cellular injection moulding. Plastics, Rubber and Composites, 35(5), 198–209.
Li, J.-Q., Li, D.-Q., Guo, Z.-Y., & Lv, H.-Y. (2007). Single gate optimization for plastic injection
mold. Journal of Zhejiang University, 8(7), 1077–1083.
Liao, S. J., Chang, D. Y., Chen, H. J., Tsou, L. S., Ho, J. R., Yau, H. T., & Hsieh, W. H. (2004).
Optimal process conditions of shrinkage and warpage of thin-wall parts. Polymer Engineering
and Science, 44(5), 917–928.
Lo, W. C., Tsai, K. M., & Hsieh, C. Y. (2009). Six Sigma approach to improve surface precision of
optical lenses in the injection-molding process. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing
Technology, 41(9–10), 885–896.
Lotti, C., Ueki, M. M., & Bretas, R. E. S. (2002). Prediction of the shrinkage of injection molded iPP
plaques using artificial neural networks. Journal of Injection Molding Technology, 6(3), 157–176.
Maldonado, A., Garcia, J. L., Alvarado, A., & Balderrama, C. O. (2013). A hierarchical fuzzy
axiomatic design methodology for ergonomic compatibility evaluation of advanced manufactur-
ing technology. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 66(1–4), 171–186.
Moayyedian, M., Abhary, K., & Marian, R. (2015a). Improved gate system for scrap reduction
in injection molding processes. In 2nd International Materials, Industrial, and Manufacturing
Engineering Conference, MIMEC 2015. Procedia Manufacturing Elsevier.
Moayyedian, M., Abhary, K., & Marian, R. (2015b). New design feature of mold in injection molding
for scrap reduction. In 2nd International Materials, Industrial, and Manufacturing Engineering
Conference, MIMEC 2015 (pp. 241–245). Procedia Manufacturing Elsevier.
Oktem, H., Erzurumlu, T., & Uzman, I. (2007). Application of Taguchi optimization technique
in determining plastic injection molding process parameters for a thin-shell part. Materials and
Design, 28(4), 1271–1278.
Ozcelik, B., Kuram, E., & Topal, M. M. (2012). Investigation the effects of obstacle geometries
and injection molding parameters on weld line strength using experimental and finite element
methods in plastic injection molding. International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer,
39(2), 275–281.
Patil, S. K., & Kant, R. (2014). A fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS framework for ranking the solutions of
Knowledge Management adoption in Supply Chain to overcome its barriers. Expert Systems with
Applications, 41(2), 679–693.
Pomerleau, J., & Sanschagrin, B. (2006). Injection molding shrinkage of PP: experimental progress.
Polymer Engineering and Science, 46(9), 1275–1283.
Saaty, T. L. (1980). The analytical hierarchy process, planning, priority. Resource Allocation. RWS
Publications, USA.
Saghafian, S., & Hejazi, S. R. (2005). Multi-criteria group decision making using a modified fuzzy
TOPSIS procedure. In International Conference on Computational Intelligence for Modelling,
Control and Automation.
Shen, Y.-K., Wu, C.-W., Yu, Y.-F., & Chung, H.-W. (2008). Analysis for optimal gate design of
thin-walled injection molding. International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer, 35(6),
728–734.
Shi, H., Xie, S., & Wang, X. (2013). A warpage optimization method for injection molding using
artificial neural network with parametric sampling evaluation strategy. International Journal of
Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 65(1–4), 343–353.
Song, M. C., Liu, Z., Wang, M. J., Yu, T. M., & Zhao, D. Y. (2007). Research on effects of injection
process parameters on the molding process for ultra-thin wall plastic parts. Journal of Materials
Processing Technology, 187, 668–671.
References 137

Suwannasri, S., & Sirovetnukul, R. (2013). The defects reduction in injection molding by fuzzy logic
based machine selection system. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology,74,
626–634.
Toe, C. (2001). Shrinkage behavior and optimization of injection molded parts studied by the
Taguchi method. Polymer Engineering and Science, 41(5), 703–711.
Torfi, F., Farahani, R. Z., & Rezapour, S. (2010). Fuzzy AHP to determine the relative weights of
evaluation criteria and Fuzzy TOPSIS to rank the alternatives. Applied Soft Computing, 10(2),
520–528.
Tosello, G., Gava, A., Hansen, H. N., & Lucchetta, G. (2010). Study of process parameters effect
on the filling phase of micro-injection moulding using weld lines as flow markers. International
Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 47(1–4), 81–97.
Tsai, K.-M., Hsieh, C.-Y., & Lo, W.-C. (2009). A study of the effects of process parameters for injec-
tion molding on surface quality of optical lenses. Journal of Materials Processing Technology,
209(7), 3469–3477.
Tsai, K.-M. (2013). Runner design to improve quality of plastic optical lens. International Journal
of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 66(1–4), 523–536.
Tsoi, H.-P., & Gao, F. (1999). Control of Injection velocity using a fuzzy logic rule-based controller
for thermoplastics injection molding. Polymer Engineering and Science, 39(1), 3–17.
Vaidya, O. S., & Kumar, S. (2006). Analytic hierarchy process: an overview of applications. Euro-
pean Journal of operational research, 169(1), 1–29.
Xie, P., Guo, F., Jiao, Z., Ding, Y., & Yang, W. (2014). Effect of gate size on the melt filling behavior
and residual stress of injection molded parts. Materials and Design, 53, 366–372.
Xu, Y., Zhang, Q., Zhang, W., & Zhang, P. (2014). Optimization of injection molding process param-
eters to improve the mechanical performance of polymer product against impact. International
Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology.
Xu, Z. (2007). Group decision making with triangular fuzzy linguistic variables. In Department of
Management Science and Engineering School of Economics and Management Tsinghua Univer-
sity, Beijing 100084, China.
Yang, K., & El-Haik, B. S. (2009). Design for six sigma: a roadmap for product development.
McGraw-Hill Companies.
Yin, F., Maoa, H., Hua, L., Guo, W., & Shu, M. (2011). Back propagation neural network modeling
for warpage prediction and optimization of plastic products during injection molding. Materials
and Design, 32(4), 1844–1850.
Zhao, P., Zhou, H., Li, Y., & Li, D. (2010). Process parameters optimization of injection molding
using a fast strip analysis as a surrogate model. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing
Technology, 49(9–12), 949–959.
Zhao, P., Zhou, H., He, Y., Cai, K., & Fu, J. (2014). A nondestructive online method for monitoring
the injection molding process by collecting and analyzing machine running data. International
Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 72(5–8), 765–777.
Zhou, H. (2013). Computer modeling for injection molding.Wiley, Inc.
Chapter 7
Conclusions and Recommendations
for Further Work

7.1 Introduction

The past century has observed the rapid increase of plastics and their proliferation
into all markets. According to world consumption of raw materials by weight, plastic
is the highest in comparison with other old materials such as aluminum, steel, rub-
ber, copper, and zinc, resulting from its properties and lower production cost (Salimi
et al. 2013; Zhou 2013). Injection molding is one of the most important processes
for manufacturing of plastic products and approximately one-third of all plastics are
converted into parts via injection molding processes (Tang et al. 2006). The appli-
cation of injection molding processes is increasing significantly in many industries
like packaging, aerospace and aviation, building and construction, automotive parts
and household articles (Altan 2010; Tang et al. 2006; Zhou 2013).
Four main factors which affect the final quality of the injected parts are: part
design, material characteristics, the mold design and the process parameters. Since
the design of the part is based on customer requirement, it is not possible to cover
all issues in part design. So the part design factor is not considered herein. So is the
material type factor because more than 17,000 plastic materials are used throughout
the world, therefore is not possible to conduct experiments on all of them. Hence
the focus of this research was to determine the effect of mold design and process
parameters in injection molding to improve the quality of injected parts which leads
to a number of defects in a plastic part.
The purpose of this chapter is to cover:
• Summary of the research.
• Contributions of the research.
• Recommendations for future research.

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019 139


M. Moayyedian, Intelligent Optimization of Mold Design and Process Parameters
in Injection Molding, Springer Theses, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03356-9_7
140 7 Conclusions and Recommendations for Further Work

7.2 Summary of the Research

The main subject of this study was improving the quality of injected parts and opti-
mization of injection molding process. This was achieving by, first introducing new
runner cross-section, introducing a new gate geometry, both for quality purposes
and scrap reduction; third, by anticipating and evaluating short shot defects before
they happen through the process; fourth, by evaluating the moldability index for the
multi-objective optimization of injection molding process.

7.2.1 Development of Cold Runner Design in Injection


Molding Process

In Chap. 3, the new feature of runner in cold runner design was developed with
the objective of scrap reduction, easier ejection of runner from the cavity and having
central flow stream of gate with runner. The developed methodology was divided into
four main modules, namely design introduction, design calculation, simulation and
experiments. The simulation and real case study results showed that the new cross
section of runner (elliptical cross section) in comparison with current cross section
(round cross section) has 20% reduction in scrap and 2.5% reduction in cooling time
for the injected parts. Also, easier ejection of molded part from the cavity is another
advantage of elliptical cross section.

7.2.2 Development of Gate Design and Filling Process


Analysis

In Chap. 4, a new methodology for the cross section of an edge gate in injection
molding was developed with the objective of easier degating from the injected part
with less visible blemish, reducing different plastic defects such as sink marks, weld
lines and meld lines, better contact surface between gate and the injected part and
finally reducing the scrap. The developed methodology was divided into four main
modules, namely design introduction, design calculation, simulation, and experi-
ments. The simulation and real case study results showed a reduction of internal and
external defects of injected parts. Also it permits easier degating of modified edge
gate in comparison with current edge gate and has less visible blemish of the part
which leads to scrap reduction. There is 17% scrap rate for modified edge gate and
56% scrap rate for current edge gate.
7.2 Summary of the Research 141

7.2.3 The Analysis of Short Shot Possibility in Injection


Molding Process

In Chap. 5, the proposed approach for the analysis of short shot possibility based
on process parameters and geometric parameters was applied in order to reduce the
short shot possibility in injection molding. The significant level of each parameter
was evaluated via ANOVA and S/N ratio. To validate the proposed method, the real
case study was conducted for an injected part. The significance rate of each parameter
in both simulation and experimental result were very close. Melt temperature was the
most influential parameter with a contribution of 74.25% and 75.04%, filling time
with a contribution of 22% and 20.19% followed by gate type with a contribution of
3.69% and 3.93% for simulation and experimental results respectively.

7.2.4 Optimization of Injection Molding Based on Fuzzy


Evaluation

In Chap. 6, the consideration of Taguchi and fuzzy AHP (FAHP) with TOPSIS offered
an efficient use approach to evaluate different objectives and also to determine the
best alternative for the best moldability index and better alternatives which were close
to the best alternative for a specific part in injection molding. By using Taguchi, if the
best alternative is not possible to maintain, there are other alternatives which are very
close to the best alternative and has the highest moldability. It is clear that instead
of having one trial number which has the highest moldability index, there were 10
alternatives with high moldability index between 0.6 and 1 for simulation results
and 5 alternatives with high moldability index between 0.6 and 1 for experimental
results.

7.3 Conclusions

This study has made significant contributions to solving different problems in injec-
tion molding process using numerical modelling, Taguchi method and statistical
analysis, AHP, TOPSIS, fuzzy logic validated by case studies.
Contribution 1: Development of a methodology for designing a new runner cross-
section in cold runner system. This new design of runner has valuable impacts on
injection molding; namely reduction in scrap rate, easier ejection of the injected
part from the cavity, cycle time reduction, and central flow stream of gate with
runner cross-section. An experiment was conducted by injecting two circular plates of
1 mm thickness and the results were verified by simulation confirming the robustness
of the proposed design of process parameters filling time, melt temperature, mold
temperature, pressure holding time and pure cooling time for which the margin error
142 7 Conclusions and Recommendations for Further Work

for inlet pressure and filling time were 7.36% and 3.38% respectively. It was also
demonstrated that an elliptical runner in comparison with a round cross section leads
to 25% reduction in scrap rate and 2.5% reduction in cooling time, and easier ejection
of runner from the cavity.
Contribution 2: Development of a methodology for the design of a new cross section
(elliptical) of an edge gate in injection molding was developed with the objective of
easier degating from the injected parts with less visible blemish, defect reduction,
namely sink marks, weld lines and meld lines, better contact surface between the
gate and the injected parts hence reducing the scrap. The experiment, along with
simulation and Taguchi method verified that, in comparison with current edge gate,
the modified edge gate has less internal and external defects, namely sink marks, weld
and meld lines leads to easier degating from the injected parts and 40% reduction in
scrape rate. Also, the percentage of contribution in creating different plastic defects
was related to the gate type (current edge gate) as a significant factor via Taguchi
method and ANOVA.
Contribution 3: Evaluation, as a consequence of which reduction of short shot
defects before it happens. This leads to a considerable improvement in quality
of the injected parts. The combination of simulation with Taguchi experimental
design method offers an efficient and easy approach to determine the significant
factors which affect the possibility of short shot-diagnosing the defects before they
occurs-in injection molding. The proposed approach for the analysis of short shot
possibility based on process and geometric parameters was applied in order to reduce
the short shot possibility. The significance rate of each parameter in both experimen-
tal and simulation result was very close together which signifies the robustness of
proposed method in evaluation of short shot possibility. Melt temperature was the
most influential factor with a contribution of 74.25% and 75.04%, and filling time
with a contribution of 22% and 20.19% followed by gate type with a contribution
of 3.69% and 3.93% for simulation and experimental results respectively. The per-
centage of contribution for part cooling time and pressure holding time is very low
in comparison with that of melt temperature, filling time and gate type which did not
consider as significant factors.
Contribution 4: Combining Taguchi and FAHP with TOPSIS offered an efficient use
approach to evaluate different objectives and also to determine the higher as well as
the highest moldability index. The combination of Taguchi with FAHP and TOPSIS
make this possibility to achieve more moldability indices, including the highest
index, though it is not always practical due to limitations of equipment, expenses,
and staff. The moldability index in both simulation and experimental results are very
similar which demonstrates the robustness of the proposed methodology. The highest
moldability index is related to trial number 2 for both simulation and experimental
result. The moldability index for trial number 2, 5, 6, 7, and 9 is the same for both
simulation and experimental results and the rest of 18 trials are very close to each
other in terms of quality evaluation.
7.4 Research Publications 143

Table 7.1 Contributions of this study based on the chapters and the publications
Contributions
C1 C2 C3
Publications P1 ✓
P2 ✓
P3 ✓
P4 ✓
P5 ✓
P6 ✓
Chap. 3 ✓
Chap. 4 ✓
Chap. 5 ✓

7.4 Research Publications

The outcome of this study has been presented in 6 peer-reviewed articles: two articles
published in international journals, and two are currently under review. Two articles
published in the proceedings of specialist international conferences. The contribu-
tions of journal papers and conference papers are shown in Table 7.1.

7.5 Recommendations for Future Work

7.5.1 New Features of Gate Design in Injection Molding

The current research presented the proposed methodology to define the new design
of current edge gate in injection molding with elliptical cross section by removing
the corners of current edge gate. Based on the simulation results, the new design
reduces different internal and external defects. The external defects analysis such as
sink marks and flashes were justified by the experimental set up. Validation of Weld
line and meld line analysis and also shear stress analysis based on the simulation
results can be an interesting future work for researchers.

7.5.2 Significant Factors in Short-Shot Possibility Analysis

This research took a limited number of parameters into consideration and determined
the significant ones which affect the possibility of occurrence the short-shot defect.
Further research is required to determine other significant parameters, namely process
144 7 Conclusions and Recommendations for Further Work

parameters such as speed of the screw and material type, and geometric parame-
ters such as different cooling systems and different gate and runner geometries for
different plastic materials.

7.5.3 Possible Alternatives for Quality Evaluation


of Injection Molding

Consideration of Taguchi and FAHP with TOPSIS offered an efficient approach to


evaluate different objectives of injection process and also to determine the higher and
highest moldability indices. This research was limited to three objectives, five geo-
metric and process parameters of three different levels. Further research is required
to increase the number of objectives such as common plastic defects, the number of
geometric and process parameters for more accurate evaluation of moldability index.

7.6 Final Word

The research did overcome the limitations of previous studies in injection molding
process where four main improvements were achieved. The first one was new (ellip-
tical) runner via the first time application of SolidWorks plastic and finite element
method (FEM). The elliptical cross section showed 25% less scrap than that of the
round cross section. The second improvement was development of a modified edge-
gate leading to reduction of internal and external defects. The third improvement
was the new definition of common plastic defects called short shot and determi-
nation of the possibility of its happening. The fourth improvement was combin-
ing Taguchi optimization method with other optimization tools such as fuzzy AHP
and TOPSIS for analysis of injection molding process to achieve more moldability
indices, including the highest index, though it is not always practical due to limita-
tions of equipment, expenses, and staff.

References

Altan, M. (2010). Reducing shrinkage in injection moldings via the Taguchi, ANOVA and neural
network methods. Materials and Design, 31(1), 599–604.
Salimi, A., Subasi, M., Buldu, L., & Karatas, C. (2013). Prediction of flow length in injection mold-
ing for engineering plastics by fuzzy logic under different processing conditions. Iran Polymer
Journal, 22(1) 33–41.
Tang, S. H., Kong, Y. M., Sapuan, S. M., Samin, R., & Sulaiman, S. (2006). Design and thermal
analysis of plastic injection mould. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 171(2), 259–267.
Zhou, H. (2013). Computer modeling for injection molding. Wiley, Inc.
Author Biography

Dr. Mehdi Moayyedian is currently an assistant pro-


fessor at American University of the Middle East. He
did his master in advanced manufacturing and
mechanical engineering in 2011 at the university of
South Australia in Adelaide. Then he started his Ph.D.
in 2013 on intelligent optimization of mold design and
process parameters in injection molding. He published
a number of journal papers and peer-reviewed confer-
ence papers in high impact factor journals during his
master and Ph.D. After graduation, he worked as a
lecturer in the school of engineering at the University of
South Australia Adelaide.
This book is the result of Mehdi’s Ph.D. thesis in Mechanical Engineering.
Mehdi’s Ph.D. degree was awarded in 2017 at the University of South Australia.

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019 145


M. Moayyedian, Intelligent Optimization of Mold Design and Process Parameters
in Injection Molding, Springer Theses, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03356-9

Вам также может понравиться