Original Article

Journal of Plastic Film & Sheeting

2014, Vol. 30(2) 162–180
The effect of material ß The Author(s) 2013
Reprints and permissions:
characteristics and mould sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/8756087913497387
parameters on the jpf.sagepub.com

thermoforming of thick
polypropylene sheets

P Shyam Kumar, G Kiran Kumar,

Satish Kommoji, Ritima Banerjee*
and Anup K Ghosh

Abstract
Two grades of 5 mm thick polypropylene (PP) sheets, one having linear polymer
chains (PP-TF-1) and the other having long-chain branches (PP-TF-2), were drape
formed, using moulds of different parameters. Single-sided heating of sheet was
found to be suitable only at lower depths of draw. Double-sided heating gave good
part shape conformance at all depths of draw. PP-TF-2 was found to have lower
crystallinity than PP-TF-1, suggesting that it would have a lower sagging tendency
and would give parts with more uniform wall thickness distribution. This was
confirmed in formability studies. At higher depths of draw, an increase in draft
angle was found to give more uniform wall thickness distribution, maintaining
reasonable values of wall thickness. At lower depths of draw, draft angle was
found to have no influence on product quality. Irrespective of material character-
istics and other mould parameters, only moulds with generous values of corner
radii gave strong corners.

Keywords
Thermoforming, formability, polypropylene, crystallinity, draft angle, corner radius

Centre for Polymer Science & Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, New Delhi, India
*Present address: Delhi Technological University, New Delhi, India.

Corresponding author:
Anup K Ghosh, Centre for Polymer Science and Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi,
Hauz Khas, New Delhi 110016, India.
Email: anupkghosh@gmail.com

Downloaded from jpf.sagepub.com at UNIV OF NORTH DAKOTA on June 17, 2015

Kumar et al. 163

Introduction
Thermoforming is the process of heating a thermoplastic sheet so that it
softens and forms into a mould with the help of pressure, or vacuum, with
or without the use of a plug assist. The factors that affect the quality of
thermoformed parts1,2 are temperature, material characteristics, pressure/
vacuum, mould characteristics and assisting plug. During thermoforming,
the sheet thins due to stretching. The wall thickness at any point of thermo-
formed part is influenced by the extent and the speed of stretching of the
sheet, the sheet temperature, the extent of assistance provided by the plug in
the forming process and in the elimination of heat. Since a decrease in part
thickness leads to deterioration in the mechanical properties of the part, it is
necessary to optimize the process before thermoforming.3 In general, thermo-
formed parts have non-uniform wall thickness. Generally, wall thickness is
the most, where the sheet touches the mould first and is the least where the
sheet touches the mould last.4 Ayhan and Zhang5 studied the wall thickness
distribution of thermoformed food containers. They found that the wall
thickness was significantly influenced by the forming temperature, pressure,
heating time, wall location, container side and their interactions. Wall thick-
ness distribution became more uniform with an increase in the plug velocity
and a decrease in the stretching time.6
The thermoforming of thick sheets is difficult and a little literature is avail-
able on the same. Since polymers are poor conductors of heat, a thick sheet
tends to be heated non-uniformly. According to Labeas et al.,7 the heated
surface of a thick sheet may reach temperatures well above the forming tem-
perature, while the core remains below the forming temperature. The final
thickness distribution of the part is drastically controlled by the initial tem-
perature distribution within the sheet.8 Since the heating phase is the first
phase in the thermoforming process, errors in this phase will have an effect
on the subsequent phases.9 Thus, a thick sheet will not be uniformly stretch-
able across its thickness during the forming process, which will necessitate the
use of more force to form. Non-uniform ease of stretching will cause an
increased tendency to rupture. Also, the formed part will tend to have
built-in thermal stresses, poor shape conformance and non-uniform wall
thickness distribution.10

Downloaded from jpf.sagepub.com at UNIV OF NORTH DAKOTA on June 17, 2015

164 Journal of Plastic Film & Sheeting 30(2)

Figure 1. Convective heating of a thick sheet.

According to Throne,11 for thermoforming of a thick sheet which is sym-

metrically heated by hot air from both sides, as shown in Figure 1, the overall
heating cycle time is controlled by the sheet centre-line temperature. For
thermoforming to be successful, the centre-line should be heated at least to
the minimum forming temperature, without the surface getting overheated.
The overall rate of heating must be controlled to achieve this effect. The
heating time can be determined with the help of the Fourier number, the
Biot number and the dimensionless temperature, which are calculated using
equations (1) to (4).

Fo ¼ ð1Þ
L2
hL
Bi ¼ ð2Þ
k
T  Tinitial
Y¼ ð3Þ
Theater  Tinitial
k
¼ ð4Þ
Cp

where
Fo ¼ Fourier number
Bi ¼ Biot number
Y¼ Dimensionless temperature
¼ Thermal diffusivity of material
h¼ Convective heat transfer coefficient
L¼ Half the sheet thickness
T¼ Temperature
F¼ Time taken to reach temperature T
k¼ Thermal conductivity of material

Downloaded from jpf.sagepub.com at UNIV OF NORTH DAKOTA on June 17, 2015

Kumar et al. 165

 ¼ Density of material
Cp ¼ Specific heat capacity of material

The Fourier number for the Y value corresponding to the desirable centre-
line temperature for a given Bi can be determined from standard plots. The
time F required to heat the centre-line from the initial temperature to the
minimum forming temperature can thus be determined. For this Fourier
number, the Y value for the surface can again be determined from standard
plots and hence the corresponding surface temperature can be calculated.
This surface temperature should not exceed the maximum forming
temperature.
The combination of good physical properties and low cost make polypro-
pylene (PP) suitable for many applications that use the thermoforming pro-
cess. However, PP being a crystalline polymer fails to show an appreciable
rubbery plateau during the process of heating. Thus, thermoforming can be
performed over a very narrow range of temperature that is close to the melt-
ing point. Throne1 has reported that PP can be thermoformed in the tem-
perature range 143–166 C. If the temperature is too low, the formed product
will not replicate accurately the detail of the mould. If the temperature is too
high, the sheet loses its dimensional stability and flows downward under
gravity to an excessive amount (known as sag). The result is that the thermo-
formed product will have uneven wall thickness and this may even cause
tearing of the sheet.12
The viscoelastic properties of a polymer have a profound influence on its
thermoformability. An ideal thermoforming material should sag less during
heating but flow well during forming, and hence should exhibit a good balance
of elastic behaviour (which controls sag) and viscous behaviour (which con-
trols flow). Cruz13 has shown that for infrared and isothermal heating of PP
and modified PP sheets, the sag rate is independent of the sheet thickness, and
a power function of the blank or opening size. The melt strength of a polymer
influences sag as well as the depth of draw. A higher melt strength is favourable
for thermoforming as it reduces the tendency to sag and increases deep draw
capability.14,15 PP has poor melt strength, and hence tends to sag. Lau et al.12
have shown that the melt strength of conventional PP decreases linearly as the
melt flow index (MFI) of PP increases. Lower MFI PP has longer molecular
chains, which form more entanglements in the polymer structure. Polymers
with higher degree of entanglements have higher resistance to extensional
deformation. Thus, lower MFI polymers tend to have higher melt strength.
Also, as compared to conventional PP, high melt strength PP was found to
have greater shear thinning behaviour and a lower tendency to sag.15 Gotsis
et al.16 have shown that there is a close relationship between the processability
of PP in thermoforming, the strain hardening behaviour of its melt in uniaxial

Downloaded from jpf.sagepub.com at UNIV OF NORTH DAKOTA on June 17, 2015

166 Journal of Plastic Film & Sheeting 30(2)

elongational flow and the number of long chain branches on its chain. When
long-chain branches were introduced on linear PP chains, a decrease in MFI,
an increase in molecular weight distribution and an increase in strain-
hardening index were observed. However, long chain branching also results
in a decrease in the strain at break of the melt. Thus, it can be said that very
high degrees of branching are not necessary for the optimization of
thermoformability.
This paper discusses studies on the thermoforming of two grades of thick
(5 mm thickness) PP sheets on different moulds, so as to correlate the product
quality with the material characteristics, and the mould parameters (draft
angle and corner radius).

Experimental
Materials
In this study, 18 in.  18 in. PP sheets of two different grades, designated
PP-TF-1 and PP-TF-2, were used. These sheets of PP were obtained from
Reliance Industries Ltd, Mumbai and were manufactured by using impact
copolymer grades of PP (Repol CO15EG and Repol CO15EG 114-73)
reported to have MFI of 1.5 g/10 min. PP-TF-1 and PP-TF-2 were reported
to have linear polymer chains and long-chain branches, respectively. The
sheets used were of 5 mm thickness.

Material characterization
PP sheets (PP-TF-1 and PP-TF-2) were characterized to gain an understand-
ing of their thermoforming behaviour, prior to the actual thermoforming
experiments.
Tensile Test: Tensile tests were performed with ZWICK universal tester,
Model 2010 at support separation of 70 mm and cross-head speed of
50 mm/min according to ASTM D638 methods. Tensile specimens of both
grades of sheets were prepared. Five specimens of each grade were tested.
Tensile strength, tensile modulus and elongation at break were calculated
from stress–strain curve.
Flexural Test: Flexural test were performed with ZWICK universal tester
(Model 2010) according to ASTM D790 methods. Flexural specimens of both
grades of sheets were prepared. Five specimens of each sample were tested.
Flexural strength and modulus and strain at maximum force were calculated
from load.
X-ray crystallinity: Powdered samples of both grades were prepared and
used for X-ray studies, using a PAN analytical X-ray diffractometer having
an X-ray tube producing monochromatic CuKa radiation. Scan range

Downloaded from jpf.sagepub.com at UNIV OF NORTH DAKOTA on June 17, 2015

Kumar et al. 167

2 ¼ 10–35 , where  is diffraction angle, and scan speed of 5 /min were used.
The curves were analysed for crystallinity. Percentage crystallinity was esti-
mated using equation (5).

Crystalline Area
Percentage Crystallinity ¼  100 ð5Þ
Total Area

Thermoforming
Mould design: Different truncated cone-shaped aluminium male moulds with
variations in parameters such as corner radius, draft angles and depth of draw
were designed, for study of the difference in thermoforming behaviour of
PP-TF-1 and PP-TF-2. All moulds were provided with suitable heaters and
vacuum holes for effective thermoforming. The moulds were fabricated using
conventional metal mould working techniques. Figure 2 shows a schematic
diagram of a mould, showing the various parameters, details of which are
given in Table 1.

Figure 2. Schematic diagram of mould.

Downloaded from jpf.sagepub.com at UNIV OF NORTH DAKOTA on June 17, 2015

168 Journal of Plastic Film & Sheeting 30(2)

Table 1. Parameters of aluminium moulds designed.

Values

Mould design Mould Mould Mould Mould Mould Mould Mould Mould
parameters 1 2 3A 3B 3C 4A 4B 4C

Corner radius C.R. (mm) 0.6 1 3 3 3 5 5 5

Draft angle (y) (degrees) 8 9 9 6 3 9 6 3
Depth of draw H (mm) 80 95 110 110 110 165 165 165
Top diameter Dt (mm) 50 50 85 100 108 128 145 163
Slant length AB (mm) 80.8 96.2 111.4 110.6 110.2 167.1 165.9 165.2

Mould sets (3A, 3B, 3C) and (4A, 4B and 4C) were designed to study the
effect of draft angle on product quality, all other parameters remaining
the same.
Machinery and equipment: Sheets were thermoformed in two kinds of
FORMECH 660 machine, with single-sided and double-sided heating facil-
ities, respectively, both having an electrically operated vacuum pump, ceramic
type heaters, mechanisms for lifting the mould platen and clamping the sheet,
and blowers for cooling the part after forming. The maximum sheet size and
thickness that the machines were capable of processing were 27  27 in.2 and
6 mm, respectively. The machines had different window frames for processing
sheets of different sizes. Frame used for the study were 6  6 in.2 for Moulds 1
and 2, and 12  12 in.2 for Mould sets 3 and 4.The maximum height of mould
suited was 180 mm.

Procedure
Equations (2) and (3) were used to calculate the values of Y and Bi. at an
ambient temperature of 28 C and a heater temperature of 250 C for
h ¼ 11.36 W/m2/K, using standard values of k and Cp of PP. By determining
the Fo value and using this value in equation (1), the time taken for the centre-
line to reach 150 C was estimated to be approximately 8 min. At this time the
surface temperature was estimated to be around 161 C. Thus a heater tem-
perature of 250 C was found to give a temperature gradient across the thick-
ness of the sheet within an acceptable range. However, ceramic heaters use a
combination of radiative and convective heating. Since radiative heating and
sag were not taken into consideration in the calculations, and a common
value of h was used without taking into consideration the effect of heater-
sheet spacing, the actual heating time was expected to be lower than 8 min.

Downloaded from jpf.sagepub.com at UNIV OF NORTH DAKOTA on June 17, 2015

Kumar et al. 169

The sheet to be formed was clamped in between the clamping frame and
the window frame. The moulds were heated to about 100 C .The heater was
set to 250 C. When the set temperature was reached, sheet heating was
started. The sheet temperature was monitored with a thermocouple. When
the surface temperature of the sheet reached 160 C, the heater was pushed
back to its resting position. The lever for raising the male mould was actuated
and the vacuum pump was switched on. After the details of the mould were
embossed on the sheet, vacuum was cut and air was blown, so as to detach the
formed part from the mould. The thermoformed parts were subjected to
formability analysis, discussed in the next section.

Formability analysis
The thermoforming behaviour of PP-TF-1 and PP-TF-2 has been analysed by
studying the shape conformance and wall thickness distribution of the formed
parts. Also, the dependence of part quality on draft angle and corner radius
has been studied.
Since, in drape forming the sheet freezes on coming in contact with the
base of the mould, it is stretched the least in this region. Therefore, in this
paper only the slant length (BA in Figure 2) has been chosen for study of wall
thickness distribution The wall thickness was measured at different points on
the formed part, starting from the corner (point B in Figure 2), along the side
(BA in Figure 2), so as to get the thickness distribution with respect to the
distance from the corner. Wall thickness was measured along the slant length
at different positions at the same distance from the corner. No significant
difference in values was observed.
Wall thickness distribution has been analysed by calculating
t with the
help of equation (6).

ðto  tÞ

t ¼  100 ð6Þ
to
where
t¼ wall thickness at a point
to ¼ maximum wall thickness along slant length

Results and Discussion

Material characterization
From the results of material characterization shown in Table 2, it can be said
that PP-TF-2 is less stiff than PP-TF-1, since it has lower values of tensile and
flexural moduli. Also, since, strain at maximum force in flexural test,

Downloaded from jpf.sagepub.com at UNIV OF NORTH DAKOTA on June 17, 2015

170 Journal of Plastic Film & Sheeting 30(2)

elongations at break and yield in tensile test are lower for PP-TF-2 than PP-
TF-1, PP-TF-2 can be expected to be thermoformed with greater ease and
lesser thinning of walls as compared to PP-TF-1. This is further supported by
crystallinity data. The lower crystallinity of PP-TF-2 indicates ease of thermo-
forming and more uniform wall thickness distribution as compared to PP-TF-
1, when thermoformed on the same moold under similar conditions.

Table 2. Material characterization data.

PP-TF-1 PP-TF-2

Tensile properties
Tensile strength at yield (MPa) 22.3 18.8
Elongation at yield (%) 14 11
Stress at break (MPa) 13.1 13.7
Elongation at break (%) 111 94
Modulus (MPa) 326 299
Flexural properties
Flexural modulus (MPa) 599 532
Flexural strength (MPa) 38.4 24.8
Strain at maximum force (%) 8 7
% Crystallinity 48 40

Formability analysis
Shape conformance: Thermoforming experiments carried out with both grades
of sheet show that single-sided heating of sheets resulted in parts with good
shape conformance, but with some wrinkles with moulds having depths of
draw of 80 mm and 95 mm. Figures 3 (a) and (b) show photographs of parts
having depth of draw 95 mm formed with PP-TF-1 and PP-TF-2 sheets, using
single-sided heating. However, at higher depths of draw, tearing of the sheets
was observed and not even a single product with good shape conformance
was obtained. This is because of non-uniform heating of the sheet across its
thickness, which lowers the ease of stretching and hence increases the ten-
dency to rupture. Figures 4(a) and (b) show some failed parts formed with
single-sided heating. The machine with both sides heating facility gave prod-
ucts with good shape conformance and with practically no wrinkle even at
higher depths of draw of 110 mm and 165 mm, at different draft angles, both
with PP-TF-1 and PP-TF-2 as shown in Figures 5 and 6. This is because of

Downloaded from jpf.sagepub.com at UNIV OF NORTH DAKOTA on June 17, 2015

Kumar et al. 171

more uniform heat distribution across the sheet thickness, which facilitates
better flow during the forming process.

Figure 3. Parts formed on Mould 2 with (a) PP-TF-1 and (b) PP-TF-2 using single-sided
heating.

Figure 4. Failed parts using single-sided heating on (a) Mould 3B with PP-TF-1 and
(b) Mould 4A with PP-TF-2.

Downloaded from jpf.sagepub.com at UNIV OF NORTH DAKOTA on June 17, 2015

172 Journal of Plastic Film & Sheeting 30(2)

Figure 5. Parts formed with PP-TF-1 with double-sided heating on Moulds (a) 3A,
(b) 3B, (c) 4A and (d) 4C.

Downloaded from jpf.sagepub.com at UNIV OF NORTH DAKOTA on June 17, 2015

Kumar et al. 173

Figure 6. Parts formed with PP-TF-2 with double-sided heating on Moulds (a) 3B, (b)
3C, (c) 4A and (d) 4C.

Effect of draft angle: Figures 7 (a) and (b) show the variation of wall
thickness distribution with draft angle for PP-TF-1 and PP-TF-2, respect-
ively, at 110 mm depth of draw. It can be observed that with an increase in
draft angle, there is no significant improvement of wall thickness distribution.
Thus, at 110 mm depth of draw, draft angle has no effect on product quality.
It only facilitates easy removal of the part.

Downloaded from jpf.sagepub.com at UNIV OF NORTH DAKOTA on June 17, 2015

174 Journal of Plastic Film & Sheeting 30(2)

Figure 7. Effect of draft angle on wall thickness distribution at depth of draw 110 mm
for (a) PP-TF-1 on Moulds 3A and 3B and (b) PP-TF-2 on Moulds 3B and 3C.

Figures 8(a) and (b) show the variation of wall thickness distribution with
draft angle, for PP-TF-1 and PP-TF-2, respectively, at 165 mm depth of draw.
The maximum and minimum wall thicknesses tmax and tmin, respectively, have
also been shown on each plot. It can be observed from Figure 8(a) that in the
case of PP-TF-1, for draft angle 3o, the wall thicknesses are much lower as
compared to 6 and 9 which is not desirable. In the case of PP-TF-2, as
shown in Figure 8(b), draft angle 3 gives a minimum wall thickness of
0.5 mm, which is clearly unacceptably low. Also, the wall thickness values
are scattered over a much wider range as compared to 6 and 9 . Only in

Downloaded from jpf.sagepub.com at UNIV OF NORTH DAKOTA on June 17, 2015

Kumar et al. 175

the case of 9 draft angle,
tmax (where
tmax is
t for t ¼ tmin) is less than
45% for both PP-TF-1 and PP-TF-2.
tmax value is higher for 3 as compared
to 6 and 9 , for both PP-TF-1 and PP-TF-2. Thus with an increase in draft
angle, an improvement in quality with respect to wall thickness and its dis-
tribution is observed.

Figure 8. Effect of draft angle on wall thickness distribution of (a) PP-TF-1 and (b) PP-
TF-2 at 165 mm depth of draw (Moulds 4A, 4B and 4C).

Effect of material characteristics: Figures 9(a) and (b) and Figure 10 show
the wall thickness distribution of PP-TF-1 and PP-TF-2 on Moulds 1, 2 and
4A, respectively, along with the values of maximum wall thickness to. Table 3
shows the results of analysis of the plots. It can be observed that irrespective

Downloaded from jpf.sagepub.com at UNIV OF NORTH DAKOTA on June 17, 2015

176 Journal of Plastic Film & Sheeting 30(2)

of the mould parameters and the mode of heating (single- or double-sided) of

sheet, parts formed with PP-TF-2 have lower values of
t than PP-TF-1.
Thus PP-TF-2 resulted in more uniform wall thickness distribution than
PP-TF-1. This can be attributed to the presence of long chain branches and
less % crystallinity in PP-TF-2, which cause an increase in melt strength as
well as strain-hardening. These are typical factors which favour the ease of
thermoforming and give products of improved quality.

Figure 9. Wall thickness distribution on (a) Mould 1 and (b) Mould 2 using single-sided
heating.

Downloaded from jpf.sagepub.com at UNIV OF NORTH DAKOTA on June 17, 2015

Kumar et al. 177

Figure 10. Wall thickness distribution on Mould 4A using both sides heating.

Table 3. Analysis of data (Figures 9 and 10).

t (%)

Mould 1 Mould 2 Mould 4A

Distance from
the corner (cm) PP-TF-1 PP-TF-2 PP-TF-1 PP-TF-2 PP-TF-1 PP-TF-2

2.5 57.1 19 39.58 29.26 44.1 40

5 40.8 28.6 33.33 21.95 26.5 30
7.5 10.2 9.5 12.5 7.3 11.8 5
10 0 4.8 0 2.4 26.5 5

Effect of corner radius: The stress concentration factor in a formed corner is

dependent on the ratio of corner radius (R) to local wall thickness (t). Higher
the ratio, lower the stress concentration factor. According to Throne,11 for a
strong corner design, R/t  3/4. Table 4 shows the wall thickness (t) values at
the corners of the thermoformed parts, and the corresponding R/t values.
From these values, it can be observed that irrespective of other mould par-
ameters, and the grade of PP used, only moulds with generous values of
corner radii give parts with strong corners. Thus, Moulds 1 and 2, in spite
of having lower depths of draw give parts with high stress concentration at the
corners, unlike Moulds 3B, 3C, 4A–4C, which give corners with R/t > 3/4.

Downloaded from jpf.sagepub.com at UNIV OF NORTH DAKOTA on June 17, 2015

178 Journal of Plastic Film & Sheeting 30(2)

Table 4. R/t values.

Wall thickness at corner (t) (mm) R/t values

Corner radius
Mould (R) (mm) PP-TF-1 PP-TF-2 PP-TF-1 PP-TF-2

1 0.6 4.9 4.2 0.12 0.14

2 1 4.8 4.1 0.21 0.24
3B 3 3.2 3.5 0.94 0.86
3C 3 3.0 3.2 1.00 0.94
4A 5 3.4 2.0 1.47 2.50
4B 5 2.5 2.9 2.00 1.72
4C 5 1.5 1.5 3.30 3.30

Conclusions
PP sheets of 5 mm thickness can be successfully drape formed, using thermo-
forming machine with both sides heating facility. A machine with one side
heating facility can be used only at lower depths of draw, up to 95 mm,
beyond which tearing of sheets occurs, due to non-uniform heating of both
sides of the sheet. PP with long chain branching, on thermoforming, gives
more uniform wall thickness distribution as compared to PP without long
chain branching. This is due to the fact that the presence of long chain
branches increases the melt strength and strain hardening index, and lowers
the crystallinity of PP. At lower depths of draw, up to 110 mm, draft angle
only facilitates easy removal of the thermoformed part. However, at higher
depths of draw, it also influences the product quality. An increase in draft
angle, at a higher depth of draw, results in more uniform wall thickness dis-
tribution and lesser thinning of walls. Irrespective of the depth of draw, and
the grade of PP used, only moulds with generous values of corner radii give
strong corners, with R/t values  3/4. Thus, to produce a thermoformed part
having a depth of draw greater than 110 mm, using PP sheets of 5 mm thick-
ness, we should select a grade of PP with long chain branches, and carry out
the thermoforming process in a machine with both sides heating facility, using
moulds with draft angle 9 and corner radii of about 3 mm.

Conflict of interest
None declared.

Funding
One of the authors (AKG) acknowledges the support from Reliance Industries
Limited, Mumbai to carry out the work.

Downloaded from jpf.sagepub.com at UNIV OF NORTH DAKOTA on June 17, 2015

Kumar et al. 179

References
1. Throne J. Thermoforming. New York: Hanser Publishers, 1986.
2. Muccio E. Plastic part technology. Ohio: ASM International, 1991.
3. Yang C and Hung S. Optimising the thermoforming process of polymeric foams:
An approach by using the Taguchi method and the utility concept. Int J Adv
Manuf Technol 2004; 24: 353–360.
4. Encyclopedia of Polymer Science and Technology. Processing & finishing of poly-
meric materials, vol. 2. New Jersey: Wiley, 2011.
5. Ayhan Z and Zhang Q. Wall thickness distribution in thermoformed food con-
tainers produced by a Benco asceptic packaging machine. Polymer Eng Sci 2000;
40: 1–10.
6. Aroujalian A, Ngadi M and Emond JP. Wall thickness distribution in plug-assist
vacuum formed strawberry containers. Polym Eng Sci 1997; 37: 178–182.
7. Labeas G, Watiti V and Katsiropoulos C. Thermomechanical simulation of infra-
red heating diaphragm forming process for thermoplastic parts. J Thermoplast
Compos Mater 2008; 21: 353–370.
8. Schmidt F, Maoult F and Monteix S. Modeling of infrared heating of thermoplas-
tic sheet used in thermoforming process. J Mater Process Technol 2003; 143–144:
225–231.
9. Yousefi A, Bendada A and Diraddo R. Improved modeling for the reheat phase in
thermoforming through an uncertainty treatment of the key parameters. Polym
Eng Sci 2002; 42: 1115–1129.
10. Dharia A. Applications of thermoformability analyzer. SPE, ANTEC. 2006.
11. Throne J. Technology of thermoforming. Munich: Hanser Publishers, 1996.
12. Lau H, Bhattacharya S and Field G. Melt strength of polypropylene: Its relevance
to thermoforming. Polym Eng Sci 1998; 38: 1915–1923.
13. Cruz CA Jr. The sag process in modified polypropylene. J Plast Film Sheet 1995;
11: 190–203.
14. Morye S. A comparison of the thermoformability of a PPE/PP blend with ther-
moformable ABS. Part 1: Small deformation methods. Polym Eng Sci 2005; 45:
1369–1376.
15. Lau H, Bhattacharya S and Field G. Influence of rheological properties on the
sagging of polypropylene and abs sheet for thermoforming applications. Polym
Eng Sci 2000; 40: 1564–1570.
16. Gotsis A, Zeevenhoven B and Hogt A. The effect of long chain branching on the
processability of polypropylene in thermoforming. Polym Eng Sci 2004; 44:
973–982.

Biographies
P Shyam Kumar did his Masters in Polymer Science and Technology from
Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi. He is currently working in Indian Oil
Corporation Limited, Panipat.

Downloaded from jpf.sagepub.com at UNIV OF NORTH DAKOTA on June 17, 2015

180 Journal of Plastic Film & Sheeting 30(2)

G Kiran Kumar did his Masters in Polymer Science and Technology from
Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi. He is currently working in Indian Oil
Corporation Limited, Faridabad.

Satish Kommoji did his Masters in Chemical Engineering from S.V.

University, Tirupati, India. Presently, he is pursing PhD from Centre for
Polymer Science and Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi,
under the supervision of Prof. Anup K Ghosh.

Ritima Banerjee did her Masters in Polymer Science & Technology from
Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi. She worked in SABIC Innovative
Plastics (erstwhile GE Plastics) for seven years and is now teaching in Delhi
Technological University.

Anup K Ghosh did his PhD in Chemical Engineering from State University of
New York (SUNY), Buffalo, USA. He joined Indian Institute of Technology,
Delhi (IITD) as a faculty in 1991 and presently is a Professor in Centre for
Polymer Science and Engineering, IITD. He has expertise in rheology and
processing of polymer blends and composites, polymer nanocomposites, bio-
polymers, structure-property correlation of polymeric systems.

Downloaded from jpf.sagepub.com at UNIV OF NORTH DAKOTA on June 17, 2015