4.7 Article

Predicting stereolithography injection mould tool behaviour using models to predict ejection force and tool strength

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PRODUCTION RESEARCH
Volume 38, Issue 16, Pages 3747-3757

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/00207540050175987

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The work reported involved Finite Element Analysis (FEA) modelling of heat transfer in a stereolithography (SL) tool and then performing a series of experiments to measure true heat transfer in the tool. The results from the practical measurement of heat transfer were used to validate and modify the FEA model. The results fi om the modified FEA model were then used to predict the tensile strength of the tool at various stages after injection of the thermoplastic melt. Previously developed equations to predict ejection forces were used to estimate the ejection Forces required to push the moulding from the SL core. During the practical experiments the true ejection forces were measured. The combination of predicted tool strength and ejection forces were intended to be used a basis for to determine whether certain SL tool designs will fail under tension during part ejection. This would help designers and manufacturers to decide whether SL tooling is suitable for a specific application. The initial FEA heat transfer model required some modifications and the measured ejection forces were higher than the predicted values, possible reasons for these discrepancies are given. For any given processing conditions there was an inherent Variance in the ejection forces required however longer cooling periods prior to ejection resulted in higher ejection forces. The paper concludes that, due to the variations in required ejection forces, a reliable tool to predict tensile failure will be difficult to produce however improved performance may be gained by adopting processing conditions contrary to those recommended in the current process guidelines.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available