4.6 Article

Optimization of Compression Molding Process Parameters for NFPC Manufacturing Using Taguchi Design of Experiment and Moldflow Analysis

期刊

PROCESSES
卷 9, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/pr9101853

关键词

compression molding; design of experiment; Moldflow; optimization; process parameters

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study utilized Taguchi design of experiment and Autodesk Moldflow(R) simulation to find the optimal processing parameters for manufacturing natural fiber-polymer composite products. The results revealed that the optimum processing parameters were mold temperature 60°C, compression time 40 seconds, melt temperature 210°C, and pressure 600 kN. Melt temperature was identified as the most significant processing parameter.
This paper presents the application of Taguchi design of experiment and Autodesk Moldflow(R) simulation in finding the optimal processing parameters for the manufacturing of natural fiber-polymer composite products. The material used in the study is a composite of recycled thermoplastic reinforced with 10% wood fibers. For the study, four critical processing parameters, namely compression time, mold temperature, melt temperate, and pressure, were selected for optimization. Process analysis was carried out in Moldflow(R) utilizing a combination of process parameters based on an L9 orthogonal array. Later, the warpage output from Moldflow(R) simulation was converted into a signal-to-noise (S/N) ratio response, and the optimum values of each processing parameter were obtained using the smaller-the-better quality characteristic. The results show that the optimum values were 60 & DEG;C, 40 s, 210 & DEG;C, and 600 kN for the mold temperature, compression time, melt temperature, and pressure, respectively. Afterward, a confirmation test was performed to test the optimum parameters. Using analysis of variance (ANOVA), melt temperature was found to be the most significant processing parameter, followed by mold temperature, compression time, and pressure.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据