3.8 Proceedings Paper

Novel round energy director for use with servo-driven ultrasonic welder

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.phpro.2016.12.017

关键词

Ultrasonic Welding; Joint Design; Round Energy Director Process Repeatability

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Increasingly stringent process repeatability and precision of assembly requirements are common for high-volume manufacturing for electronic, automotive and especially medical device industries, in which components for disposable medication delivery devices are produced in hundreds of millions annually. Ultrasonic welding, one of the most efficient of plastic welding processes often joins these small plastic parts together, and quite possibly, the one most broadly adopted for high volume assembly. The very fundamental factor in ultrasonic welding process performance is a proper joint design, the most common of which is a design utilizing an energy director. Keeping the energy director size and shape consistent on a part-to-part basis in high volume, multi-cavity operations presents a constant challenge to molded part vendors, as dimensional variations from cavity to cavity and variations in the molding process are always present. A newly developed concept of energy director design, when the tip of the energy director is round, addresses these problems, as the round energy director is significantly easier to mold and maintain its dimensional consistency. It also eliminates a major source of process variability for assembly operations. Materializing the benefits of new type of joint design became possible with the introduction of servo-driven ultrasonic welders, which allow an unprecedented control of material flow during the welding cycle and results in significantly improved process repeatability. This article summarizes results of recent studies focused on evaluating performance of round energy director and investigating the main factors responsible for the joint quality. (C) 2016 Published by Elsevier B.V.

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

3.8
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