4.6 Article Proceedings Paper

Evaluation of inserts for modular thermoplastic injection moulds produced by spin casting

期刊

JOURNAL OF MATERIALS PROCESSING TECHNOLOGY
卷 118, 期 1-3, 页码 411-416

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/S0924-0136(01)00913-X

关键词

rapid tooling; spin casting; injection moulds

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Concurrent engineering enables a company to speed up its time to market: rapid prototyping forms a part of this approach. The term rapid tooling (RT) refers to the rapid creation of tools in much the same way as RP means the rapid creation of models. It is a method that offers both designers and manufacturers attractive advantages in the form of time compression and cost reduction. In an era of automated manufacturing the prototype can be produced layer by layer directly from a 3D CAD model using rapid prototyping (RP) techniques [Rapid prototyping and manufacturing, fundamental of stereolithography, SME, Dearborn, MI, 1992; Layer Manufacturing a Challenge of the Future, Tapir Publisher, Trondheim, Norway, 1992]. The drawback is that only a limited number of RP technologies cater for metal parts and taking the top three positions of vendors into account (Stratasys, 3D Systems, Sanders), their systems have no access to metal prototypes [Rapid prototyping, state of the industry report 1998, SME, Dearborn, MI, 1999]. Several RT techniques can be employed to save time in the manufacturing of plastic injection moulds: thermal spraying; quick casting, electroplating, direct metal sintering. These techniques have been subject to intensive study for a number of years and their extensive commercial potential makes them attractive propositions. Major advances in technology makes spin casting a fully proven tool for manufacturing and prototyping functional components. This paper describes the employment of spin casting for the construction of mould inserts in standard, commercial-grade pressure die casting zinc. (C) 2001 Published by Elsevier Science 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

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