( ( ( )))2

2
center edge d = W - W 1- s -s (10.21)
As is well-known in molded part design [16], the addition of ribs will increase the
moment of inertia, and thereby decrease the likelihood of a molding to buckle and
severely warp [17].
Example:
Analyze warpage assuming that the cup lid is center gated and molded with
ABS at a packing pressure of 66 MPa at the center of the part and 0 MPa at
the outer rim.
To evaluate the warpage, it is first necessary to calculate the shrinkage rates
and check the buckling criterion. Given the 66 MPa packing pressure and a
temperature of 132�C, the linear shrinkage at the center will be 0.31 % at
the center. At the edge, the pressure of 0 MPa and temperature of 132�C
provides a linear shrinkage of 1.66 %. Given that the cup is 2 mm in thickness
and 81 mm in diameter, the buckling criterion is stated as:
( )
? 2 mm 2 1.66% 0.31% 0.44
0.5 81 mm
0.0135 0.0011
�� �� - > ��� ��� � � �
>
This criterion indicates that the central portion of the lid will buckle. The
estimated warpage is:
( ) ( ( ( )))2 2 d = 40.5 mm - 40.5 mm 1- 1.66%-0.31% =6.6 mm
In the actual molding of the lid, it is somewhat unlikely that the lid would
warp and very unlikely that the lid would warp to this extent. The reason for
the warpage in the analysis is that the analysis assumed that the pressure
at the edge of the lid was 0 MPa and did not pack out at all. As such, the
material around the edge was predicted to shrink at a rate much higher than
would be encountered in practice.
?
322 10 Shrinkage and Warpage
As the previous warpage analyses have shown, warpage is caused by nonuniform
shrinkage due to temperature gradients through the wall thickness of the molded
part, pressure gradients across the area of the molded part, or temperature
gradients
across the area of the molded part. These are the most common causes of
warpage, and have been treated with the simplest possible analysis. However,
there are other causes of nonuniform shrinkage including orientation and residual
stress. For further information, the interested mold designer is referred to the
research
literature [18�25].
Reasonably accurate warpage predictions may also be obtained with computer
simulation as previously discussed. Figure 10.20 provides the warpage prediction
from computer simulation for the simulation described for Fig. 10.8. The results
suggest that the middle of the part will bow down while the left and right sides of
the bezel will bow upwards. The reason for this behavior is the upper surface of
the
bezel contains more material, and this upper surface is shrinking less than the
lower portion of the ribs.
Figure 10.20 Simulation of predicted shrinkage and warpage
Given that warpage can be significant compared to shrinkage, mold designers may
choose to compensate for warpage by reverse biasing the mold surfaces based on
predicted or observed warpage. This bias is sometimes referred to as �Kentucky
windage,� a shooting term that refers to the adjustments a distance shooter must
make to account for the wind [26]. Thus, Kentucky windage in mold design refers
to the contouring of the mold cavity surfaces such that upon warping the molded
part flattens to the desired shape. The use of such bias is not without
controversy,
since it incurs expense in the contouring of mold cavity surfaces while also
inherently
changing the warpage and structural behavior of the molded parts. For this
reason, it remains a somewhat rare practice.
10.3 Warpage 323
10.3.2 Warpage Avoidance Strategies
There are several common strategies that should be used to avoid and address
warpage
issues. By far, the most important strategy is to design a mold that will provide
uniform melt temperatures and pressures throughout the cavity, so that the
shrinkage of the molded part(s) will be highly uniform. To maximize the shrinkage
uniformity in tight tolerance molding applications, the mold designer should:
??Avoid high flow length to wall thickness ratios by utilizing multiple gates;
??Maintain uniform cavity pressures by designing a balanced feed system with low
flow resistance;
??Maximize the mold surface temperature uniformity with a tight cooling line
pitch and highly conductive mold inserts where needed; and
??Facilitate melt pressure and temperature uniformity in the molding by requiring
uniform part thickness and generous fillets.
If the mold is well designed, then warpage is less likely to occur. In the event
that
warpage is encountered, a molder may try to reduce or eliminate the warpage by:
??Filling the mold cavity as fast as possible to reduce cooling in the solidified
skin;
??Increasing the pack time until the part weight no longer increases;
??Increasing the packing pressure to reduce the amount of material shrinkage;
??Utilizing a pack pressure profiling as discussed with respect to Fig. 10.12 to
increase
melt pressure and shrinkage uniformity across the part;
??Utilizing different coolant temperatures on different sides of the mold or in
different
portions of the mold to purposefully control the temperature and shrinkage
distribution; and
??Trying different types of materials and filler systems with varying shrinkage
behaviors to find satisfactory performance; a high flow grade of polystyrene
(such as HIPS) can indicate if the warpage problem is due to a temperature or
pressure gradient.
Even with the all these mold design and molding actions, warpage issues may require
mold design changes. There are several mold design changes that are commonly
used to reduce the magnitude of the warpage. The most common approach
might be the addition of one or more gates to improve the uniformity of the
shrinkage
across the cavity. Another common approach to reduce the likelihood of
buckling is to increase the stiffness of the molding through the addition of
shallow
ribs. The use of Kentucky windage, although of increasing interest, is less common
since it places a significant burden on the mold designer and mold maker, while
requiring a very high level of predictive capability and very fine surface
machining.
Since the dimensional shifts of the part due to warpage may exceed steel safe
limits, errors in this approach can incur very high costs.
324 10 Shrinkage and Warpage
??10.4 Chapter Review
In this chapter, shrinkage and warpage analyses were provided to predict changes
in the molded part dimensions based on the pressure-volume-temperature (PvT)
behavior of the polymer together with the melt pressures and temperatures. These
analyses provide insight into the shrinkage and warpage phenomenon, but are
highly dependent upon the assumed pressures and temperatures. For this reason,
many mold designers use a mid-range shrinkage value recommended by a material
supplier or other source. In tight tolerance applications, prototype molding
and/or steel safe mold design strategies are frequently used to converge to the
optimal
dimensions of the mold cavity to deliver the desired part dimensions.
After reading this chapter, you should understand:
??The relationship between shrinkage, mold dimensions, and part dimensions;
??The PvT behavior of amorphous and semicrystalline polymers;
??The qualitative relationship between melt pressure, melt temperature, and
shrinkage;
??How to calculate volumetric shrinkage from the PvT model;
??How to calculate linear shrinkage from volumetric shrinkage;
??The causes of differential shrinkage;
??How to calculate warpage from differential shrinkage;
??The effect of processing conditions and fillers on shrinkage and warpage; and
??Mold design strategies for managing shrinkage and warpage.
The analysis of shrinkage is useful for specifying the mold dimensions. However,
the shrinkage of the plastic onto the mold core(s) also determines the forces
required
to eject the molded part. The estimation of these ejection forces will guide
the design of the ejection system so as to avoid deforming the molded part(s) upon
ejection. After the ejection system is designed, the mold�s structural systems are
analyzed and designed.
??10.5 References
[1] Fagade, A. and D. O. Kazmer, Early cost estimation for injection molded parts,
J. Injection Molding
Technol. (2000) 4(3): pp. 97�106
[2] Bushko, W. C. and V. K. Stokes, Solidification of thermoviscoelastic melts,
Part I: Formulation of
model
problem, Polym. Eng. Sci. (1995) 35(4): pp. 351�364
[3] Greener, J. and R. Wimberger-Friedl, Precision injection molding, Hanser,
Munich (2006)
[4] Berins, M., Standards for Molding Tolerances, in SPI Plastics Engineering
Handbook, The Society of
the Plastics Industry, Inc., 5th ed., Kluwer Academic Publishers (1991) pp. 821�844
10.5 References 325
[5] Ginell, R., Derivation of the Tait equation and its relation to the structure
of liquids, J. Chem. Phys.
(1961) 34(4): pp. 1249�1252
[6] Zoller, P. and D. J. Walsh, Standard Pressure-Volume-Temperature Data for
Polymers, CRC Press (1995)
[7] Olabisi, O. and R. Simha, Pressure-volume-temperature studies of amorphous and
crystallizable polymers,
I. Experimental, Macromol. (1975) 8(2): pp. 206�210
[8] Speight, R., et al., Best practice for benchmarking injection moulding
simulation, Plast., Rubber Compos.
(2008) 37(2-4): pp. 124�130
[9] Kazmer, D. O., et al. Prediction of part dimensions using sensed melt pressure
and melt temperature
and estimated specific volume, in Injection Molding Division of the Society of
Plastics Engineers�
Annual
Technical Conference, Orlando, FL (2015)
[10] Hoffa, D. W. and C. M. Laux, Gauge R & R: an effective methodology for
determining the adequacy of a
new measurement system for micron-level metrology (2007)
[11] Bushko, W. C. and V. K. Stokes, Solidification of thermoviscoelastic melts,
Part IV: effects of boundary
conditions on shrinkage and residual stresses, Polym. Eng. Sci. (1996) 36(5): pp.
658�675
[12] Panchal, R. R. and D. O. Kazmer, In-situ shrinkage sensor for injection
molding. J. Manuf. Sci. Eng.
(2010) 132(6): p. 064503
[13] Zheng, R., et al., Modeling of flow-induced crystallization of colored
polypropylene in injection molding,
Korea-Australia Rheol. J. (2010) 22(3): pp. 151�162
[14] Fornes, T. and D. Paul, Modeling properties of nylon 6/clay nanocomposites
using composite theories,
Polymer (2003) 44(17): pp. 4993�5013
[15] Jacques, M. S., An analysis of thermal warpage in injection molded flat parts
due to unbalanced cooling,
Polym. Eng. Sci. (1982) 22(4): pp. 241�247
[16] Malloy, R. A., Plastic part design for injection molding, Hanser, Munich
(1994)
[17] Walsh, S., Shrinkage and warpage prediction for injection molded components.
Journal of reinforced
plastics and composites (1993) 12(7): pp. 769�777
[18] Zoetelief, W. F., L. F.A. Douven, and A. J.I. Housz, Residual thermal stresses
in injection molded
products,
Polym. Eng. Sci. (1996) 36(14): pp. 1886�1896
[19] Chen, S.-C., et al., Integrated simulations of structural performance, molding
process, and warpage
for gas-assisted injection-molded parts, I. Analysis of part structural
performance, J. Appl. Polym. Sci.
(1998) 68(3): pp. 417�428
[20] Chang, R. Y. and B. D. Tsaur, Experimental and theoretical studies of
shrinkage, warpage, and sink
marks of crystalline polymer injection molded parts, Polym. Eng. Sci. (1995)
35(15): p. 1222
[21] Heberlein, D. E., Jr., Warpage scale to evaluate injection molded plastics, in
Annual Technical Conference
� ANTEC, Conference Proceedings, San Francisco, CA (1994)
[22] Shrock, J. E., Study of corner cooling as related to warpage analysis, in
Annual Technical Conference �
ANTEC, Conference Proceedings, San Francisco, CA (1994)
[23] Walsh, S. F., Shrinkage and warpage prediction for injection molded
components. J. Reinf. Plast. Compos.
(1993) 12(7): pp. 769�777
[24] Bushko, W. C. and V. K. Stokes, Dimensional stability of thermoplastic parts:
Modeling issues, in
Annual
Technical Conference � ANTEC, Conference Proceedings, Indianapolis, IN (1996)
[25] Fan, B., et al., Warpage Prediction in Optical Media, J. Polym. Sci., Part B:
Polym. Phys. (2003) 41:
pp. 859�872
[26] Lankisch, T., The Kentucky Windage Solution in Simulation Reduces Warpage,
Mold Making Technology
(2014)
11
The ejection system is responsible for removing the molded part(s) from the mold
after the mold opens. While this may seem a simple function, the complexity of the
ejection system can vary widely depending on the requirements of the molding
application. Many issues must be considered including the need for multiple axes
of actuation, the magnitude and distribution of the ejection forces, and others.
Before
beginning the analysis and design of the ejection system, an overview of its
function is first provided.
Figure 11.1 provides a side view of a mold opening for the subsequent ejection of
the laptop bezel. The ejector assembly (consisting of the ejector plate, ejector
retainer
plate, return pins, ejector pins, stop pins, and other components) is housed
between the rear clamp plate, support plate, and rails.
Figure 11.1 Side view of opening mold
Ejection System
Design
328 11 Ejection System Design
At this time in the molding cycle, the molded part has shrunk onto the core side of
the mold and has been pulled from the mold cavity as the moving side of the mold
is retracted from the stationary side of the mold. In a few moments, the molding
machine will push the ejector knock-out rod against the ejector plate to actuate
the
ejector assembly and strip the molded parts off the core. At this time, however, a
clearance exists between the ejector knock-out rod and the ejector plate.
Figure 11.2 provides a side view of the mold during the actuation of the ejection
system. Prior to ejection, the opening of the molding machine platens separated
the two mold halves to allow clearance for the ejection of the part. The machine
then drives the ejector knock-out rod forward to make contact with the rear surface
of the ejector plate. Since the machine can provide a force to the knock-out rod
much greater than the force with which the moldings have shrunk onto the core,
the entire ejector assembly is forced forward. The ejector pins come into contact
with the molded part(s) and push the molding(s) off the core.
Figure 11.2 Side view of mold with actuated ejectors
After the moldings are ejected, the molding machine then