See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/301773100

Injection moulding parameters influence on weight quality of complex parts

by means of DOE application: Case study

Article  in  Measurement · April 2016

DOI: 10.1016/j.measurement.2016.04.072

CITATIONS READS

24 989

4 authors, including:

Jorge Aisa A. Martinez

University of Zaragoza University of Zaragoza
15 PUBLICATIONS   181 CITATIONS    8 PUBLICATIONS   118 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by A. Martinez on 11 July 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Injection moulding parameters influence on weight quality of
complex parts by means of DOE application: case study

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2016.04.072

Authors

A. López Junior Researcher

First Author TIIP – Research Group, integrated in I3A Institute

EINA - Universidad de Zaragoza

C/ Maria de Luna 3.

50018 Zaragoza - Spain

Tel: +34 976 76 19 70; Fax: +34 976 76 19 69

Email: lopezochoa.alvaro@gmail.com

J. Aisa Assistant professor, Mechanical Engineering Dpt.

TIIP – Research Group, integrated in I3A Institute

EINA - Universidad de Zaragoza

C/ Maria de Luna 3. 50018 Zaragoza - Spain

Tel: +34 976 76 19 70; Fax: +34 976 76 19 69

Email: jorge.aisa@unizar.es

A. Martinez Senior Researcher

Corresponding author TIIP – Research Group, integrated in I3A Institute

EINA - Universidad de Zaragoza

C/ Maria de Luna 3. Edif.

50018 Zaragoza - Spain

Tel: +34 976 76 19 70; Fax: +34 976 76 19 69

Email: arantza@unizar.es

D. Mercado Assistant professor, Mechanical Engineering Dpt.

TIIP – Research Group, integrated in I3A Institute

EINA - Universidad de Zaragoza

C/ Maria de Luna 3. 50018 Zaragoza - Spain

Tel: +34 976 76 19 70; Fax: +34 976 76 19 69

Email: daniel.mercado@unizar.es
ABSTRACT

Injection moulding is a very popular plastic transformation process to produce complex

parts, since a mould is capable to reproduce different shapes, and also due to its economic
advantages for large series. However, defects can appear into the pieces, leading to reject them
in the quality control.
In order to control these defects, it is necessary to know the influence of the injection
parameters on the quality of the part. Several researchers applied Design of Experiments
(DOE) methods to injection process, with good results for test or lab specimens, but many
industrial parts usually have more complex geometries or singularities.
This paper introduces a case study focused on the application of DOE in a complex part
because it has an integrated hinge. In this case study, the weight and pressure curves
(hydraulic and specific) are analyzed depending on the variation of process parameters. The
authors would show that the analysis has found a strong influence of the geometry on the
results which sometimes are different to the expected ones.
In authors’ opinion, the use of this procedure it still is a challenge, and this example
could assist future attempts to create new expert systems in injection moulding.

Keywords: Injection moulding, DOE, complex part, integrated hinge.

 1. INTRODUCTION

Injection moulding is the most popular plastic transformation process to produce

complex parts, since a mould is capable to reproduce different shapes, and also due to its
economic advantages for large series and high production rates. Many special processes have
been developed during last decades in order to improve injection moulding capabilities [1, 2] but
basic procedure is well-known for industrial companies.
To produce conventional plastic parts, it is necessary to use the raw material, a mould,
and an injection machine which introduces the melt material inside the mould. Each part is
manufactured by means of an injection cycle composed of three basic stages: filling, packing
and cooling (in addition to other mechanical movements as mould opening, part ejection and
mould closing and melting material into the injection unit).
The polymer is introduced into the mould during the filling phase. The parameters which
control this phase are the injection velocity and the injection temperature. During the packing
phase, the polymer begins to shrink, and then, it´s necessary to continue introducing polymer
into the mould to fill blank spaces. The packing pressure and the packing time are the
parameters which control this phase. Finally, the cooling phase is the one necessary to reach
the ejection temperature of the piece. In this case, the mould temperature and the cooling time
are the parameters to control this phase. Further information about injection moulding, mould
basis and computer modelling could be found in technical literature [3-15].
But as in all manufacturing processes, defects can appear into the pieces, leading to
reject them when they pass the quality control. In conventional injection, the burrs, the jetting or
sink marks, and part deformation (warpage) are considered unacceptable defects. In order to
control these defects, it is necessary to know the influence of the injection parameters on the
quality of the plastic part.
Design of experiments (DOE) or experimental design, is the design of any information-
gathering exercises where variation is present, whether under the full control of the
experimenter or not [16, 17]. However, in statistics, these terms are usually used for controlled
experiments. Formal planned experimentation is often used in evaluating physical objects,
chemical formulations, structures, components, and materials, so DOE is widely used in many
engineering and manufacturing fields (wear, grinding, residual stresses…). A specific
introduction about DOE for injection moulding is related in [18].
Many authors has studied the influence of injection parameters on part quality and
dozens of them applied DOE to the experimental or simulation injection process, but in all
cases, their studies use simple parts combined with conventional materials and they obtain
expected results when they apply the methodology. For example, Hassan H. [19] study the
effect of the injection moulding parameters on the cavity pressure and product weight using a
very simple part, a 80x80 mm2 squared piece with two different thicknesses, 1.5 mm and 3 mm.
The injection point is centred. Oktem [20] uses Taguchi method to optimize injection moulding
processes of an ABS/PC piece, however, again this is a piece without geometric particularity,
and in any paragraph of his paper indicates part thickness, which could make the piece
something special, because of the short cool time is needed to eject ABS/PC pieces. Gou [21]
works on the prediction of warpage in plastic injection moulding using DOE methodology. In this
case, he works with a standard piece of PP, with a thickness of 2 mm and without difficulty
when the piece is injected. Also, Gou [22] works in minimization of sink mark depth in injection-
moulded thermoplastic through design of experiments. Other authors, as Altan, Postawa,
Yousef, Mehat or Lou [23-27] make similar investigations about influence of injection
parameters on different quality aspects like weight or warpage. The common feature of all these
works is always the same: parts without geometric particularity, injected with standard materials
that simplify the application of DOE methodology since variations in injection parameters always
lead to the expected results.
There is an exception in the work of Chen [28], in which the studied piece has a very
small thickness of 0.8 mm, making it especial in terms of geometry. However, the optimization
cycle is performed using PA, a material with high fluidity that simplifies the injection of very thin
pieces. In addition, the author combines different values of injection velocity, injection
temperature, mould temperature and packing pressure to optimize the cycle by means of DOE
methodology, but he does not have in mind the packing time, which is precisely the parameter
that would lead to conflicting conclusions because the theory suggests that if packing time is
increased, the quality of part improves, and when very thin pieces are injected this could be not
true. These parts cool faster due to their low thickness, and a long packing time are ineffective.
 Other original work correspond to Sha [29]. He makes an investigation of micro-injection
moulding, but in this case, he studies the replication quality of each cavity of a same mould
varying injection parameters, and using different materials with different viscosity.
In general, the authors apply the methodology of design of experiments to evaluate the
influence of injection parameters on the quality of the piece, and to optimize injection cycle, but
none of them chooses pieces with geometric characteristics that could lead to unexpected
results. Only in some cases the authors use special parts due its low thickness, but in these
cases they do not consider packing time, the parameter which would lead to inconsistencies in
the application of the DOE methodology.
Nowadays, injection simulation software like MOLDFLOW Insight uses Taguchi
methodology to make calculations [30-32].
From these results, different companies are investigating how to use this knowledge to
develop new expert systems that could optimize the setting-up procedures and control all the
injection machine parameters during operation. The final system would be able to get the
adequate feed-back in order to prevent basic defects using the previously acquired data.
But for complex parts, i.e. geometry shapes, mould complexity, painted components,
special injection process…, there are not enough experiences due to the great number of
experiments necessaries to make a correct analysis, and the difficulty to monitor complex
moulds too. Authors consider “complex parts”, for example, pieces with special geometry like a
very low thicknesses, parts with integrated hinges, or pieces with the injection point located on
low thickness zones. On the other hand, the unconventional processes like sequential injection
[33-34] or “In Mold Decoration” injection (IMD) [35-37], make the injection cycle is special. In all
these cases, DOE methodology must be applied carefully, because the obtained conclusions
could be wrong, and these expert systems will not work properly.
For everything explained above, the authors of this article conducted a study with a
piece considered special because of its integrated hinge. It wants to show that the DOE
methodology applied conventionally could be misleading, and it is necessary to conduct a more
thorough study, with highest number of experiments and furthermore dividing the piece into
parts to understand what is really happening in each of them, and therefore, in the complete
part.

2. MATERIAL AND METHODS

2.1. Equipment required

The required material to get the goals described above includes a mould with one
pressure transducer to inject and to monitor a particular part with an integrated double hinge, a
recording pressure system, as well as raw material and the injection machine. It will be
necessary a precision scales to weight the samples, with 0.01 gr tolerance. For this study, the
“complex” mould, is one with a single cavity and cold runners to inject a kind of urine probe,
made as prototype design for medical use.

Figure 1: main dimensions of the part selected for this study. Double hinge zone is shown in
detail B.
 The urine probe is composed for two similar semi-cylindrical bodies separated by a
double hinge which is used to fold and close the complete part. Notice that the thickness of the
hinge is smaller than the general thickness of the piece, while the general thickness is 2 mm,
the hinge zone just have 0.3 mm (figure 1), and in fact there are two narrow necks, needed by
part design requirements.
The pressure transducer is located into the mould, just below the hinge, because the
aim of the study is to understand how the injection parameters affect when a piece with a
particularity is injected. After reaching the hinge, the part could be considered simple part (figure
2). The pressure transducer is a KISTLER 6157BB quartz sensor. Its main characteristics are a
temperature range for the mould up to 300ºC, a temperature range of molten material in front of
the sensor up to 450ºC, a pressure range up to 2000 bar, sensitivity of -4pC/bar and natural
frequency up 100 Hz. To complete the measurement system, the sensor is connected to a PC
through an amplifier and converter set. This device captures the transducer signal and it will be
converted into numerical data by the computer. When molten plastic reaches the transducer,
this one begins to register pressure values.

Figure 2: mould core and part view showing pressure sensor location, right below plastic flow
passes the hinge zone

To inject probes, the injection machine used is a Mateu&Sole hydraulic clamping press,
which is appropriate for the mould size. Its main characteristics are a clamping force of 55Tn, a
melting unit capacity of 50 gr/s, a mould thickness between 120-300 mm and a maximum
injection pressure of 1735 bar.
All the pieces are injected with a polypropylene Isplen PR280P1M supplied by REPSOL.

2.2. Experimental process

Experimental process is divided in two simultaneous works. One of them consists of

injecting and weighing all samples to obtain the relationship between process parameters and
part weight. On the other hand, the process will be monitored to obtain hydraulic pressure curve
from the injection machine and specific pressure curve measured by the transducer.
The main result under study is the weight, because is strongly related with later
mechanical behaviour of the part, shrinkage and warpage is not observed in this part. The
random design matrix will be composed for 54 different combinations of the variable injection
parameters. For each combination, 5 samples will be injected, representing a total of 270 valid
samples (table 1).

Table 1
Different combinations for the analysis
 Three injection temperatures
230 ºC 250 ºC 270 ºC
Three packing times Three packing times Three packing times
Two packing Two packing Two packing
pressures
2s 3s 4s pressures
2s 3s 4s pressures
2s 3s 4s
20 bar (1) (2) (3) 20 bar (7) (8) (9) 20 bar (13) (14) (15)
40 bar (4) (5) (6) 40 bar (10) (11) (12) 40 bar (16) (17) (18)

Each of the previous 18 cases are combined with three injection velocities (50%, 60%, 70% of the
maximum of the injection machine) resulting in 54 cases for the analysis
Table 1: Different combinations for the analysis

Although experiments have been performed varying injection velocity, injection

temperature, packing time and packing pressure, only the influence of three last parameters
(injection temperature, packing time and packing time pressure) will be analysed, because
injection ram speed levels were stablished in a narrow range adequate to this part and then, its
influence is not easily measurable. The mould temperature parameter and the dose will be
constant for all shots. The mould temperature set at 35ºC, and the dose is set at 11.5 mm in the
considered machine. Other parameters referred, cooling time, charge speed, etc. as well
ambient conditions, have been considered constant or not influential during the experimental
process.

Each sample of a total of five for each experiment has been analysed making three
different kind of weight measures (figure 3).
- Weight measure of complete part without runner
- Weight of first half or half A without hinge
- Weight of second half or half B without hinge (half part where sensor is placed)
Then, for each kind of weight measure, and for each experiment, the average has been
calculated.

Figure 3: definitions used in this paper for the part analysis

Then, when the three types of weight measures mentioned above are made, the
influence of process parameters can be analysed for each of the three situations: the whole
geometry as a part with integrated double hinge, injection of the first half of the piece that does
not consider the hinge effects, and the second half of the part, where it is necessary to
understand how the hinge affects plastic flow and part measures.
As mentioned above, all the information obtained with weight measures will be
completed with two pressure curves information. The injection machine provides the hydraulic
pressure curve, which shows the material behaviour when it is introduced into the mould, and
the sensor provides the material behaviour when melt front advance has exceeded the hinge.
The influence of the process parameters will be studied with the analysis of the shape of the
curves, and with an ANalysis Of VAriance (ANOVA) of the area under the pressure curves.
 3. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
In order to analyse the results obtained following the experimental process described,
Statgraphics Centurion XVI software has been used. The analysis of variance (ANOVA) is used
to know if the injection parameters affect or not to the different kind of weight measures. If the p-
value of ANOVA table is smaller than the prefixed value of significance level (0.05), the injection
parameter has influence on the weight result.
For the three different kind of weight measure, next ANOVA tables has been obtained
(table 2 for complete part, table 3 for half A, and table 4 for half B).

Table 2
Complete part
Packing time Packing pressure Injection temperature
Significant effects Yes (2nd) Yes (1st) Yes (3er)
No significant effects No No No
Iterations Yes No Yes
R2adj 94%
Table 2: Influence of injection parameters on weight of complete part: ANOVA results

Table 3
Half A: before the hinge
Packing time Packing pressure Injection temperature
Significant effects Yes (1st) Yes (2nd) Yes (3er)
No significant effects No No No
Iterations No No No
R2adj 88%
Table 3: Influence of injection parameters on weight of half A: ANOVA results

Table 4
Half B: after the hinge
Packing time Packing pressure Injection temperature
Significant effects No Yes (2nd) Yes (1st)
No significant effects Yes No No
Iterations No No No
R2adj 89%
Table 4: Influence of injection parameters on weight of half A: ANOVA results

3.1. Weight measure of complete part analysis

In this case, the packing pressure is the more significant parameter, followed of packing
time (table 2). According to the weight results, if the packing time is increased, melt material is
entering into the mould during a longer time, and then, the part is heavier. If the packing
pressure is increased, more material is introduced into the mould during the same time, and
then, the part is heavier too.
About injection temperature, if this parameter increases, the part results heavier again.
This result is contrary to those obtained for other authors who made the study with simple parts
[17]. When a simple part is studied, an increase of injection temperature leads to a lighter piece.
When the injection temperature increases, the specific volume of the material increases, so
that, when we fill a constant volume, we have a reduction in the amount of injected material. All
this results are showed in figure 4. In this way, injection temperature and its relation with part
thickness should be consider carefully.
 Figure 4: results for the complete part analysis

However, the influence of the hinge in the filling of the second half of the probe (half B),
produces the opposite effect of injection temperature on the weight result. Next sections, where
half A and half B are studied independently clarify this phenomenon.

3.2. Weight measure of half A analysis

When only half A is analysed, before the hinge, the more significant parameter is the
packing time, followed of the packing pressure (table 2). In both cases, parameter increasing
implies half A weight increasing. However, if the injection temperature increases, the weight of
the half A decreases as it has been explained in the previous section. That is to say, the
presence of hinge does not affect to this half, which has a typical behaviour of a simple part
injected by conventional injection process. The graphs in Figure 5 show these results.

Figure 5: results for the half part before the hinge zone

3.3. Weight measure of half B analysis

In this case, packing time is not a relevant parameter, and packing pressure and
injection temperature are the more significant parameters related to weight results (table 3).
Now, if the injection temperature increases, the weight of half B increases. The authors’
explanation is as follows: when the thickness of a piece is very small, the part solidifies very
quickly as it happens in the case of this hinge, which has a thickness only 0.3 mm. Therefore, if
injection temperature is higher, the time to reach solidification increases, and the material can
advance through the hinge during a longer time. In addition, when the injection temperature is
higher, the material flows better (lower viscosity). The result is more material reaching half B,
and therefore the half B weighs more.
Related to packing time, this one is not relevant for half B weight, but it is significant for
half A, and the whole part, as explained in the previous sections. Therefore, when packing time
increases, the weight of complete part is higher, but only due to an increasing of the weight of
half A since weight of half B remains constant because of the quick cooling, and the solidifying
of the hinge. Notice all these results showed in figure 6.
 Figure 6: results for the half part after the hinge zone

3.4. Analysis or pressure curves and area under the curves

All data recompiled by means of the hydraulic pressure and sensor pressure recorded
explains the results obtained previously for half B weight.
Figure 7 shows that an increase of packing time from low level to medium level
introduces a light change in the pressure curve obtained with mould transducer. The quick
cooling of the hinge makes more difficult for the material to advance through this hinge to reach
half B. However, when packing time increases from medium level to high level, it just introduces
minimum changes in pressure curve.

Figure 7: packing time effect on cavity pressure recorded

If pressure curves are compared depending on injection temperature variations, when

this injection temperature increases from low level to high level, the transducer is measuring
during a longer time, almost twice, and a slower cooling of the hinge allows material to flow
during all this longer time. Notice how the area under the pressure curves are greater if injection
temperature increases (figure 8).
 Figure 8: melt temperature effect on cavity pressure recorded

On the other hand, if packing pressure increases, the area under curves increases
(figure 9), which means more material is introduced into the mould, specifically half B, which is
monitored by the transducer. Notice that pressure effect drops from the second two for both
levels.

Figure 9: packing level efect on the cavity pressure recorded

Therefore, if design of experiments techniques are applied to cavity pressure measure

as the area under the pressure curves, the obtained results imply that packing time just doesn´t
influence on it, and packing pressure and injection temperature imply a greater influence on the
pressure curves, and the area under them (figure 10). This behaviour makes evident, in
author´s opinion, the statement made about response of half B under parameters analysed is
correct.
 Figure 10: considered injection parameters effects on cavity pressure integral

4. CONCLUSIONS
This paper has shown the injection parameters influence on the weight of a medical
component, where an integral double hinge divides the piece into two halves. This fact allows to
describe the item as “a complex part”, far from previous studies made with test or lab moulding
geometries, well-stablished in the referenced literature.
As many authors have explained in their studies [9-22], when a simple geometry is
considered, the injection parameters effects are well known, i.e. an increase of injection
temperature implies a decreasing of the weight due to an increase of specific volume of the
molten material. However, complex parts could present different behavior. In the studied case,
the effect of the increase of injection temperature is different to the expected results.
In the present work, the first conclusion is that the influence of injection parameters on
the weight of the injected parts, considered this one like quality parameter, depends on the
geometry of the piece studied. If only half A of the selected part is analyzed, its behavior is the
typical of a simple part. If the whole part or only half B are considered, the behavior varies and
we are not able to prevent some expected defects in this zone.
The special behavior of the hinge during the packing phase leads to these opposite
results, because this hinge, due to its small thickness, cools down quickly. About the injection
temperature, this is a significant parameter related to the result of weight. According to
references, an increase of temperature leads to a reduction in part weight, however, in the
experiment shown in this study, this typical phenomenon only occurs in half A, and the opposite
effect occurs in half B.
Therefore, the application of experimental design techniques to a piece of complex
geometry will require a greater number of experimental tests and a study of the process in
different areas of interest in the part. If this comprehensive study is not performed, we can fall
into partial or wrong conclusions.
Other pieces considered like “complex parts” could be parts injected through several
gates by means sequential injection, for example a bumper in automotive industry where
overpacking near the gates occurs, or injection over textile to manufacture holstered parts
where overpacking in local areas could induce to a penetration of plastic through the fabric.
That´s why it would not be easy to stablish a proper quality parameter only by means of the
DOE results for the whole part.
With the special geometry presented in this study, a general DOE could conclude that
increasing packing time implies an increase in the weight of the piece, but a more detailed study
reveals that only the weight of the half A increases, being practically constant the weight of the
second half or half B. Half A is comparable to a simple part, and behavior of half B is
conditioned for the presence of a hinge which cools down an solidify more quickly than the rest
or the part.
From the authors’ point of view, further testing trials should be carefully ran on complex
parts before new expert systems are going to be introduced in the injection workshop. The
future software will need to consider other special technologies too (for example sequential
injection moulding, GAIM or IMD) before to reach the desired capabilities: avoid the long trials
procedures and keep robust manufacturing processes to get the required quality for plastic
parts.
 5. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Authors would like to thank to Kistler Iberica S.L., the technical support for the mould
monitoring task. On the other hand, we are grateful to Mrs. Encarna Sanchez, responsible of
injection workshop in the Mechanical Engineering Department of the University of Zaragoza for
her aid during injection trials.

6. REFERENCES

1. L.S. Turng, Special and emerging injection molding processes, Journal of injection molding
technology, Vol. 5, (2001) 160-179
2. I. Stevenson, Innovation in Polymer Processing. Molding, Hanser Publishers, Munich, 1996
3. M. Menges, How to Make Injection Molds, 2nd ed., Hanser Publishers, Munich, 1993.
4. Tim A. Osswald, International plastics handbook: the resource for plastics engineers, 4th
ed., Hanser Publishers, Munich, 2006.
5. H. G. Haldenwanger, L. Vollrath, Plastics in automotive engineering, Hanser Publishers,
Munich, 1994.
6. David O. Kazmer,. Injection mold design engineering, Hanser Publishers, Munich, 2007.
7. Charles L. Tucker, Computer modelling for polymer processing, Hanser Gardner
Publications, Munich, 1989.
8. S.I. Gucerin, Finite Difference Solution of Field Problems in Computer Modeling for Polymer
Processing, Hanser Publishers, Munich, 1989.
9. Mann, J.W., Process Parameter Control: the Key to Optimization. Plastics Engineering, 1974.
30(1): p. 25- 27.
10. Coates, P.D. and R.G. Speight, Towards intelligent process control of injection moulding of
polymers. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of
Engineering Manufacture, 1995. 209(B5): p. 357-367.
11. Dubay, R., A.C. Bell, and Y.P. Gupta, Control of plastic melt temperature: A multiple input
multiple output model predictive approach. Polymer Engineering & Science, 1997. 37(9): p.
1550-1563.
12. Tanner, R.I., Engineering rheology. 2000. Medium: X; Size: Pages: 451.
13. Malkin, A.Y. and A.I. Isayev, Rheology: Concepts, Methods, and Applications 2005: William
Andrew Publishing.
14. Diduch, C., R. Dubay, and W.G. Li, Temperature control of injection molding. Part I:
Modeling and identification. Polymer Engineering & Science, 2004. 44(12): p. 2308-2317.
15. Kurt, M., et al., Influence of molding conditions on the shrinkage and roundness of injection
molded parts. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 2010. 46(5-8):
p. 571-578.
16. D. C. Montgomery, Design and analysis of experiments, John Wiley & Sons, 2008.
17. Kelton W.D., A tutorial on design and analysis of simulation experiments, Proceedings of the
1995 Winter Simulation Conference ed, C, Alexopou]os, K. Kang, W. R. Lilegdon, and D.
Goldsman, 1995.
18. S. Kulkarni, Robust Process Development and Scientific Molding, Hanser, 2010.
19. Hamdy H., An experimental work on the effect of injection molding parameters on the
cavity pressure and product weight, Int. J. Adv. Manuf Technol, 67 (2013) 675-686
20. H. Oktem et al, Application of Taguchhi optimization technique in determining plastic
injection molding process parameters for a thin-shell part. Materials & design, 28, (2007),
1271-1278
21. W. Guo et al, Prediction of warpage in plastic injection molding based on design of
experiments, Jorunal of mechanical science and technology, 26 (2012), 1133-1139
22. W. Guo, L. Hua, H. Mao, Minimization of sink mark depth in injection-molded thermoplastic
through design of experiments and genetic algorithm, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 72, (2014)
365–375
23. M. Altan, Reducing shrinkage in injection moldings via Taguchi, ANOVA and neural
network methods, Materials and Design 31 (2010) 599–604.
24. P. Postawa, J. Koszkul, Change in injection moulded parts shrinkage and weight as a
function of processing conditions, Journal of Materials Processing Technology 162–163
(2005) 109–115
25. Yousef A., Reducing warpage in injection moulding processes using taguchi method
aproach: ANOVA, Proc. Int. Conf. Engineering and Applied Science, Colombo Sri-Lanka,
2012
 26. N. M. Mehat, Modeling and Analysis of Injection Moulding Process Parameters for Plastic
Gear Industry Application, ISRN Industrial Engineering, 2013.
27. X. Lou, L.S. Khim, A statistical experimental study of the injection molding of optical
lenses, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 113 (2001) 189-195.
28. C. Cheng et al., Simulation and experimental study in determining injection molding
process parameters for thin-shell plastic parts via design of experiments analysis, Expert
Systems with Applications, 36 (2009) 10752–10759.
29. B. Sha et al, Investigation of micro-injection moulding: factors affecting the replication
quality. Journal of Materials processing Technology, 180 (2007), 248-296
30. M. Huang, Ch. Tai, The effective factors in the warpage problem of an injection-molded part
with a thin shell feature, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 110 (2001) 1-9.
31. T. Erzurumlu, B. Ozcelik, Minimization of warpage and sink index in injection-molded
thermoplastic parts using Taguchi optimization method, Materials and Design 27 (2006) 853–
861.
32. D. Choi, Y. Im, Prediction of shrinkage and warpage in consideration of residual stress in
integrated simulation of injection molding, Composite Structures 47 (1999) 655-665.
33. J. Aisa, J. Castany, Dimensional study of thermoplastic parts made using sequential
injection molding, Polymer Engineering & Science. 49 (2009) 1832-1836
34. J. Aisa, J. Castany, A. Fernandez, Sequential injection molding: design considerations,
Molding View, 89 (2012), 15-20.
35. A. Martinez, J. Castany, J. Aisa, Characterization of in mould decoration process and
influence of the fabric characteristics in this process, Materials and Manufacturing processes.
26 (2011) 1164-1172
36. A. Martinez, J. Castany, P. Serraller, Method to characterization of the overmolded
polymer penetration into the fabric, Polymer Engineering & Science. 51 (2011) 1848-1857
37. A. Martinez, J. Castany, D. Mercado, Characterization of viscous response of a polymer
during fabric IMD injection process by means a spiral mould, Measurement. 44 (2011) 1806-
1818

LIST OF CAPTIONS

Fig 1. Scheme of complex part with integrated hinge

Fig 2. Location of pressure sensor
Fig 3. Three kind of weight measures
Fig 4. Significant effects on weight: complete part
Fig 5. Significant effects on weight: half A
Fig 6. Significant effects on weight: half B
Fig 7. Comparison between pressure curves: packing time variation
Fig 8. Comparison between pressure curves: injection temperature variation
Fig 9. Comparison between pressure curves: packing pressure variation
Fig 10. Significant effects on area under pressure curves

View publication stats