Presented by:- Kaushik A. Manek SID:- 999 91 4538

Introduction ± Definition Process Steps Process in Detail MIM Advantages Comparison with other Techniques Machine-Mold Modifications MIM Limitations Developments in MIM Process Application References

Metal Injection Molding (MIM)
± Also Known as Powder Injection Molding (PIM)

± Advanced metallurgical technology
Integration of shape-making capability of Plastic injection molding with material flexibility of powder metallurgy.

± Ultra-fine metal particles - Plastic binder ± Injection molded using conventional injection molding machine (with little modification) ± Then, plastic binder is removed - Debinding ± Sintering

. Misconception of Process Metal powder melts in the barrel Metal particles act as a Filler Similar to a glass and fiber reinforcement .INTRODUCTION (Cont.) History ± MIM process ± 1st .Raymond Wiech ± Parmatech Corp.

Material Injection Molding Debinding Sintering .MIM PROCESS STEPS Mixing .

Process Steps ² in Detail .

PROCESS IN DETAIL MIXING ± 1st step in MIM ± Metal Powder + Binder = Homogeneous Compound ± Very Crucial step ± Time consuming ± If not mixed properly ± problem in later stages ± Different types of Mixing systems .

Twin Screw Extruder Z-Blade Single Screw Extruder Plunger Extruder Double Planetary Twin Cam Different Mixing Systems .

MIXING (Cont«) Selection Criteria .Binder ± Flow Characteristics Viscosity < 10 Pa-s Strong and rigid after cooling ± Powder Interaction Low contact angle and good adhesion Chemically Passive with metal powder .

MIXING (Cont«) Selection Criteria (Cont«) ± Debinding Non-corrosive and non-toxic Low ash content and low metallic content ± Manufacturing Inexpensive Easily Available Safe and environmentally acceptable Non-hygroscopic without volatile Long shelf life High lubricity & High thermal conductivity Low thermal expansion of coefficient .

MIXING (Cont«) Examples of Binder system 45% Polystyrene 45% Vegetable Oil 5% Polypropylene 5% Stearic Acid 67% Polypropylene 22% Microcrystalline Wax 11% Stearic Acid 25% Polypropylene 75% Peanut Oil 72% Polystyrene 15% Polypropylene 10% Polyethylene 3% Stearic Acid 58% Polystyrene 30% Mineral Oil 12% Vegetable Oil 98% Aniline 2% Paraffin Wax .

Al etc. Ti.. Ni. Cu. Cr.MIXING (Cont«) Metal Used for MIM ± Fe. Mn. Examples of material available in market ± Co-28Cr-4W-3Ni-1C = Stellite® ± Fe-16Cr-4Ni-4Cu = 17-4 PH Stainless ± Fe-29Ni-17Co = Kovar® . Co. C..

INJECTION MOLDING Feedstock ± Analogous to plastics injection molding Part formed after injection called ³GREEN PART´ Little modification in machine components Divided according to the material used ± Thermoplastic (same as conventional IM) Cold mold Generally PE and PP are used .

INJECTION MOLDING (Cont«) ± Thermosetting system Larger cycle time Molded with high mechanical resistance in green state. Epoxy and Polyester are used ± Thermo wax Binder based on wax Lower viscosity than the other two system .

DEBINDING Process of removing binder ± Take long time ± Expensive stage Type of debinding ± depends on the binder material used within the part Debinding rate depends on following factors:± ± ± ± ± Particle size Heating rate Particle packing density Debinding mechanism Solvent used .

Debinding Reactor .

SINTERING Final stage in MIM process Debound part ± heated to very high temperature ± specific period of time Metal particles bond to each other Process depends on the following factors:± ± ± ± ± Initial density Material used Particle size Temperature and Time Sintering atmosphere .

1-250 g) and design Ability to combine functions and eliminate sub-assemblies Good dimensional control with close tolerances Good Mechanical Properties Net shape production. composites and properties . sizes (0.MIM Advantages Wide Latitude of part shape. eliminating or minimizes machining high production rates through use of multicavity tooling Wide range of available alloys.

MIM Advantages (cont«) Cost efficient for moderate-to-high production volume Suitable for intricate and complex Geometries High Material Density and Strength Design Flexibility Produce Good Surface Finishes Attractive cost savings .

COMPARISON WITH OTHER TECHNIQUES Significant cost saving by MIM over the following competing Industries:CNC machining Precision Machining Investment Casting Precision Casting Screw Machining Traditional Powder Metal .

Cost Comparison Graph .

Comparison of Properties with different Processes9 PARAMETERS Density Tensile Strength Surface Finish Size/Weight Thin Wall Capability Complexity Design Flexibility Production Quantity Range of Materials Cost MIM 98% High High Low High High High High High Low Powder Metallurgy 86% Low Medium Low Medium Low Low High High Low Casting 98% High Medium Medium MedHigh Medium Medium High LowHigh Medium Machining 100% High High Medium Low High High High High High Stamping 100% High High Low High Low Low High Medium Low .

barrel and nozzle life ± less compare to used in conventional injection molding . barrel.Limitations of MIM Large part weight can not produced Wall thickness > 20 mm are uneconomical Residual stresses in molded part ± leads to warpage Difficult to control the injection pressure Higher tooling cost ± screw. nozzle ± Screw.

pump. non-return valve. ±to keep viscosity minimum . cylinder. accumulator ± specially designed Screw.Machine-Mold Modifications Feedstock analogous to IM Motor. shut-off valve ± have been modified Less injection time ± Due to high thermal conduction Problem of jetting ± solved by injection rate profile Maintain nozzle Temp. servo valve.

5 oC .Machine-Mold Modifications (cont«) Mold thoroughly hardened Ejectors ± largest possible surface area ± for easy de-molding Cavities should be very well vented Temperature difference in cavities must not exceed ±1.

Developments in Process Production of Large Parts ± In MIM. Debinding stage has many problems A long debinding time Oxidation of metal powder ± To overcome this problem first organic solvents ± Harmful for human body and environment .

Production of Large Parts (cont«) ± An extraction method using supercritical CO2 Remove binder in short time Time can be reduced to 1/50th Adequate for debinding of large parts Using this new binder ± Large parts can be produced soundly ± Production ability of MIM can be extended .

Developments in Process (cont«) Low Pressure Technique ± Main advantages of low pressure IM Directly in relation to that of high pressure Low consumption of energy Non-necessity of complex hydraulic system Low wear of mold .

Developments in Process (cont«) Water Based Binder System ± Technique Developed by Honeywell (PowderFlo®) Main advantages of water based binder To reduce the debinding time Parts can be molded at low temperature and pressure Ability to make large. thick parts more easily .

APPLICATIONS Fields of Application for MIM includes:± Automotive ± Watches and spectacles ± Locks and Keys ± In Jewellery Production ± Printer Components ± Hand tools hardware ± Aircraft and firearms .

Automotive .



No. ³Metallic Powder Injection Molding using Low Pressure´.89. Journal of Materials Processing Technology 118 (2001). Sept. 1999. pp.REFERENCES Aparecido Carlos Goncalves. 9th ± 13th May 1993. ³Injection Molding Process Guide for PowderFloTM´. New Orleans.0941-3596 ± citation. pp 193-198. . ³Powder Injection Molding for Novel Part Shapes´. pp. 4. ³Metal Injection Molding: An Exciting new Process for Moulders´. 23-5. Schumacher C. No. Antec ¶93. Dubridge T. ³Powder Injection Molding´. Kunststoffe Plast Europe ± ISSN. AlliedSignal System Inc. Bader C. 9. April 1995. Vol. pp 2738-42.-III. Kunststoffe Plast Europe ± ISSN.0941-3596 ± citation. 16-7.85.

Fuchizawa.shtml. Peter Mapleston. Robert E. pp 199-202. http://www. . Metalworking T. http://oemsuppliers. i9 pp 39. Metal Injection Molding is Facing a rapidly expanding Demand´. v77. Kitazima.REFERENCES (Cont«) T. ³Metal Powder Technology is enhanced with Water-based Binder System´. 1987. Nose. Shimizu. 2002. Feb 27. v14. ³MIM Advantages´. ³MIM Benefits and Comparisons with other Processes´. Irving. Journal of Materials Processing Technology 119 (2001).amt-mat. ³Production of Large size parts by MIM process´.com/index. n660 pp 31(2). 2002. Sano. Dec 7. Modern Plastics. Sep 2000.shtml. S. ³Starting small. March 20.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful