PROFESSOR Ts. Dr.

SAFIAN SHARIF FASc

Director
UTM Pagoh Campus
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia

Dept of Materials, Manufacturing and Industrial Engineering

Faculty of Mechanical Engineering
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia

Metal Epoxy Composites In Rapid Tooling Application

For Injection Molding
Jurusan Teknik Mesin
Fakultas Teknik
Universitas Sriwijaya
26 February 2023
 RESEARCH
BACKGROUND
 RAPID TOOLING (RT)
 The RT technologies are growing rapidly in today's global
market with the demand for rapid product development to
replace conventional methods for a better manufacturing
process, especially for mold insert fabrication (Atzeni et al., 2010;
Equbal et al., 2015; Ma et al., 2007).

 RT is a technology involving Additive Manufacturing (AM)

technique and applied to the mold insert fabrication methods
(Rosochowski and Matuszak, 2000; Ma et al., 2007; Ingole et al., 2009) .

 Typically, RT uses an AM model as a master pattern to build a

mold insert, or mold insert is fabricated directly from the AM
process for a limited volume of prototypes (Chua et al., 1999;
Equbal et al., 2015; Karapatis et al., 1998; Khushairi et al., 2015; Boparai
et al., 2016). Examples of Rapid Tooling
 Conventional Tooling Method
The current industrial trend for Tooling Method
(Moving from mass production to a small volume with a wide
range of product designs)
• The answer to this scenario is using hybrid molds.

• Made of tool steel (P20)

• Fabrication using CNC machine

Disadvantages of Conventional Tooling Method

2
The concept of hybrid mold
• Replacing the tool steel (P20) material with Metal Epoxy
3 Composite (MEC) using RT process.
 But, the current challenges and issues found when using MEC material :

i. The tooling materials for mold and die fabrication using RT techniques are still limited, especially on the
type and shape of filler material (Khushairi et al., 2018; Altaf et al., 2016; Mendible et al., 2017; Fernandes et al.,
2016).

ii. The non-uniform mixing of the raw materials, presence of trapped gases, sinks to the bottom and will
affect the physical, thermal and mechanical properties of the specimens/mold inserts produced (Jin et al.,
2015; Fernandes et al., 2016; Khushairi et al., 2017, Ma et al., 2007).

iii. Spherical shape filler has been commercially used for cast resin tooling, but has its limitation in terms mechanical
and thermal properties (Ma et al., 2007; Khushairi et al., 2018; Altaf et al., 2016). Lack of study on the application of
irregular shape fillers were reported as mold insert material.

iv. The main issue encountered during the development of RT for the molding process is its low thermal conductivity
(0.6 W/mK to 1.8 W/mK) results in slow heat transfer from the molten plastic to the coolant through the mold inserts
(Pontes et al., 2010; Khushairi et al., 2015; Altaf et al., 2016; Gibson, 2013)
 EPOXY RESIN for INJECTION MOLDING EXPERIMENTS
tooling applications. NISSEI NEX1000
(Molded part Material limited to ABS)

FILLERS MOLD FABRICATION

Brass and Copper in Rapid Tooling (RT) process
Irregular shape (limited to straight cooling
channel)
New formulation
SILICONE RUBBER MOLD of MEC MOLD
Preparation specimens INSERT SIMULATION ANALYSIS
(ASTM standard testing) ANSYS simulation
Moldflow simulation

RESPONSE SURFACE
SPECIMEN TESTING EQUIPMENT
METHODOLOGY (RSM)
Universal testing machine, Vickers hardness,
optimum mixing parameters.
thermal conductivity analyzer, Densimeter
and Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM)
 Adding literature and
references to the subject
area of study since its Reduce Fabrication cost,
sources are lacking Shorter lead time can be
reduce until 50%.

Producing a new blend

for MEC Mold material
performance Ability of mold in the use
of Recycled materials as
backfilling

Extending the capabilities

Solution for Low / Custom
of alternative tooling
volume production
method especially for
injection molding process
LITERATURE REVIEW
Density, thermal conductivity and Hardness tests

Khushairi et al.,2017 Bhagyashekar et al.,2009 Khushairi et al.,2017 Senthilkumar et al.,2012

a) Effects of fillers on density b) Effects of fillers on thermal conductivity

Density, Hardness and thermal

conductivity tests have indicated a
similar trend, which shows the
uptrend behavior.
Ma et al.,2007 N. Senthilkumar et al.,2012 ( filler composition, Value )
c) Effects of fillers on Hardness
 Research on trend result (Continued…)
Compression test

Compression test indicates

a nonlinear trend.

The highest compression

value in range 10-30%
composition filler particle.
Ma et al.,2007 M.Khushairi et al.,2017
This composition is useful
for extending the life of
the epoxy mold.

Martin et al.2007
d) Effects of fillers on Compression Strength
 Material Mold/
No Researchers
Fillers Shape
Properties Mold
Cooling
Analysis Experiment Optimization Application
1. Majority of these study
material filler Channel apply aluminium filled
Testing Insert
1 Senthilkumar et al. 2012. Aluminum Spherical Yes N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A epoxy and using spherical
2 Sarkar et al. 2018. Aluminum Spherical Yes N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A shape particle as mold
3 Kumar et al. 2017. Aluminum Spherical Yes N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
insert material.
Brass ,
4 Khushairi et al. 2018. Spherical Yes Yes N/A Yes Yes Yes IM
Copper 2. Testing- Thermal
Aluminum,
5 Srivastava and Verma, 2015.
Copper
Spherical Yes N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A conductivity, Hardness,
Nikel, Tensile strength, Wear,
7 Martin et al. 2007. Spherical Yes N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Aluminum Compressive Strength,
Aluminum Density and
Alumina
8 Ma et al. 2007. Spherical Yes Yes N/A No Yes N/A IM Microstructural.
Silicon nitride
Gypsum
11 C. Fernandes et al. 2016. Aluminum Spherical Yes Yes Yes N/A Yes N/A IM 3. Optimization was
12 Pontes et al., 2010 Aluminum Spherical Yes Yes Yes N/A Yes N/A IM
conducted by researchers
for preparation process
13 C. Kuo et al. 2017 Aluminum Spherical Yes Yes Yes N/A Yes N/A Wax IM
and lack of analysis on
14 Altaf et al. 2016 Aluminum Spherical Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes N/A Vertical IM Injection Molding
15 Jaafar 2014 Aluminum Spherical Yes N/A N/A N/A N/A Yes N/A parameters setting.
16 Saiful Azril 2013 Aluminum Spherical N/A Yes N/A Yes Yes N/A IM
 LOW THERMAL
CONDUCTIVITY
Thermal
Mold insert
Author Application conductivity Cooling channel Experiment / Simulation Cooling Time
Material
(W/m.K)
1.35, POOR COOLING Simulation.
( Khushairi et Injection
EA, 1.37 TIME
Experiment: Mechanical EA : 63.95s
EAB, Non properties testing of PP specimen
al. 2018) molding.
EAC. 1.87 Simulation: Autodesk moldflow.
EAB: 49.58s
EAC: 48.2s
(Carvalho Experiment:
Fernandes. et
Injection EA 0.2 Conventional straight
Inject PP material using injection Not specified.
molding P20 29 cooling channel.
al. 2016) machine.
Experiment
(Pontes et al. Injection SLS -Aluminum 49 Conventional straight Experiment : inject PP material
EA : 40s
2010) molding. EA. 0.7 cooling channel. using injection molding.
SLS : 20s
Potential future works : Without cooling channels:
Without cooling channel. 30.5 min.
•
(C. Kuo et
2017)
Investigate
al.,
Wax injection theEA relationship
Not specified.
between
Straight cooling fillers
channel. epoxy in difference
Experiment: inject wax material
using wax injecting mold.
shape.
Straight cooling channels:
mold 8.5 min.
•Producing MEC moldConformal inserts cooling
channel. with cooling channels Conformal cooling
• Evaluated molded parts produced and cooling time performance. channels :4 min.
Circular conformal cooling
Vertical
(Altaf et al., 0.6 channel Experiment: inject PP material CCCC = 983 s.
Injection EA
2016) 0.7 Profiled conformal cooling using Vertical injection molding. PCCC with insert= 334 s.
molding.
channel with insert.
 RESEARCH
METHODOLOGY
 MEC Materials Specimens Simulation
Analysis
Hybrid Mold

Epoxy
ANSYS simulation MEC Mold
MATERIAL PROPERTIES Insert
TESTING
Compressive strength
Hardness
Thermal conductivity Moldflow simulation
Density Conventional Tooling (Mold Based)
Resin Epoxy Filler particle Microstructure

MEC Mold
Performance
Cooling time
Evaluation on Molded part Mold defect
Tensile test
Shrinkage measurement
Surface Roughness
 Start

Phase I : Investigate Filler particle assessment and

selection Simulation Analysis

Machine setup (Parameters setting) or Redesign mold

filler particle MEC Phase 3 :
Develop MEC
mold insert

Meet requirement Mold Injection Molding

Optimization preparation Design and develop MEC
specimen mold insert

Improve wt% filler particle

Phase 2 : Evaluate Specimens preparation
filler particle MEC Installation MEC Mold
insert (Core and Cavity) Phase 4 :
Validation
Material Properties Testing Run Experiment (Analyse mold
And Analysis result performance)

Material No
? Mold ?
properties
Performance No
Yes
Yes
End
RESULTS AND
DISCUSSION
 Optimal hardness is achieved and proven by conducting validation
Optimal parameters
experiments on the specimens produced according to the optimal parameters
Optimal proposed.(used for fabrication specimen/Mold insert)
Parameters Units
Values

A) Curing
Temperature
174.78 o
C •Degassing time : removes air bubbles / reduce voids.
•Mixing time : metal dispersion in epoxy composite, which contributes to
B) Mixing time 6.66 Minutes
good material properties homogeneity.
C) Degassing time 38.92 Minutes
•Curing temperature : high curing temperature, allowing the hardness of
Response
Hardness
the epoxy composite material to be increased.
27.09 Hv
(Predicted)
Hardness
27.53 Hv
(Experimental)

The most significant factor are :

• Degassing time
Well distributed uniformly on the epoxy matrix :
• curing temperature •Good uniformity of the mechanical properties
• mixing time •Provide consistent readings for the tests performed
 Density & Hardness Tests

An increasing linear
trend was observed with
addition of fillers on
the epoxy.
(Composition of 60 wt.
% show the highest
value for density and
hardness).

Effects of fillers on density Effects of fillers on the hardness

EB has the highest density of 2.50 g/cm 3, followed by
EC of 2.24 g/cm3 and EA of 1.69 g/cm3.
 EB showed higher hardness at 27.9 Hv followed with EC at
25.36 Hv and EA, 24.48 Hv.
 The addition of filler particles - increases polymer chain
bonding, which contributes to increased hardness.
 An encouraging aspect of higher hardness of EB compared to EA
and EC specimens is generally due to the hardness nature of
the filler.
 - an important material property to withstand the clamping strength and
Compressive Strength Test packing pressure in the mold cavity and it is useful for extending the life
of the epoxy mold

 20% - 25% wt composition indicated the highest value (EB

= 100.29 MPa, EA = 93.56 MPa, and EC = 92.30 MPa).

 A downward trend of compressive strength after 25% -30%

wt composition.
(addition of excessive percentage of fillers beyond 30% wt could
result in the epoxy matrix becomes viscous, porous, and
agglomerated, consequently having a lower compressive
strength).

 Majority of the specimens showed permanent fracture or

deflection at the center area once the maximum load was
reached
Effects of fillers on compressive strength
 - indicates that filler material has the ability to improve the thermal
Thermal Conductivity Test properties as well as contributing to a shorter cycle time in the
injection molding process

 The addition of filler particles, increase the

thermal conductivity value.

 EC and EB showed a rapid increase when their

weight composition exceeded 15% - 20% wt due
to their irregular shaped particle and the nature
material properties of filler.

Effects of fillers on thermal conductivity

Summary of Material Properties Results

The EA filler is intended as a benchmark.

EB showed an advantage in terms of the compressive

strength of 100.29 MPa at 20%wt,
EC showed an advantage in terms of the thermal
conductivity of 2.66 W/m.K at 60%.
The continuation of the results of EB and EC is expected
to further improve the properties of MEC materials with a
combination of brass and copper fillers.

Compressive strength and thermal conductivity tests

were conducted for a (EBC) combination mixture.
Theoretically, the trend of results obtained from the
material properties testing
 Most researchers / manufacturers chosen filler particle
compositions at high compressive strengths (10% to 35%).
 Ansys simulation Moldflow simulation

Result of cooling time

EC increased the cooling Meanwhile, in the case of
efficiency by up to 17.4% high thermal conductivity
compared to the EB and condition, EC attained an
13.5% compared to the increase in the cooling
EBC at high compressive efficiency by up to 20.3%
conditions and 16.5% when compared
to EB and EBC, respectively.

 EC show the best cooling time between  These recommended parameter setting used as a
MEC materials reference in injection molding proses.
 MEC Material properties

Experimental Results Compressive Thermal

Cooling Time Packing Pressure
ANSYS simulation
Filler (Ansys (Moldflow
EC showed the best
Strength Conductivity
Simulation) Simulation)
EC shows a better thermal (+/- 1.5) (MPa) (WmK-1) cooling time value in
(s) (MPa)
conductivity value. both condition.
High Compressive Strength

EB fillers tend to improve EB 20% 100.29 1.03 24.8

Recommended=44
the compressive strength of EC 25% 92.30 1.34 20.5 Maximum =54
the material EBC 30% 93.01 1.29 23.7
High Thermal Conductivity
MoldFlow simulation
EBC filler only improves EB, EC and EBC exceed
slightly in both testing. EB 60% 84.00 1.70 23.75
the packing pressure
Recommended=44
EC 60% 80.20 2.66 18.9 Maximum =54 requirement needed to
EBC 60% 80.87 1.89 22.62 produce this MEC mold
MEC material properties at high compressive strength and high insert
thermal conductivity.
Chosen using EC filler at a composition of 60% (high thermal conductivity condition)
•EC is proven to improve the thermal conductivity/cooling time.
•Meet the sufficient compressive strength even at 60% composition.
 Cooling Time (s)
Simulation Experiment
Moldflow ANSYS (Average)
21.98 s 18.9 s 23.3 s
The cooling times of the MEC mold inserts

(a) MEC mold inserts; (b) Mold inserts installed to mold

based for injection molding process; (c) Molded parts.
Some minor
defect happened
on Mold insert
(Surface area of the
product has not been
affected)

Molded parts from MEC mold insert

 1. Tensile Strength Result

16% differences
These findings are • The majority of specimens failed in the
consistent with earlier middle.
research (12% - 25%
higher than that of steel
mold inserts)

MEC mold insert cooled

50-70% slower than the
P20 mold insert, hence MEC Molded part
increasing internal stress
in the molded parts

 It is observed that, this failure occurs at the location where there is a weld
line effect due to fusion of plastic melt from two directions.
P20 Molded part
 The correct speed according to the ATSM standard allows failure to
Tensile strength specimen failure area
break in really weak places throughout the specimen tested
2. Shrinkage Measurement

Average: 0.76%

The percentage of shrinkage;

Average : 0.52%
(Paraller and normal direction)
P20 mold insert is better and
consistent compared to the mold
part from the MEC mold insert.

Percentage different based on

Average : 4.63% parallel direction 0.24% ,
while normal direction is
2.97%.
Average : 1.67%
 3. Surface Roughness

Molded part surface roughness Ra (µm)

Averag
Mold Inserts
S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 e
Surface roughness casting
process is slightly better than
Casting
1.566 1.492 0.901 1.271 1.013 1.249 surface machining.
surface
MEC
Machining
1.987 2.56 2.305 2.104 2.3 2.251 P20 molded part has a
surface
lower roughness
P20 0.171 0.210 0.167 0.198 0.207 0.191
 The surface roughness of the molded part is dependent on the surface roughness of the mold cavity itself
where the two surfaces are in contact with each other.

The extent of surface roughness on the MEC material's surface and the occurrence of porosity in the epoxy
matrix are both impacted by the use of fillers with a high composition
CONCLUSION OF
RESEARCH
 Theoretically, the trend of study obtained by most previous researchers
for material properties tests on MEC has also been explored.
 Discovery of a new formulation of MEC material. The selection 60% wt
composition of irregular shape copper filler (EC) in the epoxy improves
the performance of the MEC material in terms of Thermal Conductivity.
 Based on the simulation results, the recommended parameters were
determined and successfully applied to the actual experiment. Actual
experimental cooling time obtained only slight variations compared to
simulations analysis.
 Proven that MEC mold inserts can be fabricated using RT techniques in
a short time while maintaining the quality and performance of the mold
by analyzing its effect on the molded part produced.
 FILLERS
Recycle Copper in fibre shape OPTIMIZATION PARAMETER SETTING
Optimizing the injection molding
process parameters effect on molded
part.
TEMPERATURE RESISTANCE
OF MEC MATERIAL
FURTHER THERMOPLASTICS MATERIALS
WORKS
- Relationship %wt filler
Studying the effect of
composition mixed with
molded part produced by
epoxy against heat
varying the types of
resistance.
thermoplastics

RECYCLE MATERIALS
Green mold - fabricated using
mixtures of recycled MEC
material powders used as
backing materials,
ACHIEVEMENT
 PUBLICATIONS EXHIBITIONS
6 Gold Medal and 2 Silver Medal
5 from international exhibition and 3 from
4 Journal with Impact Factor
national exhibition

3 Indexed Conference Proceedings

 PUBLICATIONS

Journal with Impact Factor

1. The potential of metal epoxy composite (MEC) as hybrid mold inserts in rapid
tooling application: a review. Rapid Prototyping Journal, (2021). (Q2, IF 3.095)

2. Hybrid mold: Comparative study of rapid and hard tooling for injection molding
application using metal epoxy composite (MEC). Materials, (2021) (Q1, IF
3.748)

3. Thermal-Transient Analysis for Cooling Time on New Formulation of Metal

Epoxy Composite (MEC) as Mold Inserts. Arabian Journal for Science and
Engineering, (2021) (Q2, IF 2.807)

4. Irregular Shape Effect of Brass and Copper Filler on the Properties of Metal
Epoxy Composite (MEC) for Rapid Tooling Application. Journal of
Manufacturing and Materials Processing, (2022)
 PUBLICATIONS

Indexed Conference Proceedings

1.Optimization of cutting parameters for surface roughness in ball end milling of
aluminium epoxy using Taguchi method. In AIP Conference Proceedings (2019).
(Indexed by SCOPUS)

2.Testing of material properties on metal epoxy composite (MEC): A review.

In AIP Conference Proceedings (2019). (Indexed by SCOPUS)

3.Experimental study mechanical behaviour of epoxy resin composites filled with

aluminium particles. In AIP Conference Proceedings (2019) (Indexed by
SCOPUS)

The 5th International Conference on Green Design and

Manufacture 2019 (IConGDM 2019), 29 - 30 April 2019,
AstonTropicana Hotel, Bandung Indonesia.
INNOVATION EXHIBITIONS AWARDS

SILVER MEDAL, Development of Metal Epoxy Insert for Rapid Tooling

1 Application, Bangkok International Intellectual Property, Invention,
Innovation and Technology Exposition (IPITEX) 2020. THAILAND.

2
GOLD MEDAL, A Novelty Hybrid Mold Insert Newly Metal Epoxy
Composite (MEC) Formulation, Expo Maya Rekacipta dan Pameran
Penyelidikan UniMAP 2020.

GOLD MEDAL, A Novel Metal Epoxy Insert as Mold Insert for Rapid

3 Tooling Application, European Exhibition of Creativity and Innovation

(EUROINVENT) 2020. ROMANIA

4
GOLD MEDAL, Hybrid mold: comparative study of rapid and hard tooling
for injection molding application using metal epoxy composite (MEC), 3 rd
World invention and Technology Expo (WINTEX 2020). INDONESIA
 INNOVATION EXHIBITIONS AWARDS - continued

GOLD MEDAL, A Novelty Hybrid Mold Insert Newly Metal Epoxy

5 Composite (MEC), 31st International Invention, Innovation and

Technology Exhibition (ITex) 2020. MALAYSIA

6 GOLD MEDAL, MEC Mold Insert, Expo Maya Rekacipta dan Pameran
Penyelidikan UniMAP 2021.

7 SILVER MEDAL, MEC Mold Insert, 32st International Invention,

Innovation and Technology Exhibition (ITex) 2021. MALAYSIA

8
GOLD MEDAL, Hybrid mold: comparative study of rapid and hard tooling
for injection molding application using metal epoxy composite (MEC),
Graduate Research Exibition (GrEx 2021).
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
 Researchers:
 Associate Professor Dr. Shayfull Zamree Abd Rahim
 Dr. Mohd Azlan Suhaimi
 Dr. Radhwan Hussin
 Dr. Mohd Tanwyn Mohd Khushairi
 Advanced Manufacturing Research Group, UTM
 CEGeoGTech, Universiti Malaysia Perlis (UniMAP)
 Research Management Centre (RMC) of UTM and Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia
(MOHE) for the financial support through the UTM RUG funding Q.J130000.3509.06G38