Fall 2008-r10.pmd - Beaumont Technologies, Inc. Beaumont


Fall 2008-r10.pmd - Beaumont Technologies, Inc. Beaumont
ll 2
Molding Views
Brought to you by the Injection Molding Division
of the Society of Plastics Engineers
Chair’s Message
Embracing the Perfect Storm and Repositioning Ourselves
There is no doubt that plastics engineers are facing and embracing a perfect storm—
the loss of home equity and retirement savings, the likelihood of a deepening global recession,
worries about job security, energy and environmental issues, and a spiraling downturn of
the economy that even the governments, central banks, and finance ministers worldwide
can not stop. It is anticipated that unemployment rates will continue to rise and the daunting
challenges facing the industry and our members will be very significant. So what should we
do to weather through this period of turbulence? There are many answers depending on
whom you ask, with no shortage of advice from the media, family, friends, colleagues, and
even presidential and local election candidates. Sometimes, however, the true answers Lih-Sheng (Tom) Turng
Professor, UW-Madison
may lie within your heart.
Personally, I would like to suggest a few things for our members. First, we can embrace the continuing trend of
globalization and try to capitalize on it by upgrading our job skills. Whether we like it or not, the trend of globalization
is likely to continue. We need to appreciate the benefits of globalization that enable the reduction of product costs
and time to market. Of course, we should not lose sight of the potential impacts on our businesses and job
prospectives. Try to become a professional capable of performing tasks with partners from around the globe and
be able to solve problems or design products and conduct operations from the “system” level. If possible, gain an
understanding of and respect for cultural variations across various parts of the world. This would be a great time to
learn a new language! You may want to look for opportunities to retrain yourself through distance learning programs
if you can’t afford to go back to school, or through government-sponsored vocational programs, if you can’t afford
regular tuition.
Continued on page 3
Chair’s Message
IMD Leadership
Committee Reports
Feature Article: Engineering Jobs
Ask The Experts (IM, Hot Runners, and CAE)
Reader Comments
7, 10
Featured Technology: MeltFlipper
Conference: Molding 2009
Call For Papers
IMD Best Paper
Experimental Study on the Energy Efficiency
of Different Screw Designs for IM
Feature Article: Partners in Education
IMD Best Student Paper
Investigation of Comparative Stress
Distributions in Thermoforming Versus IM
Featured Product: Learn-on-Demand
Feature Article:
Injection Moulding Process Benefits
Both Process and Moulded Part
Sponsorship Opportunities
Conference: SAMTMP 2008
Student Activities Report
Molding Corner: AGA-PGT, Inc.
On The Road: Milwaukee MiniTec
Feature Article: SPE’s New Website
SPE & Industry Event Calendar
SPE Webinars
BOD Meeting Minutes
New IMD Members and Companies
Membership Application
Sponsors in this Issue
Publisher’s Message
Disclaimer: The editorial content published in this newsletter is the sole responsibility of the authors. The Injection Molding Division publishes this
content for the use and benefit of its members, but is not responsible for the accuracy or validity of editorial content contributed by various sources.
Fall 2008
Page 1
SPE Injection Molding Division
IMD Leadership
IMD Chair
Lih-Sheng (Tom) Turng
Univ. of Wisconsin–Madison
[email protected]
Awards Chair
Jim Peret
[email protected]
Membership Chair
Nick Fountas, JLI-Boston
[email protected]
Board Member
Mal Murthy, Doss Plastics
[email protected]
Communications Chair,
Website Chair
Lee Filbert, IQMS
[email protected]
Nominations Chair
Don Allen
Phillips Chemical Co.
[email protected]com
New Board Member
Erik Foltz
The Madison Group
[email protected]
Councilor, Reception Chair
Jack Dispenza,
Design Results
[email protected]
TPC ’09
Brad Johnson, Penn State Erie
[email protected]
New Board Member
Adam Kramschuster
Univ. of Wisconsin–Stout
[email protected]
Chair-Elect, Alt. Treasurer
Dave Karpinski
[email protected]
Past Chair,
Executive Committee Liason
Hoa Pham
Lyondell Basell
[email protected]
Student Activities Chair
Walt Smith
Xaloy, Inc.
[email protected]
Technical Director
Peter Grelle
Dow Automotive
[email protected]
Jim Wenskus
[email protected]
Education Chair
Pat Gorton, Energizer
[email protected]
Engineer of Year Award
Kishor Mehta
Plascon Associates, Inc.
[email protected]
Historian, Fellows &
Honored Service Awards
Larry Schmidt
LR Schmidt Associates
[email protected]
Past Secretary
Larry Cosma
Performance Polymers
[email protected]
Board Member
Jan Stevens, Tupperware
[email protected]
Board Member
Michael Uhrain, Demag
[email protected]
Board Member
Raymond McKee, Rexam
[email protected]
New Board Member
Susan Montgomery
Priamus Sys. Tech., LLC
[email protected]
Newsletter Publisher,
Chris Lacey
Univ. of Wisconsin–Madison
[email protected]
Committee Reports
ANTEC 2009 Update by Brad Johnson
The year 2009 will be the first year ever that SPE’s ANTEC and SPI’s NPE will be held at the same time and
place, combining the world’s largest technical conference for the plastics industry with the largest trade show in the
United States. ANTEC runs Monday, June 22nd, through Wednesday, June 24th, while NPE will last the entire
week. Just about everybody who is anybody in the plastics industry will attend this conference. This will be a great
opportunity for you and your organization to showcase what you are doing in the arena of injection molding.
In addition, I would like to invite you to present a paper at ANTEC. There are two formats that can be presented:
technical and commercial. Please visit http://www.4spe.org/antec-2009-call-papers to find more information, including
a template which is very helpful when planning and writing your entry. See page 14 for more details.
I would also like to know if you have any ideas about special sessions or topics that you would like to see
presented. Please contact Brad Johnson ([email protected]), the IMD ANTEC 2009 Technical Program Chair, with
your ideas. With your help, we can make this event better than ever!
Technical Program Committee Report by Peter Grelle
The SPE IMD co-sponsored the “Injection Molding: Innovation and Emerging Technologies Conference” on
June 10, 2008 in Erie, Pennsylvania. One hundred people registered for the conference. Bill Carteaux, the
president of SPI, and Rob Neilley, IMM editor, gave interesting keynote addresses on two of the days. The
conference included a plant tour of Rehrig––Pacific’s Erie operation one evening. The presentations from
industry and the faculty tutorials were all well-received. In 2009, the conference will take a one year hiatus due to
the NPE in Chicago, Illinois.
The 2009 ANTEC paper review committee will meet on December 13, 2008, in Orlando, Florida. The
committee will consist of Brad Johnson, Dave Karpinski, Jan Stevens, and Pete Grelle.
Fall 2008
Page 2
SPE Injection Molding Division
Chair’s Message
Message - Cont Chair’s
Continued from page 1
Second, we should all strive to live within our means and make sure that we have enough savings for a rainy
day. Part of today’s problems stems from our unsustainable culture of consumerism and negative saving rates.
From our own financial decisions to corporate management, we need to build a safety net for unexpected needs or
emergencies. It may be a perfect time to re-access our investment strategies and take into account the timing of our
retirement. We mustn’t let panic or fear blind our judgment in favor of overlooking the fundamentals. As our life
expectancy increases, we may be able to work longer if we choose.
Third, we should prioritize our prospective on life and understand that sometimes happiness may be right in
front of us. Studies have found that while money might seem to “buy” happiness initially, it won’t last long. True
happiness and a meaningful life come from the support and understanding of our family and friends, especially in
tough times. We work hard to earn wealth and status, but we can not trade them in for health, which we as humans
have a tendency to take for granted. Thus, taking care of our health and focusing on the rich and meaningful parts
of our lives may pay more dividends in the long term than any amount of money.
The State of the Division
In this issue, you will find many articles, reports,
and announcements that highlight the various activities
and programs of the Injection Molding Division.
Following our great tradition, which won us the SPE
Gold Level Pinnacle Award at ANTEC 2008, the
division is actively involved in developing various
technical programs (e.g., Milwaukee MiniTec, page 30),
and sponsoring SPE scholarships (visit the SPE
Foundation Web site at www.4spe.org/spefoundation), and relevant conferences (e.g., SAMTMP
2008, page 27, and Molding 2009, page 13). The IMD
is proud to be a sponsor of the SAMTMP 2008 to be
held in Beijing, China, November 15-17, 2008. As part
of our goal to expand membership worldwide, we hope
to meet many new members from our presence in Asia.
These activities aid in meeting the charter of the SPE
IMD as well as strengthening its position within SPE.
Five new Board members have been appointed since
ANTEC 2008 to help in these efforts and more new
volunteers continue to join us. We value feedback and
participation from our current and prospective members
and encourage you all to join us in these various activities
and in recognizing members with distinguished service
and contributions to the molding community. Please do
not hesitate to contact us (see the contact information
on page 2) if you have any questions, suggestions,
comments, or candidates for nomination.
Lih-Sheng (Tom) Turng
Chair, 2008-2009
Fall 2008
Page 3
IMD Chair Professor Turng receives the SPE Pinnacle-Gold
Award from then SPE President, Dr. Vicki Flaris, at the ANTEC
2008 Banquet.
Want to be a Reporter for
the IMD Newsletter?
When you attend a molding event such as a
conference, exhibit, or trade show, you can share your
experience with thousands of IMD members. The IMD
Newsletter features the column “Things On The Road”
to provide members with an opportunity to contribute to
the IMD community. We also welcome informative
feature articles by our readers.
Send your review or summary to Chris Lacey
([email protected]) and see it published in the next
SPE Injection Molding Division
Feature Article
Productivity with
Priamus Control
Engineering Jobs Are Prestigious
by Lih-Sheng (Tom) Turng
According to the results of a Harris Interactive survey of 1,010 adults
(surveyed July 8-13, 2008), and published on the front page of USA TODAY
(Snapshot on Monday, August 25, 2008), the profession of Engineer ranked
first in terms of prestige, and furthermore, had the biggest percentage-point
increase from 2007 to 2008, surpassing other coveted professions such as
actor, architect, journalist, union leader, and banker (see chart below).
This further confirms the esteemed status of engineers, who actually apply
scientific and engineering principles, combining those skills with creativity,
workmanship, innovation, and hard work to produce tangible goods and
create wealth that are sustainable and real. IMD members, you deserve this
recognition! Keep up the good work!
Automatic balancing of
hot runner molds
Automatic transfer
to holding pressure
2007-2008 Jobs Rising in Prestige
Real-time material
viscosity measurement
Union Leader
Advanced cavity pressure &
cavity temperature sensors
2008 Job Prestige Rating
Union Leader
- Reduce dimensional
- Achieve individual and
overall part weight
Fall 2008
Page 4
SPE Injection Molding Division
Ask The Experts
Injection Molding Questions
Bob Dealey, owner and president of
Dealey’s Mold Engineering, Inc.
answers your questions about
injection molding. Bob has over 30
years of experience in plastics
injection-molding design, tooling, and
processing. Reach Bob by email at
[email protected]
Thanks from so many of us on your insight into
molding issues. I have two questions. I have a 4-cavity
hot runner mold (LLDPE) making a medical squeeze
tube. It is 1/2" diameter at the hot tip and 4" long.
Should I be using 60 degree chilled water or warm
water for the mold? My problem is that I am bending
the moving side cores which are 52 R resulting in a thin
side wall and some backfill at the parting line. Venting
is adequate but not excellent. Also, should I be injecting
fast or slow? I am injecting onto a flat core. ~Robert
Lowe, BL Plastics Inc.
First the venting. If it is "adequate," it is likely not
good enough. All of the trapped air, gases, and volatiles
need to have an easy egress from the cavity. This is the
simplest and least expensive fix that will provide the
maximum benefit to filling the cavity.
As for the mold surface temperature: A warmer
surface will, in theory, allow plastic to flow further and
with less pressure. It would be better if you measure
the mold surface temperature rather than the chiller water
temperature. A simple molding test could be the best
method to determine the best mold surface temperature.
Starting with your present 60-degree water and using
your existing molding parameters, adjust the cushion
(or lack of cushion) to yield a part about 90% full.
Increase the mold temperate in 10 degree increments,
trying 80, 90, or even 100 degrees, and then observe
the results. You will find a point that the part fills easier
and/or completely. Evaluate the cycle time ramifications
and choose the most beneficial mold surface temperature
versus cycle time and part quality.
As for injection speed, common wisdom today is
that a faster speed will allow the cavity to fill with less
Fall 2008
Page 5
pressure. Again a simple test is the best way to prove
the best filling speed for an existing mold. Start with a
slow speed and gradually increase it (being careful not
to over pack the mold) while observing core deflection.
These results will allow you to determine the best injection
speed for your mold.
While doing these experiments observe fill patterns
on your particular part (not having a sample makes it a
little difficult to understand the core deflection). Visualize
how a second gate on the opposite side would allow
material to enter and help stabilize the core. A large
number of parts with slender core ratios (length-todiameter ratios of over 5 to 1) will exhibit core deflection
when gated on only one side, with plastic material
impinging on the slender core.
The solution to core deflection is typically a gate on
the top center where material can flow and surround
the core adding stability or a double gate arrangement.
Recent studies have indicated that some cores deflect
in the packing stage and really are not a result of filling
where, in many instances, low pressures are observed.
Each case is unique and some core movement or
deflection is dependent on how the core is anchored
(insertion, fit, and concept), the mold material itself, and
the direction of plastic impinging on the core.
You did not mention the mold material used for
your core. Extensive testing has shown that material with
higher rates of thermal conductivity can allow the mold
surface temperature to be evaluated for ease of injection
and yet will cool the part more evenly to maintain or
even reduce your molding cycle. Copper alloys are
excellent for this application. Typically NiSiCr copper
alloys are used in medical applications and many have a
thin, dense chrome plating applied. Additionally, tungsten
carbide has a very high thermal conductivity, exceeding
that of typical tool steels.
SPE Injection Molding Division
Ask The Experts
Secondly, I have a stationary sticking problem
with 3/4" long parts, again in LLDPE. The
stationary side is ribbed. Should this side be highly
polished or sand blasted? In blow molding, the sand
blasted surface releases better. ~Robert Lowe, BL
Plastics Inc.
If the part has aesthetic finish requirements on the
surfaces that are creating the resistance to release, that
finish must be applied to the mold. Without knowing
any more about your application, I would suggest that
you consider an SPI B-1 or B-2 finish. A skilled mold
polisher must install this finish in the direction of part
release (draw). Where I’ve seen highly polished
surfaces release well, it is more often a combination of
draft on the cavity and ejection method than the high
polish that is responsible for lower release and/or
ejection forces. Sand blasted surfaces do break the
vacuum better, if that is the reason that the part is
sticking to the core. Other than the vacuum release
aspect, the sand blast surface will, in theory, create
higher initial injection or release forces and compound
the ejection problem.
Please let us know how you make out and/or if you
need more information. Undoubtedly many of the
division members and readers have encountered similar
situations and could provide their thoughts. The great
thing I’ve found about professionals in the injection
molding industry is a willingness to help a fellow molder.
If you need more assistance, please send a digital
picture of the part, core, gate arrangement, and mold, along
with test results from the above recommendations, and
either I or other readers will try to offer more suggestions.
Hot Runner Questions
Terry Schwenk, owner and president of Process & Design Technologies, LLC, answers your hot
runner questions. Terry has over 34
years of experience in the plastics
industry, and more then 22 years in
hot runner technology specifically.
Email your questions to Terry at
[email protected]
What causes hot runner systems to leak and
how can the leakage be prevented?
This is one of the great mysteries of operating hot
runner systems. If you have been one of the few who
have never experienced a hot runner leak, count
yourself lucky. If you use hot runner systems long
enough, you will eventually experience a leak. The
unfortunate problem is that most times you don’t realize
a material breach has occurred until the system stops
Fall 2008
Page 6
working or you see material coming out of the electrical
box. This, in my opinion, is the worst thing that can
happen to a hot runner system because the time it takes
to find the leak and the effort to analyze what happened
can be very costly. If you have a tool running and you
know a leak has occurred, before you shut down the
tool try to do a color change and run a few shots through
the system. This can be very helpful in determining where
the leak is coming from.
Leakages can be categorized into three major areas:
mechanical, electrical, or thermal. Knowing this can help
analyze the problem. In addition, it is important to
understand that a leak can NOT occur unless the
following three items are present: (1) heat, (2) pressure,
and (3) a leak path. If you take away heat the material
solidifies and stops flowing. Take away pressure and
the material viscosity will prevent it from flowing. Take
away a leak path and the material has no place to go.
Most material leakages occur due to a design flaw
or improper installation. But analyzing and trying to find
the source of the leak can be monstrous. Design flaws
SPE Injection Molding Division
The Experts
Ask The
can range from a missed dimension to an incorrect
tolerance on the print. Improper installation can range
from poor machining, poor surface finish, a programming
error, not holding tolerance, improper assembly, wiring,
or a loose screw or seal. In the case of the nozzle seals,
the seals contact the cavity steel creating an interference
fit, thus closing off a leak path. When seals get damaged
by over heating, or are dinged during installation, their
effectiveness is compromised. The success of the seal
is dependant on having full contact with the cavity block
not only from a mechanical seal standpoint but also from
a thermal standpoint. When the seal contacts the cavity
block it gives up some of its heat making it cooler. But if
the seal is loose in the bore it not only creates a leak
path, it remains hot and the material doesn’t solidify.
If there is no design flaw or improper installation,
processing conditions may be the problem. Controlling
the temperature of the hot runner system and the mold
plates surrounding the system is critical. When the
system or mold is heated thermal expansion takes place
and controlling that expansion is essential to maintaining
the integrity of the system and mold base. Carbon steels
expand at a rate of 0.0000063 inches per degree
Fahrenheit per inch. Thus, a piece of steel measuring
10 inches in length heated to 100 F over ambient
temperature will expand 0.0063 inches. A hot runner
manifold 10 inches in length heated to 470 F will expand
0.0252 inches. If the system or mold base is over heated,
or the water wasn’t turned on, this can affect the mating
of the surfaces. Components that are not seated
properly due to excessive thermal expansion will create
a leak path. Once a leak path has been established,
even if you turn the water back on, the damage will
have already been done and the system will leak.
Additional processing issues can be as simple as not
following proper startup or shut down procedures.
These procedures can change depending on the type of
tool being processed, such as a single face tool versus a
stack mold, or a multi-component versus an insert mold.
Paying attention to the hot runner supplier’s
recommendations will avoid most issues. Paying close
attention to the installation and integration of the hot
runner system will prevent leakage from occurring. In
addition, having well trained processing personnel will
avoid leakages when a mistake is made.
Fall 2008
Page 7
Reader Comments From Previous Issues
Regarding injection molding plastisol fishing
lures (Spring 2008), Caspar Van Spaendonck of
Philips Consumer Lifestyle, the Netherlands, had this
to say. You might check on the dough moulding
compound (DMC) for moulding. This is glass fiber
reinforced polyester resin for injection moulding. A long
time ago, Philips made speaker housings out of this
material, but these days, the back doors of small cars
are moulded of this material. See: http://www.composite.
Polyurethane clear coat moulding is a process of
curing the resin in the tool. A source is: http://
By the way, you were right on the barrel: Do not
use the normal screw and barrel used for thermoplastic
material. A special barrel must be used!
SPE Injection Molding Division
Ask The Experts
CAE Questions
John Ralston, operations and
engineering manager of Beaumont
Technologies, Inc., answers your
questions about flow simulation.
John has over 18 years of CAE
experience using various flow
simulation packages. Reach John at
[email protected] with a
subject line of “SPE and CAE.”
I did a mold filling simulation on a new part and
mold design to ensure that we had enough pressure
available to fill the part. However, the analysis
under-predicted the pressures by 20% and now I am
on the verge of being pressure limited. I have to go
back and rework the mold or find a molding machine
with more available pressure. Is this a common
problem with CAE? Why is the analysis prediction
so different from the actual results?
We see many instances where the flow analysis
simulation program’s pressure results do not match
closely with the actual injection molding process. There
are several reasons on why this could happen. First you
need to determine if it is a problem caused by software
limitations or an error related to the comparison of the
actual injection molding process. In order to determine
the cause of why the pressure prediction is not the same
as the actual molding, we recommend the following
trouble shooting steps.
STEP 1. First you need to determine if the analysis
truly reflects what is being molded. Here are some
common items to review when setting up an analysis to
replicate an injection molding process.
Comparison of Analysis vs. Machine Setup.
Simulations allow the user to specify an injection time
or polymer flow rate, while injection molding machines
normally have an injection profile. Profiles may ramp
up from a slow rate to full velocity and then slope down
again prior to the end of the filling phase. Even if the
molding machine is programmed to have a constant
velocity, the ram will not move at a constant speed as
the ram can not instantly change velocities. The same is
Fall 2008
Page 8
true at the end of the filling phase. Profiles on the machine
will most likely require less pressure than the constant
velocity that is typically used for most CAE flow
simulation analyses.
Machine Switchover. If the machine switch-over
to pressure control is close to the point where the cavity
is completely filled, then it is possible that the cavity will
experience hydrostatic conditions. This will be evident
through a rapid rise in cavity and machine pressures. In
multi-cavity molds, these pressure spikes can also occur
due to filling imbalances. For example, the machine may
be set to switch-over when 95% of the shot has been
injected. But if an imbalance exists, some cavities may
be full while others are only 60% full. The full cavities
will see a significant pressure spike again due to the
hydrostatic pressure conditions. Be sure to compare
the switch-over point used in the analysis to what is set
on the machine.
Accounting for Screw Conveyance and Machine
Nozzle Losses. Many CAE analysts do not model the
machine nozzle geometry, nor do they consider the pressure
required to move the ram. If the nozzle geometry is not
accounted for, then the pressure loss through the
machine nozzle and screw conveyance losses need to
be added to the analysis results for a more accurate
pressure prediction. As a rule of thumb, add 10% to
25% of the pressure achieved in the analysis to account
for these losses. This rule of thumb range is certainly
affected by the design of the nozzle (shut-off nozzle,
extended nozzle, diameters and length of the nozzle
including the orifice size, etc.), so be aware of your
nozzle’s design and its impact on pressure loss.
Correct Mold and Melt Temps. In addition to the
injection rate, the mold and melt temperatures used in
the analysis must also be conveyed to the processor so
that those temperatures are used in the process. High
mold and melt temperatures will lower the viscosity and
decrease the actual pressure. The melt temperature used
in the analysis is NOT the barrel or nozzle settings. The
best way to measure the melt temperature is with an air
shot and a hand held pyrometer (we recommend
following RJG’s 30/30 melt test). The mold temperature
specified in the analysis is the temperature at the plastic–
metal interface, NOT the temperature of the coolant or
SPE Injection Molding Division
Ask The Experts
the setting on your thermolator. The coolant temperature
will typically be lower than the temperature at the plastic–
metal interface. It should also be noted that if you did
not run a cooling analysis, the CAE software assumes
perfect uniform cooling—which in most cases does not
replicate the true molding process.
STEP 2. Once you have verified that you are closely
replicating the molding process, the next step is to verify
the analysis inputs. Major areas of concern with setting
up an analysis include the following.
Analysis Selection. There are multiple solution
platforms that can be used for a filling analysis.
Depending upon the software vendor, these could
include 2D, Midplane (2 ½ D), Dual Domain, Hybrid
3D, and Full 3D methods. The decision to use a
particular solution method is complex and based on the
scope of the problem, part complexity, and the degree
of accuracy required. Choosing a wrong solution
platform may cause inaccurate results. You should ask
questions of your CAE analyst or supplier to verify that
your problem can be solved effectively and efficiently
with the chosen solution platform.
Inaccurate Modeling. Ensure that the entire feed
system is modeled, including the sprue, runner system,
and gates. This applies for hot and cold runner systems,
or hybrid systems (hot-to-cold). There is a pressure
loss associated with any channel that the melt flows
through, with the feed system contributing significant
portions of the total pressure loss.
Material Characterization. This is an area where
a lot of variation could be introduced. CAE analysis
calculations for flow, temperature, and pressure are
highly dependant upon proper material characterization.
In most cases, the material database supplied with the
CAE software is limited, which presents a problem when
performing an analysis for your specific job. To
compound the problem, even if you find the exact
material, supplier, and grade in the database, the data
may not be valid for several reasons.
For example, improper rheological characterization
or the use of generic family data (Generic PVT) may
inaccurately represent your specific material’s rheology.
Single point thermal conductivity or specific heat values
verses tabulated data may also cause problems. The
best way to ensure proper results is to have the material
Fall 2008
Page 9
tested based on your analysis requirements. The
drawback with material testing for each project would
be added expense and time required. Another option
would be to run verification analyses concurrently with
the actual analysis. This can be accomplished by
analyzing an existing mold or through the use of
proprietary methods such as Veri-flo™ services
(contact Beaumont Technologies, Inc. for more
SUMMARY. As you can see, there are many variables that can contribute to inaccurate results with CAE
flow analysis programs. We discussed the major sources
for error, but there are certainly others to consider. The
key to obtaining the best results is to understand the
injection molding process, how it relates to flow analysis
simulation, and the limitations and assumptions made in
the code. If you are outsourcing flow simulation, do
your homework and find a CAE consulting source that
understands these issues and can react appropriately,
providing you with the best results available with today’s
technology. The key to making simulation successful is
having someone with the ability to interpret the results,
not just the ability to make pretty pictures.
SPE Injection Molding Division
Ask The Experts
Reader Comments
From Previous Issues
Regarding a copolymer with
an orange peel surface finish
(Summer 2008), Caspar Van
Spaendonck of Philips Consumer
Lifestyle, the Netherlands, had this
to say. Having some experience
with Asian tooling, it might be that
the polishing of the tool was done
too hastily. When polishing steel
with too high speed and pressure
(over polishing), an orange peel
effect can appear. See this link for
ASSAB / Uddeholm polishing
guidelines (orange peel problems
are mentioned on page 8): http://
Regarding bubbles in a clear polycarbonate part (Spring 2008), Caspar Van Spaendonck of Philips
Consumer Lifestyle, the Netherlands, had this to say. I appreciated your article on PC moulding; it was practical,
helpful, and to the point. Allow me to share some experience on the air inclusions. If the bubble consistently
appears in the same location, ask yourself the following questions.
1) Are three flow fronts colliding? Especially in
a flat area with no pins or other venting
possibilities, the air will be trapped. In the
worst case, it will burn. This is a tool/gating
problem. If you are lucky with a shut-off hot
runner, you can try sequential opening of the
runner nozzles to move the colliding flow
2) Is there a weldline after a hole? In cases where not
vented or poorly vented air is dragged along, venting
the pin will help.
3) Is the bubble at the end of the flow where the part
cannot be easily packed? Here we have a real
problem with PC. Acombination of difficulty flowing
and over packing near the gate can cause excessive
stress. If the gate does not freeze too early, a special
packing pressure profile might be the solution.
Fall 2008
Page 10
SPE Injection Molding Division
Featured Technology
An Example of MeltFlipper Technology:
Performance Evaluation of an 8 Cavity PVC Medical Parts
The image below shows the two distinct flow groups of an 8 cavity geometrically balanced mold. Flow groups
are made up of a group of cavities that receive the same melt properties with or without the patented Beaumonth
Techology MeltFlipper melt rotation technology used by Integrity Plastics for this evaluation. The inside four
cavities make up flow group 1 (red) and the outside four cavities make up flow group 2 (blue). Any variation
between these flow groups is caused by shear. These shear variations can be addressed using MeltFlipper technology.
Variations within these flow groups are classified as steel imbalances. Steel imbalances can be caused by differences
in runner size, wall thickness variations, cold slug issues, venting, gate diameters, etc. MeltFlipper technology
cannot resolve steel variations.
5 Step Software Results
Short shot samples were analyzed using the Beaumont 5 Step Software to determine the root cause of imbalance
in the medical PVC part mold. Shown below is the steel variation for the two flow groups. Flow group 1 shows a
2.1% steel variation (due mainly to cavity 6). Flow group 2 shows a 4.6% steel variation (due mainly to cavity 5).
Fall 2008
Page 11
SPE Injection Molding Division
Featured Technology
Steel imbalances are caused by differences in
the physical steel dimensions. Small differences in
runner and gate diameters can have a large effect
on the filling balance. Shown below is the pressure
drop equation highlighting the impact that the channel
radius (r) has since it is raised to the 4th power.
Cavity 5 and 6 are both the lightest cavities in
their respective flow groups. Consequently, these
parts are fed by the same secondary runner which
should be checked for consistency to the other
runners. The difference between the flow groups
evaluates the amount of shear imbalance. The shear
imbalance determined from the short shot samples
was 8.1%.
Shear imbalances are caused by shearing the material through the machine nozzle and the runner system.
MeltFlipper technology provided uniform filling by managing and distributing the high sheared laminates to all the
cavities. By using the MeltFlipper technology, Integrity Plastics was able to improve the filling balance and enable
the cavities to receive identical melt properties. The MeltFlipper technology has the potential to increase the
process window with improved dimensional consistency. Other benefits include a potential for decreased scrap,
lower injection pressures, and faster mold commissioning.
Fall 2008
Page 12
SPE Injection Molding Division
Fall 2008
Page 13
SPE Injection Molding Division
Call For Papers
Fall 2008
Page 14
SPE Injection Molding Division
IMD Best Paper
Experimental Study on the Energy Efficiency of Different
Screw Designs for Injection Molding
Jeff A. Myers: BARR Inc., Onsted, MI
Mark Ruberg 1, Ritch Waterfield 1, Mark Elsass1, Steve Kelsay1: Milacron Inc, Batavia, OH
New advances in screw designs and mixing sections
have allowed processors to advantage of new resins,
higher production rates, and improved product quality.
With new material formulations, and increased energy
cost it is paramount that the machine utilize the total
energy input in the most efficient manner. This paper
will present data on the melting performance of a new
injection screw design with a unique flight geometry that
maximizes the conductive melting mechanism (low shear)
in the screw channel. A comparison is made between
the total energy required for melting, pumping and mixing
characteristics between a standard General purpose
screw, barrier screw and a new Variable Barrier Energy
Transfer screw (VBET) (12).
Injection molding is the most widely used plastic
forming process in the industry today. The cost of each
part produced depends on a number of factors including
resin, cycle time, total energy input and scrap rate just to
name a few. In general, the lowest cost per part will
occur at the highest production rate and the lowest energy
usage. The majority of the energy required to fully melt
the resin is dictated by the screw design selected.
Viscous energy dissipation via shearing in single screw
extrusion has been the subject of intensive study over
the last forty years. It is well documented in the literature
that the polymer pellets start to melt after 2 to 4 diameters
from the hopper and are compacted into what is known
as a “solid bed”, as shown by Figure 1. The initial melting
mechanism of a tightly compacted solid bed is mainly by
rubbing on the hot barrel surface as it rotates with the
screw and by conductive heating from the barrel heaters
(1). As the melt film between the solid bed and the barrel
increases, heat is generated from viscous shear heating,
which dominates the melting of the polymer. In
conventional screws, viscous shear heating is the principle
source of energy to melt the polymer (2).
More modern screw designs utilize a barrier flight as
shown in Figure 2. As the melt film is wiped off the
barrel surface by the main flight, the melt is deposited
Fall 2008
Page 15
into a separate melt channel. A barrier flight divides the
solid and melt channel such that the clearance over the
barrier flight will only allow melt to enter into this channel.
The main function of a barrier flight is to separate the
melted polymer from the solid bed and keep the solid
bed from becoming unstable and prematurely breaking
up. By continuously removing the melt film over the
barrier flight, the solid bed surface remains intact. This
allows for a greater solid bed surface area on the barrel
wall to keep the viscous energy dissipation via shearing
as high as possible. In addition, since the melt film
thickness over the barrier flight is small, the shear energy
is also high. It is believed that this type of phase separation
will increase the melting rates as compared to non-barrier
type screws. However, since approximately 90% of the
polymer is melted by the high shear in the barrier section,
the melt temperatures are correspondingly higher, which
is undesirable in many applications.
Recognizing the inherent problems and limitations of
barrier type screws, the solid/melt mixing type screw
was developed (1). This principle differs from the barrier
designs in that the metering section is divided into two
equal subchannels by a secondary flight. The solid bed
is intentionally broken up at the end of the melting section
to allow some solids to enter the mixing section. The
clearance of the secondary flight is much greater than
the clearance of the barrier flight on a barrier screw,
allowing unmelted pellets to pass through. The depth of
one subchannel decreases while the depth of the other
increases, forcing the melt to flow over the secondary
flight at relatively low shear rates, as shown by Figure 4.
Solid bed fragments mixed in the melt are broken into
individual pellets by passing over the secondary flight.
The pellets are continually mixed with the melt promoting
heat transfer by conduction from the melt to the pellets.
Since the viscous energy dissipation via shearing in solid/
melt mixing screws is low and the primary melting
mechanism is by conduction, the melt temperature is
reduced (3).
The goal of this work is to evaluate the total energy
requirements for the molding machine with three different
screw designs and make a comparison on the
performance and energy each screw required at different
molding conditions.
SPE Injection Molding Division
IMD Best Paper
The resin used for this study was a standard injection
grade High Density Polyethylene (HDPE), Fortiflex T50500 grade. The melt flow rate (MFR) of the resin was
6.5 g/10 min (190 0C, 2.16 Kg). All tests were performed
using 100% virgin natural pellets.
The experiments were performed on a Milacron MM550 (4) injection machine with the specifications listed in
Table 1. The barrel was fitted with standard Ceramic
heater bands. The total kW per zone is listed in Table 2.
The General purpose (GP) and Barrier screw that
were evaluated are typical designs supplied by the
machine manufacture.
The GP screw had a 100mm constant lead-length and
a primary flight clearance of 0.10mm. It had a 12diameter feed section that was 12.70mm deep, a 5diameter constant taper transition section, and a 5diameter constant depth meter section that was 4.70mm
The Barrier screw had a 9.4-diameter feed section
that was 14.50mm deep with a 100mm lead-length, 8.0
diameter barrier section with a 125mm lead-length, and
a 2.6 diameter constant depth meter section that was
5.33mm deep. The feed and metering section were single
flighted and the barrier section was designed with a melt
and solid channel as shown in Figure 2. The clearance
over the barrier flight had a constant depth of 0.51mm.
The barrier screw had a 2.0 diameter spiral mixing section
at the discharge end.
The VBET solid/melt mixing design had a lead-length
of 120.7mm and a primary flight clearance of 0.10mm.
It had a 6.0 diameter feed section that was 19.0mm deep.
The constant taper transition section was 6.4 diameters
long with a starting depth of 19.0mm and ending at 7.6mm
depth. The solid/melt mixing section was 6.9 diameters
long with a starting depth of 7.6mm and exit depth of
6.9mm. Within the mixing section the channel depth
varied between 3.8mm and 12.7mm. As shown in Figure
4, the depth and length of the undercut flight varied
through the length of the mixing section. The starting
depth of the first peak was 3.8mm and the ending depth
was 2.5mm. The period of these oscillations was out of
phase for the two channels. The constant depth meter
section was 1.3 diameters long at 6.9mm deep. The
discharge end of the screw had a 1.0 diameter slotted
mixing section. This screw design will be referred to as
the Mixing screw in the rest of the paper.
Fall 2008
Page 16
The barrel heater zones and screw motor were
connected to a data acquisition systems which allowed
the total power to be recorded for each test. A meter
was installed on the main power supply which recorded
the total machine power required for the duration of each
test. To investigate the total energy input for each screw,
the molding parameters were held constant throughout
the test and are listed in Table 3. Data was recorded for
fifty consecutive shots once the machine was at steady
Results and Discussion
The screw Recovery Rate (g/sec) is shown in Figure
5. The Mixing screw had an 18% higher rate compared
to the GP design and a 15% higher rate compared to the
Barrier design at 150 rpm. The melt temperature was
measured using a hand held pyrometer after the last
consecutive shot in each test. The maximum discharge
temperature at 75 and 150 rpm is shown in Figure 6. The
discharge temperatures for the Mixing Screw were 14
to 12 oC lower than the Barrier design at 75 and 150 rpm
respectively. The melt quality for the Barrier and Mixing
screw showed no sings of unmelt. The melt quality of
the GP design showed evidence of unmelts at 75 and
150 rpm. At 150 rpm, unmelted pellets were more evident
in the purging and the molded part. This data is consistent
with the low discharge temperature with the GP design.
The specific energy inputted by the screw is shown
in Figure 8. The Mixing screw used 6 to 12 % less energy
compared to the GP and Barrier design. The varying
depths in the solid/melt section of the Mixing screw
allowed energy from the screw to be used more
effectively. Shear energy inputted to the resin in the
shallow channel regions was readily transferred to the
cooler solids in the deep channel.
The total energy required, Et , to produce a single part
is calculated from the following relationship:
E t = P t /RM ; kW/kg
RM = 3.66*W t /CT ; kg/hr
Where Pt is the total machine power in kW. RM is the
machine specific rate in kg/hr, which is a function of the
cycle time. Wt is the part weight in grams, and CT is the
total cycle time in seconds. The results at 75 and 150
rpm are listed in Figure 9. The Mixing screw required
1.6 to 2.6% less energy per molded part compared to
the Barrier and GP design. The actual value would be
higher if scrap rates and are included in the calculation.
SPE Injection Molding Division
IMD Best Paper
Machine efficiency is an important aspect in the
molding process. The data clearly shows that screw
design plays an important role in the total energy required
to produce a molded part. The results of our tests suggest
that a design that maximizes conductive melting as the
primary melting mechanism requires less energy per part
than a GP or Barrier design. Data from a subsequent
test indicated that the Mixing screw is able to produce a
more uniform melt temperature distribution and improved
mixing which can also improve the overall machine
Figure 2. Barrier screw channel flow.
1. C.I Chung, Extrusion of Polymer, Hanser, (2000).
2. J.A. Myers, R.A.Barr, SPE-ANTEC Tech. Papers,
48,154 (2002)
3. T.A. Hogan, M.A. Spalding, E.K. Kim, R.A. Barr,
J.A. Myers, SPE ANTEC Tech. Papers, 180, 490
4. Milacron Inc. Plastic Technologies Batavia, OH
5. “ET” Registered Trademark of Robert BARR Inc.
6. C.I. Chung and R.A. Barr, SPE ANTEC Tech.
Papers, 29, 168 (1983).
7. C.I. Chung and R.A. Barr, U.S. Patent 4,405,239.
8. T.A. Plumley, M.A. Spalding, J. Dooley, and K.S.
Hyun, SPE ANTEC Tech. Papers, 40, 324 (1994).
9. S.A. Somers, M.A. Spalding, J. Dooley, and K.S.
Hyun, SPE ANTEC Tech. Papers, 41, 222, (1995).
10. B.A. Salamon, M.A. Spalding, J.R. Powers, M.
Serrano, W.C. Sumner, S.A. Somers, and R.B. Peters,
R.B., Plast. Eng., 57, 4, 52 (2001).
11. R.A. Barr, U.S. Patent 6,599,004 (2001).
Key Words:
Solid Melt/Mix, Conductive Melting, VBET.
Figure 3. Solid/melt mixing channel flow.
Figure 4. Schematic of VBET section.
Table 1. Machine specifications.
Injection Capacity, Max
G.P. Styrene , kg
Screw Diameter, mm
Maximum Screw Stroke, mm
Electric Screw Motor, kW
Maximum Screw, rpm
Number of Heater Zones
Total Heating Capacity, kW
Table 2. Heater zone specifications.
Figure 1. Conventional screw channel flow.
Fall 2008
Page 17
Zone -1-Feed end
kW per zone
SPE Injection Molding Division
IMD Best Paper
Table 3. Molding conditions.
Screw Speed, rpm
Back Pressure, Bar
Feed Throat, o C
Zone-1, o C
Zone-2, o C
Zone-3, o C
Zone-4, o C
Nozzle, o C
Screw Stroke, mm
Cycle Time, sec
75, 150
22.0, 18.0
Figure 7. Screw motor power required.
Figure 5. Screw recovery rate.
Figure 8. Specific energy inputted by the screw.
Figure 6. Discharge temperature.
Figure 9. Total machine energy required per molded part.
Fall 2008
Page 18
SPE Injection Molding Division
Feature Article
Partners in Education
By Mike Thomas, Milwaukee SPE
Milwaukee SPE is delighted to announce that this year’s Ticona grants will be awarded to two deserving students
on March 17, 2009, during Milwaukee SPE’s Annual Education Career Night. Ticona and Milwaukee SPE will begin
their 12th year presenting these joint financial grants. With a shared goal of the education of our customers, employees,
members, communities, and public and private schools and universities, Ticona and SPE Milwaukee have worked
seamlessly over the years to recruit and reward deserving recipients of this prestigious award. Ticona is always
looking for polymer, engineering, and manufacturing talent from Midwestern Universities, and the partnership between
Ticona and Milwaukee SPE seeks to further the placement of qualified individuals with Ticona, thus keeping talent in
the Midwest.
Mike Thomas, a former employee of 32 years with Ticona and current member of
Milwaukee SPE, has directed this joint financial grant from SPE Milwaukee’s side for
the last 12 years. Originally started with Ticona’s Pat Hughes in 1995, Mike continued
the program with Jack Grates and, more recently, with Clay Linstid. Clay visited Milwaukee
in February 2007 to personally present the grant to Scott Winkelmann of UW-Milwaukee.
Clay also worked with Gail Bristol of SPE National on joint educational programs. It is
with great regret that I inform you that Clay passed away unexpectedly on June 29, 2008.
He is sorely missed by everyone who knew him. Vivek Jain of Ticona has taken over for
Clay in coordinating Ticona’s educational programming in 2008 and 2009. Ticona’s
generosity and commitment to the students and professionals in the plastics industry over
the years has not gone unnoticed.
Ticona, which is part of Celanese Corporation, is a global company of material scientists, design engineers,
technical support experts, account managers, and customer service representatives dedicated to helping companies
achieve their goals in the use of engineering resins. They are a world leader in materials such as acetal polymers,
liquid crystal polymers, long fiber reinforced thermoplastics, and ultrahigh molecular weight polyethylene. They hold
strong positions across their broad portfolio of other thermoplastics as well. Ticona has about 1,800 employees in
polymer production, compounding plants, and laboratory and design centers throughout the world. Their products
serve designers and engineers in a number of key markets, including automotive, appliance components, information
technology, consumer and recreational products, industrial, medical and health, and many others. They are dedicated
to the principles of responsible care, including care for the health and safety of their customers, employees, and
neighbors, as well as the environment overall.
Their global reach, extensive product portfolio, and engineering and science capabilities enable them to work with
their customers at any stage of the process—be it an early concept or in the full production stage—anywhere in the
world. Ticona’s goal is simple: To meet the customer’s design and engineering challenges and exceed the customer’s
expectations of technical expertise and support.
For more information, visit Ticona’s website (www.ticona.com) and Milwaukee SPE (www.milwaukeespe.org).
These two fantastic organizations are committed to maintaining their leadership position in the plastics industry. A
long term relationship is vital to our success.
Fall 2008
Page 19
SPE Injection Molding Division
IMD Best Student Paper
Investigation of Comparative Stress Distributions in
Thermoforming Versus Injection Molding
Thomas W. Shoaf, Department of Industrial Studies
University of Wisconsin-Platteville, Platteville, WI 53818
Experimental Procedure
The comparison of stress distributions has been
investigated in thermoformed and injection molded parts
of a similar design. Injection molding is traditionally
preferred for automotive applications because of its ability
to create parts with minimal internal stress. However, in
recent years because of potential cost reductions,
thermoformed parts are often being substituted. Matrox
Inspector has been used to evaluate internal stress created
by both processes. Results show a difference in the
comparative stress distributions of similar parts that is
dependent on location.
In this study, two injection molded parts with different
designs were prepared; the first part being a clear
Plexiglas faceplate and the second being a common, clear
plastic cup. Using the injection molded parts as a
template, two male molds were produced in order to be
able to form a nearly identical thermoformed part.
Clear sheets of PET (polyethylene terephthalate)
were heated in a thermoformer at 550 degrees Fahrenheit
for 19 seconds then vacuum formed around the molds
for 14 seconds. The subsequent thermoformed parts were
then hand cut from their sheets.
Several of each injection molded and thermoformed
parts were then separately subjected to a polarized light
and viewed through a polarizing film. This caused bright
bands of colors, created by the bending of light, to form
as shown in Fig 1. These bands of color indicate areas
of stress in the part. A Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ5 was
then used to take photographs of the areas which were
to be analyzed.
Each of the injection molded and comparative
thermoformed parts had an area designated for analysis.
For the face plates the area for analysis was the flat
face area away from the injection site, otherwise known
as the gate. The analysis area on the plastic cups was
on the bottom of the cup at the injection site.
To quantify the stresses in the areas of analysis, the
photographs were loaded into Matrox Inspector; a
computer program designed for photographic analysis
which, hereafter, will be referred to as photographic
analysis software (PAS). A blob analysis, with threshold
at 140, was then performed to indicate areas of stress in
the plastic, as shown in fig. 4. The results from the blob
analysis where then recorded and averaged.
A product’s strengths and weaknesses are often
dependent on how it is processed. Because of its ability
to produce a nearly stress free part, the preferred
technique for processing plastics for use in automobiles
has been injection molding. Whenever the design
parameters of a product allow, thermoforming is being
considered as a viable processing alternative. This can
potentially reduce the cost and processing times of
production. Because of these savings many
manufacturers have switched from injection molded to
thermoformed parts.
The differences between the thermoforming
technique and injection molding technique can create
different stress distributions in identical parts that are
inherent to each individual process. Research has shown
that these stresses are the result of changes in the
equilibrium position of atoms and the distortion of valence
angles in the molecular chains as well as from changes
in the distances between segments in the molecules [1].
High levels of stress in a plastic have the potential to
adversely affect a final product. This can manifest itself
in the form of reduced optical characteristics, post
processing warpage, and premature, or unexpected,
failure of a part [3]. These stresses can also leave a
plastic open to chemical attack, reducing the lifespan of
a part. It is because of this that the focus of this study is
the comparative stress distributions created by the
injection molding technique versus those of the
thermoforming technique.
Fall 2008
Page 20
Results and Discussion
A PAS blob analysis was used to quantitate the areas
of stress in the test areas. A blob analysis works by
segmenting objects in an image from a background, as
well as from each other, using a variety of threshold
operations. The PAS then counts and labels the
segmented objects. For each test area the threshold was
set to count only the highest concentrations of colored
SPE Injection Molding Division
IMD Best Student Paper
bands produced by the polarizing film; effectively
indicating and counting the areas of stress.
Analysis of the injection molded and thermoformed
faceplates revealed 16 and 184 average areas of stress
respectively, as shown in Fig 2. The stress in the injection
molded part can be explained by the molding conditions.
If the part cools too quickly from the melt, frozen-in
stresses may be quite high due to differential shrinkage
[2]. Even so, most of the plastic is able to relax during
cooling, relieving the majority of the internal stress. This,
however, is not the case for the high levels of stress in
the thermoformed parts, which are a result of the heating
and stretching inherent to the thermoforming process.
When running a blob analysis on the injection molded
and thermoformed cups the PAS respectively indicated
87 and 78 average areas of stress as shown in Fig 3.
The high level of stress in the injection molded cup is
due to the fact the area of analysis on the cup was near
the plastic injection location. Flow-induced stresses arise
from the presence of the shear and normal stresses
during the filling and packing of the polymer in the mold
cavity [4]. During the cooling phase, some of these
stresses are frozen in the final product due to incomplete
relaxation. This gives the area of injection in the injection
molded part a similar stress distribution to the
thermoformed part.
Comparison of the different stress distributions due
to processing in relation to the analysis areas show less
stress in the injection molded parts away from the
injection area. However, in the thermoformed parts
stress distribution was high in both analysis areas.
then injection molding is the best choice of processing.
However, for this technique to produce the best part an
investment needs to be made in the research and
development of the mold to prevent stress form forming
during processing. When the design of a mold allows for its
use and the internal stress in the part is not a concern then
thermoforming is an often cheaper, viable option.
1. G. Menges, A. Dierkes, L. Schmidt, and E. Winkel,
SPEANTEC Tech Paper, 300 (1980).
K. C. COLE, Journal of Injection Molding
Technology (USA), 2, 59 (1998).
K. C. COLE, Journal of Injection Molding
Technology (USA), 2, 78 (1998).
4. J. M. Hoffman, A. Sjong, SPE-ANTEC Tech. Papers,
1409 (2006).
When comparing the stress distributions of injection
molded versus thermoformed parts, a number of patterns
start to emerge. First the injection molded parts in general
have a lower level of internal stress in comparison to
the thermoformed parts. Second, stress in the injection
molded parts is concentrated around the gate and
dissipates as a function of distance, while the
thermoformed parts tend to have similar levels of stress
The internal stress level in an injection molded part
can be influenced by the injection process itself or by
rapid cooling after the initial injection. These can lead to
the creation of an injection molded part that has a stress
level comparable to that of a thermoformed part. For
this reason it is important to consider the application of
the part to be produced before making a choice of
technique to process it.
If a part needs a relatively low level of internal stress
Fall 2008
Page 21
Figure 1. Image of the bright bands of colors.
Figure 2. PAS indicated average number of stress
areas in injection molded faceplates at 16 and 184
for the thermoformed faceplates.
SPE Injection Molding Division
IMD Best Student Paper
Figure 3. PAS indicated average number of stress areas in injection molded cup at 87
and 78 for thermoformed cup.
Featured Product
SPE and SpecialChem are offering a special 20% discount on a subscription to the Learning-on-Demand
library of videos, good through November 30th. Learning-on-Demand, a new service SPE has developed in
collaboration with SpecialChem, offers online access to talks by experts on specific technical topics, including
most of our e-Live webinars. At a sale price of $550 (€ 399) for one year, you’ll receive unlimited access to more
than 150 recorded presentations, with new videos added weekly. Go to www.omnexus.com/lod and benefit
from the special rebate for SPE members. Use the code SPEXT4 when registering. Remember, this offer ends
November 30th.
The Learning-on-Demand Team
[email protected]
Fall 2008
Page 22
SPE Injection Molding Division
Feature Article
Injection Moulding Process Benefits Both Process and Moulded Part
by André Lück, Demag Plastics Group
Injection compression moulding (ICM) and its advantages for machine selection, process design, and part properties have long
been known. Many injection moulding processes are currently gaining important benefits when combined with injection
compression moulding. Whether compression is applied sequentially or in parallel with injection, with ICM control for injection
moulding machines, the possibilities are endless.
Injection compression moulding,
sometimes also called injection stamping
moulding, provides many qualitative
advantages for injection moulding apart
from reduced material shearing and less
orientation. It also permits reductions in
injection pressure, clamping force, and
cycle time. In addition, there tends to be
an improved holding pressure effect,
which minimises sink marks and warpage.
The number of ICM applications is
increasing—for IMD-decorated parts,
mechanically stable plastic elements in
automobiles, or exceptionally thin-walled
packaging articles, for optical and foamed
parts, as well as for thin parts with a finely
textured surface, or for decorative backing
The advantages of ICM—ranked in
decreasing order of importance—can be
categorised as follows.
1. In the ICM process, shrinkage is
compensated not only via the fluid
centre but by compression of the
melt as the mould closes. There are
two advantages: the action of the
holding pressure is on a flat surface
and uniform, and overpacking of the
cavity is possible earlier during
injection. By reducing holding time,
this cuts cycle times, removes sink
marks at points of material accumulation or at the end of the flow path,
and diminishes clamping force
2. Reduced molecular orientation
during injection into an extended
cavity has a positive effect on
warpage and provides better longtime dimensional accuracy.
3. Improved venting to the mould
enables critical parts to be easier
filled which avoids surface flaws
and tends to result in fast injection.
Fall 2008
Phases of injection compression moulding.
Injection compression moulds call for special engineering design.
Flat-face effect of the hold pressure during injection compression
moulding is advantageous.
Page 23
SPE Injection Molding Division
Feature Article
4. Backing injection reduces stresses
in mats or foils to be decorated and
ultimately, enhances the freedom on
using designs and decors.
5. Material shear in injection
compression is less so that fibre
degradation in the case of long fibre
thermoplastics (LFTs) is reduced
and mechanical part properties are
The possible advantages are counterbalanced, however, by the extra costs for
the machine and mould as well as
restrictions in respect of part geometry:
The IM machine requires an
additional ICM controller, the extra
cost, by the way, is often
The mould must be physically
adapted to ICM in order to prevent
the melt from penetrating into the
parting line. There are a number of
technical solutions to address this
Undercuts or penetrations across
the compression direction are
Parts that are designed with
considerable depth in the injection
direction are very difficult to mould
by the ICM process.
Basically, the ICM processes are
always alike and easy to understand since
what they add to the injection moulding is
only an additional stroke of the clamping
1. Close mould down to the compression gap,
Fall 2008
Table 1: Advantages and disadvantages of different mould concepts for
injection compression moulding.
In processing LFTs, Injection compression moulding makes for
favourable fibre orientation.
Applied for optical parts, ICM reduces double refraction.
Page 24
SPE Injection Molding Division
Feature Article
2. Inject and fill cavity 80 to 95%
(equivalent to 100% or more of the
ultimate volume),
3. Sequential or simultaneous compression by clamping the mould, and
4. Apply hold pressure, cool, open
mould, and eject part.
Compression is effected either by the
closing movement of the mould only or by
the movement of an individual mould
element that is activated by means of a
hydraulic core pull function (“core
compression”). Besides the basic
functions, it is possible in ICM to use a
number of additional options, for instance,
pre-compression and intermediate
opening. Pre-compression serves for the
forming of materials to be decorated.
Intermediate opening may be necessary
where the mould is initially closed
somewhat more than necessary for ICM
in order to prevent jetting and ensure
laminar flow during injection. Intermediate
opening may also be helpful in foaming if
it is desired to permit initial distension to
the melt.
ICM controllers come at two levels
of sophistication: (1) sequential ICM
control with the process phases taking
place in succession, and (2) simultaneous
ICM control with the process occurring
in parallel with injection as well as precompression and intermediate opening.
The options are summarised on
Demag screen pages 9 (“compression
control”) and 8 (“pre-compression/
intermediate opening”) for the control of
injection compression. Here, ICM control
is fully integrated in the “flexible machine
operation.” It is an add-on feature that can
be deactivated to serve as a standard IM
What is often underestimated is the
savings potential on cycle time. Injection
into an extended cavity and parallel
compression will, as a rule, shorten cycle
time by anything from a few tenths of a
second to more than a second. The rest
of the cycle is identical in the case of
sequential and parallel compression with
Fall 2008
In the in-mould decoration process, ICM counteracts creasing.
In decorative backing injection, ICM reduces stresses in the material to
be decorated.
Table 2: Advantages of ICM for various applications.
Page 25
SPE Injection Molding Division
Feature Article
Sponsorship Opportunities
the press-moulding by means of ICM offering
potential to reduce holding pressure time. Here again,
time savings are possible of a few tenths of a second
or up to several seconds—depending on the type of
part and material.
Recently, there have been distinct improvements
in mould designs. The trend is for the classical vertical
flash face to be replaced by female mould/male plug
concepts or by designs with guided intermediate
plates. In some cases, male plug and core compression variants have established themselves. An
overview of the pros and cons of the three mould
variants is provided in Table 1.
Injection compression by means of the clamping
unit of IM machines offers the advantage of a
substantially higher force reservoir compared to
designs with a male plug fitting into a female mould.
In contrast to hydraulic two-platen machines, toggle
clamping units apply the force uniformly and centrally
to the mould with a distinctly sufficient compression
force—contrary to a widely held prejudice.
Especially when filling asymmetrically arranged
cavities or cavities with long flow distances, the toggle
is advantageous. Thanks to the special kinematics
of the toggle, mould movements can be duplicated
and guided with a very high degree of accuracy near
the locking range and, consequently, for extremely
small compression gaps.
Typical examples
In many currently important applications—such
as IMD components, mechanically stressed LFT
parts, thin-walled packaging articles, optical parts,
parts made by decorative backing injection, finely
textured surfaces and foamed moulded parts—an
ICM function will provide technical or economical
benefits (Table 2).
It is a good plan to decide already at the design
stage of the mould whether an ICM function will be
helpful for technical, economical or qualitative
reasons. It is also important to configure the machine
with the necessary ICM functions and to ensure the
ICM controller is logically organised and easy to
About the Author: André Lück, Dipl.-Ing. (FH)
for Plastic Engineering, is a Process Development
Engineer in the Research and Process Technology
Center of the injection moulding machine
manufacturer Demag Plastics Group in Schwaig,
Germany. Contact: [email protected]
Fall 2008
Page 26
Become A Sponsor Today
The newsletter for the Injection Molding Division
of SPE is issued three times a year to more than
5000 members worldwide. This readership is
composed of individuals just like YOU who are
involved in all aspects of injection molding, from
product design and engineering through processing
and product quality. These editions are made
possible through the generous support of the
sponsors shown in this newsletter. An index to our
sponsors, with website addresses, can be found on
the last page of every issue.
Three issues/year
1 page
1/2 page
1/3 page
1/4 page
1/10 page
AD SIZE (W X H in inches)
1/10 page:
1/4 page std:
1/4 page horiz.:
1/3 page square:
1/3 page vertical:
1/2 page horiz.:
1/2 page isl.:
Full page:
business card
3-3/8 by 4-7/8
4-3/4 by 3-1/4
4-3/4 by 4-3/4
2-1/4 by 10
7 by 4-7/8
4-3/4 by 7
7 by 10
No bleeds permitted on any ad.
Spring Issue:
February 20
Summer Issue:
June 20
Fall Issue:
October 20
For information on sponsorship of future
issues please contact our publisher:
Chris Lacey
[email protected]
SPE Injection Molding Division
Member Profile
Student Activities Report
Student Activities Report
By Walter S. Smith
The Injection Molding Division (IMD) offers a $3000 scholarship that is made annually to a graduate or
undergraduate student. Applicants must have experience in the injection molding industry, such as courses taken,
research conducted, or jobs held. The scholarship will be awarded through the SPE foundation.
The IMD continues to sponsor the Injection Molding Reception at ANTEC. Many students attend this event.
This is a great opportunity for students to network and meet professionals in their chosen career field. Furthermore,
the IMD contributes $1000 to the Student Author Travel Fund which aids students in their travel to the various
ANTEC cities.
The SPE Foundation 2008 Scholarship brochure/application is available for interested students who will be
attending college during the 2008–2009 school year. General foundation scholarships range up to $4000/year.
Specific scholarships requiring specific knowledge or background can range up to $7000/year.
SPE offers membership to over 120 student chapters. Learn, network, and educate yourself with the help of
SPE. Get involved in an existing SPE chapter or start your own! For more information on what it takes to start a
student chapter, or to find out what SPE can do for your plastics program, contact Tricia McKnight at
[email protected]
I strongly recommend that all students get involved. I promise that it will be worth your time and effort.
Fall 2008
Page 27
SPE Injection Molding Division
Molding Corner
AGA-PGT, Inc. – A World Class Molder and Mold Maker of Plastic Gears
by Mal V. Murthy, Ecogenus Group LLC
A Bit Of History
In 1944, Helmar Anderson, Edward Bertsche, and
Clarence Anderson formed the ABA Tool & Die
Company in Manchester, CT, as a metal component
machine shop dedicated to the supply of precision parts
to the aircraft industry, primarily Pratt & Whitney of
nearby East Hartford, CT. The company performed
well and in the early 1950’s, it evolved into a
manufacturer of injection molds for the new and
burgeoning plastics industry. Circa 1956, Donald
Anderson, Helmar’s son, assumed the presidency of
the company and brought in his brother Bill, as accountant and buyer, and his brother Earl, as shop floor
manager and maintenance director.
As the plastics industry grew and changed, ABA
Tool & Die moved along with it. In 1961, ABA Tool &
Die began to manufacture injection molds specifically
for the production of plastic gears. Remarkably, many
of those gears are still hard at work today. Thus began
the ascent of what was once a tool and die machine
shop into one of the world’s pioneers and world class
manufacturers of plastic gears and plastic gear injection
In what was the first publication devoted exclusively
to the design of plastic gears (there were many
publications regarding metal gears), William McKinley
and Samuel Pierson collaborated to publish “The ABA
Plastics Gearing Design Manual” in 1967.
There are many stories of injection mold makers
being asked by their customers to “qualify” their molds
by running them on in-house injection molding machines,
and ABA was no exception. As you might imagine,
production injection molding was not far behind, and in
1969, ABA Tool & Die started the Plastics Gearing
Technology (PGT) division. It was 23 years later that
the ABA mold making division officially merged with
the PGT molding division to form ABA-PGT, Inc., an
Fall 2008
Page 28
employee stock ownership (ESOP) company dedicated
to the manufacture of plastic gears and plastic gear
injection molds.
The New Millennium
The newly merged entities enjoyed the fruits of a
plastics industry growing by leaps and bounds, as plastics
cut into many of the previously sacred domains of cut
metal gears. Boasting lower costs, reduced weight, and
less noise, plastics were becoming a gear designers
panacea for correcting problems posed by metal.
But ABA-PGT wasn’t about to stand still and simply
grow as the industry grew. It was, and remains, a
technology-driven enterprise. The company pioneered
another first: the “lights out” manufacturing of plastic
gears in 1996 at a satellite plant in Vernon, CT.
The success of the company presented space
challenges, as their facility at 1395 Tolland Turnpike—
a rather typical old New England mill—became
cramped. With help from the state of Connecticut, ABAPGT built a state-of-the-art molding and mold making
facility in a new industrial park in Manchester, CT: a
68,000 square foot building that now holds 40 injection
molding machines and a 30-man tool room.
SPE Injection Molding Division
Molding Corner
“Lights Out” facility in Vernon, Connecticut
Not An Injection Molder of Gears, But A Gear
What’s the difference between an injection molder
that occasionally molds gears and a gear molder that
exclusively molds gears? This: Plastic gear quality is
determined by measurements of concentricity,
roundness, involute profile, tooth spacing errors, axial
hourglass or taper, helix angle (for helical gears), and
size, arc tooth thickness, and outside and root diameters.
A plastic gear molder has invested in special
measurement equipment/software and has trained
personnel to provide assurance that each lot of parts is
shrinkage and spark gap, thus producing a moldingquality finish and avoiding the distortion of postprocessing. Add 60 years of expertise across a full staff
of tool designers and toolmakers, and you have a
winning combination.
10 Gear Drive, Manchester, CT 06042
Website: www.abapgt.com
Email: [email protected]
Phone: (860) 649-4591
FAX: (860) 643-7619
It’s The Tool That Makes The Part
ABA-PGT designs the gear molds that it makes
and then manufactures that mold to the highest standards
of quality. Alloy steel components hardened to Rockwell
“C” 50-62 result in durability that enables the company
to offer a one million cycle service commitment—the
best in the industry. In-house manufactured master-gear
quality electrodes properly compensate for mold
Fall 2008
Page 29
SPE Injection Molding Division
On The Road
SPE Milwaukee MiniTec: October 21, 2008
Over 60 people attended the SPE MiniTec in Milwaukee, entitled “Emerging Technologies and Materials:
Nanotechnology and Biopolymers,” on Tuesday, October 21st, in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The event was coorganized and co-hosted by Vic Baez, president of SPE Milwaukee, and Lih-Sheng (Tom) Turng, chair of the
SPE Injection Molding Division. Sponsors included Nanocor, Dealey’s Mold Engineering, and Sabic Innovative
Plastics. Speakers came from both academia and industry, including such prominent names as Tom Hotaling of
Nanocor, Maureen Reitman of Exponent Failure Analysis Associates, John Baldus of the Wisconsin Office of
Energy Independence, Sam Dahman of RTP Company, Ned Bryant of RTP Company, Krishna Pillai of UWMilwaukee, Tim Osswald of UW-Madison, Bill Hickey of Phillips Plastics Corp., Craig Clemons of the US
Forest Products Laboratory, Adam Kramschuster of UW-Stout, Sarah Gong of UW-Milwaukee, and LihSheng (Tom) Turng of UW-Madison. The presentations were followed by a networking reception partially
sponsored by Leanne Burton of Great Lakes Calcium.
Milwaukee co-organizers, Prof. Lih-Sheng (Tom)
Turng of the SPE IMD, and Mr. Vic Baez of the SPE
Milwaukee section, welcome the attendees.
MiniTec speakers (from left): Prof. Adam
Kramschuster, Dr. Maureen Reitman, Prof. Sarah
Gong, and Prof. Lih-Sheng (Tom) Turng.
MiniTec attendees browsed the table-top exhibit.
Over 60 people attended the MiniTec.
Fall 2008
Page 30
SPE Injection Molding Division
Feature Article
SPE’s New Website
By Susan Oderwald
Initial Release
I am pleased to announce that we have launched a
new SPE website. This marks an important upgrade to
our online presence around the globe. As of now, the
new site includes a series of “under the hood” changes
that will allow it to function more efficiently and better
support SPE’s many transactions that now take place
It also includes a completely new look, feel, and
architecture. This update was sorely needed to allow
members to better search and navigate, and to allow
SPE to better promote the full range of Society activities
and events—including events produced independently
by SPE groups.
As you explore this new site, keep in mind that the
architecture and layout were engineered by a
professional web-development firm with the average
SPE member or prospect in mind. The site design was
based on composite profiles of SPE members and nonmembers, from both our 2007 member-survey results
and outside research on how technical people, and
engineers specifically, utilize the web as part of their
daily jobs. The site was NOT designed for people who
are already familiar with the Society. This strategy
protected us from making incorrect assumptions about
how others might use the site.
Important Upgrades
Most of the site contains the same information and
functionality of the prior site, but some important
upgrades have been added:
Fall 2008
A MUCH better calendar function that is
pervasive throughout the site, and a new
group forum function to replace the antiquated AskPIP service. This includes a discussion forum for each Division and Special
Interest Group.
Page 31
Much of the site is accessible to members
through a single login mechanism. An
important exception is the Online Technical
Library. At present, this service is provided by
a vendor with whom a unified login is costprohibitive. We are moving to a new provider
within the next six to eight months. The Online
Technical Library will be accessible under the
single login feature after the transition. We are
looking forward to that.
The new website was designed, from the ground
up, with “search engine optimization” in mind
(for details, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Search_engine_optimization). This is an important
advancement. We anticipate that the site will
gain more visibility and usage over time by folks
who had previously not been able to find us
online. Full search engine optimization will take
a month or so to complete (all the basics are
done, but a full auditing and testing phase can
take place only in a live environment). The new
site will provide a great deal more statistical
information about its usage, which will help us
monitor and change the site over time as
demand dictates.
Group Pages
One especially good thing about the site is that it
puts our technical groups—Sections, Divisions, Special
Interest Groups, and Student Chapters—front and
center (group pages are housed under the menu
“Technical Groups”). An important advancement to the
Division and Special Interest Groups pages is that online
discussion boards are posted to and accessible from
group pages, in addition to the pages where one can
reach the entire discussion board. If you visit the
discussion forum and post a question under
“Automotive,” a notification will also appear on the
SPE Injection Molding Division
Feature Article
Automotive Division’s webpage. This redundancy is important because different users of the site will come to
information in different ways. This site-wide functionality is programmed into our calendar feature as well. Events
that are posted to the calendar feature of an individual group’s webpage will be instantaneously populated on the
Society-wide calendar, located throughout the site.
We are, of course, very excited about this new functionality. However, these new features will be useful only if
individual groups make full use of them. I was a little disappointed to learn that of our 80-plus active Sections,
fewer than 25 utilized the old SPE site to promote their activities. I hope that this will change. Given the nature of
search engine optimization, it is very likely that outsiders to SPE seeking activities and information on plastics will
find them first through our global site, and only later discover local sites. It is therefore important that all groups,
Sections, Divisions, Special Interest Groups, and Student Chapters update the SPE site as much as possible (in
addition to independently-maintained sites).
Technical Challenges
As with all new launches of a site, there will undoubtedly be a few glitches to work through as various support
technologies are fully tested and tried in a live environment. The site was optimized for Internet Explorer 7.0 or
higher and Mozilla Firefox 2.0 or higher. If you use another browser, you may see occasional odd spacing.
The Leadership Services area and content for SPE group pages are being moved to the new site. These areas
can still be accessed through a legacy version of the previous website, at http://legacy.4spe.org/communities.
Membership Chairs and Treasurers should be on the lookout for a separate email with guidance on how to access
materials necessary for their operational area. Thank you for your patience as we work to bring these online.
Moving Forward
Your constructive feedback is always welcome, but I don’t want to overwhelm my staff at this particular
moment. If you could please jot down ideas and comments and forward them to us over the next few months, we
will work through them all. If you see glaring errors (broken links, typos, incorrect information on an event, etc.)
please forward those immediately to [email protected], and I will distribute them to the appropriate folks. To
assist us in this type of troubleshooting, please copy and paste the link (string at the top of your browser that
specifies the exact page), so we can locate the problem.
Moving all of our information over to this new system, wireframe, and design was a huge undertaking by our
technical staff here at headquarters. I want to thank and applaud everyone for their efforts, with the full understanding
that this is just the beginning. A number of new functions and activities are scheduled to be added to the site over the
next six to twelve months. As you all know, a website is never finished.
As we move into the next phase of website enhancements, we will turn our attention to developing an extranet
to facilitate the operational aspects of administering Society activities, including more online tools for SPE groups
(document storage, newsletter forms and templates, friendlier access to data downloads, etc.). We look forward
to bringing you these additional features in the near future.
Fall 2008
Page 32
SPE Injection Molding Division
SPE & Plastics Industry Event Calendar
November 2008
Blow Molding - Concept to Customer
November 17–18, 2008; Toronto, Ontario Canada
Plastic Parts Failure Analysis and Product Liability
November 5–6, 2008; Charlotte, North Carolina USA
Die Design Principles for Extrusion of Polymers
November 5–6, 2008; Charlotte, North Carolina USA
Fundamentals of Plastic Materials & Processes
November 19, 2008; Toronto, Ontario Canada
Scientific Processing for Injection Molding
November 19, 2008; Toronto, Ontario Canada
Mold Design & Mold Building Fundamentals
November 5–6, 2008; Detroit, Michigan USA
December 2008
Injection Molding: Advanced Concepts & Analyses
November 5–7, 2008; Charlotte, North Carolina USA
Euromold Exhibition
December 3–6, 2008; Frankfurt, Germany
Snap-Fits, Press-Fits & Welding of Plastics
November 7, 2008; Detroit, Michigan USA
Modern Toolmaking Conference
December 4, 2008; Frankfurt, Germany
Highlights of Thermoplastic Formulation &
November 10, 2008; College Park, Georgia USA
February 2009
Expo Plasticos 2009
February 3–5, 2009;
Cintermex, Monterrey, Nuevo Leon, Mexico
Blown Film Technology & Troubleshooting
November 10, 2008; College Park, Georgia USA
Crystallization & Mechanical Behavior of Polymers
November 10–11, 2008; College Park, Georgia USA
Twin-Screw Extrusion Technology
November 10–11, 2008; College Park, Georgia USA
SPE 2008 New Technology Symposium
November 11–12, 2008; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania USA
SPE International Polyolefins Conference 2009
February 22–25, 2009; Houston, Texas USA
GPEC® 2009
February 25–27, 2009; Orlando, Florida USA
March 2009
SPE Polymer Nanocomposites Conference
March 2–4, 2009; Bethlehem, Pennsylvania USA
Practical Applications for Melt Rheology
in Polymer Processing
November 11–12, 2008; College Park, Georgia USA
SPE Thermoset Conference
March 4–5, 2009; New Orleans, Louisiana USA
Purchasing & Quoting of Plastics Parts
November 12–13, 2008; College Park, Georgia USA
The Failure Analysis & Prevention SIG’s Virtual Conf.
March 5–6, 2009; On-line via SPE E-Learning
Thermoplastic Elastomers
November 13, 2008; College Park, Georgia USA
SPE 30th Industrial Thermoforming
Symposium & Workshop
March 8–13, 2009; Dallas, Texas USA
Profile Extrusion Design and Advanced Processing
November 13–14, 2008; College Park, Georgia USA
Fundamentals of Patent Law for Plastics Professionals
November 14, 2008; College Park, Georgia USA
6th European Additives & Colors Conference
March 11–12, 2009; Antwerp, Belgium
Plast ‘09
March 24–28, 2009; Milan, Italy
Principles of Polymer Blending & Alloying
November 17, 2008; Toronto, Ontario Canada
June 2009
Fundamentals of Extrusion
November 17–18, 2008; Toronto, Ontario Canada
ANTEC™ 2009
June 22–24, 2009; Chicago, Illinois USA
Fall 2008
Page 33
SPE Injection Molding Division
SPE & Plastics Industry Event Calendar
An SPE e-Live® Webinar is a simple and easy way to view a live presentation from the comfort of your home. You
can also participate in an SPE webinar along with your colleagues in an office or conference room as well. All you
need is a direct or dial-up Internet connection and a separate phone line to access the teleconference portion of the
presentation. There will be a touchtone polling and question and answer period at the conclusion of the event.
Presentations are recorded by the Society of Plastics Engineers for future distribution.Webinars are usually one
hour in length (typically 11am to12pm EST). The cost is $99 ($150 for non-members).
Understanding Bioplastics and Property
Modification With Additives
November 5, 2008
Failure Analysis of Plastic and Rubber Materials
- Part 1
January 8, 2009
Statistical Process Control
November 6, 2008
Failure Analysis of Plastic and Rubber Materials
- Part 2
January 15, 2009
Developing International Standards
With ASTM Committee D20
November 13, 2008
Failure Analysis of Plastic and Rubber Materials
- Part 3
January 22, 2009
Film & Textile Insert Injection Moldings:
Applications and Challenges
November 19, 2008
Failure Analysis of Plastic and Rubber Materials
- Part 4
January 29, 2009
Engineering Design with Polymers and
Composites - Part 1
December 3, 2008
Closed-Loop Process-Control Systems
for Injection Molding Based Upon
Melt-Front Detection
February 4, 2009
Engineering Design with Polymers and
Composites - Part 2
December 4, 2008
Container Molding: Never-Ending Challenges
February 11, 2009
Simulation-Driven Product Design
in Plastic Packaging
February 19, 2009
Utilizing FTIR, DSC, TGA and Ash
to Identify Polymer Types
December 10, 2008
Tutorial on Carbon and Environmental Footprint
of Bioplastics Using Biocarbon Content and
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)
December 11, 2008
Basic Rubber Technology
December 17, 2008
Plastics Recycling:
Processes, Opportunities, and Issues
December 18, 2008
The Failure Analysis & Prevention SIG’s
Virtual Conference
March 5–6, 2009
Fast-Scan DSC
March 11, 2009
Closed Loop Control in Laser Welding
of Plastic Components
March 25, 2009
DMA - An Introduction and Overview
April 15, 2009
Fall 2008
Page 34
SPE Injection Molding Division
Board of Director Meeting Minutes
Board of Director’s Meeting - October 20, 2008 - Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Technical Dir:
Tom Turng
Dave Karpinski
Jack Dispenza
Peter Grelle
Jim Wenskus / Dave Karpinski
Walt Smith
Chairman, Tom Turng:
· Meeting called to order at 1:00 pm Central
· Roll call taken.
Milwaukee MiniTec, Jack Hill:
Discussed Milwaukee MiniTec details.
SPE Presentation, Tricia McKnight:
· Talked about recent SPE activities, financial
situation and present assets of SPE, new
website, ANTEC 2009, EUROTEC Papers,
and other SPE plans for 2009.
Secretary, Walter Smith:
· Review minutes of May 4, 2008 meeting.
Motion to accept May 4th minutes made by
Jack Dispenza and seconded by Dave
Karpinski. Motion passed by Board.
· Board roster was circulated for updates and
Financial Report, Jim Wenskus/Dave Karpinski:
July 1, 2008 – September 30, 2008
· The IMD SPE rebate was $4,468.96.
· Newsletter sponsorships payments were
· Interest and dividends were $129.02 for a total
of $42,216.61 of available funds.
· Expenses were $531.51 for an ending balance
of $41,685.10.
Financial Audit, Larry Cosma/Walt Smith:
Skipped. (This information is in the IMD bylaws).
Councilor Report, Jack Dispenza:
The SPE Councilor Committee meeting took place
on Saturday, October 18, 2008.
· Color and Appearance and CAD are the two
divisions returning their rebate to SPE.
· Talk about giving our SPE rebate back to SPE
in the winter meeting in Orlando?
· Action item: Jack to submit complete
Councilor’s report to the IMD Board.
Fall 2008
Page 35
Chair Elect Report, Pinnacle Award, Dave
· There will be no newsletter awards given
· The 2008–2009 Section/Goals & Plans must
be submitted by November 15th.
· Council and Sections/Divisions Committee
Meetings: Jack Dispenza to verify attendance
to 2007–2008 Council and Sections/Divisions
Committee meetings.
· Membership: Nick Fountas to verify if the
IMD is in compliance. Prospective members
information to be sent to SPE.
· Technical Programming: Collect information
on recent Topcon activities with non-SPE
· Communication: IMD to improve SPE
headquarters database accuracy. IMD Board
Members to verify evidence of compliance.
· Membership: Develop and implement at least
one new service that offers member value.
IMB Board members to verify evidence of
Technical Director, Peter Grelle:
Technical Programs Update
· ANTEC 2009 paper review, December 13th,
Brad Johnson, Pete Grelle, Dave Karpinski,
and Jan Stevens at the Florida Mall Hotel in
Orlando, Florida. 104 Abstracts submitted.
Papers due November 14, 2008. The Matrix
meeting is scheduled for December 15, 2008.
· Penn State Erie Conference, Brad Johnson:
June 10–12, 2008, 100 attendees.
· Milwaukee IM MiniTec, Tom Turng: 60
· Coming TopCon and MiniTech scheduling
· Molding 2009 & SAMTMP 2008 sponsorship
· Drawing for attending Molding 2009: two IMD
board members or guests will win this
John Ratzliff (Our IMD SPE liaison):
Seeking IMD members to speak at trade shows in
China on various technical topics.
Fellows & HSM Committee, Larry Schmidt:
Larry requested candidate names for HSM and
SPE Injection Molding Division
BOD Minutes - Cont Fellow from existing board members. Nomination
forms for the following two IMD Board members
have been completed and forwarded to SPE
· Robert A. Beard – Honored Service
· Shia-Chung Chen – Fellow
BOD Terms & IMD History, Larry Schmidt:
· Action Item: Existing Board members to
send Larry an e-mail stating your dates of
service on the IMD Board. Larry also needs
best paper award history.
· Action Item: Walt Smith to send Larry
another disc containing IMD Board history
and IMD information.
European Update, Jan Stevens:
No update given at this time.
Membership Report, Nick Fountas:
· Below are the SPE/IMD membership
numbers as of May 2008:
– 4,932 IMD members, both primary
and secondary; down 6.2% from
year prior.
– 18,501 SPE primary members; down
5.9% from year prior.
· A new IMD brochure has been developed to
recruit new members to the IMD and will be
distributed at ANTEC, Topcons, MiniTecs,
and third party conferences.
· Action Item: Nick to submit updated
Membership report to the IMD Board.
Communications Committee Report,
Lee Filbert/Chris Lacey:
· Chris went over sponsors to the IMD
newsletter, both new and lapsed sponsors.
· Need more sponsors for the newsletter.
· Action item: Walt Smith needs to get Fall
IMD Board meeting minutes to Chris Lacey
by Monday 10/27/08 for inclusion in the Fall/
Winter newsletter.
· It was suggested that the IMD Board offer
a 10% discount upon IMD sponsorship
renewal for the newsletter.
Website Committee, Lee Filbert:
· Lee put forth pricing proposals for the
website construction. Three website
development bids were shown, including
Fall 2008
Nelix ($5250), Scott Watson ($3800), and Acera
Technologies ($999).
Raymond Mckee, Nick Fountas, and Pat Gorton
will serve on website committee with Lee.
Discussion about Education Committee and Chair
Candidate, Tom Turng:
· Pat Gorton will serve as committee chair for the
Education Committee.
· Susan Montgomery will serve on this committee.
Nominations Committee, Don Allen:
· Don Allen will be working with Tom Turng and
Larry Schmidt on the dates of service for board
Student Activities, Walt Smith:
· Action Item: Tom Turng to contact Leslie Kiel
concerning rooms for IMD board meeting and
Student Reception room at ANTEC 2009.
· IMD will sponsor the Injection Molding
Reception at ANTEC 2009 for $7500.
· IMD will contribute $1000 to the Student Author
Travel Fund.
· IMD will sponsor an annual $3000 scholarship to
a graduate or undergraduate student.
New Business, Tom Turng:
· New IMD Board members: Tom Turng
appointed three new members to the IMD
Board for the remainder of the term effective
October 20, 2008, up to ANTEC 2009.
· The new IMD Board members are Susan E.
Montgomery, Erik Foltz, and Adam
Action Item: Tom to talk to Mal Murthy about
being an emeritus member to the IMD Board.
Old Business, All IMD Members:
· Next IMD Board meeting will be on either
January 23, 2009, or February 6, 2009, in
Orlando, Florida.
· Tom went over action items from May 4, 2008
board meeting.
· Mike Uhrain can not be TPC in 2011 because of
prior commitments in Germany. The board needs
to find another volunteer for the 2011 TPC.
· Eric Foltz volunteered to help Nick Fountas on
the Membership Committee.
· Motion by Pete Grelle at 5:01 PM Central time
to adjourn meeting. Motion passed by board
Page 36
SPE Injection Molding Division
New Members
The IMD welcomes 73 new members from around the world.
Nicolae Abrudean
David Job
Mark Vliem
Steven Lubowinski
Tony Acuna
Renita J. Anderson
Mark G. Kurtzweg
Al W. Leidinger
Ralph Whitney
Clifton C. Willis
Robert M. Maier
Alex Mayes
David Arencon
Andrei Belooussov
Greg Letendre
Ed Mackessy
William Chi Wai Wong
John L. Anderson
Mason Myers
Andreas Nuess
Morton D Bohn IV
Dave Brimble
David W. Magnuson
Adrian Mines
David A Baglia
Caprice Black
Richard Oles
Steve Parker
Wayne T. Comeau
Rosendo Cordova
Ken Nelson
Al Norton
Yann Cally
Cary D Colton
Florian Petzold
Julio Rivera
Mike Ervin
Bill Patton
John Correia
Steve Cowen
Tom Scheck
Andreas Schreiber
Board of
Fleming Jr. Meeting MinAnil Pitta
John Gaidos
Ruben Gonzalez-Nunez,
Jack Pollitt
Andre Preissler Sr.
Ed Grabowski
Dustin Hahn
Larry Sletten
Mark W. Snyder
Keith Hague
Margaret Reeber
Won-gil Gil Ryim
Len Harvey
Sebastian Hessner
Kevin Stoneman
Corey Tracey
Jeff Hammond
Raleigh J. Harness
Dave W. Smith
Mark Smith
Alan Hickok
Fritz Klaiber
Richard Vaughan
Mike Vaughn
Mickael Havel
Mark Hawkins
Peter Thorpe
Robert W. Tymcio
Jeffrey P. LeFan
Alexander Willer
The IMD also welcomes 56 companies and organizations that have
recently expanded their membership in the Injection Molding Division.
A.C Dispensing Equipment Inc.
ACT Fastening Solutions
Greene, Tweed & Co.
Heubach GmbH
Qingdao Blue Ocean New High
Tech Co. Ltd.
Arkema Inc.
Armstrong Mold Corp.
HydroHoist Marine Group
Reckitt Benckiser
Rowa Group USA
BD Biosciences
Beaumont Technologies
Imerys Performance Minerals N.A.
Imtech Design Moldflow
SafetySyringes Inc.
SIGMA Plastic Services Inc.
Brett Martin Ltd.
Centre Catala Del Plastic
Infiltrator Systems Inc.
Sinostar Ltd.
Square D Co.
Compressor Products International
Institute of Plastics Processing
Tacony Manufacturing
Tec Products Inc.
Dickten Masch Plastics LLC
Lewis Pipe Co. Inc
LyondellBasell Industries
Tri-Craft Inc.
U. Auckland
Douglas Corp.
EcoWater Systems LLC
M Vliem & Associates LLC
Universidad De Guadalajara
Vanguard Search Group
Elster Amco Water
EM Lyon
Natech Plastics Inc
Vision Plastics Inc.
Wilsonart International
Eurotherm Inc.
Piper’s Croft
Plasti-Co Equipment Co.
Wittmann Inc.
Worldwide Dispensers
FiSA North America, Inc.
GAF Material Inc.
Progressive Components
PSG Plastic Service Group Inc.
Xaloy Inc.
Fall 2008
Page 37
SPE Injection Molding Division
Membership Application
Fall 2008
Page 38
SPE Injection Molding Division
Dear Readers,
I hope you’ve enjoyed the
fall edition of the SPE IMD
newsletter. This issue has a
“Featured Technology” column.
Would you like to showcase
one of your technologies or let
others know about a technology
that has made a difference in Chris Lacey
your life? If so, please send me Newsletter Publisher
an email for consideration in our 1513 University Ave.
Madison, WI 53523
next issue.
The success of the Ask the T: 608-263-5963
F: 608-265-2316
Expert columns continues to [email protected]
grow with the addition of John
Ralston of Beaumont Technologies, here to answer your CAE questions.
Do you have an idea for making this newletter
even better? Then what are you waiting for? Please
email me with your suggestions.
Last but not least, we invite you to take advantage
of our sponsorship opportunities. It’s a great way to
reach over 5000 individuals in the injection molding
industry! Don’t have an ad? With your images and text,
I can help design one for you (see the Dealey’s Mold
Engineering and Priamus ads as examples). Sponsorship
details can be found on page 26.
Fall 2008
Page 39
SPE Injection Molding Division