1

Co-injection Process
Technical Challenges and Solutions
2012
Moldex3D R11
European
Webinar
Series
2
Current position:
CoreTech System Technical Research Division
Education:
PhD in Polymer Science from the University of
Connecticut
Specialization:
Polymer rheology, processing, and properties,
polymer composite, biomedical materials,
degradable polymers, and plastics applications
in industrial design
Dr. Sun has researched parenteral drug packaging in Eli Lilly and Company. He has
also worked with Teleflex Medical to develop a fully absorbable bone graft composite.
He is now a senior research engineer supporting the development of advanced
injection molding CAE software and also in charge of material testing and measurement
in Coretech System company.
Shih-Po Sun, Ph.D.
3
Contents
> Part 1:
Introduction to co-injection molding
Product common defects and solutions
Product development through CAE
> Part 2:
Case study 1: Earphone hook
Meeting product spec how to resolve unwanted warpage
Case study 2: Car door panel
Prioritize gate location for ideal filling pattern
4
Multi-material injection
Also called multi-component injection molding (MCM)
Processes of combining different material qualities and
properties in one component.
PP
TPV PC
In-mold assembly Co-injection
PP
EVOH
5
Multi-material injection family
Multi-material processes
Multi-component
Bi-injection
Co-injection
(Sandwich)
Multi-shot
Rotating tool
Core back
Transfer
Over-molding
Insert
Lost core
6
Skin / core combinations
Handle, lever : Computer housing:
Soft feel skin / hard core Unfilled skin / core with conductive filler
Garden furniture: Yogurt pot:
Virgin skin / recycled core Pigmented skin / uncolored core
7
Stages
Step 1
Empty cavity
1
st
shot (skin): blue
2
nd
shot (core): yellow
Step 2
Skin injection
Step 3
Core injection
Step 4
Second skin
injection for
1-2-1 structure
8
Todays objective - aesthetics
Structural product: co-injection is preferred to
conventional structural foam or fiber reinforced plastics
because of its superior surface finish.
A solid skin combined with a structural foam core
provides the advantages such as low molded-in stress,
sink-free parts without the skin surface defects
Quality surface is obtained in fiber reinforced plastics
since the fiber-loaded material is restricted in the core of
the part.
9
Todays objective - property combination
Combined properties: one can achieve a combination of
properties not available in a single resin by combining
different materials.
For instance:
An elastomeric skin over a rigid core will provide a
structure with a soft touch.
A brittle material can be encased by a material of high
impact resistance or high ductility.
10
Sustainability
11
> Recycled core reduces costs
> Recycled core reuses waste
> Engineering core structure, e.g. fiber
foaming, enhances product strength or
performance
> Virgin skin provides quality aesthetic
finish for recycled or engineering core
> Elastomer skin improves surface touch
> No increase on cycle times comparing to
sequential or multi-component molding
Benefits of using co-injection molding
12
Important processing considerations
> Strength Material adhesion
> Skin / core distribution Flow characteristics
> Specification Shrinkage / Warpage
> Performance Material selection
Related processing conditions:
Material properties, injection rate, skin-core transition ratio,
skin/core temperature and packing pressure
13
Machine design - nozzle
14
Machine design hot runner
15
Machine design multiple gate
16
Process Co-Injection Bi-Injection Insert Molding Over Molding Multi-Shot
Interface
Controllability
Poor

Poor

Good

Good

Good

# of Nozzles 1 n 1 n n
# of Materials 2 2 2 2 2
Mold Complexity Low Low Low Medium High
Part
Complexity
Simple Very simple Medium High Very high
Use of
Preforms
No No Yes No No
Source: http://www.isr.umd.edu
Multi-Material Molding Process
Comparisons
interface depends on the laminar flow of materials
interface is controlled by the mold geometry
n the number of separate materials being used
17
How to turn single shot machine into a
co-injection one?
Source: Krauss Maffei
18
Co-injection machine design - Melt
Milacron
19
Co-injection machine design Mold
Meiki
Master Mold Plate US patent 6196822
20
Co-injection machine design - Screw
Spirex Twinshot
21
Source: Engel
Material compatibility
22
Material Properties
Viscosity f ( , T, P, )
Volume f (T, P)

&
Heat conductivity f (T)
Heat capacity f (T)
23
Relationship
between and u
or viscosity,
Thermal conductivity, k
Heat capacity, C
p
Temperature-pressure dependent volume, V(T, P)
Modulus, G
( ) 0 = +

t
Mass balance
Energy balance

&
: =

T k T
t
T
Cp u
Momentum balance
g p
Dt
D
+ =
u
CAE procedure
Thermoset conversion balance
0 = + + R j X
&
Density,
Conversion rate, R
Flow behavior
Cooling, warpage analysis
Equations to describe melt flow
24
Important questions
How does my change of design affect
the skin/core distribution?
What is my flow orientation for the
core layer? If the core is fiber filled.
Where is the area with high stress and
temperature?
How does the core layer affect overall
warpage?
25
Skin / core evolution
26
> Two materials can only be processed successfully by co-
injection molding if their processing properties match.
Previous studies have suggested that the core/skin
viscosity ratio should be between 0.5 and 5.
> Lower viscosity ratios would lead to breakthrough of
core material.
> Higher viscosity ratios would lead to poor mold filling,
finger like defects and a variable core thickness through
the part.
Gomes, 2011, Polym Eng. Sci.
Viscosity limitations of 2 materials
27
Effect of viscosity ratio
Yottha Srithep, 2008
viscous
28
H
i
g
h
e
r
L
o
w
e
r
2
n
d
s
h
o
t

v
i
s
c
o
s
i
t
y

c
o
m
p
a
r
e
d

t
o

1
s
t
s
h
o
t
Skin-core ratio (1
st
shot volume / total volume)
80% 70% 60%
A
B
Material: PC
Effect of viscosity ratio
29
Injection rate effect
Yottha Srithep, 2008
30
Injection rate effect
Skin injection speed constant
Core injection speed
31
Material break through
Source: C-Mold
32
Core filling ratio
V
core
/V
total
33
Material break through prediction
Two opposing forces: viscosity vs. filling ratio
Less viscous core requires higher skin filling ratio to prevent break through.
34
Controlled break out technique
Lattoflex, Winx300
IF 99 design award
35
Break through simulation
36
Cornering effect
> Uneven distribution, uneven thickness
Flow around corners must be considered in
design phase to prevent thin inside corners.
Use a generous radius.
Source: Gas-assist injection molding:
principles and applications
37
Flow
behavior
Part
design
Processing
condition
Material
selection
Mold
design
Design considerations
Quality
product
Material distribution vs. Design criteria?
38
Questions
If I want to
Which design change is possible?
39
Benefit of CAE
CAE is a must in predicting the spatial distribution of core and skin.
General knowledge is difficult to predict the simultaneous flow of two
materials.
Knowing the melt front evolution of both shots, CAE can:
Evaluate the flow front pattern to aid in part design and gate placement
Predict the extent of penetration of the core material and the skin
breakthrough point
Determine injection pressure and clamping force for proper molding
machine selection
Determine the best switch point from skin injection to core injection
40
Benefits of Moldex3D
Moldex3D can help users in all aspects of co-injection molding
process:
> For mold design, locate the optimum gate locations
> For cost reduction, evaluate the maximum core ratio without
causing break through.
> For structural analysis, provide skin thickness distribution.
> For quality control, pinpoint potential locations with high
temperature and stress.
> For spec requirement, precisely estimate shrinkage and
warpage concerning the interaction between skin and core
material.
41
Case Study 1: Earphone hook
> The hook connects to the phone and mic assembly.
> The hook design has a flexible skin to provide better feel of
touch in contact with the ear.
> The hook should have enough stiffness to withstand
deformation.
> The hook dimension should meet specification.
42
Original sequential design
PP
TPE
43
Using co-injection process
Benefit:
> The co-injection process provides ideal material
combination of soft skin / hard core to meet design
criteria.
Concern:
> Part and process design to reach desired mechanical
strength
> Warpage due to imbalanced core distribution
44
Melt front evolution
45
Skin ratio
90% 80%
50%
70%
Break through occurred!
46
Skin ratio
47
Cornering effect
Core travels toward
inside of the corner
48
Shrinkage, X-axis direction
48
10
49
Gate location design
50
70% skin filling ratio
51
Controlled break through
40% skin filling ratio
0.07 s
Break through occurred
52
53
Skin ratio
54
Shrinkage, X-axis direction
10
55
Moldex3D FEA workflow
Element properties
Structural simulation
software
Material parameters
Flow analysis
+
56
Structural analysis result
B.C.
Fixed location
around the joint
Load
500g of force applied at the end
57
Deformation results
58
Case study 2: door panel
> The size of the door panel requires multiple gate mold design.
> The core amount should be maximized without surfacing.
59
Using co-injection process
Benefit:
> Co-injection integrates rigid and flexible components into
a single molded structure with a single step.
> The core should be completely contained within the
flexible material.
Concern:
> Number and location of the gates to ensure balanced
melt flow and material distribution
> Warpage due to imbalanced core distribution
60
Information
> Dimension
> Dimension710476 mm
> Thickness : 7 mm
> Volume1660 c.c.
> Material
> Skin : TPO
> Core : PP
> Processing condition
> Time (total): 5 s
> Melt temperature: 260 C
> Mold temperature: 40 C
Hot Runner 12.0 8.0
mm
Gate Type : circular
Diameter8 mm
61
Single skin material filling
62
Skin /core material filling
63
Number of gates
5 gates, 60% skin ratio 6 gates, 60% skin ratio
64
Increasing skin ratio
6 gates, 70% skin ratio 6 gates, 80% skin ratio
65
Gate location modification
66
67
Gate contribution
68
Skin ratio
69
Clamping force
Skin in contact with the wall
70
Volumetric shrinkage
71
Warpage, Y-direction
72
Conclusions
> Co-injection process brings design versatility to newly
designed or existing products. While the transition to co-
injection process from already own equipment is not
difficult, optimizing part design and processing
conditions to achieve desired material distribution poses
challenges.
> CAE flow analysis is an indispensible tool providing
complete solution for managers, designers, and
engineers to fully control the outcome of their fiber
reinforced plastic product.
> Modules in Moldex3D work seamlessly together
providing invaluable information throughout the entire
design, manufacturing, and usage phases.
73
If you have questions, please type
into the chat box.
74
Contact Information
Dr. Sun
tobersun@moldex3d.com
Dannick
dannickteng@moldex3d.com
Vincent
vincenthung@moldex3d.com
75
Next Webinar
Topic
Latest Development in Long / Short Fiber Reinforced
Plastics Applications, Processing Techniques and
Simulation Technology
Goals
Lean how to estimate fiber orientations to gain strategic
benefits by adopting CAE incorporated design.
Have an overview on the design work flow from part geometry
all the way to dimension accuracy and mechanical properties.
Speed up your fiber product development with a clearer view
on most important design considerations and processing
controls.
Time
9:00AM UTC -13 January,2012