Engineering with Computers (2006) 21: 289295 DOI 10.

1007/s00366-006-0018-x

O R I GI N A L A R T IC L E

Geng Tie Li Dequn Zhou Huamin

Three-dimensional nite element method for the lling simulation of injection molding

Received: 28 December 2004 / Accepted: 26 January 2006 / Published online: 20 May 2006 Springer-Verlag London Limited 2006

Abstract With the development of molding techniques, molded parts have more complex and larger geometry with nonuniform thickness. In this case, the velocity and the variation of parameters in the gapwise direction are considerable and cannot be neglected. A three-dimensional (3D) simulation model can predict the lling process more accurately than a 2.5D model based on the HeleShaw approximation. This paper gives a mathematical model and numeric method based on 3D model to perform more accurate simulations of a fully ow. The model employs an equal-order velocitypressure interpolation method. The relation between velocity and pressure is obtained from the discretized momentum equations in order to derive the pressure equation. A 3D control volume scheme is used to track the ow front. During calculating the temperature eld, the inuence of convection items in three directions is considered. The software based on this 3D model can calculate the pressure eld, velocity eld and temperature eld in lling process. The validity of the model has been tested through the analysis of the ow in cavities. Keywords 3D Equal-order interpolation Injection molding Simulation

1 Introduction
During injection molding, the rheological response of polymer melts is generally non-Newtonian and nonisoG. Tie L. Dequn Z. Huamin State Key Laboratory of Mold & Die Technology, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei 430074, Peoples Republic of China G. Tie (&) Machine and Electric Engineering College, Henan University of Technology, 450052 Zhengzhou, Henan, Peoples Republic of China E-mail: gengtie2000@sina.com Tel.: +86-0371-67758626 Fax: +86-372-3932808

thermal with the position of the moving ow front [13]. Because of these inherent factors, it is dicult to analyze the lling process. Therefore, simplications are usually used. For example, in traditional middle-plane model and dual-domain model [4, 5], the HeleShaw approximation [6] is used. So both of these models are 2.5D models. In 2.5D model, the velocity and the variation of pressure in the gapwise direction are neglected except that the temperature is solved by FDM, and the lling of a mold cavity becomes a 2D problem in ow direction and a 1D problem in gapwise direction. As most of the injection molded parts have a sheet-like geometry in which the thickness is much smaller than the other dimensions of the part, these models have been generally successful in predicting the advancement of melt fronts, pressure elds, and temperature distribution. The interest in 3D simulation of injection molding has increased tremendously and some progress has been made [79] in the past few years. One reason is the processing of large and complex parts. With the development of molding techniques, more and more molded parts have thick or nonuniform thickness, such as those encountered in gas-assisted injection molding. In these cases, the velocity and the changes of parameters in the gapwise direction are considerable and cannot be neglected. On the other hand, the requirements on the performance of injection molded items have been ever increasing. Several situations occurring during mold lling which cannot be accurately predicted using the HeleShaw approximation need to taken into account nowadays, such as the uid behavior at the free surface (ow front), the uid behavior near and at the solid walls, the phenomenon occurring at merging of two or more uid streams (weldlines), and the kinematics in areas where shear and extensional deformations contribute signicantly to the stress eld (gates, ribs, etc.). A 3D simulation model should be able to generate complementary and more detailed information related to the ow characteristics and stress distributions in molded parts. This will be particularly important when dealing with multicomponent mold lling and with molding of ber-reinforced systems.

290

This paper presents a 3D nite element model to deal with the 3D ow of injection molding. In this model, the velocity in the gapwise direction is not neglected and the pressure also varies in this direction. An equal-order velocitypressure formulation method [1012] is employed, and the relation between velocity and pressure is obtained from the discretized momentum equations. A 3D control volume scheme is introduced to track the ow front. During calculating temperature eld, the inuence of convection items in three directions is considered in order to get more exact results and to apply to the wider range of parts. Finally, the validity of the model has been tested through the analysis of some cases.

g0 T ; P . ; _ 1 g0 c s 1n

_ where n, c; s* are non-Newtonian index, shear rate and material constant, respectively. Because there is no notable change in the scope of melt temperature during lling, Arrhenius model [13] for g0 is employed as following:   Tb expbP ; g0 T ; P B exp T where B, Tb, b are material constants.

2 Governing equations
The pressure of melt is not very high during lling the cavity, so the melt is considered incompressible. Inertia and gravitation are neglected as compared to the viscous force. With the above approximation, the governing equations, expressed in Cartesian coordinates, are as following: Momentum equations:    !  ! @ @u @ @v @u @ @w @u 2g g g @x @x @y @x @y @z @x @z @P 0  @x !    ! @ @v @u @ @v @ @w @v g 2g g @x @x @y @y @y @z @y @z : @P 0 @y  !  !   @ @w @u @ @v @w @ @w g g 2g @x @x @z @y @z @y @z @z @P 0 @z 1 Continuity equation: @u @v @w 0: @x @y @z Energy equation:     @T @T @T @T @ @T qCP u v w K qCP @t @x @y @z @x @x   ; @ @T @ @T 2 K K g_ c @y @y @z @z 3 where x, y, z are 3D coordinates and u, v, w are the velocity components in the x, y, z directions. P, T, q and g denote pressure, temperature, density and viscosity, respectively. Cross-viscosity model has been used for the simulations: 2

3 Finite element calculations for the pressure eld

3.1 Velocitypressure relation In a 3D model, since the change of the physical quantities are not neglected in the gapwise direction, the momentum equations are much more complex than those in a 2.5D model. It is impossible to obtain the velocitypressure relation by integrating the momentum equations in the gapwise direction, which is done in a 2.5D model. The momentum equations must be rst discretized, and then the relation between velocity and pressure is derived from it. In this paper, the momentum equations are discretized using Galerkins method with bilinear velocitypressure formulation. The element equations are assembled in the conventional manner to form the discretized global momentum equations and the velocity may be expressed as following: ui ~i Kiu u where ~i u ~i v ~ wi X
i6j

@P @P @P ~ vi ~i Kiv wi wi Kiw ; v @x @y @z ! Ax uj ij By vj ij Bx v j ij Ay u j ij
x Cij wj

=Ax ; ii ! =By ; ii !
Z =Cii ;

X
i6j

y Cij wj

X
i6j

z Cij wj

Az u j ij

Bz vj ij

the nodal pressure coecients are dened as: 0 1 Z Kiu @ Ni dV A=Ax ; ii 0 Kiv @ 0 Kiw @
V

Z
V

1 Ni dV A=By ; ii 1
z Ni dV A=Cii ;

Z
V

291

where Ax, Bx, Cx, Ay , By, Cy, Az , Bz , Cz represent global ij ij ij ij j ij ij ij ij velocity coecient matrices in the direction of x, y, z coordinate, respectively. Ku, Kv, Kw denote the nodal i i i pressure coecients in the direction of x, y, z coordinate, respectively. The nodal values for Ku, Kv, Kw are obi i i tained by assembling the element-by-element contributions in the conventional manner. Ni is element interpolation and i means global node number and j is, for a node, the amount of the nodes around it. 3.2 Pressure equation Substitution of the velocity expressions (4) into discretized continuity equation, which is discretized using Galerkin method, yields element equation for pressure:     Z @Ni @Nk @Ni @Nk Nj Kju Pk Nj Kjv Pk @x @x @y @y V  ! @Ni @Nk Nj Kjw Pk dV @z @z  Z  @Ni @Ni @Ni ~ Nj ~j Nj~j Nj wj dV : u v @x @y @z
V

velocity eld obtained by solving momentum equations does not satisfy continuity equation. The velocities are updated using the following relations: Z Z 1 @P 1 @P ui ~i x N dV vi ~i y dV u v N Aii @x Bii @y V V Z 1 @P ~ w i wi z N dV : Cii @z
V

3.5 The tracing of the ow fronts The ow of uid in the cavity is unsteady and the position of the ow fronts varies with time. Like in 2.5D model, in this paper, the control volume method is employed to trace the position of the ow fronts after the FAN (ow analysis network)[14]. But 3D control volume is a spacial volume and more complex than the 2D control volume. It is required that 3D control volumes of all nodes ll the part cavity without gap and hollow space. Two 3D control volumes are shown in Fig. 1.

4 Finite element calculations for the temperature eld

The temperature eld plays an important role during injection molding process. Because the viscosity of the polymer varies with its temperature, so the variation of the temperature of polymer will have important inuence to the injection molding process. Only after the temperature eld during lling has been calculated exactly, the simulations for packing and cooling are meaningful. In 2.5D model, though the variation of the temperature in the gapwise direction is solved by FDM, the model is based on the HeleShaw approximation, which supposes the injection-molded parts are thin. As shown in Fig. 2, in 2.5D model, the triangular elements are meshed in the gapwise direction by creating nite dierence grids, and the temperature in ow plane is represented by linear interpolation, and the temperatures in the gapwise direction are represented by FDM. In 2.5D models, the velocity in the gapwise direction is neglected, so only the thermal conduction item is considered in the gapwise direction. This paper gives a 3D

The element pressure equations are assembled in the conventional manner to form the global pressure equations. 3.3 Boundary conditions In the cavity wall, the no-slip boundary conditions are employed, e.g., u v w 0; ~ ~ w 0; u v ~ Kiu Kiv Kiw 0

on an inlet boundary, u v w given 3.4 Velocity update After the pressure eld has been obtained, the velocity values are updated using new pressure eld because the
Fig. 1 3D control volumes. a Control volume of an internal node and b a boundary node

Kiu Kiv Kiw 0:

292

Thermal convection item and viscous heat item are anisotropic and has to do with the direction of ow. To keep the numerical stability, the upwind method is employed to handle the convection item and viscous heat item, e.g., only the contributions of the upriver elements from the nodes are considered when the convection item and viscous heat item are calculated. In the above equations, the time T is discretized using a forward-dierence method:
n1 @Tj Tj Tjn ; @t Dt

Fig. 2 Illustrative nite dierence in the gapwise direction

where Dt denotes time step. The element temperature equations are assembled in the conventional manner to form the global temperature equations. The overall procedure for pressure and temperature calculations is relaxation iterative. Because the pressure, velocity and temperature inuence each other during the calculation, the temperature and pressure are coupled during the procedure.

model for calculating the temperature eld which considers the inuence of convection items on three dimensions and suitable for the wider range of parts and has more exact results compared with the 2.5D models. According to the energy equation (3), by the use of Galerkins method, the equation for the temperature eld can be expressed as following:   Z Z @T @T @T @T dV N qCp u v w N qCp @t @x @y @z V  V      ! @ @T @ @T @ @T K K K g_ 2 dV : c @x @x @y @y @z @z
Fig. 3 The test cavity. a The cavity dimension and b the meshed cavity

5 Results and discussion

The rst test cavity and dimensions are shown in Fig. 3a. The meshed 3D model of cavity is shown in Fig. 3b. The selected material is ABS780 from Kumbo. The parametric constants corresponding to the n,s*, B,Tb and b of the ve-constant cross-type viscosity model are 0.2638, 4.514 104 Pa, 3.13198043 107 Pa S, 1.12236 104 K, 0.000Pa 1. Injection temperature is 45C, mold temperature is 250C, injection ow rate is 44.82 cu cm/s. Fountain ow is a typical ow phenomenon during lling. It has to do with the uid near the center moving

Fig. 4 Comparison between predicted shapes of ow front based on present 3D model (a) and based on 2.5D model (b). a Shape of 3D ow front and b shape of 2.5D ow front

293 Table 1 Material properties Index 1 2 3 4 Material property Density (q) Specic heat (Cp) Thermal conductivity (K) Cross-type viscosity model N B Tb b s Unit kg/m3 J/kg K W/(m K) Reference value 968.6 1.70 103 0.140

Fig. 5 The example cavity

Pa s K 1/Pa Pa

0.3783 1.0527 103 9.3841 103 0 1.955 103

Fig. 6 The meshed cavity Fig. 7 The ow front at four dierent lling times. Time = 0.08, 0.36, 0.65 and 0.80 s

faster than the average across the thickness and upon catching up with the front, deecting to move toward the walls, so the shape of the ow front is round like the fountain. In 2.5D models, the convection eects in the fountain region cannot be represented and the details of the fountain region are also lost, as shown in Fig. 4b. In presented 3D model, this fountain ow phenomenon can also be simulated. The round shape of the ow fronts at three lling times is illustrated clearly in Fig. 4a. Another example is typical of an industrial application as shown in Fig. 5. The outline dimensions of the cavity are 63.3 43.4 24.2 mm3 with a thickness 4 mm. represents the location of entrance.

294 Fig. 8 Temperature eld on the plane Z = 13 in four lling times. Time = 0.08, 0.36, 0.64 and 0.82 s

The meshed cavity is as in Fig. 6. The injection temperature is 250C, mold temperature is 45C, injection time is 0.82 s. The selected material is PS ASAHIPS 408. The material properties and the parametric constants corresponding to the ve-constant cross-type viscosity model are specied in Table 1. Figure 7 shows the locations of ow fronts in four dierent lling times. A complex 3D ow eld develops in the cavity and a rounded free surface is clearly seen. It can be seen that the lling process of the melt in the interior of the cavity can be predicted in the 3D model, and it is crucial for predicting more exactly the locations of the weldlines, the possibility of the air entrapments as well as the pressure and temperature distributions,

especially for these cavities with complex geometry and thick walls. Compared with the 2.5D model, which can only simulate the ow of melt in the surface of the cavity, 3D simulation model is suitable for the wider range of cavities and has more exact results. Figure 8 shows the temperature distributions on the plane Z = 13 in four lling times. It can be seen that there is a higher temperature in the interior of the cavity and the lower temperature near the cavity walls. The temperature near the entrance is even higher than the injection temperature due to the viscous heating of the melt: Figure 8 shows that a thermal layer is presented in the lled portion of the cavity, in which there is a variation of temperature from wall to the interior of cavity.

295

It can be seen that the heat transfer is mainly driven by convection and the conduction is rather small, so the thermal layer is very thin. It can be seen that the temperature distributions on the arbitrary section plane can be seen clearly in the 3D model. On the contrary, in the 2.5D model, only the average temperature in the thickness direction is shown on the middle-plane or the surfaces of the cavity, and for the thick or nonuniformthickness parts, which are not, suitable for the Hele Shaw approximation, the results from 2.5D model have much error and even are mistakes.

6 Conclusion
A numerical model to simulate the lling of injection molding based on a 3D nite element model is presented in this paper. The 3D model uses the equal-order velocitypressure formulation method and a 3D control volume scheme is adopted to track the ow front. During calculating temperature eld, the inuence of convection items in three directions is considered in order to get more exact results and to apply to the wider range of parts. Two parts have been employed as example to test the validity. It has been seen that 3D simulation model is suitable for the wider range of parts and has more exact results compared with 2.5D models.
Acknowledgements The authors would like to acknowledge nancial support from the National Natural Science Foundation Council of the Peoples Republic of China, under Grant 20490220 and Research Foundation for PhD Candidates of Universities of the Peoples Republic of China (20020487032).

2. Schlichting H (1968) Boundary-layer theory. McGraw-Hill, New York 3. Chen BS, Liu WH (1989) Numerical simulation and experimental investigation of injection mold lling with melt solidication. Polym Eng Sci 29:10391050 4. Dequn L (2002) New progress of ow simulation for plastic injection molding. China Int Forum Die Mould Technol 5:47 48 5. Huamin Z, Dequn L (2002) Computer lling simulations of injection molding based on 3D surface model. Polym Plast Tech Eng 41:911021 6. Hiebert CA, Shen SF (1980) A nite-element/nite-dierence simulation of injection molding lling process. J Non-Newtonian Fluid Mesh 7:132 7. Inoue Y, Higashi T, Matsuoka T (1996) Numerical simulation of 3-dimensional ow in injection molding. ANTEC Proc 1:744748 8. Pichelin E, Coupez T (1998) Finite element solution of the 3D lling problem for viscous incompressible uid. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 163:359371 9. Hwang CJ, Kwon TH (2002) A full 3D nite element analysis of the powder injection molding lling process including slip phenomena. Polym Eng Sci 42:3350 10. Prakash C, Patankar SV (1985) A control volume-based niteelement method for solving the NavierStokes equations using equal-order velocitypressure interpolation. Numer Heat Transfer 8:259280 11. Prakash C (1986) An improved control volume nite-element method for heat and mass transfer, and for uid ow using equal-order velocitypressure interpolation. Numer Heat Transfer 9:253276 12. Rice JG, Schnipe RJ (1986) An equal-order velocitypressure formulation that does not exhibit spurious pressure modes. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 58:135149 13. Hieber CA (1987) Injection and compression molding fundamentals. Marcel Dekker, New York 14. Tadmor Z, Broyer E, Gutnger C (1974). Flow analysis method for solving ow problems in polymer processing. Polym Eng Sci 14:660665

References
1. Gotoh Terumasa, Iizuka, Miyamoto Masayuki et al (1986) Simulation of polymeric ows in the cavity lling process of injection molding. Sharp Tech J 34:6370