Authored by: |
Today’s engineers are often unaware of the chemical or biological properties of resins used in injection molding. But asking several questions can help with resin selection.
• What’s the part’s expected operating environment?
• Does it need to withstand solder reflow temperatures or other high-heat situations?
• Does it touch the human body or other biological materials?
• Is lubricity important?
• How about hygroscopic properties?
• How much should it cost?
After getting the answers to these and other questions, the next step is to review some commonly used resins. The basics on a few are described in the accompanying box, “Common molding materials.”
In addition to material properties, many other variables affect molded-part performance. For example, most thermoplastics come in a variety of grades that mold differently from each other. And additives such as glass, carbon, and other fibers change molded-resin properties and affect how the resin melts, flows, and fills a given geometry.
Resin data sheets generally show information on larger sample bars. Micromolded parts — typically those with features measured in microns and total part size 0.25 in. or less — may require different processing parameters, such as gate size, than manufacturers suggest.
That’s why it’s a good idea to consult an experienced micromolder when in doubt about a part or material. However, knowing what resins have the best chance for success can help when matching material properties to project requirements.
Flow studies
To compare the performance of common engineered resins in thin-wall applications, engineers at Accumold, Ankeny, Iowa, molded a range of resins in the same mold using standard processing parameters specified for each resin. The mold had a 0.003-in.-thick wall meant to test thin-wall molding capabilities and a thick-to-thin transition to help resin fill the mold.
To keep variables consistent across the tested resins, the same mold was used to form 100 parts of each resin without any modifications. In real-world applications, molds are often adjusted to minimize shrinkage or match other resin characteristics. For this study, the goal was to maintain a 0.003-in.-thick wall for the longest fill length possible, not to get the longest overall fill.
Technicians measured and averaged the dimensions of the 100 parts molded for each resin.
The tested resins were acetal, acrylic, high-density polyethylene (HDPE), liquid-crystal polymer, nylon, polybutylene terephthalate (PBT), polycarbonate (PC), polyetheretherketone (PEEK), polyetherimide (PEI), polypropylene (PP), and polysulfone (PSU). The results are summarized in the accompanying table, “Micromolding results.”
The tested polymers that completely filled the mold’s 42:1 aspect ratio were LCP, HDPE, PP, and acetal. In all four cases, shrinkage after cooling brought the average final length below the 0.1267-in. mold length, but molds optimized for specific resins would have prevented shrinkage.
The LCP tested was reinforced with 30% glass fiber and colored black. The HDPE was white and designed for high melt flow. Engineers described the final product as “very flexible,” a characteristic which could be a benefit or a drawback, depending on the application. The acetal resin was designed for multicavity and thin-wall molding.
Acrylic, PBT, and nylon resins filled about half the mold. Engineers felt that better molds, molding parameters, or a narrower thin-wall section could have let the resins push further but doubted they could have filled the entire 0.1267-in. mold.
The average aspect ratio for acrylic parts was 26:1, with the best part achieving a 32:1 aspect ratio and all PMMA parts warping. The PBT resin contained 30% glass reinforcement and averaged a 25:1 aspect ratio. The center of the PBT flow tended to push further than the edges, and these parts also warped. The 50%-glass-fiber-filled black nylon 6/6 reached an 18:1 aspect ratio. However, the final fill line was extremely uneven.
PSU and PC resins both averaged aspect ratios of 14:1 with average fill lengths of 0.0418 in. and 0.0411 in., respectively. PSU is not noted for its long-aspect, thin-molding capabilities, and despite its bulk rigidity and toughness, the parts were flexible to finger pressure at the tested thickness.
Transparent PEI and a PEEK grade reinforced with 30% glass fibers brought up the rear with 10:1 and 3:1 average aspect ratios, respectively. The PEI was touted as “enhanced flow” by its manufacturer and did have an even fill edge despite traveling only 0.0294 in. The PEEK supplier classified its product as “easy flow,” but it only traveled 0.009 in., and the flows’ edges traveled further than the centers.
Common molding materials High-density polyethylene (HDPE) Polypropylene (PP) Nylon or polyamide Polycarbonate (PC) Acetal or polyoxymethylene (POM) Polysulfone (PSU) Polybutylene terephthalate (PBT) Acrylic or polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) Polyetherimide (PEI) Liquid-crystal polymer (LCP) |
About the Author
Jessica Shapiro
Jessica serves as Associate Editor - 3 years service, M.S. Mechanical Engineering, Drexel University.
Work experience: Materials engineer, The Boeing Company; Primary editor for mechanical and fastening & joining.