
FEATUREARTICLE
Mold Building for Metals
Designing a mold for MIM is no easy task - tight tolerances and paying the utmost attention to intricate details are just the tip of the iceberg.
|
||
|
GETMOREINFO
For more information contact Steve Mogensen of MedSource Technologies, Inc. (Minneapolis, MN) at (952) 807-1234 and David Lewis, Sr. of Matrix Tool, Inc. (Fairview, PA) at (814) 474-5531.
However, for the companies that have chosen to make it a specialty, it is a lucrative business. David Lewis, Sr., president of Matrix Tool, Inc. (Fairview, PA) - a plastic injection and metal injection molding (MIM) moldmaker for the telecommunications, medical, electronic/electrical, auto-motive and personal care industries - notes that his company was first built around precision plastic injection molds before it delved into the intricacies of MIM tooling. In Lewis' experience, MIM mold construction is best for small- to medium-sized parts. Matrix has done a great deal of work for the medical device industry, where the size of the surgical device components has ranged from 0.15 to 23.4 grams. "Other parts have included watch bezels, drive gears, metal cutting tools, pliers' jaws and chisel bits weighing as much as 60 grams," he states. "I do know that many larger parts exist - such as golf club heads and knee and hip replacement parts." Both plastic and metal injection moldmaking require the highest commitment to quality and service, he adds.
In agreement is Karl Hens, formerly the vice president of technology at MedSource Technologies, Inc. (Minneapolis, MN) - a provider of engineering, product development and manufacturing services, as well as supply chain management solutions to the medical device industry. "When looking for moldmakers for MIM, I first look for the discipline and the organization - if it's a bigger shop, it ought to have ISO certifications and all of its procedures in place," he states. "When it comes to something complicated like building molds for MIM - and the moldmaker is not organized - you are headed for disaster. Quality is key. Plus, what makes it more difficult is that we are in the medical industry where quick time-to-market is critical, so we also want fast turnaround. It's often tough to get both quality and fast turnaround."
The ABCs of MIM "The basics of MIM tool construction are identical to that of plastic injection molds - with a few exceptions," Lewis adds. "These would include choice of cavity and core steel, fits for shut-off angles and slides, a runner system designed for good flow of the material, gate locations, venting depths, surface finish of the molding areas, and the correct choice of plating to be applied to the finished cavity and core details." Hens expands on these sentiments. "While many moldmakers start constructing tools from general layout prints - giving the machinist and toolmaker a lot of liberty to perform detail design as they are building the tool - this approach does not typically work for MIM molds," he states. "Instead of the moldmaker and the MIM molder reviewing a layout of a tool, it becomes essential to jointly review a set of fully detailed prints. The more time that is spent upfront, the less time it will take to get the mold operational successfully. Details involving material selection for each mold component, mold and cavity tolerancing, surface finish and coating, gate and runner sizing, vent location and sizing, pressure transducer location, ejection and cooling become key issues in building an MIM mold successfully."
Cavity/Core Steel
Shut-Off Angles/Slides Hens adds that the tolerances that one has to hold are typically much tighter with a metal mold because MIM feedstock parts are very flash sensitive and will flash very easily. "If a plastic part flashes you can get rid of the flash easily, but if it's metal it's like a knife edge and it's a problem - you don't want flash," he explains. "You have to make a flash-free mold."
Venting Depths Premium feedstocks exhibit a minimum amount of shrinkage during the subsequent sintering process, according to Hens. "To maximize shape retention, a maximum amount of metal-powder filler is used, often approaching 70 percent by volume," he explains. "To be able to obtain good flowability of highly filled feedstocks, low molecular molecules and additives are used, resulting in a high flash sensitivity of MIM feedstocks not dissimilar to that exhibited by many filled nylons. Wax and polyethylene/glycol-based feedstocks tend to have better flow characteristics than acetyl-based feedstocks at the expense of a higher sensitivity to flashing."
Polish
Plating
Learning Curve Hens adds that different metals basically have the same mold build requirements, with the exception of sometimes having to plug in a different shrinkage factor. "It's not shrinkage in the mold. All of our shrinkage happens once the part is out of the mold and it goes into the furnace," he explains. "In the mold, you have almost zero shrinkage, less than one thousandths of an inch per inch shrinkage, so in the mold, shrink is very small because you have so many fill lines and material." Using valve-gated hot runners provides better shot control, Hens points out. "However, when we use valve-gated hot runners, we typically cheat and don't go directly into the part," he notes. "We just use a small subrunner that goes into the part. Remember that these parts must be molded stress-free because they all get heated afterward during heat-treating. So, if you mold in any stresses, parts come out distorted. You will get the best parts by using reasonably large diameter cylindrical, but very short length, runners. Processing windows are wider when short runners are used rather than hot-gating right into MIM components." Additionally, Hens has one last piece of advice. "History has shown that several mold shops have had to build a poor tool before they recognize the challenge at hand," he says. "Whenever a mold shop builds a first tool for an MIM producer, a lot of time is spent together in the design of the mold to ensure that all of the topics are covered. Typically, as a result, the mold is excellent and works right from the get-go - or maybe with one minor change after the first mold trial. Then the MIM producer assumes that the tool shop understands what the demands are and lets it work more independently on the second and third mold, relying on the success of the first one. This is when disaster often strikes. As the first tool seemed easy as all of the details were analyzed carefully, an over-confidence has been created and less attention is paid to the mold details. It is not uncommon that a lot of time and money was spent debugging a second tool, often involving major rework. At this point the moldmakers have learned the hard way - and if they have not given up on MIM molds at this point, subsequent molds will typically be excellent."
| ||
| MoldMaking Technology Online is a trademark of Gardner Publications, Inc, copyright 2008. MoldMaking Technology and all contents are properties of Gardner Publications, Inc. All Rights Reserved. |