1 / 39

Low Cost Insulated Beverage Dispenser Design Using Structural Web Molding

Low Cost Insulated Beverage Dispenser Design Using Structural Web Molding. X. Qi , E. Moghbelli , C. Steve Suh and H. J. Sue Department of Mechanical Engineering Institute for Innovation and Design in Engineering Polymer Technology Center Texas A&M University.

adolfo
Télécharger la présentation

Low Cost Insulated Beverage Dispenser Design Using Structural Web Molding

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Low Cost Insulated Beverage Dispenser Design Using Structural Web Molding X. Qi, E. Moghbelli, C. Steve Suh and H. J. Sue Department of Mechanical Engineering Institute for Innovation and Design in Engineering Polymer Technology Center Texas A&M University

  2. A Successful Teamwork Partnering …. Government – Bob Bernazzani, Bob Trottier (Natick) Jesse Burns (DLA/CORANET) Industry – Chip Jarvis, Fred Gates, Ernie Freeman(Cambro Manufacturing) Academics – C. Steve Suh (Institute for Innovation and Design in Engineering, Texas A&M University) H. J. Sue (Polymer Technology Center, Texas A&M University)

  3. A Successful Teamwork Bringing In …. Government – Needs, Project management, Funding, Design requirements, Test criteria, Evaluations, Field feedback Industry – Engineering expertise, In-kind support, Facility, Equipment, On-site training, Mold-tooling, Prototyping Academics – Concept development, Configuration design, Material testing, Molding analysis, CAE environment, Design optimization, Tooling design, Rapid-prototyping

  4. Project Objectives • Develop a viable alternative IBD design using multinozzle (gas-assisted) structural-web molding to achieve • Reduced unit cost • Faster production cycle • Shorter delivery period • Improved product performance • Developing manufacture-ready tooling • Meeting desired mechanical and thermal characteristics specified in Commercial Item Description A-A-52190A

  5. Scope of Work • Perform needed analysis on identifying functional and performance requirements required of IBD • Identify underlying design parameters governing structural-web molded IBD • Create viable IBD concepts using parameters identified in (2) • Identify candidate resin fill materials using results from (2) and (3) • Develop IBD computer configurations in SolidWorks using results from (3) and (4) • Optimize IBD configurations for thermal, structural and dynamical performances using integrated • CAE tools • 7. Down-select an optimal IBD configuration for alpha SLA rapid prototyping • 8. Test alpha prototype for meeting design requirements • 9. Revise alpha prototype to finalize design configuration • 10. Design structural-web mold tooling with optimized cavities and nozzle parameters • 11. Fabricate tooling using CAM • 12. Create structural-web beta prototype for validation of form, fit, function, production run time, and • conformance to IAW CID A-A-52190A • Revise structural-web mold tooling to be manufacturer-specific and manufacturing-ready • Test in manufacture’s facility to validate (13) • Transfer mold tooling to NSC or DLA upon successful completion of (14) Alpha Prototype Beta Prototype

  6. Candidate Materials [1] [2] [3] *Chevron Phillips Chemical Company LP ** Piping Technology and Products, Inc.

  7. Design Requirements 6. Must have a lid and contain foams to comply with thermal requirements 1. Capacity: 5 gallon 2. Must have two handles 9. Eliminategasket 7. Eliminate additional welding 4. Cup room: at least 4“ 8. Eliminate latches 5. Faucet location: lowest point of inner surface 3. Stackable with current IBDs: total length (17”) cannot be changed

  8. Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Concept Development User/Field Input Concept Selection Phase I Stage 1

  9. Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Thermal Performance Compared with Baseline IBD:

  10. Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Mechanical Performance Stress Deformation

  11. Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Design Revision 1. Dilemma between Gas “Blowout” and High Gas Percentage Low Gas Percentage Poor Thermal Performance Gas “Blowout” Region High Gas Percentage Mesh Model Gas “Blowout” Unfinished Product Filling Gas Core

  12. Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Design Revision To resolve the dilemma between “blowout” and high gas percentage To deal with non-uniform distribution of gas core Gas always travels along paths of least resistance Overflow Well An overflow well is a secondary cavity into which the gas can displace polymer and thereby penetrate further into the part. Constant Thickness Overflow Well

  13. Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Design Revision 2. Constant Thickness is NOT Enough for Uniform Gas Core Distribution Mesh Model Gas Core Filling Distribution of gas core is still not uniform, no matter where to put gas entrances (nozzles).

  14. Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Design Revision Gas-assist molding is not proper for flat structures, but works very well for channel-like structures. To obtain more uniform distribution of gas core Build gas channels to control gas penetration, i.e. make grooves on side walls Four evenly distributed overflow wells Initial Design Mesh Model

  15. Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Design Revision Bottom: Not Covered Side Walls: OK Mesh Model Filling Gas Core Bottom: Not Covered Bottom: OK Side Walls: Not Covered Side Walls: OK Grooves and Overflow Well on the Bottom

  16. Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Design Revision To account for all side walls and the bottom to obtain a good thermal performance 2-Piece Configuration Adhesive Bonding Interfaces Initial Design

  17. Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Gas-assist Molding for 2-Piece Design Lower Piece - Update Gravity Gas Entrance Mesh Model Polymer Entrances Gas Entrances Manufacturing Position Filling Gas Core

  18. Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Gas-assist Molding for 2-Piece Design Gravity Polymer Entrances Gas Entrances Mesh Model Manufacturing Position Filling Gas Core

  19. Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Gas-assist Molding Design Revision Phase I Stage 2 Phase I Stage 1

  20. Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Thermal Performance Compared with Initial Design:

  21. Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 MechanicalPerformance Stress Deformation

  22. Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Design Revision (Incorporating manufacturing & tooling requirements) To revise previous thick-wall design to thin-wall structures without losing thermal and mechanical performances Construction of multiple thin-wall pieces

  23. Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Design Revision Advantages: No seam line Bonding interface takes no loads Faster assembly/bonding

  24. Phase-I Stage-1 induced cracks with variation in length Stage-2 Stage-3 Adhesive Test Samples

  25. Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Mechanical Testing

  26. Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Typical loading curves * Extension controlled at 1.0 inch/min

  27. Phase-I Stage-1 Fracture surfaces Stage-2 Stage-3 Optical micrographs of fracture area

  28. Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Design Revision Nozzle Position 6 inches Design of Gas Channels and Nozzle Positions Gas Channels Nozzles are placed on the inner surfaces so that they cannot be seen after assembled.

  29. Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Molding Analysis Lower Body Filling Mesh Model Gas Affected Zone

  30. Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Molding Analysis Upper Body Filling Mesh Model Gas Affected Zone

  31. Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Molding Analysis Lower Lid Filling Mesh Model Gas Affected Zone

  32. Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Molding Analysis Upper Lid Filling Mesh Model Gas Affected Zone

  33. Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Manufacture and Tooling Requirement Design Revision Phase I Stage 3 Phase I Stage 2

  34. Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Dimensions

  35. Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Product Weight

  36. Thermal Performance Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Compared with Baseline Design:

  37. MechanicalPerformance Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Mechanical Performance Stress Deformation

  38. Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Final Design Configuration Adhesive Bonding Interfaces This handle design may have a core-out problem after molding, thus an alternative handle design was applied.

  39. Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Summary • CAE enabled 12 months development cycle: Concept generation DFM design evolution Material selection Design validation • Molding time reduced from 40 to 4 min; assembly time improved by eliminating gaskets and welding • Lighter, stronger and better thermal performance • Rapid prototypes for testing for meeting Thermal, Impact, Bonding Quality and NSF requirements

More Related