390 likes | 532 Views
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.
E N D
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
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)
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
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
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
Candidate Materials [1] [2] [3] *Chevron Phillips Chemical Company LP ** Piping Technology and Products, Inc.
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
Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Concept Development User/Field Input Concept Selection Phase I Stage 1
Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Thermal Performance Compared with Baseline IBD:
Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Mechanical Performance Stress Deformation
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
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
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).
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
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
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
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
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
Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Gas-assist Molding Design Revision Phase I Stage 2 Phase I Stage 1
Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Thermal Performance Compared with Initial Design:
Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 MechanicalPerformance Stress Deformation
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
Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Design Revision Advantages: No seam line Bonding interface takes no loads Faster assembly/bonding
Phase-I Stage-1 induced cracks with variation in length Stage-2 Stage-3 Adhesive Test Samples
Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Mechanical Testing
Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Typical loading curves * Extension controlled at 1.0 inch/min
Phase-I Stage-1 Fracture surfaces Stage-2 Stage-3 Optical micrographs of fracture area
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.
Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Molding Analysis Lower Body Filling Mesh Model Gas Affected Zone
Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Molding Analysis Upper Body Filling Mesh Model Gas Affected Zone
Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Molding Analysis Lower Lid Filling Mesh Model Gas Affected Zone
Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Molding Analysis Upper Lid Filling Mesh Model Gas Affected Zone
Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Manufacture and Tooling Requirement Design Revision Phase I Stage 3 Phase I Stage 2
Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Dimensions
Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Product Weight
Thermal Performance Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Compared with Baseline Design:
MechanicalPerformance Phase-I Stage-1 Stage-2 Stage-3 Mechanical Performance Stress Deformation
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.
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