Forget typical cycle times. We’re pushing the boundaries of conformal cooling.  While traditional approaches deliver reductions, at SyBridge, we see further.  By combining our expertise in 3D printing, mold tooling design, and in-house manufacturing, we engineer conformal cooling solutions that unlock the true potential of this transformative technology. Our unique synergy allows us to not just achieve impressive results, but to truly test the limits of what conformal cooling can accomplish for your product.   

Conformal cooling improves throughput 

SyBridge uses conformal cooling designs–either in retrofitting older tooling or as an initial design element–to enhance cooling efficiency, reduce cycle times, and increase productivity (Figure 1).  

In one redesign, after a mold flow simulation revealed hot spots on the tips of the parts, SyBridge experts engineered precision water channels to enhance cooling efficiency. Their unique design focused on cooling the front tip of the part, which enhanced the cooling of the rest of the part. This design change substantially reduced mold-open time. Figure 2 dives deeper into the results of these conformal cooling design enhancements. 

It takes experience to design effective conformal cooling 

Additive manufacturing (AM or 3D printing) is an excellent avenue for designing conformal cooling. AM enables intricate and complex structures that closely conform to every shape of the part in a way that–depending on the part geometry and complexity–is not always possible with subtractive manufacturing. During the design phase, long before the part is molded, SyBridge engineers use mold flow simulation, virtual testing, and digital integration to configure and test the conformal cooling capacities.  

Can we help you reduce cycle times? 

As conformal cooling experts, SyBridge engineers know how to help you get the cycle times and efficiencies your product needs. Contact our team to explore how solutions like conformal cooling can improve your injection molding process.

The post Conformal Cooling: Impact By the Numbers appeared first on SyBridge Technologies.

Get the full article at MoldMaking Technology

The post How to Make Data Work for Mold Productivity and Performance appeared first on SyBridge Technologies.

Multi Jet Fusion enables the efficient production of end-use nylon parts using additive technologies. Here’s a checklist for design teams.

Introduction

What is Multi Jet Fusion?

Multi Jet Fusion (MJF) is an industrial form of 3D printing that can be used to produce functional nylon prototypes to higher volume production parts with exceptional design freedom and mechanical properties. The MJF process works by using inkjet nozzles to selectively distribute fusing and detailing agents across a bed layered with nylon powder. Unlike selective laser sintering, which uses lasers to fuse the powder into solid material, the MJF printer uses a continuous sweeping motion to distribute agents and apply heat across the print bed layer by layer until the part is finished, MJF can produce high-quality parts at high speeds.

This manufacturing process also does not require support structures to produce parts, making it possible to create complex geometries like internal channels or co-printed assemblies. MJF parts have mechanical properties comparable to injection-molded ones, but without the need for expensive tooling.

Designing for manufacturability will go a long way in ensuring optimal part quality and yield, minimizing post-processing needs, and driving cost reductions. Here’s a quick checklist to help your team ensure that you’re following MJF design best practices.

1. Is MJF a suitable process for my project?

Before diving into design changes, it is important to ensure that the MJF process will meet all product requirements. Here are a few questions to ask yourself:

Do any of the material offerings meet my product requirements?

While MJF has many strengths, it has a limited list of approved materials. PA12 and its glass bead counterpart are fairly versatile for rigid plastic applications. TPU, a flexible polyamide, can find use where an elastomeric material is required. If the available materials do not meet a specific requirement, you may need to consider a different process.

Does my part fit in the build volume?

One key limiting factor is the machine’s build volume, which is 380 x 380 x 284mm for the Jet Fusion 4200. In some cases, large parts can be printed as smaller subcomponents and assembled using adhesive or mechanical joints. In this case, design features such as dovetail joints may facilitate alignment and adhesion.

Do I have any tight tolerances I need to hit?

While the gap between additive and injection molding tolerances is narrowing, it is important to make sure that MJF’s tolerances are sufficient within the context of your assembly.

2. Are there areas where I can use less material?

In most cases, MJF defects are caused by thermal gradients that develop during the build. If the material cools unevenly, the piece may warp or develop sinks. Parts that are long and thin, have abrupt changes in cross-sections, or have thin curved surfaces are especially prone to shrink-induced warp.

Removing material from part designs wherever possible through the use of pockets, shelling, lattices, and topology optimization is key to mitigating and preventing these defects. Avoiding large changes in cross-sections is another way to limit warp. Ensure that chamfers and fillets are incorporated where needed throughout the part design to make the transitions between different features more gradual.

3. Are my features above the minimum threshold size?

In general, the wall thickness of MJF-printed parts should be a minimum of 1.5mm. Small design features should also be no smaller than 1.5mm, though some features such as slits, embossing, engraving, or the diameters of holes and shafts can be as small as 0.5mm. For embossed or debossed text, the font should be no smaller than 6pt (approximately 2mm) and should be a minimum of 0.3mm deep.

If a part includes screw threads, they should be M6 or larger. Where smaller, more precise, or more durable threads are needed, consider using threaded inserts. Beyond feature resolution, you should also consider how small, slender features might break off in post-processing.

4. Have I taken assembly tolerances into account?

Even with the greater geometric flexibility provided by the MJF process, some applications may still require a part to be assembled from multiple components. In general, mating faces should have 0.4 – 0.6mm of clearance to ensure that the components can properly fit.

If your project involves co-printing assemblies, the components printed together should have at least 0.5mm of clearance, but may require more, particularly when there are thick cross sections or there is a significant contact surface area.

5. Is my part design optimized for post-processing?

If your part requires post-processing, there are a few things to double-check in your design to help make secondary operations more effective.

1. Ensure that there are no unvented or trapped volumes in the design.
2. Avoid blind holes whenever possible — these are hard to clean, which can quickly drive up costs.
3. Add fillets to corners where the powder can cake and become difficult to remove through standard tumbling and bead blasting.

6. Have I seized every opportunity to lower part costs?

Besides improving part quality, intelligent DFM changes can drive cost savings. Lightweighting your part, for example, reduces the risk of defects and lowers the material cost per part. The other main consideration when designing for MJF and cost is optimizing nestability in a build. Adding draft or altering the position of printed assemblies may increase the number of parts that can fit per build and distribute fixed costs over more parts, lowering the overall part cost.

In addition to optimizing designs for manufacturability, additional factors to consider include your part’s cosmetics, surface finish, and ease of storage and transportation. MJF parts are naturally grey, but can be dyed black easily. If painting, priming, or other processes are not essential to the part’s function, they can be foregone to reduce expenses. Most MJF-printed parts will have a 125-250 microinches RA finish — if a smoother surface is needed, the part can undergo a variety of surface treatments, including sanding, tumbling, or vapor smoothing. Texturing can be an effective design technique to improve part aesthetics without additional post-processing.

Getting Started With a DFM Expert

Adhering to DFM principles is key to the success of manufacturing processes for a number of reasons. It helps to keep your operating expenses as low as possible, allows you to detect and address design issues early, and improves your overall part quality. This checklist is a valuable resource for making sure your MJF parts are optimized and refined before production begins.

The added advantage of partnering with SyBridge is that your team gains access to the latest in digital design technologies and expert advice. Our team is standing by to help guide each project from design and prototyping through to fulfillment, ensuring that you receive superior-quality parts on time and at the right price. Contact us today to get started.

The post HP Multi Jet Fusion Design Guidelines appeared first on SyBridge Technologies.

The terms “thermoplastic” and “thermoset” appear in many of the same conversations regarding plastic part manufacturing, but they’re not interchangeable. This article breaks down the major differences between thermoplastics and thermosets, as well as key advantages and best applications for each material.

Thermoplastics: What You Need to Know

Mechanical/Chemical Properties

A thermoplastic is any plastic material with a melting point that becomes molten when heated, solid when cooled, and can be re-melted or molded after cooling. The process is completely reversible, and doing so will not significantly compromise the material’s physical integrity. 

Thermoplastics are usually stored as pellets to facilitate easy melting during the injection molding process. Common examples of thermoplastics include acrylic, polyester, nylon, and PVC.

• Nylon: Nylon provides a unique combination of strength and wear resistance that makes this family of materials well-suited for a range of applications.
• TPE and TPU: When product designers and engineers want a part to have certain properties like shock absorption, flex rebound, or high impact strength, they often turn to polymers made out of thermoplastic elastomers. 
• ULTEM (PEI): ULTEM® is one of the only resins approved for use in aerospace settings. It is also among the most versatile plastics on the market. 

Advantages of Thermoplastics

Thermoplastics are strong, shrink-resistant, and relatively easy to use. Their inherent flexibility makes them an excellent choice for manufacturers who require shock-absorbent products that can withstand wear and tear while retaining their shape. 

Thermoplastics are generally more cost-effective than thermosets because they’re easier to process. This is because thermoplastics are made in higher volumes and don’t require post-processing. Plus, thermoplastic molds can be made from affordable materials like aluminum. Thermoplastics are highly compatible with injection molding processes, and are ideal for making repeatable parts in high volumes. 

Additionally, thermoplastics are some of the more environmentally friendly plastics on the market as they are highly recyclable by design. As an added benefit, manufacturing with thermoplastics produces fewer toxic fumes than working with thermosets. 

Common Thermoplastics Applications

Manufacturers often use thermoplastics for prototyping because if the final product doesn’t meet certain standards, they can easily melt the part down and start over without producing a lot of scrap material.

Beyond part prototyping, thermoplastics can be used to create a range of familiar consumer products, as well as medical devices, automotive components, and more.

Thermosets: What You Need to Know

Mechanical/Chemical Properties

In contrast to thermoplastics, a thermoset is any plastic material that hardens once cured by heat and cannot be reshaped after the curing process. During curing, valence bonds in the polymer cross-link together to form three-dimensional chemical bonds that cannot be undone, even under extreme heat. 

Thermosets are usually stored in liquid form in large containers. Common examples of thermosets include epoxy, silicone, and polyurethane.

• Epoxy (EPX 82): An additive material developed by Carbon for its DLS process. This material is ideal for automotive, industrial, and consumer applications. 
• Silicone (SIL 30): SIL 30 is an additive material developed by Carbon® for its digital light synthesis (DLS). Also known as SIL 30, this silicone urethane offers a unique combination of biocompatibility.
• RPU 70: Known for its toughness, strength, and ability to withstand heat, RPU can be used across multiple industries including consumer products, automotive, and industrial. 

Others like Phenolics are available as a granular product.

Advantages of Thermosets

Thermosets offer a wide range of benefits; overall, they are strong, stable, chemical-resistant, and have outstanding electrical properties. They won’t warp, degrade, or break down easily in extreme temperatures. 

Due to their strength and durability, thermosets are often used to reinforce another material’s structural properties. Among the most impact-resistant materials on the market, they are frequently used to seal products to protect them against deformation. 

Common Thermosets Applications

While thermoplastics offer a more diverse range of high and low functionality applications, thermosets can be used to create high-performance products in a wide variety of industries. 

Thermosets are ideal for building anything that comes into contact with extreme temperatures on a regular basis, such as kitchen appliances and electronics components.  

Start Building With Us

The crucial difference between thermoplastics and thermosets boils down to how they react to heat. Thermoplastics can be molded and remolded in the presence of heat without losing structural integrity, while thermosets can be molded only once. Of the two, thermoplastics are better suited for all-purpose products that need to be strong and flexible, while thermosets make better high-performance products. An experienced manufacturing partner can help you decide which material best fits your needs. 

When you partner with SyBridge, you partner with a dedicated team of engineers and manufacturing experts who will help you take your project to the next level. We’ll match your vision with optimal materials, manufacturing processes, and post-production services to ensure that you end up with a product of unmatched quality. Contact us today for a quote.

The post Thermoplastics vs. Thermosets: What’s the Difference? appeared first on SyBridge Technologies.

To provide NFL and D1 players with enhanced protection with greater comfort, VICIS collaborated with the advanced manufacturing team at SyBridge, 3D printer/materials manufacturer Carbon and the digital customization experts at Toolkit3D to create player-specific 3D printed pads for ZERO2 MATRIX football helmets.

SNAPSHOT

Challenge

The team at VICIS was seeking a way to manufacture football helmet pads that offer greater comfort, safety and durability to provide players with improved protection against head injuries.

Solution

Drawing upon the expertise of the teams at SyBridge and Carbon, VICIS 3D printed these advanced new helmet pads with Digital Light Synthesis (DLS) technology, utilizing lattice structures made from a new energy-damping, strain-rate-sensitive elastomer (EPU 45). To achieve a truly custom fit, VICIS turned to sports body equipment customization specialists Toolkit3D to perform 3D head scans of individual players. With SyBridge’s digital manufacturing capabilities and expertise in 3D printing, VICIS was able to create pads that conform to each player’s unique head shape, providing custom-fit comfort, enhanced protection and greater durability.

Outcome

Worn by some of the world’s best football players, VICIS helmets featuring these individually-customized 3D printed pads are now the top rated helmets for safety according to the NFL and NFLPA.*

*Data and rankings as of April 2023

“Just as in football, precision, speed and agility were key components when selecting a manufacturing partner for the 3D printed pads used in the Zero2 Matrix helmet. With SyBridge’s engineering expertise and advanced manufacturing technologies like Carbon® DLS and the Fast Radius Portal, we were able to incorporate feedback from the field to develop this helmet with player-specific customization in mind, bringing next-level design, protection and performance to the D1 and professional players of this sport we love.”

— Cord Santiago, Senior Design Engineer, VICIS

In the world of professional football, player safety is of utmost importance. With a growing concern about head injuries and the long-term effects they can have on athletes, leading helmet manufacturer VICIS set out to create an improved football helmet that would reduce impact force during head collisions.

To make this possible, the team at VICIS turned to SyBridge and Carbon in order to design and manufacture protective helmet pads, leveraging the digitization and customization expertise of Toolkit3D to achieve a custom fit for each player’s unique head shape.

The Challenge

REPLACING FOAM AROUND THE DOME

With traditional football helmets, including many of those used by professional and D1 athletes, foam is used as the primary material for padding and impact absorption. However, there are several key issues with foam pads that prevent them from being ideal for this application.

Foam pads:

• Offer little ability to fine-tune for specific impacts, limiting performance and safety
• Lack durability and require frequent reconditioning
• Cannot be customized without machining or other labor or material-intensive processes
• Trap heat and moisture

Recognizing the limitations of traditional foam pads, VICIS aimed to create helmet pads that not only remain structurally intact over time but also prioritize player comfort and offer unparalleled safety against head impacts. This required an innovative manufacturing approach, along with expertise in material science and engineering, leading VICIS to the advanced manufacturing experts at SyBridge and Carbon, and the sports body equipment customization specialists at Toolkit3D.

About EPU 45

EPU 45 is a new energy-damping elastomer developed by the material science engineers at Carbon. It prints four times faster than traditional elastomeric polyurethanes and is a strain-rate sensitive material that stiffens to absorb energy at higher impact rates, enabling the design of highly breathable lattice structures tuned for comfort at low-impact speeds and energy absorption at high-impact speeds.

Advantages of Lattice Structures

In addition to enhanced breathability, the lattice structures of the 3D printed helmet pads allow for optimal energy distribution upon impact. Combining this structural design with the unique properties of EPU 45 makes these advanced helmet pads a superior alternative to foam padding traditionally used in football helmets, as they offer greater durability with superior impact absorption.

The Solution

CRAFTING A NEW PLAYBOOK FOR IMPROVED CRANIAL PROTECTION

Working closely with the designers and materials scientists at Carbon and manufacturing engineers at SyBridge, VICIS determined that Digital Light Synthesis (DLS) was the right technology to manufacture these advanced helmet pads due to material compatibility and a focus on customization. With a lattice-structure design consisting of the new EPU 45 material, the 3D printed helmet pads would offer an ideal combination of enhanced protection and greater durability.

To create a truly custom fit for each player, VICIS leaned on the expertise of Toolkit3D, specialists in digitizing and automating the customization of high-performance medical and sports body equipment, to create a digital model of each player’s unique head shape. Then, collaborating with the engineers at SyBridge and Carbon, VICIS was able to optimize each pad’s design for manufacturability and cost-effectively 3D print the custom elastomeric helmet padding.
For additional customization and traceability, each pad is printed with the player’s name, pad set, print date and serialization, ensuring that players use the correct pads for their specific cranial geometries.

In the event a replacement pad is needed, utilizing the design flexibility that 3D printing provides combined with the on-demand digital manufacturing capabilities of SyBridge’s Fast Radius Portal, players can receive new pads that match their original head scans in as fast as 2 days, ideal for reconditioning equipment during bye weeks.

The Outcome

LEADING THE LEAGUE IN HELMET SAFETY

The agility of digital manufacturing and the rapid production times that 3D printing offers have allowed VICIS to manufacture these new pads for their Zero2 Matrix helmets with mass customization in mind. When it comes to comfort, one size doesn’t fit all, and sacrificing safety for an improved fit should never be a consideration.

Worn by some of the world’s best football players, VICIS helmets featuring these individually-customized 3D printed pads are now the top rated helmets for safety according to the NFL and NFLPA.*

With these helmets, players get enhanced safety without the impediment of additional size or weight, and a truly customized fit for improved security and performance.

*Data and rankings as of April 2023

The NFL in collaboration with the NFLPA, through their respective appointed biomechanical experts, annually coordinate extensive laboratory research to evaluate which helmets best reduce head impact severity. The results of those tests, which are supported by on-field performance, are set forth on this poster.

The helmet models are listed in order of their performance, with a shorter bar representing better performance. The rankings are based exclusively on the ability of the helmet to reduce head impact severity measures in laboratory testing. Performance variation related to helmet fit, retention, temperature-dependence, and long-term durability are not addressed in these rankings.

All helmets in green are recommended for use by NFL players. Based on a statistical grouping analysis, helmets in the Top-Performing group have been further distinguished into two green categories. The darker green group represents those that performed similarly to this year’s top-ranked helmets, while the light green group performed similarly to the lowest ranked dark green helmet. Helmets with poorer laboratory performance were placed in the yellow or prohibited groups. Yellow and newly prohibited red helmets are not permitted for new players and players who did not wear them during the 2022 NFL season. Newly prohibited helmets will be prohibited for all players in 2024.

The laboratory test conditions were intended to represent potentially concussive head impacts in the NFL. The results of this study should not be extrapolated to collegiate, high school, or youth football.

The post Tackling Football Head Injuries With Manufacturing Innovation appeared first on SyBridge Technologies.

DFAM draws on the same idea as design for manufacturability (DFM) — integrating process planning and product development. But instead of optimizing a product for urethane casting or injection molding, DFAM optimizes a product for production-grade manufacturing with additive technologies by analyzing competing factors to develop the most efficient design.

Additive manufacturing isn’t as simple as hitting print, especially when using DFAM principles to design a part for industrial-grade quality while minimizing production costs. But the resulting parts meet the performance of traditionally manufactured parts while reducing lead times, eliminating tooling costs and maximizing design flexibility. Leveraging DFAM guidelines early on in the product development process allows product design teams to optimize their designs to capture the value of additive manufacturing.

Here are a few common principles of DFAM to consider when leaping from additive manufacturing for prototyping to additive manufacturing for production:

Minimize Overhangs and Reduce Reliance on Supports

Each successive slice of your part as it is printing (e.g., in FDM, DMLS, etc.) relies on the layers below it for support. Large overhangs, openings and other features may require additional support during the build to prevent warping and ensure the product achieves its performance tolerances.Parts designed with DFAM principles in mind will be self-supporting, minimizing the need for supporting features which can add cost through material waste and added post-processing needs. And if supports are required, one cost-saving consideration would be to orient the part so that supports are placed in regions that aren’t user-facing, where marks are acceptable. This reduces the sanding and finishing time required in post-processing.

Part Orientation

While additive manufactured parts can be built in many orientations, the angle at which a feature is built can affect its tolerances. And because features can only deviate from the spec so much until it affects tolerance limits, it’s important to consider a range of possible orientations early on in the design process. That way, you can identify which orientation is best-suited for producing your part.

Consolidate Multi-Part Assemblies

It’s difficult to produce complex shapes with traditional manufacturing, which can necessitate creating some products as multi-part assemblies. If you are transitioning your product from traditional to additive manufacturing, it can often be consolidated into fewer parts to significantly reduce assembly costs. When Steelcase designed an arm cap using for additive manufacturing, for example, we transformed a three-part assembly into one uninterrupted part with multiple functional zones

Leveraging Generative Design to Optimize Your Part

The unique geometries possible through additive processes allows product designers to leverage generative design tools (e.g., topology optimization or lattice structures) to optimize the structure of your part based on hundreds of variables. And because lattices allow you to precisely tune the strength and material density in different regions of a part, one contiguous part can meet different performance requirements in different regions.

The Most Important Additive Manufacturing Design Consideration

None of these guidelines address one of the biggest obstacles to transitioning to production-grade additive manufacturing: An additive manufacturing product design skills gap. Because of this gap, the most important design guideline is to align yourself with additive manufacturing product design experts at the outset of any DFAM project. They will recommend design modifications that will optimize the cost and performance of your product. And they’ll understand how to drive efficiencies at the supply chain level through on-demand production and virtual warehousing. The sooner you involve expert AM design and engineering support, the greater the benefits you stand to earn with your switch to additive.

Interested in learning more? Be sure to check out our article on how to go beyond prototyping, and make your case for additive. At SyBridge, we’ll partner with companies across industries to discover, design and develop any part or product using additive manufacturing technologies. Learn how our experienced additive manufacturing design team can partner with you to design and deliver production-grade parts precisely tuned to your performance and design requirements. We’ve helped multi-million-dollar companies capture value with additive manufacturing, and can help you with your application, too. Get in touch with us today.

The post Applying Smart Design Principles to Amplify Benefits of Additive Manufacturing appeared first on SyBridge Technologies.

One of the most important factors to consider when manufacturing with plastic is durometer or shore durometer, which speaks to the hardness of a given material. Here’s everything engineers and product teams should know about this important measurement:

What is Durometer?

Durometer is a standardized way of measuring the hardness of materials like rubber or plastic. Hardness is a measure of how resistant a plastic is to deformation caused by mechanical indentation or abrasion.

Engineers can test a material’s hardness using a durometer tester. The apparatus looks like a round tire pressure gauge and has a needle on a calibrated spring extending from one end. To test for durometer hardness, an engineer places the needle against the elastomer or plastic and applies pressure. Once the needle has penetrated the material as much as it can, the measurement needle indicates the corresponding durometer hardness on the appropriate scale.

Although durometer can be measured on a scale of zero to 100, it’s not a unit of measurement. It’s actually a dimensionless measurement, meaning durometer numbers measure how hard or soft a material is relative to other materials that have been measured using the same durometer scale. Lower numbers indicate softer plastics, while higher numbers indicate harder plastics. For example, 90A polyurethane tubing is harder than 70A polyurethane tubing.

Different shore hardness scales were invented so that engineers and product teams could discuss the hardness of materials using a consistent, universal, and reproducible reference. The three most common shore hardness scales are shore 00, shore A, and shore D. Shore 00 is only used to measure the hardness of extremely soft rubbers and gels, shore A measures flexible rubbers that can range from very soft to hard, and shore D is only used to measure hard rubbers and plastics.

Product teams should know that durometer hardness doesn’t directly correlate to the flexibility of the end part. Rather, it’s an indirect measure of stiffness that teams can use to better understand the general feel of a material at a glance. Product teams should also know that they cannot compare materials that lie on different shore hardness scales. Durometer numbers are relative to the materials on their specific scale, meaning there’s no direct relationship between hardness on one durometer scale and hardness on another.

For example, a material with a durometer hardness of around 80 on a shore 00 scale is about as hard as a pencil eraser, but a material with a measurement of 80 on the shore D durometer scale has the hardness of a hard hat. Clearly, these measurements aren’t equivalent, although they share the same number, so product teams must remember to only compare the hardness of materials on the same scale.

How Durometer Hardness Factors Into Material Selection

When evaluating elastomers or plastics, engineers and product teams should think about their product’s end-use application and the project requirements. These factors will help narrow down the pool of potential materials and give product teams a clue as to what shore durometer scale they should focus on. If the part must be able to support a lot of weight over an extended period of time, for instance, teams should bypass the shore 00 scale altogether and only consider materials between the 70 and 100 range on the shore A hardness scale and/or the entire range of the shore D hardness scale.

Engineers should also balance desired hardness with other considerations like cost to determine which trade-offs they’re willing to make. For example, harder metals can be more expensive or difficult to machine. To work around this, engineers can use post-process hardening treatments to achieve higher durometers while maintaining ease of machining.

Still, material hardness is not the only factor that matters, and hardness is not necessarily indicative of other properties like strength or corrosion resistance. Stiffness and compression modulus measurements will give a more accurate reading on the sealing performance of a certain rubber than its durometer hardness.

To do their due diligence and select the best material for their specific requirements, product teams should evaluate options against a range of mechanical properties, including density, compression force deflection, application force, and thickness, in addition to durometer hardness.

Durometer Considerations for Injection Molds

The hardness of materials is especially important to consider when working with molds. Engineers must choose a mold rubber that will allow them to easily extract the original model and any subsequent castings from the mold once it has been cured — and shore hardness will have a direct impact on that.

For example, it wouldn’t be wise to use a 70A durometer elastomer to make a mold for a part with thin segments that stick out at different angles. A 70A durometer rubber is as hard as a car tire and doesn’t offer the flexibility necessary to extract such a delicate part without breaking it. An elastomer with a 30A shore durometer or lower would likely be flexible enough for this application.

Durometer Considerations for Additive Manufacturing

It’s also important for product teams to consider materials’ hardness when using additive manufacturing technologies. Many product teams aren’t as familiar with additive manufacturing materials, but if you know the durometer of an additive material, you can compare it to the durometer of more traditional plastics used in injection molding. This will give you a general idea of how the additive material will perform and provides a frame of reference.

Note that some additive materials have two durometers — an instant durometer and a five-second durometer. For example, a part produced using the Carbon Digital Light Synthesis (DLS) process likely won’t perform as expected until after it has been cured. Product teams using at-home printers or manufacturing in-house will notice a difference, but if you work with a manufacturing partner, you don’t need to worry about a material’s instant durometer because you’ll only see the final product. Still, it’s good to know that some materials require additional curing and post-processing to achieve their final durometer, so initial measurements are subject to change.

Get Started With SyBridge

To sum it up, durometer is a dimensionless but standardized measurement used to indicate the hardness of an elastomer or plastic relative to other elastomers or plastics on the same scale. Materials with higher durometers are harder, but teams should be careful not to compare materials across different scales because there’s no direct relationship between a given number on one scale and the same number on another.

Engineers and product teams should consider durometer during material selection, especially if their applications have specific hardness or softness requirements. However, evaluating shore hardness alone is insufficient. Teams should carefully consider all relevant design and performance requirements in order to select the best-fit material or materials. A seasoned manufacturing partner can simplify material selection and streamline the entire product development process.

At SyBridge, we specialize in helping product teams ensure their final products meet their needs. We know how crucial material selection is, and partnering with us means gaining access to our collective years of manufacturing, engineering, and supply chain expertise. By working with an experienced manufacturing partner like SyBridge, product teams can make the material selection process simple and stress-free, while accelerating project timelines and keeping costs low. Contact us today to get started.

The post What is Durometer? Understanding and Evaluating Plastic and Elastomer Hardness appeared first on SyBridge Technologies.

Many 3D printed parts aren’t 100% ready straight out of the printer, which is where additive post-processing comes in. Post-processing techniques like sanding and smoothing can improve the look and feel of your part, but other post-processing techniques such as the application of metal inserts, enhance its mechanical properties or geometric accuracy. In some cases, post-processing inserts may need to be added to ensure that a part functions as intended, meets its design specifications, and is ready for customer use.

Additive post-processing inserts serve different purposes, including allowing for printed parts to be fastened to other components, eliminating the need for rivets or adhesives, and helping to streamline the manufacturing process. Since metal is more durable than plastic, certain inserts can even increase part durability, meaning that 3D printed plastic products can be repeatedly assembled and disassembled without damage.

Three are three general types of additive post-processing inserts available: press-fit inserts, heat-staked inserts, and Helicoil inserts. Each insert type is better suited to different 3D printing processes and use-cases: with that in mind, we’re here to help you understand which is the right fit for your project.

Additive Post-Processing Inserts

Press-Fit Inserts

Press-fit is the most common additive post-processing insert type, and is best suited to Carbon Digital Light Synthesis (DLS), HP Multi Jet Fusion (MJF), and stereolithography (SLA) parts. While tapping a part or integrating threads into its design may be an option for 3D-printing projects, plastic threads will wear or break down relatively quickly compared to metal press-fit insert threads. With that issue in mind, press-fit inserts are often used in cases that require high load-carrying capabilities and durability, such as 3D-printed plastic housings, casings, consumer electronics, and other parts that need to accept screws for assembly.

To use a press-fit insert, you’ll need to design your part with a hole, or drill one after the print is complete. Adding the insert will be relatively easy once you have your hole: press-fit inserts are tapered, so they will self-align as they are pressed in. Instead of tapping the hole or melting the plastic before installing an insert into a 3D-printed part, you can simply use a hammer or arbor press to set it into place. Since press-fit inserts often have knurled outer surfaces, they will stay in place once inserted.

Heat Staked Inserts

It’s also possible to use heat-staked inserts with additive parts. Best suited for MJF and FDM printing projects, heat staking involves heating the insert to melt the plastic, and pushing it into place as it cools. Raising and cooling the temperature of 3D plastic components will enable the material to re-form around the insert, creating a strong bond with the printed part. You’ll need to pay attention to how much heat and pressure you apply when installing heat-staked inserts in order to achieve the best results. 

Heat staking not only reduces a part’s complexity by eliminating the need for CAD thread design or rivets, but increases its durability and improves cosmetic appearance. Threaded inserts that have been heat-staked (rather than 3D printed or tapped) will also have greater pull-out strength and be able to better resist stripping, pull-out loads, and torque-out loads. As a result, using heat staking to fix metal inserts and fasteners into 3D printed parts is a common practice in many industries, including the automotive, telecom, and appliance industries, and the process is used on everything from electronic enclosures to appliance dials.

Helicoil Inserts

Helicoil inserts are traditionally used in metal parts but can also be used in FDM 3D prints, regardless of whether a part has a 3D printed thread or a traditionally drilled and tapped hole. Also known as helical inserts and screw thread inserts (STI), Helicoil inserts are coiled wire inserts with coils that are wider than the hole into which they are inserted. To install a Helicoil insert, you’ll need to drill and tap, or 3D print, a threaded hole, before screwing the insert onto an installation tool and installing it. The coil will then expand, forming a tight seal against the existing threads.

There are several types of Helicoil inserts available. Stanley Engineering, for example, offers HeliCoil threaded wire inserts that provide internal threads for standard-sized fasteners and screw locking wire inserts that offer permanent conventional screw threads. Stanley Engineering also produces free-running wire inserts with threads that can be used from both ends, and tangless threaded inserts that are wear-resistant and eliminate the need for tang retrieval.

Metal Helicoil inserts are strong, durable, and resistant to heat. They also prevent threaded holes from wearing out, and so can lengthen a 3D printed part’s lifespan. Helicoil inserts are commonly used in the aerospace, defense, automotive, medical, and telecom industries.

Creating Strong, Durable Parts With SyBridge

Press-fit inserts, heat-staked inserts, and Helicoil inserts offer everything from increased part durability to the possibility of a more streamlined manufacturing process. However, since each insert type is best suited to different project requirements, incorrect installation can damage plastic parts and end up increasing production times and costs. Given the importance of inserts to certain projects, and their associated challenges, it makes sense to work with an experienced manufacturer like SyBridge to ensure that you select the right insert for your needs. 

When you work with SyBridge, you won’t need to be a manufacturing expert to add inserts to your 3D-printed parts, or to navigate any aspect of production. Our team of experts will guide you through the manufacturing process, helping you refine your designs to ensure that your parts are optimized for quality and cost at every stage, and meet your expectations on completion. It’s easy to get your project started: simply create an account and upload your design, and we’ll generate an instant quote for your parts. Prior to generating a quote, you’ll be able to adjust part materials and manufacturing methods, and run automated design for manufacturing (DFM) checks to identify issues with your part. To learn more about post-processing inserts, or any of our manufacturing services, contact us today. 

The post Your Guide to Additive Post-Processing Inserts appeared first on SyBridge Technologies.

3D printing, also known as additive manufacturing, is a relatively new technology, but it has already come a long way. Since its invention in the 1980s, 3D printing has become increasingly prevalent in the manufacturing industry, so much so that, in 2021, the global 3D printing market was valued at $12.6 billion, and expected to grow to $34.8 billion by 2026.

Although companies like Adidas and Rawlings have used 3D printing technology to create innovative new products, additive manufacturing continues to face adoption challenges at the industrial scale. Research suggests that 63% of enterprises that use additive manufacturing only use the technology for prototyping purposes, and just 21% use it to produce items that can’t be manufactured via other methods.

Common challenges in additive manufacturing

Production-grade 3D printers are much cheaper than industrial CNC machines or injection molding machines, but additive manufacturing equipment can still be costly. In fact, in a survey by Stratasys, 25% of respondents identified equipment costs as the top challenge when using additive manufacturing. That response is hardly surprising: saving up for the upfront cost of a 3D printer can take time, and most businesses need more than one to handle the volume of orders they receive, which means investing even more money. Some companies simply cannot justify the capital expenditure. 

Then, there are the manufacturing and processing costs themselves. In the same Stratasys survey, 16% of respondents said the manufacturing costs associated with additive manufacturing were a top concern. While 3D printers are very autonomous, they still need someone to send the digital file to the printer, ensure the printer is configured correctly, and start the printing process. With multi-material fused deposition modeling (FDM) prints, someone may need to be on hand to swap filaments mid-print and, depending on the materials and printer being used, adjust the nozzle, print speed, retraction settings, and bed temperature. Finally, once a print is done, someone will need to remove any support structures and process the part to achieve a quality surface finish.

Beyond manufacturing and processing costs are additive equipment maintenance costs. 3D printers can break down without proper maintenance, leaving companies without new parts for days (or even weeks) as they wait for replacement parts to arrive. For FDM printers, maintenance can take the form of routinely adjusting belt tension and removing any accumulated plastic from the nozzle. Multi Jet Fusion (MJF) printers require regular printhead and heating lamp maintenance, which can cost thousands of dollars per year, and stereolithography (SLA) printers require regular resin tank maintenance or even replacement. Over time, these maintenance costs can certainly add up.

Additive manufacturing also presents challenges when prints are complete. Most 3D printed parts require some form of post-processing, which takes time and increases the overall labor and overhead costs per unit. For example, SLA parts are covered with viscous excess resin straight out of the printer, and need to be washed in a solvent. FDM parts often require sanding or vapor smoothing due to prominent layer lines or surface blemishes left behind by support structures. With those issues in mind, it’s hardly surprising that 9% of survey respondents named post-processing requirements as a top challenge to additive manufacturing.

It’s also worth noting that additive manufacturing is a much younger technology than traditional manufacturing methods. While injection molding and CNC machining have been used for decades, and already have a large database of compatible materials as well as globally-accepted material standards, additive manufacturing has a more limited selection of materials and fewer established material standards.

Fortunately, additive manufacturing is becoming more popular, and more businesses are investing in developing, standardizing, and qualifying additive materials. In fact, one of the major trends in additive manufacturing in 2021 was the introduction of novel additive materials. Eventually, this research will enable manufacturers to close the gap between additive manufacturing and other technologies. The establishment of globally accepted standards in various industries will also help additive manufacturing gain a stronger foothold in the manufacturing landscape.

Technical challenges to additive manufacturing

Compared to injection molding and CNC machining, additive manufacturing may have lower process predictability and repeatability. For example, additively manufactured parts often go through post-processing to improve their surface finish which, when not controlled properly, is prone to human error and can result in components that can’t meet tight tolerance requirements. This issue represents a challenge when it comes to using additive manufacturing within industries that require extremely high levels of accuracy, such as the aerospace or automotive sectors.

Even though additive manufacturing enables companies to print complex objects without additional assembly, post-processing techniques can lengthen turnaround times and stretch budgets. Furthermore, companies would likely need to invest in inspection and quality control resources to ensure that 3D printed parts comply with any required specifications.

Operational and organizational challenges with additive manufacturing

As a relatively new technology, additive manufacturing also faces operational and organizational challenges. Not only is there no precedent for adopting additive manufacturing at the operational level, but there are a lack of business- and cost-calculation models based on the technology. Many businesses are also wary of using 3D printing because they are uncertain about the ownership of digital designs.

Adding to those challenges, there are few dedicated educational tracks specifically for careers in additive manufacturing, which has resulted in a shortage of skilled personnel with deep knowledge of the technologies and processes. Those factors, combined with the typically limited knowledge of additive technologies in companies that do not specialize specifically in additive manufacturing, mean that many customers aren’t sure where it can add value to their business, so — often to their own detriment — they avoid it altogether.

Solving challenges by working with an experienced additive manufacturing partner

If you aren’t quite sure how to incorporate additive manufacturing into your business, can’t figure out how to design for 3D printing, or aren’t ready for the investments and technical challenges that come with having 3D printers of your own, it’s best to work with a manufacturing partner. An experienced 3D printing partner can help you overcome many of the top challenges associated with additive manufacturing, including upfront equipment costs, inconsistent results, and a lack of 3D printing knowledge. Working with a partner can also give you access to more additive materials and a more comprehensive range of post-processing options.

When you work with SyBridge, we can provide insight into the design and material selection processes for additive manufacturing technologies, and even identify cost-saving opportunities to help you maximize your savings and profits. Contact us to speak with an additive manufacturing expert today.

The post The Top Challenges in Additive Manufacturing and How to Overcome Them appeared first on SyBridge Technologies.

Since its development in the mid-20th century, polycarbonate (PC) has been an increasingly popular material in manufacturing. Today, around 2.7 million tons of polycarbonates are produced each year globally. Over the years, various companies have created different formulas for polycarbonate, so there are several industry grades of polycarbonate to choose from. Some forms have more glass fiber reinforcement, while others have additives like ultraviolet stabilizers for protection against long-term sun exposure.

Strong and versatile, this amorphous thermoplastic is resistant to heat, impact, and many chemicals. As such, polycarbonate is ideal for components that need to be tough or repeatedly sterilized and is often used in the automotive and medical industries.

How Polycarbonate is Manufactured

Each company manufactures polycarbonates slightly differently, but polycarbonate materials have traditionally been created via the condensation polymerization of bisphenol A and carbonyl chloride. However, many companies have started to use diphenyl carbonate instead because carbonyl chloride is extremely toxic.

Regardless of whether carbonyl chloride or diphenyl carbonate is used, a bisphenol A solution in sodium hydroxide is required and then mixed with the carbonyl chloride or diphenyl carbonate solution in an organic solvent so polymerization can take place. When the polycarbonate forms, it will initially be in a liquid state. The solution will be evaporated to form granules, or ethanol will need to be introduced to precipitate the solid polymer.

Once created, polycarbonate is often sold in rods, cylinders, or sheets and can be used in various manufacturing processes. Polycarbonate is compatible with thermoforming, extrusion, and blow molding, but it’s most often used with injection molding. After all, as a thermoplastic, polycarbonate can be melted, cooled, and reheated without burning or significant degradation, making it an ideal injection molding material.

During injection molding, polycarbonate needs to be processed at a high temperature and injected into the mold with high pressure because polycarbonate is quite viscous. The melt temperature should be between 280°C and 320°C, and the mold temperature should fall between 80°C and 100°C. However, those numbers can vary depending on the grade of polycarbonate being used. For example, a high-heat polycarbonate will require a melt temperature between 310°C and 340°C and a mold temperature between 100°C and 150°C, whereas a PC-ABS (polycarbonate/acrylonitrile butadiene styrene) blend’s melt temperature only needs to be between 240°C and 280°C and its mold temperature can fall as low as 70°C and up to 100°C.

Properties and Mechanical Specifications of Polycarbonate Material

While there are several grades of polycarbonates, each with their own molecular mass, structure, and properties, all polycarbonates have a few things in common.

For one, they are known for their toughness and high impact resistance. As a result, polycarbonate is often used for applications that require reliability and high performance.

Despite their toughness and strength, polycarbonates are light weight, allowing for extensive design possibilities and relatively easy installation when compared to other materials.

Polycarbonates are also very resistant to heat and flames. A polycarbonate can maintain its toughness in temperatures up to 140°C, which means polycarbonate parts can withstand repeated sterilization. Polycarbonates also have light transmittance rates above 90% and good chemical resistance against diluted acids, oils, greases, aliphatic hydrocarbons, and alcohols.

A polycarbonate’s properties depend on its molecular mass and structure, so each material is slightly different. To give you an idea of what you can expect, here are some typical key characteristics and specifications:

• Specific gravity: 1.21
• Melt temperature: 295 – 315°C
• Mold temperature: 70 – 95°C
• Heat deflection temperature: 137°C at 0.45 MPa
• Tensile strength: 61 MPa
• Flexural strength: 90 MPa
• Shrink rate: 0.5 – 0.7%
• Rockwell hardness: 118R

As you can see, polycarbonate manufacturing has plenty to offer. However, there are a few things you’ll want to be aware of before selecting this material for a project. For example, its mechanical properties can degrade after prolonged exposure to water over 60°C. Polycarbonate is also susceptible to scratching, more costly to manufacture than many other materials, and vulnerable to diluted alkalis and aromatic and halogenated hydrocarbons. Additionally, the polycarbonate formulations without UV stabilizers can sometimes yellow over time when exposed to UV rays.

Common Uses of Polycarbonates in Everyday Life

Polycarbonate’s toughness and high impact resistance make it a popular material choice for automotive industry manufacturers, particularly when it comes to parts that must be clear or translucent and are subject to frequent impact, such as headlight and turn signal lenses.

In the medical industry, polycarbonate can be found in everything from incubators to dialysis machine housings. After all, polycarbonate is tough, resistant to heat, dimensionally stable, and able to withstand sterilization via FDA-approved methods including autoclaves and irradiation. Polycarbonate can be used in blood filters, reservoirs, and oxygenators, as well as surgical instruments. Plus, given its transparency, polycarbonate enables doctors to more easily monitor blood and track the administration of fluids.

Polycarbonate is also a material of choice in many household appliances, such as mixers, hair dryers, refrigerators, and electric razors. Other common uses for polycarbonate include exterior lighting fixtures, machinery guards, protective gear, bullet-proof glass, fuse boxes, television housings, roofing, skylights, greenhouses, suitcases, eyeglasses, and beverage containers, such as baby bottles, sippy cups, and refillable water bottles.

Getting Started With Polycarbonate

Polycarbonate is a strong and impact-resistant thermoplastic that’s used across a variety of industries. However, there are several different kinds of polycarbonate on the market, each with its own characteristics. Working with an experienced manufacturing partner like SyBridge can make all the difference for product teams who are unfamiliar with polycarbonate or are looking to manufacture parts and products with materials that may be more suitable for a specific application. Want to see if polycarbonate is the right material for your next project? Create an account and upload your part files or contact us today to get started.

The post Know Your Materials: Polycarbonate (PC) appeared first on SyBridge Technologies.