Abstract
In the precision thermoforming process, one of the main drawbacks occurs in the profile deviation of the produced part. In this study, the effect of different thermoforming process parameters on the mold replicability of a high impact polystyrene container produced by vacuum forming and drape forming processes has been experimentally and numerically investigated. According to experimental results, in the drape forming process, when the initial sheet thickness increases, the part will have higher mold replicability, whereas in the vacuum forming process, by increasing the initial sheet thickness, the mold replicability increases and reaches its peak, then decreases. The results also indicate that both temperature and vacuum pressure exhibit the most significant effect on mold replicability of the part. Furthermore, the finite element method is utilized by the implementation of a fully thermomechanically coupled hyperviscoelastic constitutive model in ABAQUS 6.13. By using this material model, it is possible to compare the sensitivity of the output (mold replicability of the part) to the changes in the range of the process parameters. The simulation results verified by the experimental data and the hyperviscoelastic model showed to be an outstanding and stable platform for the process simulation.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Dr. Abbas Ghaei, Mr. Hamed Barghikar, Mr. Mohammad Ghobadnam, and Mr. Masood Rezaei Rejani for their technical help during the completion of this project.
References
[1] Muralisrinivasan NS. Update on Troubleshooting in Thermoforming, Smithers: Shropshire, UK, 2010.Search in Google Scholar
[2] Laroche D, Erchiqui F. J. Plast. Film Sheeting 1999, 15, 287–296.10.1177/875608799901500404Search in Google Scholar
[3] Marckmann G, Verron E, Peseux B. Polym. Eng. Sci. 2001, 41, 426–439.10.1002/pen.10740Search in Google Scholar
[4] SIMULIA, Abaqus CAE documentation, Providence, RI: Dassault Systèmes, 2013.Search in Google Scholar
[5] Ghobadnam M, Mosaddegh P, Rejani MR, Amirabadi H, Ghaei A. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2014, 76, 1079–1089.10.1007/s00170-014-6329-ySearch in Google Scholar
[6] Ghobadnam M, Mosaddegh P, Namdari N, Masoomi M, Ghaei A. Thermo-mechanical Characterization of High Impact Polystyrene Sheets Using Uniaxial Stress Relaxation Tests, The Bi-annual International Conference on Experimental Solid Mechanics and Dynamics, 2014.Search in Google Scholar
[7] T-SIM material database, Accuform: Brooksville, FL.Search in Google Scholar
[8] Erchiqui F, Kandil AN. J. Reinf. Plast. Comp. 2006, 25, 463–473.10.1177/0731684405056435Search in Google Scholar
[9] Jiang W-G, Warby MK, Whiteman JR, Abbott S, Shorter W, Warwick P, Wright T, Munro A, Munro B. Comput. Mech. 2003, 31, 163–172.10.1007/s00466-002-0402-3Search in Google Scholar
[10] Erner A, Billon N. Int. J. Forming Processes 2005, 8, 265–281.Search in Google Scholar
[11] Bernard CA, Correia JPM, Bahlouli N, Ahzi S. Key Eng. Mater. 2013, 554–557, 1602–1610.10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.554-557.1602Search in Google Scholar
[12] Xu H, Kazmer DO. Polym. Eng. Sci. 2001, 41, 1553–1563.10.1002/pen.10854Search in Google Scholar
[13] Tsai JT. Polym. Eng. Sci. 1982, 22, 265–268.10.1002/pen.760220409Search in Google Scholar
[14] Je Kyun L, Virkler TL, Scott CE. Polym. Eng. Sci. 2001, 41, 1830–1844.10.1002/pen.10880Search in Google Scholar
[15] Glimore CM. Materials Science and Engineering Properties, SI ed., Cengage Learning: Stamford, CT, 2015.Search in Google Scholar
[16] Rosen SL. Fundamental Principles of Polymeric Materials for Practicing Engineers, Barnes/Noble Publications: London, 1971.Search in Google Scholar
[17] Chen SC, Huang ST, Lin MC, Chien RD. Int. Commun. Heat 2008, 35, 967–973.10.1016/j.icheatmasstransfer.2008.04.008Search in Google Scholar
[18] Collins P, Harkin-Jones EMA, Martin PJ. Int. Polym. Process 2002, 17, 361–369.10.3139/217.1702Search in Google Scholar
©2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
