Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-2n9c9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T06:20:23.485Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Packing and solidification in ceramic injection moulding

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2011

S. Krug,
J. R. G. Evans and
J. H. H. ter Maat
S. Krug
Affiliation:
Department of Materials, Queen Mary, University of London, Mile End Road, London E1 4NS, United Kingdom
J. R. G. Evans
Affiliation:
Department of Materials, Queen Mary, University of London, Mile End Road, London E1 4NS, United Kingdom
J. H. H. ter Maat
Affiliation:
BASF Aktiengesellschaft, 67056 Ludwigshafen, Germany
Get access

Abstract

The occupation of volume in large ceramic injection mouldings solidified under different pressures using two moulding techniques is considered. Large (60 × 45 × 25 mm) alumina injection mouldings were prepared in cavities fitted with conventional (metallic) and insulated [poly(ether ether ketone)] sprues. These provide quite distinct solidification histories which, in turn, influence the physical properties of the moulding and the extent and type of defects it contains. In the former case, the gate solidified after 26 s whereas, in the latter, the hold pressure could be applied for over 240 s. In insulated sprue moulding, the advance of the solid liquid boundary during packing and solidification was traced by fractography. Pressure was varied from 5 to 120 MPa. The interdependencies of moulding mass, apparent density, local density, polymer crystallinity, and microstructure were accounted for as a function of pressure and pressure transmission method. Changes in polymer crystallinity due to different cooling rates at different positions in the mouldings were insufficient to account for observed density differences. Systematic changes in the mass as a function of hold pressure were related to macroporosity in conventional mouldings and to microporosity in insulated sprue mouldings.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Materials Research , Volume 16 , Issue 6 , June 2001, pp. 1829 - 1837
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2001

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

1.Evans, J.R.G., Injection Moulding, in Processing of ceramics: Materials Science and Technology Series, edited by Brook, R.J. (VCH, Weinheim, Germany, 1996), pp. 268–306.Google Scholar
2.Reed, J.S., Principles of ceramic processing (John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1995), pp. 477–489.Google Scholar
3.Krug, S., Evans, J.R.G., and ter Maat, J.H.H., J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 82, 2094 (1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Krug, S., Evans, J.R.G., and ter Maat, J.H.H., Proc. PIM98 (Powder Injection Moulding Technologies, Innovative Materials Solutions, PA, 1998), pp. 407–414.Google Scholar
5.Zhang, T. and Evans, J.R.G., J. Mater. Res. 8, 187 (1993).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Thomas, M.S. and Evans, J.R.G., Br. Ceram. Trans. J. 87, 22 (1988).Google Scholar
7.Zhang, T. and Evans, J.R.G., J. Mater. Res. 8, 345 (1993).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Hunt, K.N. and Evans, J.R.G., J. Mater. Sci Lett. 10, 730 (1991).Google Scholar
9.Woodthorpe, J., Edirisinghe, M.J., and Evans, J.R.G., J. Mater. Sci 24, 1038 (1989).Google Scholar
10.Wright, J.K. and Evans, J.R.G., J. Mater. Sci. 26, 4897 (1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Ebenhoch, J., ter Matt, J.H.H., and Sterzel, H.J., Adv. Powder Met. Vol. 2, Powder Injection Moulding (Metal Powder Industries Fedn., Princeton, NJ, 1991), pp. 159–161.Google Scholar
12.ter Matt, J.H.H., Ebenhoch, J., and Sterzel, H.J., Proc. 4th Int. Symp. Ceramics Materials and Components for Engines, Goteburg, Sweden (Elsevier, London, U.K., 1991), pp. 544–551.Google Scholar
13.ter Maat, J.H.H. and Ebenhoch, J., Proc. 3rd Congr. Eur. Ceram. Soc., Madrid, Spain (Faenza Iberica, Castellon, Spain, 1993), pp. 437–443.Google Scholar
14.Jansen, K.M.B., and Titomanlio, G., Polym. Eng. Sci. 36, 2029 (1996).Google Scholar
15.Wimberger-Friedl, R., Prog. Polym. Sci. 20, 369 (1995).Google Scholar
16.Kostic, B., Zhang, T., and Evans, J.R.G., J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 75, 2773 (1992).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17.Krug, S., Evans, J.R.G., and ter Maat, J.H.H., J. Eur. Ceram. Soc. 20, 2535 (2000).Google Scholar
18.Kellet, B. and Lange, F.F., J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 66, 398 (1983).Google Scholar
19.Wilski, H., Makromol. Chem. 150, 209 (1971).Google Scholar
20.Krug, S. and Evans, J.R.G., Ceram. Int. 25, 661 (1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21.Zhang, T. and Evans, J.R.G., J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 75, 2260 (1992).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22.Krug, S., Evans, J.R.G., and ter Maat, J.H.H. (unpublished).Google Scholar
23.Van Krevelen, D.W., Properties of Polymers (Elsevier, New York, 1990), pp. 603–609.Google Scholar
24.Galeski, A. and Piorkowska, E., J. Polym. Sci., Part B: Polym. Phys. 28, 1171 (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
25.Galeski, A. and Piorkowska, E., J. Polym. Sci., Part B: Polym. Phys. 21, 1299 (1983).Google Scholar
26.Galeski, A. and Piorkowska, E., J. Polym. Sci., Part B: Polym. Phys. 21, 1313 (1983).Google Scholar
27.Piorkowska, E. and Galeski, A., J. Polym. Sci., Part B: Polym. Phys. 31, 1285 (1993).Google Scholar
28. Data Sheet Catamold AO-F BASF AG, Ludwigshafen, Germany, May 1996.Google Scholar