Show simple item record

contributor authorShaoqiang Dong
contributor authorDavid O. Kazmer
contributor authorChunsheng E
contributor authorBingfeng Fan
contributor authorKourosh Danai
date accessioned2017-05-09T00:24:44Z
date available2017-05-09T00:24:44Z
date copyrightAugust, 2007
date issued2007
identifier issn1087-1357
identifier otherJMSEFK-28015#802_1.pdf
identifier urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl/handle/yetl/136286
description abstractMost plastic processing set points are variables that need to be defined for each sample point of the cycle. However, in the absence of on-line measures of part quality, the set points cannot be defined by feedback and need to be prescribed a priori for the entire cycle. In conventional practice, the shape of each set-point profile is defined either heuristically, according to qualitative experience, or mechanistically, to enforce a predefined trajectory for a simulated internal process state that is used as a surrogate measure of part quality (e.g., the velocity profile defined to dictate a constant melt front velocity). The purpose of this study is twofold: (i) to evaluate the efficacy of using a single internal state as the surrogate of part quality, and (ii) to explore the feasibility of devising a multivariate profiling approach, where indices of multiple process states act as surrogates of part quality. For this study, an injection-compression molding process used for production of digital video disks was considered as the development domain, and a pseudo-optimal cycle of the process was found by reinforcement learning to provide a basis for evaluating the ideal behavior of the process states. Compared to conventional molding, the results indicate that the asymmetric process capability index, CPK, was increased by ∼50% with velocity profile optimization and to 120% with both velocity profile and pressure profile optimization. Two general conclusions result. First, velocity and pressure profiling provide important degrees of freedom for optimizing process control and maximizing part quality. Second, estimators for unobservable process states, in this case birefringence and warpage, can be used to develop different machine profiles to selectively trade off multiple quality attributes according to user preferences.
publisherThe American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)
titleProcess-Driven Input Profiling for Plastics Processing
typeJournal Paper
journal volume129
journal issue4
journal titleJournal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering
identifier doi10.1115/1.2738094
journal fristpage802
journal lastpage809
identifier eissn1528-8935
keywordsPressure
keywordsDouble refraction
keywordsWarping
keywordsCycles
keywordsPlastics
keywordsDisks
keywordsPacking (Shipments)
keywordsMolding
keywordsMachinery
keywordsFlow (Dynamics)
keywordsOptimization AND Feedback
treeJournal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering:;2007:;volume( 129 ):;issue: 004
contenttypeFulltext


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record