隨著加工技術的進步、產品品質與產品功能的要求日益提升。在射出成型製程中,必須兼具產品精密成型性、表面品質及量產速度等要求,為了符合產品的需求,提高模具溫度為最有效的方法之ㄧ,但因此會造成較長的成型週期。而動態模溫控制系統能夠在成型週期中的充填階段維持高模溫,直到冷卻階段時快速的降低模溫,不僅提升產品品質同時能減少成型週期。 在本論文中,首先,建置氣體輔助動態模溫控制系統,並針對其製程參數對模溫影響性作一探討。其次,利用冷熱水切換模溫機與氣體輔助加熱系統對實驗加熱模板進行加熱與冷卻效益比較,並且使用分析軟體ANSYS對上述兩種加熱方式進行模擬分析,比較實驗與模擬分析的加熱、冷卻效益與溫度分佈場之結果,驗證製程之可行性。第三階段進一步將氣體輔助加熱之目標模溫設定提高,以因應未來產業需求,並且與感應加熱之加熱、冷卻效益與溫度分佈均勻性作一比較。第四階段將氣體輔助加熱製程應用至微流道生物晶片模具,探討動態模溫控制對於提升微流道轉寫性與模溫均勻性之效益。 研究結果顯示,使用冷熱水切換模溫機將加熱模板從60℃加熱至120℃需要186s,而氣體輔助加熱僅需2s。在冷卻方面,使用冷熱水切換模溫機將加熱模板從120℃冷卻至60℃需要84s,而氣體輔助加熱僅需21s,由上述實驗結果顯示出氣體輔助加熱在加熱、冷卻效益之優勢。在ANSYS模擬分析結果中,其加熱、冷卻效益與溫度分佈場與實驗結果的趨勢相當接近,藉由分析成功的驗證製程的可行性。 與感應加熱比較之實驗案例一中,顯示出氣體輔助加熱的溫度分佈均勻性優於感應加熱,並且對於感應加熱不適用之電鑄模仁也能進行加熱。在實驗案例二中,成功的將氣體輔助動態模溫控制系統應用在微射出成型上,當加熱之目標模溫高於材料玻璃轉換溫度時,能夠完整的複寫出微流道之結構,同時預期能縮短成型週期,顯示其應用的高度潛力和可行性。
As the technology of mold process advances, the high quality of products is demand gradually. High mold temperature provides great contributions for the injection molding parts, but it always increases cycle time. However, dynamic mold temperature control system could not only decrease cycle time but also improve quality. It keeps high mold temperature during the filling stage and decreases mold temperature rapidly during the cooling stage. This study is established Gas-assisted dynamic mold temperature control system (GDMTCS) first, and the parameters of process including gas temperature, distance between air outlet and mold surface, heating time and stamp material also analyzed. Analyze the mold temperature field in different heating methods include traditional mold temperature control (TMTC) and GDMTCS by ANSYS software. In addition, compare GDMTCS with induction heating system(IHS) in high mold temperature condition. GDMTCS was also applied to biochip mold with micro channel, and can improve the geometric of the micro channel and the quality. It was found that the mold surface temperature increases from 60℃ to 120℃takes 186 seconds by TMTC but only 2 seconds by GDMTCS. In addition, the mold surface temperature decreases from 120℃to 60℃ takes 84 seconds by TMTC but only 21 seconds by GDMTCS. The result shows that the GDMTCS was better than TMTC. The Feasibility was proved here by analysis successfully, because experiment result was relatively closed to simulation result. In conclusion, it was found that IHS will destroy the stamp mold with micro feature. Moreover, GDMTCS was applied to micro injection molding successfully. Hence, the experiment results show significant feasibility and high potential in injection molding application.