2017
DOI: 10.1007/s11740-017-0719-6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Self-optimizing injection molding based on iterative learning cavity pressure control

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
2
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 26 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In 2016, Nam et al [11] developed a diagnostic and error prediction model for lens injection molding based on the response surface method to extract the signal of cavity pressure during the injection molding process and measure the shape error of the lens they want to produce by embedding a pressure sensor in the mold to improve the yield of the lens in actual injection molding. In 2017, Hopmann et al [12] applied an iterative learning control method to optimize the control strategy of cavity pressure to improve the injection molding machine accuracy and further improve the injection molding product quality based on the PVT (pressure, volume and temperature) characteristics of the material, i.e., considering the relationship between pressure, volume and temperature at the same time and using the characteristic that the injection molding process is repetitive. In 2020, Stemmler et al [13] proposed the concept of model-based self-optimization in injection molding and applied a model-based parametric optimization iterative learning controller (NOILC) to monitor the variation of cavity pressure during injection molding, and the experiments of this study show that their proposed method could achieve highprecision control of cavity pressure and improve the product quality, especially the weight stability.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In 2016, Nam et al [11] developed a diagnostic and error prediction model for lens injection molding based on the response surface method to extract the signal of cavity pressure during the injection molding process and measure the shape error of the lens they want to produce by embedding a pressure sensor in the mold to improve the yield of the lens in actual injection molding. In 2017, Hopmann et al [12] applied an iterative learning control method to optimize the control strategy of cavity pressure to improve the injection molding machine accuracy and further improve the injection molding product quality based on the PVT (pressure, volume and temperature) characteristics of the material, i.e., considering the relationship between pressure, volume and temperature at the same time and using the characteristic that the injection molding process is repetitive. In 2020, Stemmler et al [13] proposed the concept of model-based self-optimization in injection molding and applied a model-based parametric optimization iterative learning controller (NOILC) to monitor the variation of cavity pressure during injection molding, and the experiments of this study show that their proposed method could achieve highprecision control of cavity pressure and improve the product quality, especially the weight stability.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Control signal learning control, also called iterative learning control (ILC), adjusts the controller output directly. e ILC method has been widely used in injection molding to achieve stable tracking of the time and batch sequence of the set point trajectory so as to improve process accuracy and repeatability [164,169,187,188].…”
Section: Conventional Iterative Learning Controlmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, with advanced sensing technology, much physical information about molten polymer within the cavities can be revealed [7,8]. For example, the cavity pressure profile detected by a cavity pressure sensor can reflect the variations of molten polymer quality during the mold filling process [9,10,11,12,13]. Regarding V/P switchover control, Kazmer et al [14] compared the effects of the V/P switchover setting point on molded part quality with seven different methods, including: (1) screw position; (2) injection time; (3) machine pressure; (4) nozzle pressure; (5) sprue pressure; (6) cavity pressure; and (7) cavity temperature.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%