NSF Workshop on Polymer

Processing,
June 9-10, 2004
Hari Dharan
University of California at Berkeley

Present research
Resin Transfer Molding
New concept for resin transfer molding
(RTM) in which tool articulation provides
significantly faster mold fill time
compared to conventional RTM
processes.

Outline
Review of conventional RTM

Darcys Law and its components

Current analytical methods based on Darcys Law
Example of one-dimensional analysis for mold fill time
Drawbacks with conventional RTM
Factors affecting permeability

Tool articulation concepts

Resin peristalsis by tool articulation
One-dimensional analysis for mold fill time using articulated tool
Advantages and drawbacks

Some suggestions for future investigations

Introduction
In RTM, the mold is packed with a dry fiber
preform in which the fibers are oriented in the
desired directions for reinforcing the part.
The preform is impregnated by resin injected
through one or more ports in the mold. After the
mold is filled, the resin solidifies by cross-linking
and the part is removed from the mold.
There are currently many analyses and computer
programs that simulate the mold filling process.

Prior Work
Gonzalez, Castro and Macosko (1985): axisymmetric
analysis 1-D (analytical and numerical)
Coulter and Geri (1988): 2-D finite-difference code for
isothermal flow
Young, et al (1991): included variable permeability effects
Bruschke and Advani (1993): non-isothermal flow using
finite-element method
Others: Hieber and Shen (1980), Trochu and Gauvin
(1992): numerical simulation issues

Process description of RTM

Liquid resin

Major process steps

1. Prepare mold
2. Place fiber preform
3. Inject liquid resin
4. Cure impregnated fibers
5. De-mold and finish
Fiber reinforcements
In http://www.owenscorning.com

Conventional RTM
Key Benefits

Complex shapes
All surfaces finished in the mold
Low cost for repetitive production
Moderate production quantities

Drawbacks
Anisotropic flow leading to entrapped voids
Long times to allow for resin flow and delayed cure
Mold temperature control: slow
Restricted to low viscosity thermosetting resins
Fiber wash

Ideal RTM process

Rapid mold fill (minutes, not hours)
No voids or resin bypass regions
No fiber wash for various preforms
Applicable to a variety of resin systems:
hot melt epoxies, vinyl esters, thermoplastics
Hybrid fiber preforms and embedded inserts

Resin Infiltration Model

Darcys law => V = - (S/)(dP/dx)
S:Permeability Tensor, :Viscosity, (dP/dx):pressure gradient

Mold fill time can be reduced only by :

1. Increasing permeability
2. Lowering viscosity, or
3. Increasing inlet pressure

1. Increasing Permeability
Decrease fiber volume fraction
Increase use of chopped and felt preforms
Problem: Lowers composite properties

2. Lowering Viscosity
Low molecular weight resins
High temperature injection
Problems: Process window and control issues
Lower Tg, modulus, compressive strength

3. Increasing Pressure
Problems: Preform distortion and fiber wash
Permeability reduction

Permeability through Fiber Preform

In-plane components (Sx, Sy) >> Sz
Different types of preforms will have different
compliance in the thickness direction resulting in
different relative permeabilities
(in-plane vs thickness).
Compressible --> Permeability = f(P)
Multi-scale permeable paths :
(Preform level / fiber bundle level)

Articulated Approach
Major tooling and functional features
Segmented upper mold
Peristalsis-like flow propagation
Squeeze flow through loose fibers
Mechanical consolidation

Articulated RTM
Result: Loading point follows flow front
Pressure gradient is kept from degrading at constant load
Filling rate is expected to remain high
Key process scheme
1. Liquid resin is supplied onto loose dry preform
2. Initial squeeze-down of upper mold segments
3. Transverse infiltration is driven by the first segment
4. Unloading of second segment
5. Excessive resin volume is captured by the unloading segment

Analytical Approach
Objective
Comparison of mold fill-time between conventional (C-) RTM and
articulated (A-) RTM
Investigation of segment controls as process parameters

Process model
Approach

Unidirectional mold/ten segments

Darcys eqn applied to each segment
Transverse flow (w.r.t. laminate) is achieved by
consolidation, longitudinal flow occurs
through loose preform (higher S)
Loose fiber volume fraction, Vo =0.58
Sx/Sz=100 at a given fiber volume fraction

Mold filling analysis in C-RTM

Transverse flow rate

z f
S z P
q z Ao
Ao 1 V f
y
t

Longitudinal flow rate gradient

x f
q x
S x P

1 V f
z
x
t

Total volume flow rate

q qx qz

Two-directional flow is considered

Longitudinal flow rate is a function of y and time
Nomenclature :

In the next page

Nomenclature
qx

: Longitudinal volume flow rate per unit width

qz

: Transverse volume flow rate per unit width

t
xf

: Time
: Longitudinal flow front, fn(z)

zf

: Transverse flow front.

Ao

: Inlet area in C-RTM

Po

: Constant inlet pressure in C-RTM

Vf

: Fiber volume fraction

Sx

: Longitudinal permeability at Vf

Sz

: Transverse permeability at Vf

: Viscosity

Mold filling analysis in A-RTM

Resin flow in A-RTM

Two-stage flow

Case 1 : Initial stage when the first segment is in motion

Transverse down-flow through the loose preform only
Longitudinal flow through the squeezed preform is restricted
Case 2 : After the transverse flow is completed in case 1.
Longitudinal flow is driven by the excessive resin squeezed
by segment motion.
Transverse flow is achieved by the consolidation
of the wet loose preform

Case 1:
Volume flow rate per unit
width by transverse flow

q Az 1 Vo

2 S z' Po t
1 Vo

This equation is limited to when the transverse

flow front reaches the bottom of preform
Az
Po
Vf
Vo
Sx
Sz

: Area of a segment in contact with preform

: Constant inlet pressure in C-RTM
: Fiber volume fraction
: Fiber volume fraction of loose fiber
: Longitudinal permeability at Vo
: Transverse permeability at Vo

Case 2:
Volume flow rate per unit width by longitudinal flow
After the transverse flow is completed in case 1
q

21 Vo h f
3

S x Po
where D1
1 Vo

tc
h
Sx
Sz

2 D1 t tc

S z Po
D2
1 Vo

h
1
h f

hf

3/ 2

2 S z Po t
1 Vo

: Time when the transverse flow reaches bottom

(when hf = h)
: Preform thickness at Vo
: Longitudinal permeability at Vo
: Transverse permeability at Vo

Mold filling simulation results

Mold fill ratio with time
1

tr : Mold-fill time
for C-RTM

Mold-fill ratio

0.8
Articulated process
Conventional RTM

0.6

Po : Inlet pressure
for C-RTM
P(segment load)=Po

0.4

0.2

Ten segments
0
0

0.2

0.4

0.6

Normalized time (t/tr)

0.8

Result: Mold fill time for A-RTM is 6 % of C-RTM fill time

Effect of segment load on mold fill

time
0.5

tr: Mold-fill time

for C-RTM

Mold fill time (t/tr)

0.4

0.3

P(segment load)=xPo
0.2

Ten segments

0.1

0
0

Pressure (P/Po) for articulated process

For P/Po = 1, mold fill time (t/tr)=0.06 relative to C-RTM

Lower pressures than this still result in faster mold fill times
relative to C-RTM

Effect of number of segments

2

Mold fill time (t/ts)

1.8

1.6

ts : Mold-fill time
for ten Segments

1.4

P(segment load)=Ps
Mold length is constant

1.2

1
2

Number of segments

10

For ten segments, mold fill time (t/ts)=1.

Four segments result in a 40% increase in mold fill time.
This is still only 8% of C-RTM mold fill time.

Summary of results
Mold-fill rate does not decelerate during the process
Mold fill time is increased by increasing segment load
Mold filling is much faster than in conventional RTM
Fewer segments result in slightly slower mold filling
3-4 segments can increases mold fill time effectively

Advantages of Articulated Tooling

Fast filling --> Mass-production
Fiber distortion and wash-out can be avoided
Locally trapped air pockets can be removed
Robust process relatively insensitive to resins, preform
characteristics and temperature
Mechanical design of tool is complicated but probably
not significantly more than for a typical injection
molding tool

Potential applications of A-RTM

Mass production of large and complex parts
Tool motion control can be used to tailor local
permeability for various types of reinforcements
Multi-resin systems: High temperature resins can be used,
including high-viscosity systems
Complex stitched preforms can be used
A-RTM Tooling
Control of articulated segments is straight-forward
using computer-controlled servoactuators (with load and
position feedback)
Proposed concept could be coupled to low presssure
injection machines

Articulated RTM Tooling

Schematic of axi-symmetric process
Center piston(segment)
First ring(segment)

Second ring(segment)

Servohydraulic equipped A-Tooling

Schematic drawing of cross-section configuration
of axi-symmetric process

Servo hydraulic
pump

Upper mold
segment

Inlet hole

Drawbacks of Articulated Tooling

Expensive tooling
Probably restricted to small parts < 1 m2 ?
Potential for fiber damage by articulated
segments needs to be assessed and eliminated
by tool force control.

Future work
Conduct simple experiments using
axisymmetric segmented mold
Study preform characteristics using preg
fiber bundles for thermoplastic matrices.
Couple to front-end of injection
molding machine.

Issues to be addressed
Modeling of conventional processes should
predict defects and flow paths.
Adjustments in conventional processes should
be applied to eliminate predicted defects,
increase process speed, widen range of
allowable parameters (viscosity, molecular
weight, temperature, reaction times).
Transfer to industry via interactive programs
(instrumented prototype machinery, correlation
with models, validate improved processes)

Modeling issues
Dynamic modeling
Pressure gradient-dependent permeability
Thermoplastic processing extension to
continuous, oriented fibers.
Controlled porosity, fiber orientation and
distribution achieved by mold and process
design.
Preform and fiber placement machine
design.