Moldflow - 3 D mesh analysis 1

[cameprak]

Hello,

Anybody has experience with 3d mesh moldflow analysis. How is the reliabilty compare to midplane mesh analysis.

Moreover, Which is better option for uniform wall thickness products. Midplane or Fusion?

Planning to purchase. Looking for your experience.

Thanks in advance for your replies.

Cameprak

 

[jelmerra]

each mesh type has its advantages/applications.

I tend to use the 3d stuff for connectors and other varying thickness parts. Not sure if moldflow would be my first pick for 3d flow (simpoemold or moldex or sigma). Interpretation requires experience. Patience or a lot of computing power is required.

Fusion is for a quick start but a long runtime. Results require frequently additional explanation.

Mid plane requires more time to build but then interpretation of the results is straight forward. Short run times.

Jelmerra

 

[cameprak]

Thanks jelmerra.

I got more or less same reply frm other sources with little changes.

1. Fusion results r not reliable. Especially in warpage.
Do u feel the same way.

How about flow +warp modul without cool. Will it be really useful since cooling is the major contributor for warp.

How is ur expereince with warp results frm moldflow. Is it matching with reality. Are u able to solve any problem using this results.

Thanks in advance.

cameprak

 

[jelmerra]

Fusion is a compromise between 2.5d and 3d. The problem is that you easily overlook chubby regions. Difficult to say if the analist is wrong or the software. It works out that way because the software takes away the meshing and does a lot of smart interpolation in the background. For proper injection moulding parts fusion works but for everything else it is not always giving realistic results.

You will need the cooling for neat resin warp analysis for filled materials you could consider to skip the cool module.

I think moldflow is a great tool for the initial design of a mould. For optimisation it is very good. Not sure if it is competitive in a preproduction environment. Varying the injection moulding parameters on a machine is a lot quicker than waiting for an analysis to complete. Correlation between simulation and actual parts is in general very good. Finding the right material data is often a bigger problem.

Jelmerra

 

[cameprak]

Thanks jelmerra.

 

[moldflowk]

If you use uniform thickness model, I would like to use a midplane mesh than the others.

The midplane ceneration is not easy matter with complex geometry, therefore you have to consider hot to make a midplane model.

Moldflow has been introduce the Caddotor software to clean a model geometry as like a fillet and radii.

The midplane mesh and solver odes work well for flow, cool and warp for a uniform thickness model.

The fusion model is easy to make mesh model but mesh quality is different issues, Moldflow recommended fro flow more than 85% mesh match ratio, for cooling and warpager analysis more than 90%. According to my experience that much match ratio is very difficult to get.

I would recommend you to use a midplane mesh and solver, if you use an uniform thickness model without complex geometry.

 

[moldflowk]

Hi,

For cooling package, Moldflow recommended to use cool + Flow + Warp analysis procedure because mold temperature distribution is very important for Warpage prediction.

I am not sure a analysis result oof warp without cooling analysis.

you do not need if you sure your mold temperature distribution is really good as much as possible.