Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Procedia CIRP 69 (2018) 342 – 347

25th CIRP Life Cycle Engineering (LCE) Conference, 30 April ± 2 May 2018, Copenhagen, Denmark

Analysis of Process Parameters affecting

Energy Consumption in Plastic Injection Moulding
Isaac Meekers, Paul Refalo*, Arif Rochman
Department of Industial and Manufacturing Engineering (DIME), University of Malta, Msida, Malta

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +356 23402058; E-mail address: paul.refalo@um.edu.mt

Abstract

Sustainable manufacturing has become essential amongst industries of all types due to the diminishing non-renewable sources and an ever-
increasing demand for environmentally friendly products. Injection moulding is one of the most widely used processes for the production of
plastic products and is a large consumer of energy. Energy efficiency has become a serious concern due to the rising energy costs and the
associated environmental impacts. IEA (2007) reports that one third of the global energy consumption and 36 percent of ଶ emissions are
attributed to the manufacturing sector. The aim of this study was to optimize the injection moulding process in order to reduce energy
consumption whilst also ensuring no loss in part quality. This was achieved by investigating the impacts of cooling time, screw rotational
speed, mould temperature and nozzle temperature. It was found that the cooling time and the nozzle temperature had the greatest impact on
energy consumption. The mass and length of the part were not affected by any of the parameters within the selected processing windows, while
the surface roughness was slightly influenced by the mould temperature range. Results indicated a possibility of using lower cycle times and
lower nozzle temperatures to decrease energy consumption without having adverse impact on part quality. When comparing the energy
consumption while using process parameters set at their minimum values compared to midpoint values, savings of 14 percent were achieved.

©©201
207TheThe Authors.
Authors. Published
Published by Elsevier
by Elsevier B.V. ThisB.V.
is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 25th CIRP Life Cycle Engineering (LCE) Conference.
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 25th CIRP Life Cycle Engineering (LCE) Conference

Keywords: Sustainability; Energy Consumption; Sustainable Manufacturing; Injection Moulding; Process Parameter Optimization

1. Introduction life, manufacturers are pressed to satisfy this demand whilst

using less raw material as well as reducing waste and emitted
Industry has a key role to play in the transformation of our pollutants. Hence, the energy efficiency of processes and
society towards sustainability. Energy and resource efficiency products has become an essential feature and a competitive
are acknowledged as the main drivers to establish an differentiator.
environmentally less damaging economy [1].
The energy sector is responsible for around two thirds of Nomenclature
all greenhouse gas emissions induced by human activities. In
2012, the industrial sector was responsible for approximately Tm Nozzle Temperature
25 percent of the total energy consumption in Europe, and 28 Sr Screw Rotational Speed
percent on a world scale [2]. Furthermore, IEA (2007) found Tmo Mould Temperature
that 36 percent of global ଶ emissions was attributed to tc Cooling time
industrial processes. IEA also determined that ଶ energy
related emissions reached a new high of 31.6Gt in 2012 [3].
As human beings constantly seek to enhance the quality of

2212-8271 © 201 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 25th CIRP Life Cycle Engineering (LCE) Conference
doi:10.1016/j.procir.2017.11.042
 Isaac Meekers et al. / Procedia CIRP 69 (2018) 342 – 347 343

2. Injection moulding conducted by Spiering et al. that investigate the energy

consumption with respect to the injection moulding of
Injection moulding has become the most popular technique automotive parts using a hydraulic injection moulding
for plastic processing due to its high efficiency and cost machine. The authors determined that approximately 50% of
effectiveness. This forming manufacturing technique can be the energy consumed was associated with the drives of the
used to produce components with complex geometries from machine, while 20% was consumed by the mould cooling,
polymer materials. Several products such as mobile phones, 10% by the supply of pressurised air, 10% by the spindle
computers and automobiles contain injection-moulded heating and another 10% by material transport and drying [1].
components. Injection moulding machines comprise three Mianehrow et al. attempted to determine the most
main components: (1) Clamping unit, which serves to mount important parameters contributing to energy consumption
the mould, (2) Injection unit that is responsible for the feeding during injection moulding of polypropylene using a standard
and melting of the polymer inside the barrel at a specific test called the Euromap-60.2. Tests were carried out on six
temperature and injecting the material into the mould to form hydraulic injection moulding machines and their energy
the desired shape, (3) Control unit whereby the moulding profile over one complete cycle was measured in five second
process parameters are defined. The injection moulding intervals using a TES-3600 power analyser. Results showed
process also requires peripheral equipment such as a hopper, that the cycle time has a significant impact on the Specific
dryer unit and mould temperature control unit (TCU) [4]. Energy Consumption (SEC) [7]. By reducing the cycle time,
the operation time of the motors and pumps is also reduced
2.1 Injection moulding process and according to Muller et al. this can be achieved by
Injection moulding involves five main operational stages, reducing the cooling and holding times. The results
comprising mould closing (clamping), melt injection confirming this relationship are shown in Table 1.
(packing), cooling, mould opening and ejection. The process
commences by feeding the plastic material (usually granules) Table 1 - Relationship between Cycle Time and SEC [7]
Injection Moulding Cycle Time SEC
from the hopper to the heated injection barrel of the injection-
Machine (s) (kWh/kg)
moulding machine. The granules are melted in the heated
barrel through heat conduction from the heated barrel and Machine A 100 0.748
shear action carried out by a rotating screw. The screw rotates Machine B 120 0.776
and transports the molten material to the screw chamber in
Machine C 120 0.924
front of the screw tip. Following this plasticization stage, the
polymer is injected into the mould cavity, which is shaped as Machine D 100 0.724
the negative of the part to be produced. The filling phase
Machine E 120 1.739
includes the compression of the melt in the cavity, which is
then followed by a packing/holding stage, in which a high Machine F 70 0.540
melt pressure is maintained in order to compensate for
shrinkage as more molten material is forced into the cavity. Another study conducted by Muller et al. assessed the
The compression stage or the changeover point from the process of injection moulding Polybutylene Terephthalate
injection to the holding phase occurs when 95% of the mould (PBT) parts using dual electrical energy signatures. The dual
is filled. The mould is then cooled with the aid of cooling energy signature method involves comparing the power
channels inside the mould, resulting in the solidification of the curves of a single processing cycle to a cycle without material
plastic part. The process ends with the ejection of the cooled (air filling) in order to establish value adding (VA) and non-
solid part. The part is ejected when the mould which consists value (NVA) adding elements in the process. By
of two halves is opened. The entire process is repeated [5]. superimposing the power profile graphs of the two processing
cycles the value adding and non-value adding elements were
2.2 Energy consumption during injection moulding determined. The results showed that, in terms of energy, a low
value adding efficiency of 23% was obtained. The authors
Due to its large scale, the injection moulding industry is a then attempted enhance the efficiency of the process by
large consumer of energy and hence several studies have been reducing the process time through optimising the holding time
conducted in terms of sustainability in this sector. and cooling time as well as decreasing the power level. They
The specific energy requirements for manufacturing found that the cycle time could be reduced by 7.7 s compared
processes are dynamic depending on the machine¶s state and to using the recommended settings. Muller et al. stated that
production stage. The different machine states are defined as: this would result in a saving time of approximately 15% as
(1) Off (no energy consumption), (2) Start/ramp up (the well as an energy saving of around 15% [8].
demand for energy spikes due to the turning on of Qureshi et al. made use of an empirical method to obtain a
components and heating up steps), (3) Idle (relatively constant relationship between the process variables and the energy
energy consumption after the ramp up phase and machine is consumption. Factors such as the clamping pressure, injection
ready to start production), (4) Operation (the actual energy pressure, holding pressure, decompression pressure, injection
used for the value addition process) [6]. speed, decompression speed and dosing speed were
Energy consumption in injection moulding is distributed controlled. SEC was chosen as the response variable and was
across the different process components. There exist studies calculated from the mass, power and cycle time. Power
344 Isaac Meekers et al. / Procedia CIRP 69 (2018) 342 – 347

consumption was recorded every 0.1 s. Upon determining the removable 2-cavity inserts on both the injection and ejection
power consumption, the authors computed the SEC values sides were designed and manufactured.
and concluded that the throughput was the most important
factor affecting energy consumption. Qureshi et al. found that
the variation of the process parameters alone had no
significant impact on the energy consumption as the fixed
power dominated the SEC and the factors has minimal impact
on the cycle time or throughput [9].
Figure 1 - Case Study Part
2.3 Impact of process parameters on quality criteria
3.2 Experiment set-up
Besides a vast amount of research in energy consumption
in the field of injection moulding, there also exist studies on This study was performed on a hydraulic BOY 22E
various quality criteria. Manufacturers consider the cycle time injection moulding machine shown in Figure 2. KEW 6305
to be critical to their success. However, based on customer KYORITSU power loggers were connected to the injection
demand, it is also critical to offer better quality at the moulding machine and its ancillary equipment in order to
minimum product cost. In injection moulding, some quality measure the energy consumption and generate the
characteristics include mechanical properties, dimensional corresponding power and energy profiles of the injection
conformity and surface appearance. moulding process. The set up consisted of three main units;
Bano et al. made use of Response Surface Methodology the injection moulding machine, the temperature control unit
(RSM) to optimize the injection moulding process parameters. and a chiller unit. Each of the data loggers were connected to
RSM refers to a collection of statistical and mathematical a central computer for the transfer of data.
techniques which are useful for modelling and analysing
engineering problems. The parameters that were varied were
the mould temperature, injection pressure and screw speed
rotation. The results showed that by increasing the mould
temperature and the injection pressure, values closer to the
target values for the part length and width were achieved [10].
Huang et al. analysed the impacts of six input parameters;
mould temperature, packing pressure, packing time, injection
time and melting temperature, on the surface quality of the
injection moulded part. C-MoldTM software was used to
generate simulations of the injection moulding process using a
PC/ABS blend at the various parameter settings. It was found
that the most significant factor was the mould temperature
followed by the melt temperature, packing pressure, packing
time and lastly the injection time [11].
There are many studies that investigate the possibility of
reducing energy consumption during injection moulding, both
through empirical modelling and parameter optimization.
However, there seems to be a lack of studies, which consider
part quality and energy consumption simultaneously. It is
important that quality is considered when attempting to
reduce energy consumption as all three economic,
Figure 2 - BOY 22E hydraulic injection moulding machine
environmental and social pillars must accounted for in order
for sustainability to be reached. 3.3 Selection of process parameters
3. Experiments Several variables have an impact on the injection moulding
process. Due to the vast number of parameters the variables
3.1 Case Study Part Design having the greatest impact in terms of energy consumption
and part quality had to be identified.
The first step of this study was the design of a case study The process of parameter selection involved carrying out a
part to be used during energy consumption as well as quality few trial tests in order to aid determining which settings were
criteria investigation. Attention was given to certain criteria most likely to have an impact on energy and part quality. It
such as the size of the part, machinability, and machining was found that the most energy intensive phases were the
costs amongst other factors. Other crucial design features cooling phase, followed by the plasticizing stage and holding
were the position and design of the gate and cooling channels. phase. The portions of energy consumption per phase are
The designed case study part was that of a bottle opener made shown in Figure 3.
of TPI Porene ABS, as shown in Figure 1. A mould with
 Isaac Meekers et al. / Procedia CIRP 69 (2018) 342 – 347 345

11 +1 -1 +1 -1
Ϯϲй 12 +1 -1 +1 +1
13 +1 +1 -1 -1
Injection
ϭϬй 14 +1 +1 -1 +1
Holding -1
15 +1 +1 +1
ϲй Ϯϲй Plasticizing 16 +1 +1 +1 +1

Cooling Table 3 - Process parameters' upper and lower bound values

Factor Lower Bound Upper Bound Unit
Ejection
ϯϮй Tm 220 240 Ž

Sr 40 60 RPM
Figure 3 - Energy consumed at each phase Tmo 30 40 Ž

tc 15 25 s
The selected process parameters for this study included the
Nozzle (Barrel) Temperature, Mould Temperature, Cooling 3.5 Energy data collection and analysis
time and Screw Rotational Speed.
Trial injection moulding runs were then carried out in The data collected was analysed using the Analysis of
order to obtain the upper bound and lower bound setting Variance (ANOVA) function of Minitab 17 software to
values to be tested for each parameter. acquire a concrete conclusion on the effects of the process
parameters on the energy consumption.
3.4 Design of experiments
3.6 Quality criteria tests and analysis
Design of experiments is a fundamental tool used for the
development of an experimental strategy, which maximizes Quality tests which involved measuring the part mass, part
learning while using minimum resources [12]. length and part surface roughness were performed. The
For the purpose of this study, a two-level full factorial criteria measured to assess the smoothness of the part
design was used where each process parameter was set at a included profile roughness parameters: Arithmetic Average
specified minimum and a maximum value. Hence, all the Roughness (Ra) and Geometric Average Roughness (Rq)
possible combinations for the set of factors were investigated. These surface tests were conducted on a Mitutoyo Surftest
The two-level full factorial design is expressed as 2k, in which 501 machine having a resolution of 0.1 ȝP The mass was
k represents the number of factors that are investigated. Four measured using a KERN PLJ 730-3A precision balance that
factors were varied, resulting in a total of 16 trials, whereby had automatic internal calibration and an accuracy of േ1mg.
energy consumption was measured over 10 cycles for each The part length was measured using a Mitutoyo digital
trial. In order to ensure stability of the system, 5 runs were calliper having an accuracy of േȝP For the inspection of
processed between trials prior to recording data. part mass and length 10 parts were weighed and measured
The experimental procedure generated using the Design of respectively, while for the surface roughness test, two
Experiments inbuilt function on Minitab17 is shown in Table readings were recorded on a single part from each trial. The
 µ¶ UHIHUV WR VHWWLQJ WKH SDUDPHWHU DW WKH XSSHU ERXQG results were also evaluated using the ANOVA technique.
YDOXHZKLOHµ-¶UHIHUVWRVHWWLQJLWDWWKHORZHUERXQG value).
This is shown in Table 2 and Table 3. 3.7 Determining the best trade off

Table 2 - Experimental procedure An evaluation of the energy and quality impacts incurred
Standard Tm Sr Tmo tc
by the various process parameters was accomplished through
Order (oC) (RPM) (oC) (s)
the use of statistical techniques, namely; ANOVA, Pareto
1 -1 -1 -1 -1
charts, Main Effects charts and Interaction Effects charts.
2 -1 -1 -1 +1 Upon evaluation, the parameter setting combinations that
3 -1 -1 +1 -1 gave the best trade-off between energy consumption and part
quality were identified.
4 -1 -1 +1 +1
5 -1 +1 -1 -1 4. Results
6 -1 +1 -1 +1
7 -1 +1 +1 -1 The energy data showed that the chiller unit was the main
consumer of energy (at 52 percent) followed by the injection
8 -1 +1 +1 +1
moulding machine and TCU respectively. The individual
9 +1 -1 -1 -1 consumption patterns of each unit for the 16 runs are shown in
10 +1 -1 -1 +1 Figure 5.
346 Isaac Meekers et al. / Procedia CIRP 69 (2018) 342 – 347

Regarding the quality criteria of the part, the ANOVA

results determined that none of the parameters had a
Machine (Wh) significant effect on the mass and length of the part.
ϯϰй Regarding the surface roughness of the part, the mould
TCU (Wh) temperature had a very low impact on the surface roughness
Chiller (Wh) of the part, while the other process parameters had no impact.
ϱϮй This is shown in Figure 8.

ϭϰй

Figure 4 - Percent Energy Consumption of each Unit

ϰϬ
ŶĞƌŐLJŽŶƐƵŵƉƚŝŽŶ;tŚͬĐLJůĐĞͿ

ϯϱ
ϯϬ
Ϯϱ
ϮϬ
ϭϱ
ϭϬ Figure 8 - 3URFHVV,PSDFWVRQ6XUIDFH5RXJKQHVV ȝP

ϱ
It was concluded that setting all parameters at their lower
Ϭ
ϭ Ϯ ϯ ϰ ϱ ϲ ϳ ϴ ϵ ϭϬ ϭϭ ϭϮ ϭϯ ϭϰ ϭϱ ϭϲ
bound values would save significant amounts of energy whilst
Standard Order still ensuring satisfactory part quality.
DĂĐŚŝŶĞ dh ŚŝůůĞƌ
5. Discussion and recommendations
Figure 5 - Energy patterns of machine, chiller and TCU

The results prove the optimization of the injection

The ANOVA technique was used to model the relationship
moulding process through the designed experiments is
between a response variable and the independent variables. A
possible. The experiment outcomes show that the main energy
confidence interval of 0.95 was used and the results showed
consumer was the chiller unit, entailing approximately 52
that the cooling time had the greatest impact on the energy
percent of the total energy consumption. It also had the
consumption, while the nozzle temperature also had a
greatest influence on the variances in energy consumption for
significant impact. The mould temperature and the screw
the sixteen trials. This was due to the 4.5 kW rated cooling
rotational speed on the other hand had a negligible effect. The
unit, which operated at regular intervals, and due to the
impacts of the process parameters on the energy consumption
constant high base load of its 1 kW pump. On the other hand,
are shown in Figure 6 and Figure 7.
the TCU had negligible effect on the fluctuations of energy
consumption and operated independently to the injection
moulding process. This is because the TCU simply uses
energy for pumping water to the mould and the only slight
change in energy consumption is due to a longer cooling time.
Regarding the injection moulding machine, the main
sources for energy consumption variation between trials were
the different process parameters. Results showed that the
cooling time had greatest impact on energy consumption. The
cooling time directly determines the cycle time of the entire
process and therefore having a longer cycle time results in the
Figure 6 - Impact of Process Parameters on Energy Consumption
injection moulding machine operating for an extended period
of time, hence consuming more energy. The nozzle
temperature also had an impact on the energy consumption
due to the additional energy required for the heating bands.
The mould temperature and screw rotational speed on the
other hand had negligible impact on energy consumption.
Therefore, to a certain extent melting the polymer by shearing
rather than heat conduction from the heating bands would
increase the process efficiency.
Concerning the quality of the injected ABS parts, the tests
showed that none of the process parameters had a significant
impact on the mass or length of the part. This may be because
ABS is an amorphous material and hence does not shrink
Figure 7 ± Parameters Effect on Mean Energy Consumption (Wh/cycle)
 Isaac Meekers et al. / Procedia CIRP 69 (2018) 342 – 347 347

much. Regarding the surface roughness of the part, it was parameters as well as their combinational impacts. Therefore,
found that the mould temperature had a minimal effect. The one could investigate the impact of other parameters.
surface roughness of the part increased with increasing the
PRXOGWHPSHUDWXUHDVWKHSDUW¶VVXUIDFHUeplicated the surface Acknowledgements
texture of the mould. Since the process parameters had no
major consequences on the quality criteria, the energy per The authors would like to thank the staff of the DIME at
cycle could be easily reduced without adverse effects. the University of Malta, particularly Ing. John Borg and Mr
It is estimated that the energy required for raw ABS Michael Attard.
production (26.4 kWh/kg) and high volume injection
moulding (5.8 kWh/kg) totals around 32.2 kWh/kg [13]. If the References
material is recycled, the energy required is estimated at 13 [1] Stephan Kohlitz, Harald Sundmaeker, Crishoph Herrmann Tim
kWh/kg [13]. Hence the energy required to process an ABS Spiering, "Energy Efficiency Benchmarking for Injetion Moulding
component throughout its whole lifecycle from raw material Processes," Sustaining Resilience in Today's Demanding
production to recycling totals around 45 kWh/kg [13]. The Environments, vol. 36, no. 36, pp. 45-59, 2014.
[2] W.Dewulf, B.Lauwers, J-P.Kruth, J.R.Duflou K.Kellens,
energy requirements in this low-volume injection moulding "Environmental Impact Reduction in Discrete Manufacturing:
study was reduced by 14% from 7.5 kWh/kg (using midpoint Examples for Non-Conventional Processes," Proceedings of the
parameters) to 6.5 kWh/kg (using minimum parameter Seventeenth CIRP Conference on Electro Physical and Chemical
settings). Machining (ISEM), vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 27-34, 2013.
[3] Catherine Azzaro-Pantel Jean-Pierre Dal Pont, New Approaches to the
For comparison purposes, consider manufacturers based in Process Industries, The Manufacturing Plant of the Future. London,
China, Europe and USA that produce 5 million similar parts UK: ISTE Ltd and John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2014.
per year. Using the midpoint parameter settings, a [4] H. M Mohd R.M Farizal, "Sustainable Manufacturing in Injection
manufacturer would consume 34.4 Wh per cycle; hence it Moulding: Development of Energy Map," School of Technology &
Logistics, University Utara Malaysia.
would require around 85,000 kWh/year. On the other hand,
[5] Rainer Schilligb, Timo Stockab, Miriam Schmeilerb Egon Müllera,
the energy per cycle while using the minimum bound values "Improvement of injection moulding processes by using dual energy
for the process parameters is 29.7 Wh, resulting in an energy signatures," Procedia CIRP, vol. 17, pp. 704-709, 2014.
saving of around 14%. Therefore, the energy consumed would [6] G. Bogdanski, C. Herrmanna, S. Thiedea, "A Systematic Method for
drop to 73,100 kWh for the same amount of parts. Likewise, Increasing the Energy and Resource Efficiency in Manufacturing
Companies," Procedia CIRP , vol. 2, pp. 28-32, 2012.
CO2 emissions would also be reduced. Table 4 compares the
[7] Ali Abbasian Hanieh Mianehrow, "Energy monitoring of plastic
CO2 emissions using the two setting types. injection moulding process running with hydraulic injection moulding
machines," Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 148, pp. 804-810, April
Table 4 - Carbon Dioxide Emission Reduction [14] 2017.
CO2 intensity CO2 [8] Daniel Elduque, Carlos Javierre, Angel Fernandez, Jorge Santolaria
Region
(kgCO2ͬkWh) (tonnes) Ana Elduque, "Environmental impact analysis of the injection molding
process: analysis of the processing of high-density polyethylene parts,"
Mid-point Lower bound
Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. xxx, pp. 1-10, 2015.
China 1.049 89,165 76,682 [9] Wen Li, Sami Kara and Christoph Hermann Farhan Qureshi, "Unit
USA 0.610 51,850 44,591 Process Energy Consumption Models for Material Addition Processes:
Europe (OECD) 0.391 30,770 26,462 A Case of the Injection Molding Process," in 19th CIRP International
Conference on Life Cycle Engineering, Berkeley, 2012.
[10] Jumat Sulaiman and S. Rajalingam Awang Bono, "Analysis of Optimal
Besides reducing energy costs and CO2 emissions, a lower Injection Moulding Process Parameters for Thin-Shell Plastic Product
cooling time would also increase production rates, which is Using Response Surface Methodology," Journal of Applied Science,
extremely beneficial to manufactures. vol. 23, no. 14, pp. 3192-3201, 2014.
[11] Ching-Chih Ta Ming-Chih Huang, "The effective factors in the
warpage problem of an injection-molded part with a thin shell feature
This study shows that energy savings are clearly linked to ," Journal of Materials Processing Technology, vol. 110, pp. 1-9, 2001.
sustainability. The reduction in energy consumption leads to [12] R.Panneerselvam, Design and Analysis of Experiments. New Dehli:
lower CO2 emissions, which varies in different regions. The Asoke K. Ghosh, PHI Learning Private Limited, 2012.
ultimate goal of manufacturers is to make profit. This study [13] 0DWHULDO8QLYHUVH'DWDEDVH³$%63ODVWLF´*UDQWD'HVLJQ/WG
showed that reducing energy consumption without lowering [14] International Panel on Climate Change. Carbon Dioxide Intensity of
Electricty. [Online]. https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/special-
product quality is possible. Hence the product would still sell reports/sroc/Tables/t0305.pdf
at lower energy costs, impacting all three pillars of
sustainability (environmental, economic and social)
positively.

6. Possible future work

Future studies could include investigating energy savings

for injection moulding different parts using different
machines. One could also investigate the effect of material
selection on the process parameters and their associated
impacts. This study neglected the effect of various process