Case study: Industrial Molds Group convinces its customer to select the more expensive, but more efficient toolCase study: Industrial Molds Group convinces its customer to select the more expensive, but more efficient tool

Illinois moldmaker overcomes its customer thinking, “We’ve never done it that way before.”

Mold: 1+1+1, two-shot, three-station tool 


Industry: Automotive


Challenge: A customer came to us with an extremely challenging tool that required some creative, out-of-the-box thinking. This tool is sourced in both Europe and North America making very comparable parts. Industrial Molds Group (Rockford, IL) had experience developing similar molds for this customer, so we were confident that we could come up with a solution. After looking at the CAD file for the part being created, it was obvious that there were very poor steel conditions. One area in particular would be extremely thin and subject to high-cost maintenance problems down the road.

The customer is currently molding similar parts by first creating the thermoplastic part and then transferring it by robot to a second station in the same tool for molding a thermoplastic rubber on sections of the part. This is the method the customer has used for a number of years for this type of part, and for which Industrial has built several molds. On this particular mold, however, by using the current design methods, it would have created potential tool durability and part issues. Molding the TPE around the thermoplastic part required the steel to be shaped and actions to move in such a way that the likelihood for migration and flash was high. The tool would contain fragile actions.



Solution: The press the customer was using was quite large, so Industrial Molds came up with a way to mold the part in a 1+1+1 three-position tool. The first shot would mold the thermoplastic part. A robot would come in and transfer that part to the second station, where a portion of the TPE would be molded onto it, and that was transferred via robot to a third station at the top of the mold for the rest of the TPE shot.

While designing the mold in this manner actually made it larger, the press that the customer was using was quite large, so we determined it would fit. We also determined it wouldn’t add cycle time to producing final product. In fact, the cycle time would be exactly the same as the two-station tool. We were just adding one extra stop along the way. Designing the mold in three positions also allowed for improved cooling in the tool over the two-stage approach. This would potentially reduce cycle time and improve the product.

We presented it to the customer and they questioned our rationale. Their first response was, “We’ve never done it that way before.” After explaining our reasoning, their next concern was the cost ramifications. We determined that while the mold would cost a bit more to build on the front end, it would actually cost less on maintenance, tool warranty issues, and grooming to create flash-free product because the steel in the problem area would be more robust.

The customer in the U.S. gave us the go-ahead. We spent a week getting the conceptual design finished. They looked at it and decided it really did make sense to build the mold in this way. The mold would be larger, but it would be more robust and have better cooling. However, they now needed to sell this redesign to their European counterparts. They had a meeting with the European supplier and the end customer who wanted to understand this new design. After explaining the purpose of the redesign to them and why we were using this approach, the Europeans said the same thing the U.S. people said: “We’ve never done it that way before.” Ultimately our customer decided it would be the best approach, and since it didn’t cost any more to do the redesign, we got the green light.



Results: We built the mold, sampled it, and found that it was a sound design that resulted in a robust tool. “I think that it’s critical to note that Industrial Molds had developed credibility with this customer over the years so that they had confidence in our design ideas and our ability to be creative in solving the customer’s problem even without being asked,” says Kerry Smith, engineering account manager for Industrial Molds Group. “Bringing innovative solutions to our customers makes us all winners.” —Clare Goldsberry