FLOW-LENGTH VALIDATOR · REV 1

Wall Thickness × Flow Length Check

Resin — sets base max L/t ratio & MFI reference

Actual MFI (g/10 min)

g/10min

PP reference MFI: 20 g/10min · current value matched

Minimum wall thickness (mm)

Use the thinnest section on the longest flow path

Maximum flow length (mm)

Gate edge to farthest unfilled point — measure along melt path

Injection pressure (MPa)

120 MPa

Typical 80–160 MPa · high-speed thin-wall up to 200 MPa

Number of cavities

1 cav

Scales total gate count recommendation for the complete tool

Validation results live

✓

Fill feasible — geometry is well within limit

L/t ratio uses only a small fraction of the maximum for this resin.

Actual L/t ratio

100.0

dimensionless

Max allowable L/t

280.0

at current MFI & pressure

Fill ratio

36%

% of max capacity used

Gates per cavity

minimum recommended

Fill capacity utilization — safe 0–70% · caution 70–85% · risk 85–100% · short-shot >100%

0% 70% 85% 100% 150%

Flow path visualization — gate to fill front

Safe zone

Caution zone

Risk zone

Short-shot zone

Actual fill front

1 gate per cavity Single centre or edge gate — standard for this L/t ratio.

Flow length input200 mm

Min wall thickness2.0 mm

Actual L/t ratio (L / t)100.0

Base max L/t (material, ref MFI)280

MFI adjustment factor (MFI / ref)^0.301.000

Wall thickness adjustment (t / 2.0)^0.201.000

Pressure adjustment (P / 120)^0.151.000

Max allowable L/t (adjusted)280.0

Fill ratio — verdict36% — safe

EJECTOR EVAL · REV 1

Ejection Force & Pin Layout Evaluator

Resin — sets shrinkage stress & allowable contact pressure

Side-wall gripping area (cm²)

cm²

Sum of all side-wall contact areas (core-facing surfaces). Exclude parting-plane & top face.

Part depth / core height (mm)

Used to check pin buckling slenderness ratio (L/d). Pin length ≈ depth + 10 mm.

Wall thickness at ejection zone (mm)

Thinner walls are more vulnerable to sink marks from concentrated pin loads.

Draft angle (°)

1.0°

Standard draft · moderate ejection force reduction

Surface finish (core side)

Polished finish selected · μ = base × 1.00

Evaluation results live

Ejection force

—

Force in kgf

—

kgf

Min pin count

—

pins

Rec. pin diameter

—

mm (DIN standard)

Sink mark risk

—

Punch-through risk

—

Pin buckling risk

—

— pins recommended —

Top-view pin layout — recommended arrangement

Ejector pin

Part footprint

Recommended placement zone

Gripping area—

Shrinkage grip stress (σ)—

Base friction coefficient (μ)—

Finish multiplier—

Effective friction (μ_eff)—

Draft angle reduction factor—

Ejection force = μ_eff × σ × A × f_draft—

Allowable contact stress per pin—

Min pin area = F / σ_allow—

Min pin diameter & recommended DIN size—

HOT RUNNER ROI · REV 1

Hot Runner vs Cold Runner — ROI Calculator

A — Product & production parameters

Annual production volume (pcs/year)

pcs/yr

Part weight (g/pc)

g/pc

Runner weight ratio (% of part weight)

35%

Moderate runner ratio · typical 2-cavity cold runner tool

Number of cavities

4 cav

Affects cycle time saving calculation

B — Material & machine costs

Virgin resin price (USD/kg)

USD/kg

Regrind recovery value (% of virgin)

50%

Cold runner regrind recovered at 50% of virgin price

Machine rate (USD/hr)

USD/hr

All-in press cost incl. labor & overhead

Cycle time improvement with hot runner (%)

Typical 5–15% from eliminated runner cooling time

C — Hot runner system investment

Hot runner system price (USD)

USD

System price only — installation & commissioning added below

Installation & commissioning cost (%)

12%

Typical range 10–20% of system price

Annual maintenance cost (%)

3.0%

Industry norm 2–5% of system price per year

Annual production days

300 d

Used to convert annual volume to daily throughput

ROI results live

Hot runner pays back in — months

—

Annual material saving

—

USD/year

Annual cycle-time saving

—

USD/year

Total investment

—

USD (system + install)

Payback period
—
months

Year 1 net

—

Year 2 cumulative

—

Year 3 cumulative

—

36-month cumulative net cash flow

Cumulative net saving

Break-even line

Break-even volume — annual pcs

Annual net saving

Current volume

Runner weight per part—

Net material cost of runner (after regrind recovery)—

Annual material saving—

Annual machine-time saving (cycle improvement)—

Annual maintenance cost (hot runner)—

Net annual benefit—

Total investment (system + installation)—

Payback period—

Break-even annual volume—

3-year cumulative net saving—

MOLD COST ESTIMATOR FIELD EDITION

Mold Development Cost & Lead Time Estimator

01 Part size — projected area

02 Appearance requirement

03 Part complexity

04 Number of cavities

05 Mold steel grade

06 Market & standard

07 Surface finish (cavity)

Estimate updated live

Low estimate

—

Competitive market price.
Verify supplier capability.

REFERENCE RANGE

Mid estimate

—

Quality-capable supplier.
Use as budget baseline.

High estimate

—

Premium supplier / tight spec.
Full documentation.

Active cost drivers

Lead time estimate (weeks from tool design approval)

Optimistic

—

Standard

—

Cautious

—

Indicative cost breakdown (mid estimate)

Field estimate only — figures are indicative reference ranges based on industry benchmarks for China-based toolmakers. Final quotation requires a complete 2D/3D DFM review, gate and cooling analysis, and confirmed mold standard. Actual prices may vary ±30% depending on supplier, region, steel availability, and order timing.

COST BREAKDOWN v2

Unit Cost Breakdown & What-If Analyzer

live

Material & product

Part weight (g)

Runner weight (g/shot)

Total per shot, shared across all cavities

Material price (USD/kg)

$/kg

Regrind recovery (%)

60%

Runner recovered at 60% of virgin price

Machine & process

Machine rate (USD/hr)

$/hr

Labor rate (USD/hr)

$/hr

Set 0 for fully automated cell

Cycle time (s/shot)

Number of cavities

cav

Quality & overhead

Scrap / defect rate (%)

2.0%

World-class: <0.5% · Typical: 1–3% · Poor: >5%

Overhead / admin rate (%)

18%

Covers facility, utilities, admin on top of variable costs

Mold amortization (USD/pc)

$/pc

Mold cost ÷ lifetime parts. Set 0 to exclude.

Unit cost per good part

0.2543USD/pc

Cost / 1K pcs

$254

Output

4/shot

Pcs/hr

514

Mat% of total

22%

Cost composition — proportional waterfall

Optimization opportunities — ranked by cost impact

Cycle time

Base: 28s

28s

Cavities

Base: 4

Part weight

Base: 25g

25g

Material price

Base: $2.20/kg

$2.2

Scrap rate

Base: 2.0%

2.0%

Machine rate

Base: $65/hr

$65

tools archive

Wall Thickness × Flow Length Check

Ejection Force & Pin Layout Evaluator

Hot Runner vs Cold Runner — ROI Calculator

Mold Development Cost & Lead Time Estimator

Unit Cost Breakdown & What-If Analyzer

plastic mold