Additively Manufactured Polymer Tooling for Rubber Compression Molding

Navy SBIR 24.1 - Topic N241-053
NAVSEA - Naval Sea Systems Command
Pre-release 11/29/23   Opens to accept proposals 1/03/24   Now Closes 2/21/24 12:00pm ET    [ View Q&A ]

N241-053 TITLE: Additively Manufactured Polymer Tooling for Rubber Compression Molding


OBJECTIVE: Develop an additive manufacturing (AM) technology to rapidly create high strength, high temperature, and low-cost polymer tooling for use in rubber compression molding applications.

DESCRIPTION: Compression molding is a common manufacturing process for making rubber products. During this process, uncured rubber stock is placed within a heated mold before the mold is closed. The rubber cures and conforms to the mold cavity before the mold is opened and the finished part is removed. Within the Navy, numerous undersea sensor components, such as cable plugs and connectors, are fabricated using rubber compression molding. The molding process typically uses tooling made from steel due to the high temperatures and pressures required. However, steel tooling can have high costs and lead times. Advances in AM (also known as 3D printing) and new high-temperature polymers may allow these steel molds to be replaced with AM polymer molds, which could significantly reduce costs and lead times and open up new workload capabilities.

Limited research has been done to adapt AM technology and polymer materials to rubber compression molding. Some commercial AM systems have the capability to print room-temperature silicone molds or low-volume injection mold inserts, but the materials used in these systems do not translate well to the high continuous use temperature of the compression molding environment. The Navy is seeking the development of an additive manufacturing process that can rapidly create high strength, high temperature, and low-cost polymer tooling for use in rubber compression molding applications.

Polymer AM was chosen as the preferred process due to its speed, low cost, easy implementation within existing spaces, geometry flexibility, and safety. Metal AM processes will not be considered due to relatively high investment and post-processing costs. Several challenges exist for bringing polymer tools close to parity with traditional steel tools. Surface roughness, dimensional accuracy and precision, durability, and longevity are key focus areas to consider. Surface treatments, coatings, machining, and other post processing techniques may be used, but should be minimized to reduce overall costs. Polymer materials may be thermoplastics, thermosets, composite reinforced, photopolymer, or other novel material and must be non-hazardous. Companies may develop a new material, machine, or process; or adapt a commercial material, machine, or process to meet the Navy’s needs. All printed inserts will be used in a metal master unit die (MUD) frame.

The new AM solution will be utilized in a production setting to enable the rapid turnaround time for time- or cost- sensitive tasking, reduce project costs, and develop new products. Proposed concepts should meet the following thresholds:

1. Process:

a. Process: additively manufactured

b. Material: Polymer or composite; surface coatings, treatments, or other post-processing permissible but should be minimized; non-hazardous

c. Build size: 6 in x 3 in x 3 in Threshold, 12 in x 12 in x 6 in Objective

2. Tool:

a. Inserts will sit in metal MUD frame

b. Continuous use temperature: 300°F

c. Typical clamping force: 15 tons

d. Duty cycle: 1 hour minimum cycle time under required temperature and pressure

e. Reusability: 100x minimum, molded part must meet requirements

f. Mating face flatness: 0.010 in Threshold, 0.005 in Objective

g. Chemical resistance: no special considerations

3. Molded part:

a. Dimensional tolerance: 0.010 in Threshold, 0.005 in Objective; or 0.05 in/in Threshold, 0.002 in/in Objective; whichever is greater

b. Surface Roughness: 250 microinch Threshold, 125 microinch Objective

c. No physical defects, bumps, or voids > 0.030 in

PHASE I: Develop a concept for an AM process to create rapid, low-cost polymer tooling for use in rubber compression molding as detailed in the Description. The concept shall include proposed material(s), machine(s), and post-processing technique(s) needed to meet the Navy’s requirements and how they address the challenges of high temperature, high pressure, surface finish, dimensional accuracy, and durability. Demonstrate the feasibility through modeling, simulation, analysis, or other formal methods. The Phase I Option, if exercised, will include the initial design specifications and capabilities description to build a prototype solution in Phase II.

PHASE II: Develop, demonstrate, and deliver an AM prototype to create mold inserts that meet the Navy’s requirements. The proposed material(s), machine(s), and post-processing technique(s) will be evaluated to determine their capability and feasibility. Perform detailed testing and analysis addressing required performance. Deliver a minimum of five prototype mold inserts for rubber parts chosen by the Navy for evaluation and demonstrate the flexibility of their concept to apply to various rubber part shapes and sizes.

PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: Apply the knowledge gained in Phase II to further develop a complete turnkey AM system capable of producing polymer inserts suitable for rubber compression molding and assist the Navy in transitioning the technology for use. The AM system may include commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) parts or equipment, and need not include equipment for typical or readily available post-processing steps such as machining. Support the Navy in implementation of the system within Navy production spaces and qualifying the system for production use. The complete AM solution will be used to support production of undersea sensors components aboard various surface ships and submarines.

Explore the potential to apply the solution to other military or commercial rubber molding shops or do further research to apply advancements to similar molding applications, such as injection or composite layup molding.


  1. Tuteski, Ognen and Kocov, Atanas. "Mold Design and Production by Using Additive Manufacturing (AM) – Present Status and Future Perspectives." International Scientific Journal of Scientific Technical Union of Mechanical Engineering Industry 4.0, Vol. 3, Issue 2, 2018.
  2. Gohn, Anne M.; Brown, Dylan; Mendis, Gamini; Forster, Seth; Rudd, Nathan; and Giles, Morgan. "Mold Inserts for Injection Molding Prototype Applications via Material Extrusion Additive Manufacturing." Additive Manufacturing, Volume 51, 2022.

KEYWORDS: Additive manufacturing; rubber compression molding; high temperature polymers; composite reinforced plastics; master unit die; undersea sensors.


The Navy Topic above is an "unofficial" copy from the Navy Topics in the DoD 24.1 SBIR BAA. Please see the official DoD Topic website at for any updates.

The DoD issued its Navy 24.1 SBIR Topics pre-release on November 28, 2023 which opens to receive proposals on January 3, 2024, and now closes February 21, (12:00pm ET).

Direct Contact with Topic Authors: During the pre-release period (November 28, 2023 through January 2, 2024) proposing firms have an opportunity to directly contact the Technical Point of Contact (TPOC) to ask technical questions about the specific BAA topic. Once DoD begins accepting proposals on January 3, 2024 no further direct contact between proposers and topic authors is allowed unless the Topic Author is responding to a question submitted during the Pre-release period.

SITIS Q&A System: After the pre-release period, until January 24, 2023, at 12:00 PM ET, proposers may submit written questions through SITIS (SBIR/STTR Interactive Topic Information System) at by logging in and following instructions. In SITIS, the questioner and respondent remain anonymous but all questions and answers are posted for general viewing.

Topics Search Engine: Visit the DoD Topic Search Tool at to find topics by keyword across all DoD Components participating in this BAA.

Help: If you have general questions about the DoD SBIR program, please contact the DoD SBIR Help Desk via email at [email protected]

Topic Q & A

1/16/24  Q. The limitations with some high-temperature silcones will be that the part made (the mold) can only be about 0.25” thick because they require exposure to atmospheric moisture to cure. Is this going to be a show-stopper for 3-D printing molds?
   A. 0.25” is an acceptable thickness, assuming that the dimensional, strength, and durability requirements are still being met. The mold insert and frame design can be modified to accommodate for the thinness of this example.
1/16/24  Q. Can AM polymer contain chopped fiber reinforcement, inorganic additive, etc.?
   A. Yes these are all acceptable.
1/16/24  Q. How will the printed mold be attached to the MUD? Does it require any metal inserts or pins for alignment?
   A. This is flexible and open to creative solutions. Typically, yes, the inserts are located within the platen/MUD with dowel pins.
1/16/24  Q. Is there any requirement regarding the tooling’s thermal conductivity?
   A. There are no numerical requirements. Heat transfer from the platens, through the insert, and into the molded part is important to fully cure the rubber part. The higher the conductivity, the better, but we do not have a target value in mind. The other requirements are the higher priority at this time.
1/16/24  Q. Is the printed mold designed to process one type or multiple types of rubber?
   A. For this topic, we are focused on one type of rubber, neoprene.
1/16/24  Q. Specific types of rubber compression mold, such as flash, positive or semi-positive mold?
   A. All molds are flash molds.
1/16/24  Q. Is it a single or multi-cavity mold?
   A. Single cavity
1/16/24  Q. 1. Is the rubber compression molding parts a thermoplastic or thermosetting polymer?
   A. The rubber parts which will be made using these molds are neoprene rubber, a thermoset. The AM material which you choose to make the molds themselves from are up to you and can be a thermoplastic or thermoset.
1/16/24  Q. 2. What types of rubber polymers are these molded parts?
   A. The molds will be used to create neoprene parts.
1/10/24  Q. What are your preferred M&S platforms for this topic and what role does it play vs. an experimental approach?
Are proposed solutions required to have M&S?
   A. It is recommended to have some level of modeling and simulation in the proposal. Experimental data could also be included instead of or in addition to analytical models. M&S or experimental data would be most beneficial to validate how well your chosen material will perform under the required temperature and pressure.

[ Return ]