Zones, sensors, heaters, plugs and valves
Compare the controlled hot-runner schedule and schematics with the exact proposed controller, power, cable and actuation scope.
G21
MOLD / CONTROLLER / CELL INTERFACE
Treat the hot runner as a configured mold, controller and machine-cell interface.
Bring one controlled package into the RFQ: zone and thermocouple schedules, heater demand, plugs and pinout, controller ownership, valve-gate actuation, data exchange, fault boundaries and acceptance evidence.
ANSWER FIRST
A hot-runner label does not define the controller or interface scope.
The buyer needs mold-specific demand beside a supplier-confirmed proposal. Keep static engineering data, electrical connections, data exchange, safety functions and runtime acceptance as separate evidence layers.
Keep the melt-entry geometry in its own reviewHot-runner interface release gate
- Identified mold, hot runner, controller and machine/cell
- Released zone, sensor, heater, valve and plug schedules
- Written controller, cable, actuation and interface scope
- Separated control/data and safety boundaries
- Configured acceptance evidence and closed deviations
TWO LINKED REVIEWS
First match mold demand; then close the configured cell boundary.
Do not collapse zone totals, plug fit, valve actuation, data exchange and safety into one unsupported “compatible” answer.
Signals, data, faults, safety and acceptance
Declare the endpoints, document releases, item mappings, fault semantics, safety owner and configuration-specific evidence.
RFQ / INTERFACE REGISTER
Twelve fields turn “hot-runner ready” into a reviewable scope.
Keep each mold requirement beside its source and the proposed supplier response. Missing implementation evidence remains an open action, not a capability assumption.
| Field | Record for the proposed mold and cell | Evidence to request |
|---|---|---|
| Scope identity | Mold and hot-runner identities, drawing revisions, intended machine and cell, controller ownership, installation location and responsible parties | Controlled mold, hot-runner and cell records with revision, owner and release status |
| Engineering basis | The mold designer's target-equipment assumptions, verified article/resin basis, intended operating envelope and unresolved dependencies | Released mold engineering handover plus an open-action list; a draft data model alone is not project evidence |
| Zone schedule | Unique zone references, zone types, design temperatures, maximum working limits and the relationship to the mold drawing | Hot-runner supplier zone schedule and electrical scheme for the identified assembly |
| Heater electrical demand | Rated supply basis and heating demand by zone, grouping rules, load ownership, protection boundary and any controller dependency | Current hot-runner electrical data and supplier-confirmed controller or power-interface proposal |
| Thermocouple schedule | Sensor count, type, zone assignment, polarity or wiring basis, identification and treatment of unused or spare channels | Controlled sensor schedule, wiring diagram and proposed controller channel map |
| Plugs and pinout | Heater and sensor plug identities, mating sides, pin assignments, cable responsibility, keying, labeling and environmental constraints | Both mating connector records, pinout comparison and as-proposed cable schedule |
| Controller scope | Whether the controller is buyer-, mold-supplier-, machine-supplier- or third-party scope, with exact model/configuration, included channels and enclosure or mounting boundary | Written commercial and technical scope tied to the proposed controller configuration; no assumed built-in function |
| Valve-gate actuation | Valve type, actuation medium or drive, coupling, required pressure or other demand, position/sequence assumptions and controller ownership | Hot-runner valve schedule, schematic and supplier-confirmed actuation/control proposal |
| Signals and data exchange | Required endpoint, interface document and release, identification/configuration data, process values, commands, events and access ownership | Implementation declaration and item-level mapping for the exact machine and hot-runner device; a standard title is insufficient |
| Safety boundary | Safety-related functions, ordinary control/data functions, guarding/interlock dependencies, reset ownership and applicable risk-assessment owner kept separate | Approved cell safety concept and validation responsibility; do not treat ordinary data exchange as a safety interface |
| Fault and recovery semantics | Required alarm, inhibit, timeout, loss-of-communication, sensor/heater fault and restart states without prescribing an operating response | Configured functional description plus planned FAT/SAT observations approved by the responsible parties |
| Acceptance and handover | Configuration baseline, document checks, agreed function evidence, deviations, as-built files, backups, spares, release owner and recheck triggers | Signed acceptance record tied to the delivered mold, controller, machine, cables, software and interface releases |
EVIDENCE SEQUENCE
Move from mold engineering data to one as-built scope record.
This sequence structures procurement evidence; it is not a hot-runner design, wiring, setup, test or operating procedure.
Freeze the project identities
Name the exact mold, hot runner, proposed machine/cell and each responsible party. Keep drawing, controller, software and interface revisions visible from RFQ onward.
Collect the mold-side demand
Request the zone, heater, sensor, plug, valve and target-equipment records from the responsible mold and hot-runner parties. Mark estimates and missing data rather than filling them with generic values.
Separate demand from proposed scope
Place each mold requirement beside the supplier-confirmed controller, power, actuation, cable and machine-interface scope. Keep exclusions and option dependencies explicit.
Map every physical and data endpoint
Compare mating connectors and pinouts, then list the exact data-exchange document, release and item mapping where communication is required. Do not infer implementation from a standard name.
Assign evidence and acceptance ownership
For each requirement, name the document review, supplier declaration or agreed FAT/SAT observation that will close it, together with the approving machine, mold, controller and site parties.
Retain the as-built boundary
Handover the released configuration, mappings, drawings, deviations, backups and recheck triggers so a mold, controller, cable, software or interface change reopens the right review.
EVIDENCE / DO NOT MERGE
Four source types answer four different questions.
A field model, electrical reference, data specification and named OEM example cannot substitute for one another or prove the proposed equipment configuration.
Static engineering data
A mold engineering record can describe intended zones, thermocouples, valves and target-equipment assumptions. It does not prove runtime behavior or a delivered controller implementation.
Electrical interface
A heater or thermocouple interface reference helps identify connector and circuit questions. Its edition, applicability and the configured pinout still require project confirmation.
Data exchange
A communication specification defines exchange semantics within its scope. It does not establish the power connection, safety interface, physical fit or actual implementation on the proposed equipment.
Named OEM example
An ARBURG control example belongs to the named ARBURG platform and options. It cannot be transferred to NEW ORIENTAL IMM or treated as a generic market capability.
PRIMARY SOURCES / BOUNDARY
Official sources define RFQ fields—not a NEW ORIENTAL configuration.
The sources establish a current draft engineering-data structure, a released data-exchange scope, a 2009 electrical-interface reference and one named OEM control example. None proves controller inclusion, channel count, plug/pinout, valve-gate function, communication or performance for the proposed machine.
EUROMAP 101.2 Draft 1.0 — Plastics and Rubber Moulds: Engineering Data
The official January 2026 draft identifies pre-production feasibility and equipment selection as a use case. It structures target-equipment assumptions and hot-runner data including zones, temperature sensors, plugs, valve type, coupling and actuation demand.
Boundary: Draft 1.0 is a static engineering-data model, not a runtime test, final standard, sizing rule or proof of a NEW ORIENTAL IMM controller, channel count, valve function or interface implementation.
EUROMAP 82.2 — IMM-to-Hot-Runner Device Data Exchange
The official page describes the data-exchange interface between injection molding machines and hot-runner devices and identifies Release 1.00 dated 1 June 2021.
Boundary: EUROMAP 82.2 covers the stated data exchange. It does not prove implementation, electrical power or pinout compatibility, safety functions, valve actuation or support by the proposed machine/controller.
Technical Recommendations — EUROMAP 14 (2009) Electrical Interface
The official library lists EUROMAP 14 from 2009 for the electrical interface between injection molding machines and hot runners or electrical mold-heating equipment, with separate thermocouple and heating-resistor parts.
Boundary: This 2009 recommendation is an electrical-interface reference, not a universal current requirement. Confirm the applicable edition, destination requirements, connector/pinout and supplier implementation for the identified project.
GESTICA Control System Brochure
The official brochure provides a named OEM example of hot-runner temperature management and data integration with hot-runner controllers on the ARBURG GESTICA platform.
Boundary: These functions and options belong only to the named ARBURG control platform and configured equipment. They are not attributed to NEW ORIENTAL IMM and do not establish a universal controller or interface package.
BUYER QUESTIONS
Hot-runner controller and interface FAQ
These answers keep mold demand, controller scope, the dated electrical reference, data exchange and named OEM examples from becoming unsupported supplier claims.
01Does a hot-runner mold mean the injection molding machine includes its controller?+
No. Identify who supplies the controller, its exact configuration, channel and enclosure scope, cables, plugs, valve-gate control, machine interface and acceptance evidence. Keep unconfirmed items open in the RFQ.
02Does the total zone count prove controller compatibility?+
No. Compare the complete zone and thermocouple schedules, zone types, electrical demand, sensor types, plugs, pinout, controller configuration, valve functions and required evidence. A single total does not close the interface.
03Does EUROMAP 82.2 prove that the proposed machine and controller can communicate?+
No. Ask both responsible suppliers to declare the exact implementation and release, then map the required items and acceptance evidence. The specification title alone is not an implementation record and does not cover the safety boundary.
04Can EUROMAP 14 be treated as the current connector rule for every project?+
No. The official library identifies it as a 2009 recommendation. Use it as a dated electrical-interface reference, then confirm the project-specific edition, destination requirements, mating connectors, pinout and supplier approvals.
05Can the ARBURG GESTICA example be used as a NEW ORIENTAL capability claim?+
No. It is a named ARBURG platform example. It demonstrates why controller functions and integration must be confirmed by configuration, but none of its functions, options or results transfer to another supplier.
06Is this a hot-runner setup, wiring or operating procedure?+
No. This is a procurement and evidence checklist. Design, wiring, setup, testing and operation remain under current manufacturer instructions, applicable requirements, the cell risk assessment and authorized responsible parties.
07What should the hot-runner interface RFQ include?+
Include the mold and hot-runner identities; zone, heater and thermocouple schedules; electrical scheme; plugs and pinout; controller ownership/configuration; valve-gate data; required interface document and release; fault semantics; acceptance evidence; deviations; and recheck triggers.
HOT RUNNER / NEXT STEP
Request one controlled hot-runner interface schedule with the machine quote.
Attach the mold and hot-runner records, zone/heater/thermocouple schedules, electrical scheme, plugs and pinout, controller and valve-gate scope, required interface release, fault semantics, acceptance evidence, deviations and recheck triggers.
Build the machine brief