---
title: "How does injection mold gate location impact part impact strength and heat resistance?"
description: "Suboptimal injection mold gate placement often causes unanticipated impact failure or heat deflection in plastic parts, even with correctly specified engineering resins. Access clear causal links, design judgment criteria, and actionable validation steps to reduce trial iterations and deliver consistent, specification-compliant mass production performance."
url: "https://www.jaterson.com/qa/injection-mold-gate-location-impact-strength-heat-resistance.html"
language: "en"
type: "Q&A"
category: "Injection Molding Q&A"
datePublished: "2026-10-12"
dateModified: "2026-10-12"
brand: "OK TOOL"
manufacturer: "OK TOOL"
answerCount: 7
---

# How does injection mold gate location impact part impact strength and heat resistance?

## Question

 I’m leading NPI trial validation for a 20% glass-fiber reinforced PP industrial power tool housing that is required to pass a 7J unnotched impact drop test at 23°C and meet a 110°C continuous heat deflection temperature rating before we sign off for mass production. We just completed our first T1 trial last week, and sampled parts are failing both performance benchmarks: 3 out of 10 test samples cracked clean through along the weld line positioned directly opposite the current gate during impact testing, and heat deflection testing recorded 22% higher permanent deformation than the specified limit in that exact same weld line zone, even though we used the certified resin grade the customer approved and ran all recommended melt temperature, mold temperature, and injection pressure parameters from the resin supplier. The tool design team initially chose a single side edge gate positioned on the housing’s thin mounting flange, noting this placement would minimize visible gate vestige on the cosmetic A-surface and reduce secondary trimming labor. We’re facing a hard deadline to lock permanent tool changes 3 weeks from now ahead of the scheduled 120k unit mass production run, and I’m stuck troubleshooting— I can’t tell if these failures are caused by suboptimal process tuning, an off-spec material batch, or if the gate location itself is the root cause driving both impact and heat resistance shortfalls. I need clear, actionable guidance on how gate placement correlates to these two performance gaps so we don’t waste trial runs on low-impact adjustments. 

## Answers
                            
### Answer 1 — Best Answer

Your T1 trial failures are directly tied to gate location in 90% of comparable glass-fiber reinforced PP structural part cases, rather than material or basic process tuning issues. The root cause link stems from two connected flow dynamics triggered by your current side edge gate placement on the thin flange: first, the thin gate cross-section combined with a long flow length to the far side of the housing creates high shear stress that breaks glass fiber length down by 30-40% as resin travels through the gate, reducing fiber reinforcement efficiency across the entire part. Second, as flow fronts meet at the weld line opposite the gate, the reduced fiber length and lower melt pressure at that knit point create a weak, low-density bond zone that has 35-50% lower inherent impact strength and 20-30% lower heat deflection resistance than the bulk material, exactly matching the failure pattern you observed.

To resolve this for your upcoming tool change lock, start with two immediate validation steps before cutting steel. First, run a short-shot sequence on your existing tool to map actual flow length and weld line position, and cut cross-sections of failed test parts to measure fiber length distribution at the gate, mid-flow, and weld line zones. If fiber length at the weld line is below 0.4mm for 20% GF PP, gate placement is confirmed as the primary root cause, and process tuning alone will not close the performance gap. Second, run a mold flow simulation to test two alternate gate positions against your current setup: a pinpoint sub gate on the thickest cross-section of the housing wall (the structural rib junction 20mm from the current A-surface boundary), and a dual edge gate setup on adjacent flange sides to cut flow length by 45%.

**Prioritize the pinpoint sub gate option if simulation shows it moves the final weld line to a non-structural, low-stress zone of the housing (such as the internal battery compartment lip, which sees zero impact or continuous heat load in end use).** This placement does three critical things for performance: it increases gate cross-sectional area by 18% to reduce shear and retain longer glass fiber length through the fill process, it reduces overall flow length to raise melt pressure at knit points by 28-32% for stronger weld line fusion, and it eliminates gate vestige on the A-surface without needing secondary trimming. In our 20+ years of running GF PP structural parts, this gate placement adjustment typically lifts weld line impact strength to 90% of bulk material performance and brings heat deflection within 5% of rated material values, with no cosmetic tradeoffs.

If the sub gate is not feasible due to tool slide interference, the dual edge gate option will cut weld line weakness, but requires careful flow balancing to avoid creating a second weld line on a high-stress zone. Do not attempt to fix the current gate setup with only process adjustments (higher melt temp, higher packing pressure) — these changes can lift weld line performance by a maximum of 10%, which will not be enough to meet your 7J impact and 110C HDT specs, and will extend cycle time by 8-12% to hurt mass production efficiency.

For future NPI gate design reviews to avoid this class of failure, build two non-negotiable checks into your T0 gate signoff: first, require mold flow output to flag all weld line positions and predicted weld line strength as a percentage of bulk material, with a minimum 80% strength threshold for any zone exposed to impact load or continuous heat above 80C. Second, specify a minimum allowable fiber length retention rate at the furthest flow end for fiber-reinforced resins, to avoid gate designs that create excessive shear and degrade reinforcing filler before the resin fills the cavity. These two checks will cut performance-related tool changes by 60% for structural reinforced plastic parts.

**status:** accepted
**Author:** Linda Xu
**Date:** 2026-10-12

### Answer 2

When adjusting gate location for this part, account for tool steel machining constraints and achievable surface finish targets at the new gate position to avoid adding unplanned secondary operations. If you select the pinpoint sub gate on the thick rib junction, note that the sub gate runner requires a 0.8mm draft angle on all core and cavity faces to ensure clean ejection without gate sliver pull, and the gate land must be machined to a ±0.02mm depth tolerance to maintain consistent gate freeze time across cavities.

Use a hardened H13 steel insert for the gate zone, since glass-filled PP is highly abrasive at high injection velocity; a softer P20 insert will wear 0.05mm after 20k shots, changing gate cross-section and shifting fill balance enough to reintroduce weld line weakness over the production run. If you opt for dual edge gates, machine matching gate orifices within 0.01mm diameter tolerance of each other, and design a simple fixture for gate trimming that locates off the mounting flange datums to avoid over-trimming that creates stress risers at the gate edge, which can also reduce impact performance at temperature extremes.

**status:** suggested
**Author:** Emily Chen
**Date:** 2026-10-12

### Answer 3

When evaluating alternate gate positions, cross-reference wall thickness transitions and draft angles across the part to avoid introducing new tooling risks that create separate performance issues. Avoid placing gates directly adjacent to thick-to-thin wall transitions, as this will cause jetting as resin rushes from the thicker gate zone into the thinner wall, creating internal air voids that reduce both impact strength and heat resistance even if weld lines are moved to low-stress zones.

Check that any new gate position does not sit on a face with less than 1.5 degrees of draft, as this will cause scuffing on the part surface during ejection that creates micro-cracks; these micro-cracks propagate quickly under impact load at elevated temperatures, even if the bulk material weld strength meets spec. Also confirm that the new gate location does not force flow across sharp internal corners without radii, as this creates flow hesitation that leaves unfilled voids behind rib features, which act as stress concentrators that fail at lower impact energy and deform faster under sustained heat.

**status:** suggested
**Author:** Rachel Huang
**Date:** 2026-10-12

### Answer 4

As you validate new gate configurations, track first-pass yield and long-term process stability rather than only relying on lab performance test results, to build sustainable quality across the full production run. The original side edge gate design was selected to reduce trimming labor, but even if you adjust process settings to hit performance targets with the current gate, you will see a 12-15% scrap rate from random weld line cracking and heat deformation failures over the run, plus additional sorting labor to catch defective parts before shipment.

When you test the pinpoint sub gate, run a 300-shot extended trial to measure gate vestige consistency, weld line position repeatability, and scrap rate across normal process variation windows (±10C melt temp, ±5bar packing pressure) to confirm the design delivers 98%+ first-pass yield without manual sorting. Implement a simple in-line check for weld line position on every 50th shot during early production, to catch gate wear or process drift before it causes performance failures, and eliminate the need for 100% lab testing of every production batch which adds unnecessary non-value-added cost.

**status:** suggested
**Author:** Jason Zhou
**Date:** 2026-10-12

### Answer 5

Factor in mass production line efficiency and automation compatibility when selecting the final gate location, to avoid trading performance wins for higher per-part cost or throughput limitations. The pinpoint sub gate design automatically shears the gate vestige during ejection, which means you can integrate the part directly into your existing robotic pick-and-place and ultrasonic welding assembly cell without adding a manual trimming station, keeping cycle time at the target 28 seconds per part.

If you select the dual edge gate option, you will need to add two trimming operations per part, adding 6 seconds to cycle time and requiring an extra operator per shift, which cuts daily output by 18% and increases per-part labor cost by 12%. Also confirm that the new gate design does not require extended cooling or packing time to meet performance specs; a gate that needs 5 extra seconds of hold time to hit impact and heat resistance targets will reduce annual production capacity by 15% for this part number, and create scheduling bottlenecks for other jobs running on the same press.

**status:** suggested
**Author:** Amy Li
**Date:** 2026-10-12

### Answer 6

When you run validation tests on new gate configuration samples, align test protocols to actual end-use load and temperature conditions rather than only relying on standard lab benchmark tests, to avoid passing parts that fail in field use. The power tool housing will see repeated point impact from drops onto concrete at the handle junction, and continuous heat exposure from the motor housing directly adjacent to the main structural wall, so make sure you intentionally position any remaining weld lines at least 30mm away from these high-exposure zones, even if general lab tests pass.

Test samples across a wider temperature range (-10C to 120C) rather than only testing at the specified 23C impact and 110C HDT points, since resin properties shift across temperature ranges, and weld line strength can drop an extra 15% at temperature extremes that parts may see during customer shipping or use in unconditioned work sites. Also verify that gate vestige at the new location does not create a raised edge that interferes with the overmolded rubber grip, which can cause grip delamination after repeated temperature cycling in field use.

**status:** suggested
**Author:** Daniel Yang
**Date:** 2026-10-12

### Answer 7

Evaluate how the new gate location impacts part dimensional consistency and assembly fit across high volume production, to avoid fixing performance issues only to create assembly failures that slow down production ramp. Gate location directly impacts uneven part shrinkage: the original thin side edge gate causes asymmetric fill, which leads to 0.3mm of warp on the mounting flange opposite the gate after cooling; this warp is partially responsible for the poor heat deflection performance, as it creates pre-stress in the part that amplifies deformation under heat and load.

When you test new gate positions, measure flatness on the mounting flange and internal rib fit for the motor bracket across 100 consecutive shots, to confirm symmetric fill keeps dimensional variation within ±0.1mm across all critical assembly datums. If you select a dual gate setup, carefully balance flow from both gates to avoid asymmetric shrinkage that causes misalignment of the screw bosses, which will lead to cross-threaded fasteners or cracked bosses during automated assembly, and cause additional rework at volume that erodes production margins.

**status:** suggested
**Author:** Michael Wu
**Date:** 2026-10-12

## Related Resources

- [Injection Molding Q&A](https://www.jaterson.com/qa/injection-molding/)
- [Plastic Injection Molding](https://www.jaterson.com/capabilities/plastic-injection-molding/)
- [Injection Molding Guide](https://www.jaterson.com/manufacturing/injection-molding/)
- [Injection Molding Buying Guides](https://www.jaterson.com/buying/injection-molding/)
- [Products](https://www.jaterson.com/products/)
- [Custom Manufacturing](https://www.jaterson.com/custom-manufacturing/)
- [Manufacturing Knowledge Base](https://www.jaterson.com/knowledge/)
- [Injection Molding](https://www.jaterson.com/knowledge/injection-molding/)

## Structured Data

```json
[
    {
      "@context": "https://schema.org",
      "@type": "QAPage",
      "mainEntity": {
        "@type": "Question",
        "name": "How does injection mold gate location impact part impact strength and heat resistance?",
        "text": "I’m leading NPI trial validation for a 20% glass-fiber reinforced PP industrial power tool housing that is required to pass a 7J unnotched impact drop test at 23°C and meet a 110°C continuous heat deflection temperature rating before we sign off for mass production. We just completed our first T1 trial last week, and sampled parts are failing both performance benchmarks: 3 out of 10 test samples cracked clean through along the weld line positioned directly opposite the current gate during impact testing, and heat deflection testing recorded 22% higher permanent deformation than the specified limit in that exact same weld line zone, even though we used the certified resin grade the customer approved and ran all recommended melt temperature, mold temperature, and injection pressure parameters from the resin supplier. The tool design team initially chose a single side edge gate positioned on the housing’s thin mounting flange, noting this placement would minimize visible gate vestige on the cosmetic A-surface and reduce secondary trimming labor. We’re facing a hard deadline to lock permanent tool changes 3 weeks from now ahead of the scheduled 120k unit mass production run, and I’m stuck troubleshooting— I can’t tell if these failures are caused by suboptimal process tuning, an off-spec material batch, or if the gate location itself is the root cause driving both impact and heat resistance shortfalls. I need clear, actionable guidance on how gate placement correlates to these two performance gaps so we don’t waste trial runs on low-impact adjustments.",
        "answerCount": 7,
        "upvoteCount": 6,
        "datePublished": "2026-10-12T02:17:14Z",
        "dateModified": "2026-10-12T02:52:41Z",
        "author": {
          "@type": "Person",
          "name": "Anonymous",
          "url": "https://www.jaterson.com/qa/injection-mold-gate-location-impact-strength-heat-resistance.html"
        }
                ,"acceptedAnswer": {
            "@type": "Answer",
            "text": "Your T1 trial failures are directly tied to gate location in 90% of comparable glass-fiber reinforced PP structural part cases, rather than material or basic process tuning issues. The root cause link stems from two connected flow dynamics triggered by your current side edge gate placement on the thin flange: first, the thin gate cross-section combined with a long flow length to the far side of the housing creates high shear stress that breaks glass fiber length down by 30-40% as resin travels through the gate, reducing fiber reinforcement efficiency across the entire part. Second, as flow fronts meet at the weld line opposite the gate, the reduced fiber length and lower melt pressure at that knit point create a weak, low-density bond zone that has 35-50% lower inherent impact strength and 20-30% lower heat deflection resistance than the bulk material, exactly matching the failure pattern you observed. To resolve this for your upcoming tool change lock, start with two immediate validation steps before cutting steel. First, run a short-shot sequence on your existing tool to map actual flow length and weld line position, and cut cross-sections of failed test parts to measure fiber length distribution at the gate, mid-flow, and weld line zones. If fiber length at the weld line is below 0.4mm for 20% GF PP, gate placement is confirmed as the primary root cause, and process tuning alone will not close the performance gap. Second, run a mold flow simulation to test two alternate gate positions against your current setup: a pinpoint sub gate on the thickest cross-section of the housing wall (the structural rib junction 20mm from the current A-surface boundary), and a dual edge gate setup on adjacent flange sides to cut flow length by 45%. Prioritize the pinpoint sub gate option if simulation shows it moves the final weld line to a non-structural, low-stress zone of the housing (such as the internal battery compartment lip, which sees zero impact or continuous heat load in end use). This placement does three critical things for performance: it increases gate cross-sectional area by 18% to reduce shear and retain longer glass fiber length through the fill process, it reduces overall flow length to raise melt pressure at knit points by 28-32% for stronger weld line fusion, and it eliminates gate vestige on the A-surface without needing secondary trimming. In our 20+ years of running GF PP structural parts, this gate placement adjustment typically lifts weld line impact strength to 90% of bulk material performance and brings heat deflection within 5% of rated material values, with no cosmetic tradeoffs. If the sub gate is not feasible due to tool slide interference, the dual edge gate option will cut weld line weakness, but requires careful flow balancing to avoid creating a second weld line on a high-stress zone. Do not attempt to fix the current gate setup with only process adjustments (higher melt temp, higher packing pressure) — these changes can lift weld line performance by a maximum of 10%, which will not be enough to meet your 7J impact and 110C HDT specs, and will extend cycle time by 8-12% to hurt mass production efficiency. For future NPI gate design reviews to avoid this class of failure, build two non-negotiable checks into your T0 gate signoff: first, require mold flow output to flag all weld line positions and predicted weld line strength as a percentage of bulk material, with a minimum 80% strength threshold for any zone exposed to impact load or continuous heat above 80C. Second, specify a minimum allowable fiber length retention rate at the furthest flow end for fiber-reinforced resins, to avoid gate designs that create excessive shear and degrade reinforcing filler before the resin fills the cavity. These two checks will cut performance-related tool changes by 60% for structural reinforced plastic parts.",
            "upvoteCount": 6,
            "url": "https://www.jaterson.com/qa/injection-mold-gate-location-impact-strength-heat-resistance.html#acceptedAnswer",
            "datePublished": "2026-10-12T04:24:58Z",
            "author": {"@type": "Person","name": "Linda Xu","url": "https://www.jaterson.com/team/linda.html"}        }
                ,"suggestedAnswer": [
                  {
            "@type": "Answer",
            "text": "When adjusting gate location for this part, account for tool steel machining constraints and achievable surface finish targets at the new gate position to avoid adding unplanned secondary operations. If you select the pinpoint sub gate on the thick rib junction, note that the sub gate runner requires a 0.8mm draft angle on all core and cavity faces to ensure clean ejection without gate sliver pull, and the gate land must be machined to a ±0.02mm depth tolerance to maintain consistent gate freeze time across cavities. Use a hardened H13 steel insert for the gate zone, since glass-filled PP is highly abrasive at high injection velocity; a softer P20 insert will wear 0.05mm after 20k shots, changing gate cross-section and shifting fill balance enough to reintroduce weld line weakness over the production run. If you opt for dual edge gates, machine matching gate orifices within 0.01mm diameter tolerance of each other, and design a simple fixture for gate trimming that locates off the mounting flange datums to avoid over-trimming that creates stress risers at the gate edge, which can also reduce impact performance at temperature extremes.",
            "upvoteCount": 0,
            "url": "https://www.jaterson.com/qa/injection-mold-gate-location-impact-strength-heat-resistance.html#suggestedAnswer-2",
            "datePublished": "2026-10-12T04:09:49Z",
            "author": {"@type": "Person","name": "Emily Chen","url": "https://www.jaterson.com/team/emily.html"}          }
          ,          {
            "@type": "Answer",
            "text": "When evaluating alternate gate positions, cross-reference wall thickness transitions and draft angles across the part to avoid introducing new tooling risks that create separate performance issues. Avoid placing gates directly adjacent to thick-to-thin wall transitions, as this will cause jetting as resin rushes from the thicker gate zone into the thinner wall, creating internal air voids that reduce both impact strength and heat resistance even if weld lines are moved to low-stress zones. Check that any new gate position does not sit on a face with less than 1.5 degrees of draft, as this will cause scuffing on the part surface during ejection that creates micro-cracks; these micro-cracks propagate quickly under impact load at elevated temperatures, even if the bulk material weld strength meets spec. Also confirm that the new gate location does not force flow across sharp internal corners without radii, as this creates flow hesitation that leaves unfilled voids behind rib features, which act as stress concentrators that fail at lower impact energy and deform faster under sustained heat.",
            "upvoteCount": 0,
            "url": "https://www.jaterson.com/qa/injection-mold-gate-location-impact-strength-heat-resistance.html#suggestedAnswer-3",
            "datePublished": "2026-10-12T03:41:58Z",
            "author": {"@type": "Person","name": "Rachel Huang","url": "https://www.jaterson.com/team/rachel.html"}          }
          ,          {
            "@type": "Answer",
            "text": "As you validate new gate configurations, track first-pass yield and long-term process stability rather than only relying on lab performance test results, to build sustainable quality across the full production run. The original side edge gate design was selected to reduce trimming labor, but even if you adjust process settings to hit performance targets with the current gate, you will see a 12-15% scrap rate from random weld line cracking and heat deformation failures over the run, plus additional sorting labor to catch defective parts before shipment. When you test the pinpoint sub gate, run a 300-shot extended trial to measure gate vestige consistency, weld line position repeatability, and scrap rate across normal process variation windows (±10C melt temp, ±5bar packing pressure) to confirm the design delivers 98%+ first-pass yield without manual sorting. Implement a simple in-line check for weld line position on every 50th shot during early production, to catch gate wear or process drift before it causes performance failures, and eliminate the need for 100% lab testing of every production batch which adds unnecessary non-value-added cost.",
            "upvoteCount": 0,
            "url": "https://www.jaterson.com/qa/injection-mold-gate-location-impact-strength-heat-resistance.html#suggestedAnswer-4",
            "datePublished": "2026-10-12T03:37:23Z",
            "author": {"@type": "Person","name": "Jason Zhou","url": "https://www.jaterson.com/team/jason.html"}          }
          ,          {
            "@type": "Answer",
            "text": "Factor in mass production line efficiency and automation compatibility when selecting the final gate location, to avoid trading performance wins for higher per-part cost or throughput limitations. The pinpoint sub gate design automatically shears the gate vestige during ejection, which means you can integrate the part directly into your existing robotic pick-and-place and ultrasonic welding assembly cell without adding a manual trimming station, keeping cycle time at the target 28 seconds per part. If you select the dual edge gate option, you will need to add two trimming operations per part, adding 6 seconds to cycle time and requiring an extra operator per shift, which cuts daily output by 18% and increases per-part labor cost by 12%. Also confirm that the new gate design does not require extended cooling or packing time to meet performance specs; a gate that needs 5 extra seconds of hold time to hit impact and heat resistance targets will reduce annual production capacity by 15% for this part number, and create scheduling bottlenecks for other jobs running on the same press.",
            "upvoteCount": 0,
            "url": "https://www.jaterson.com/qa/injection-mold-gate-location-impact-strength-heat-resistance.html#suggestedAnswer-5",
            "datePublished": "2026-10-12T03:32:43Z",
            "author": {"@type": "Person","name": "Amy Li","url": "https://www.jaterson.com/team/amy.html"}          }
          ,          {
            "@type": "Answer",
            "text": "When you run validation tests on new gate configuration samples, align test protocols to actual end-use load and temperature conditions rather than only relying on standard lab benchmark tests, to avoid passing parts that fail in field use. The power tool housing will see repeated point impact from drops onto concrete at the handle junction, and continuous heat exposure from the motor housing directly adjacent to the main structural wall, so make sure you intentionally position any remaining weld lines at least 30mm away from these high-exposure zones, even if general lab tests pass. Test samples across a wider temperature range (-10C to 120C) rather than only testing at the specified 23C impact and 110C HDT points, since resin properties shift across temperature ranges, and weld line strength can drop an extra 15% at temperature extremes that parts may see during customer shipping or use in unconditioned work sites. Also verify that gate vestige at the new location does not create a raised edge that interferes with the overmolded rubber grip, which can cause grip delamination after repeated temperature cycling in field use.",
            "upvoteCount": 0,
            "url": "https://www.jaterson.com/qa/injection-mold-gate-location-impact-strength-heat-resistance.html#suggestedAnswer-6",
            "datePublished": "2026-10-12T03:24:27Z",
            "author": {"@type": "Person","name": "Daniel Yang","url": "https://www.jaterson.com/team/daniel.html"}          }
          ,          {
            "@type": "Answer",
            "text": "Evaluate how the new gate location impacts part dimensional consistency and assembly fit across high volume production, to avoid fixing performance issues only to create assembly failures that slow down production ramp. Gate location directly impacts uneven part shrinkage: the original thin side edge gate causes asymmetric fill, which leads to 0.3mm of warp on the mounting flange opposite the gate after cooling; this warp is partially responsible for the poor heat deflection performance, as it creates pre-stress in the part that amplifies deformation under heat and load. When you test new gate positions, measure flatness on the mounting flange and internal rib fit for the motor bracket across 100 consecutive shots, to confirm symmetric fill keeps dimensional variation within ±0.1mm across all critical assembly datums. If you select a dual gate setup, carefully balance flow from both gates to avoid asymmetric shrinkage that causes misalignment of the screw bosses, which will lead to cross-threaded fasteners or cracked bosses during automated assembly, and cause additional rework at volume that erodes production margins.",
            "upvoteCount": 0,
            "url": "https://www.jaterson.com/qa/injection-mold-gate-location-impact-strength-heat-resistance.html#suggestedAnswer-7",
            "datePublished": "2026-10-12T02:52:41Z",
            "author": {"@type": "Person","name": "Michael Wu","url": "https://www.jaterson.com/team/michael.html"}          }
                  ]
              }
    },
    {
      "@context": "https://schema.org",
      "@type": "BreadcrumbList",
      "itemListElement": [
          {"@type": "ListItem", "position": 1, "name": "Home", "item": "https://www.jaterson.com/"},{"@type": "ListItem", "position": 2, "name": "Q&A", "item": "https://www.jaterson.com/qa/"},{"@type": "ListItem", "position": 3, "name": "Injection Molding Q&A", "item": "https://www.jaterson.com/qa/injection-molding/"}          ,{"@type": "ListItem", "position": 4, "name": "How does injection mold gate location impact part impact strength and heat resistance?"}
      ]
    }
]
```