Explicit finite element method simulation of consolidation of monolithic and composite powders
- 119 Downloads
The explicit finite element method (FEM) has been used to simulate the compaction of monolithic and composite powder compacts. It is concluded that with the proper FEM model and appropriate loading speed, explicit FEM can be used to simulate powder compaction with satisfactory accuracy. The simulated pressure-density curves for four periodic powders are in reasonable agreement with experiments using model powders consisting of rods. The effects of the friction coefficient, Poisson’s ratio, and hardening exponent on densification are investigated. Powder compacts consisting of particles with larger Poisson’s ratio, larger interparticle friction, and larger hardening exponent are more diffcult to consolidate in monotonic compaction. Compaction of multiparticle arrays is also simulated to assess the effects of packing randomness and particle rearrangement. The results reveal that local packing details affect the compaction behavior and, in general, the more heterogeneous the powder mixture is, the more difficult it is to consolidate the powder compact. Networking of hard particles significantly increases the densification resistance.
KeywordsMaterial Transaction Hard Particle Finite Element Method Simulation Soft Particle Periodic Cell
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.D.L. Erich: Int. J. Powder Met., 1987, vol. 23, pp. 45–54.Google Scholar
- 5.R.W. Heckel: Trans. TMS-AIME, 1961, vol. 221, pp. 671–75.Google Scholar
- 6.A. Schofield and C.P. Wroth: Critical State Soil Mechanics, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY, 1968.Google Scholar
- 8.A.L. Gurson: Advances in Powder Metallurgy and Particulate Materials, Proc. 1992 Int. Conf. Exhib. on Powder Metallurgy & Particulate Materials, Metal Powder Industries Federation, Princeton, NJ, 1992, vol. 2, pp. 133–45.Google Scholar
- 13.S.B. Brown and G.G.A. Weber: Proc. 1988 Int. Powder Metallurgy Conf., American Powder Metallurgy Institute, Princeton, NJ, 1988, vol. 18, pp. 465–76.Google Scholar
- 20.E.K.H. Li and P.D. Funkenbusch: Metall. Trans. A, 1993, vol. 24A, pp. 1345–54.Google Scholar
- 29.S. Krishnaswami and J.R.L. Trasorras: in Net Shape Processing of Powder Materials, S. Krishnaswami, R.M. McMeeking, and J.R.L. Trasorras, eds., ASME, New York, NY 10016, 1995, AMD-vol. 216, pp. 89–98.Google Scholar
- 37.X.J. Xin, P. Jayaraman, G.S. Daehn and R.H. Wagoner: Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, unpublished research, 2001.Google Scholar
- 38.John O. Hallquist: LS-DYNA Keywords Manual: Non-Linear Dynamic Analysis of Structures, version 9.50, Livermore Software Technology Corporation, Livermore, CA 94550, 1999.Google Scholar
- 39.A. Mattiasson, P. Strange, A. Thilderkvist, and A. Samuelsson: 5th Int. Conf. on NUMIFORM, New York, NY, 1995, pp. 115–24.Google Scholar
- 40.N. He and R.H. Wagoner: in NUMISHEET 96, J.K. Lee, G.L. Kinzel, and R.H. Wagoner, eds. The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, 1996, pp. 308–15.Google Scholar