Russian Journal of Non-Ferrous Metals

, Volume 60, Issue 5, pp 499–503 | Cite as

Study of Compaction of the Titanium Powder by the Experimental-Analytical Method

  • A. G. ZalazinskiiEmail author
  • A. V. NesterenkoEmail author
  • I. M. BerezinEmail author


The dependence of porosity θ of the spongy titanium-based powder material on stress state coefficient k during the plastic deformation with the prevailing effect of the uniform compression is investigated. Based on the results found in previous works, the family of yield curves with a variable porosity is plotted on the σ–T plane. The yield criterion of the powder material is based on the Modified Drucker–Prager Cap Model. Straight lines corresponding to various values of stress-state coefficient k = σ/T, where σ is the average hydrostatic stress and T is the intensity of tangential stresses, are represented in the graph of the geometric interpretation of the accepted plasticity model. To formulate the relation of porosity (θ, %), average normal stress (\(\bar {\sigma }\)), expressed in the dimensionless form, and stress-state coefficient k, intersection points of the family of curves corresponding to generatrices of yield surfaces on the σ–T plane and radial straight lines, are used. This results in the derivation of the equation of the θ = θ (\(\bar {\sigma }\), k) form. To verify the adequacy of this relationship, the experimental part of the investigation is fulfilled. Powder billets preliminarily compacted at a pressure of 1000 MPa and temperature 325°C are subjected to electroerosion cutting along the axial section to form planar samples (templates). Several characteristic segments are selected on the template surface to determine the local surface porosity by quantitative metallography. The stress state was additionally determined in representative segments by the numerical simulation. Values of bulk plastic strain (\(\varepsilon _{{v}}^{{{\text{pl}}}}\)), intensities of tangential stresses (T), and hydrostatic normal stress (σ) are calculated in axial section zones corresponding to the regions under study. It is shown that the stress state coefficient insignificantly affects the porosity upon its variation in a rather broad range (k = –10 to –0.86).


compaction densification porosity powder simulation plasticity model stress-state coefficient 



The authors claim that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    Nesterenko, A.V., Novozhonov, V.I., Zalazinskii, A.G., and Skripov, A.V., Influence of temperature on compactibility of briquettes of titanium sponge alloyed with hydrogen, Russ. J. Non-Ferrous Met., 2015, vol. 56, no. 3, pp. 287–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Helle, A.S., Easterling, K.E., and Ashby, M.F., Hot-isostatic pressing diagrams: new developments, Acta Metal., 1985, vol. 33, no. 12, pp. 2163–2174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Swinklers, F.B., Wilkinson, D.S., Arzt, E., and Ashby, M.F., Mechanisms of hot isostatic pressing, Acta Metal., 1983, vol. 31, no. 11, pp. 1829–1840.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nissel, C., HIP diffusion bonding, Powder Metall. Int., 1984, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 113–116.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hartong, B., Jerier, J.F., Doremus, P., Imbault, D., and Donze, F.V., Modeling of high-density compaction of granular materials by the discrete element method, Int. J. Sol. Struct., 2009, vol. 46, nos. 18–19, pp. 3357–3364.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Maksimenko, A.L., Simulation of deformation hardening of porous and powder materials in extrusion processes, Poroshk. Metall., 2014, nos. 11/12, pp. 3–14.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Martynova, I.F. and Shtern, M.B., Plasticity equations of porous solids considering true strain of the base material, Poroshk. Metall., 1978, no. 1, pp. 23–29.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Xin, X.J., Jayaraman, P., Daehn, G.S., and Wagoner, R.H., Investigation of yield surface of monolithic and composite powders by explicit finite element simulation, Int. J. Mech. Sci., 2003, vol. 45, no. 4, pp. 707–723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Loginov, Yu.N., Stepanov, S.I., and Khanykova, E.V., Effect of pore architecture of titanium implants on stress-strain state upon conversion, Solid State Phenom., 2017, vol. 265, pp. 606–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Maksimenko, A.L., Mikhailov, O.V., and Shtern, M.B., Effect of the morphology of pores on the regularities of plastic-deformation of porous bodies. 2. Evolution of the shape of pores in the process of plastic deformation, Soviet Powder Metall. Met. Ceram., 1992, vol. 31, no. 5, pp. 381–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Orlova, E.V. and Panova, I.M., Analysis of the densification process of discrete materials under hydrostatic pressure, Kuzn.-Shtamp. Proizv. Obrab. Mater. Davl., 2016, no. 6, pp. 10–15.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zalazinskii, A.G. and Polyakov, A.P., Model of plastically compressed material and its application to the study of the extrusion process of a porous billet, Prikl. Mekh. Tekh. Fiz., 2002, no. 3, pp. 140–151.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kushch, V.I., Podoba, Ya.O., and Shtern, M.B., Effect of micro-structure on yield strength of porous solid: A comparative study of two simple cell models, Comput. Mater. Sci., 2008, vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 113–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Grigor’ev, A.K., Rudskoi, A.I., and Kolesnikov, A.V., Mathematical model of the elastoplastic deformation process of porous sintered materials, Poroshk. Metall., 1992, no. 12, pp. 1–10.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Perel’man, V.E., Analysis of powder materials compaction under hydrostatic loading, Poroshk. Metall., 1977, no. 9, pp. 15–21.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ogbonna, N. and Fleck, N.A., Compaction of an array of spherical particles, Acta Metal. Mater., 1995, vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 603–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Loginov, Yu.N., Babailov, N.A., and Pervukhina, D.N., Simulation of porous material compaction process using Abaqus software, Kuzn.-Shtamp. Proizv. Obrab. Mater. Davl., 2015, no. 6, pp. 45–48.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Zhou, M., Huang, S., Hu, J., Lei, Y., Zou, F., Yan, S., and Yang, M., Experiment and finite element analysis of compaction densification mechanism of Ag–Cu–Sn–In mixed metal powder, Powder Technol., 2017, vol. 313, pp. 68–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Druyanov, B.A., Prikladnaya teoriya plastichnosti poristykh tel (Applied Theory of Plasticity of Porous Solids), Moscow: Mashinostroenie, 1989.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Laptev, A.M., Plasticity criteria for porous materials, Poroshk. Metall., 1982, no. 7, pp. 12–17.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    DorMohammedi, H. and Khoei, A.R., A three-invariant cap model with isotropic-kinematic hardening rule and associated plasticity for granular materials, Int. J. Sol. Struct., 2008, vol. 45, no. 2, pp. 631–656.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    DiMaggio, F.L. and Sandler, I.S., Material model for granular soils, J. Eng. Mech. Div., 1971, vol. 97, no. 3, pp. 935–950.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Gurson, A.L., Continuum theory of ductile rupture by void nucleation and growth: Part 1. Yield criteria and flow rules for porous ductile media, J. Eng. Mater. Technol. Trans. ASME, 1977, vol. 99, no. 1, pp. 2–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Shima, S. and Oyane, M., Plasticity theory for porous metals, Int. J. Mech. Sci., 1976, vol. 18, no. 6, pp. 285–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Doraivelu, S.M., Gegel, H.L., Gunasekera, J.S., Malas, J.C., Morgan, J.T., and Thomas, J.F., A new yield function for compressible P/M materials, Int. J. Mech. Sci., 1984, vol. 26, nos. 9–10, pp. 527–535.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lee, D.N. and Kim, H.S., Plastic yield behavior of porous metals, Powder Metall., 1999, vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 121–141.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Park, S.J., Han, H.N., Oh, K.H., and Lee, D.N., Model for compaction of metal powders, Int. J. Mech. Sci., 1976, vol. 18, no. 6, pp. 285–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Biswas, K., Comparison of various plasticity models for metal powder compaction processes, J. Mater. Proc. Technol., 2005, vol. 166, no. 1, pp. 107–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Drucker, D.C. and Prager, W., Soil mechanics and plastic analysis for limit design, Quart. Appl. Mat., 1952, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 157–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Resende, L. and Martin, J.B., Formulation of Drucker–Prager cap model, J. Eng. Mech. ASCE, 1985, vol. 111, no. 7, pp. 855–881.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Dassult Systemes Simulia Corp., Abaqus Theory Manual, accessed June 13, 2013.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kolmogorov, V.L., Loginov, Yu.N., Parshakov, S.I., and Shilov, S.V., Revisiting the hypothesis of a single curve for powder materials, in Obrabotka metallov davleniem (Pressure Treatment of Metals), Sverdlovsk: Kirov UPI, 1981, pp. 47–50.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Berezin, I., Nesterenko, A., Zalazinskii, A. and Kovacs, G., Influence of stress state conditions on densification behavior of titanium sponge, Acta Polytech. Hungar., 2017, vol. 14, no. 6, pp. 153–168.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Berezin, I.M., Nesterenko, A.V., and Zalazinskii, A.G., Identification of the Druker–Prager yield condition and modeling of compaction of the plasticized titanium feedstock, Russ. J. Non-Ferrous Met., 2017, vol. 58, no. 3, pp. 297–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Allerton Press, Inc. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Engineering Science, Ural Branch, Russian Academy of SciencesYekaterinburgRussia
  2. 2.Ural Federal UniversityYekaterinburgRussia

Personalised recommendations