Materials Transactions

© 2022 The Japan Institute of Metals and Materials

Analysis of Powder Compaction Process Using Multi-Particle Finite Element Method

Parviz Kahhal1,2, Jaebong Jung1, Hyunjoo Choi3, Pil-Ryung Cha3 and Ji Hoon Kim1,+
1
School of Mechanical Engineering, Pusan National University, Busan 46241, Korea
2
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Ayatollah Boroujerdi University, Boroujerd, 38198, Iran
3
School of Advanced Materials Engineering, Kookmin University, Seoul 02707, South Korea

Cold compaction is an essential step of the powder metallurgy process, which is cost-effective in the manufacturing industry. In the present
study, the compaction of pure iron powder is investigated. A MATLAB code is developed to create a representative volume element with a given
size distribution, number of particles, and initial relative density. The finite element analysis is performed by implementing an ABAQUS/
Explicit python script. Multi-particle finite element analysis of compaction is employed to analyze the deformation of the particles into the green
body. The effects of loading path, geometry configuration, and wall friction on punch force, axial and transverse stresses, strains, and yield
surface are discussed. The results indicate that wall friction affects the load, stress state, and yield surface. It was found that, with the increase of
the wall friction from 0.0 to 0.2, the compaction force increases by 14.70%. Also, the difference between the upper and lower RVE face forces
increases from 1.01% to 16.27%. Changing the loading path from the compression to the hydrostatic compaction decreases the compaction force
by 57.7% in upper and 65.75% in lower RVE faces, while the axial stress decreases by 27.70% and the transverse stress increases by 40.41%.

Ad
The volume strain of compaction is smaller by 35.33% than that of hydrostatic compression. [doi:10.2320/matertrans.MT-MB2022012]

(Received March 31, 2022; Accepted August 24, 2022; Published October 7, 2022)
Keywords: powder compaction, multi-particle finite element analysis, yield surface

1. Introduction
va force distribution between the top and bottom punches in

nc
Powder metallurgy is helpful for the mass production of
parts with complex geometries. An essential step of this
process, cold compaction of powders, is of interest for many
manufacturing processes, for example, the production of
green bodies, ceramic parts, pellets, and tablets in the
pharmaceutical industry.1,2) In lots of uses, powder parts must
be compacted up to as high as possible relative density.3)
metal powder compaction with the addition of graphite
powders.12) Zhang et al. utilized DEM to investigate the
correlation mechanism between force chains and the friction
mechanism during powder compaction.13) Xu and Meng
eV employed DEM to study metal powder flow and force chain
characteristics in high-velocity compaction.14) Redanz and
Fleck used DEM to investigate the yield surfaces for sticking
and frictionless particle contacts in a 2-dimensional analy-

The finite element method is a powerful tool to model the
process and predict the process outputs. Many researches
used numerical methods to investigate the flow behavior in
the powder compaction process. Three main modeling
approaches in powder compaction simulations are the
continuum media approach, the discrete element method
(DEM), and the multi-particle finite element method
(MPFEM).
Inter-particle contact interactions were ignored in the
continuum media approach, and particles were studied as
a continuous medium. In this method, the macroscopic
behavior of the material can be investigated as a plasticity
problem with significant deformation.4) Employing this
approach, Sinka et al. investigated the effect of wall friction
in pharmaceutical tablets compaction using the Drucker­
Prager cap model.5) Redanz et al. and Lewis et al. used the
continuum approach to analyze large deformation in the
compaction process.6,7) Akhmetshin et al. simulated com-
paction of tungsten carbide/cobalt powder via the Drucker-
Prager Cap constitutive model to obtain the stress distribution
and volume of plastic deformation during compaction.8)
Cundall9) developed DEM in 1971. In this method, the
motion of particles is studied through the Newton’s second
law of motion, considering contact interactions between
particles and processing contact forces as functions of the
particle overlap.10,11) In this regard, Jeong and Choi used
DEM to investigate the stress transmission and compressive
iew
sis.15)
In MPFEM, classical finite element simulations on a
discrete particle assembly are performed. These particles are
composed of finite elements, and their interactions are
ruled by classical finite-element contact conditions.16) Using
MPFEM, Abdelmoula et al. investigated the plastic flow of
granular materials with highly deformable elastic-plastic
grains.17) Demirtas and Klinzing investigated the compaction
behavior of hollow spheres computationally and experimen-
tally.18) They simulated two different particle sizes with
different shell thicknesses using MPFEM.
The most realistic MPFEM simulation that considers all
the affecting parameters has been done with a limited number
of particles so far. This research aims to investigate the
macrostructure of the powder compaction process using a
vast number of particles. In section 2, the representative
volume element generation method is explained, followed by
the finite element method. Section 3 describes the results and
discussion. Section 4 concludes the research achievements.
2. Methods
2.1 Material properties
In this research, the elasto-plastic model has been used to
analyze pure iron powder compaction. Table 1 includes the
material properties for the elasto-plastic model. The stress-
strain equation for this model is as follow:

+
·
¼ 465:5ð
¾ þ 0:0140Þ0:2481 ð1Þ
Corresponding author, E-mail: kimjh@pusan.ac.kr
2 P. Kahhal, J. Jung, H. Choi, P.-R. Cha and J.H. Kim
Table 1 Material parameters of pure iron powder.
Ad
va
nc
Fig. 1 Stress-strain curve of the iron powder.
where ·
(in MPa) and ¾
are the effective stress and the
equivalent plastic strain, respectively. The true stress-strain
diagram for both material models is shown in Fig. 1.
2.2 Representative volume element generation
The first step of the simulation is to generate a
representative volume element (RVE) that consists of a
desired number of particles considering initial relative
density and preventing overclosure between particles. A
MATLAB code has been implemented to generate the RVE.
Table 2 includes the inputs and outputs of the RVE generator
code.
Figure 2 shows the experimentally measured particle size
distribution and the output distribution. The curve had been
fitted using a Gaussian distribution considering the cut-off
radii (22.5 µm³88.5 µm):
1  ðx®Þ 2
y¼ e 2· 2
ð2Þ
2³·
where ® is the mean of the distribution and · is the standard
deviation, taking the values of 111 µm and 29 µm in this
work to fit the experimental distribution, respectively.
Table 2 Input parameters of the RVE generator.
Fig. 2 Measured and generated particle size distribution.
The algorithm for generating RVE is as follows:
1. Determine the RVE size based on the Gaussian fitted
particle size distribution and input parameters.
2. Determine the RVE edge size, a:

1=3
4³r3m
a¼ ð3Þ
3μ i;target
eVwhere μi,target is the target initial relative density, and rm is the
mean radius.
3. Generate a list of radii with cut-off radii.
4. Choose a radius.
iew
5. Divide the RVE into G3 cubes of an equal size (G: an
integer number).
6. Sweep all the cubes in a random order and check if a
new particle space is occupied by other particles. For
each cube, maximum 50 new positions are tried. If an
unoccupied space is found, insert the particle and go to
Step 8.
7. If the sweeping is completed but fails to find a new
particle position, increase G by 2 and go to Step 5.
8. Repeat 4­7 until no more particles can be inserted.
2.3 Finite element model
Using the generated RVEs, finite element models were
constructed for investigating the effect of various model and
process parameters. Table 3 shows the outputs of the
generated RVE for FEM studies.
The finite element modeling and analysis have been done
by ABAQUS/Explicit 2020 python script. Figure 3 shows a
generated RVE.
2.3.1 Model sensitivity analysis
To check the sensitivity of the finite element mesh, the
Table 3 Output parameters of the RVE generator.
 Analysis of Powder Compaction Process Using Multi-Particle Finite Element Method 3

v
v
v

v
v

Fixed
(a) (b)

Ad
Fig. 3 (a) The RVE with loading directions, and (b) the discretized RVE.

Mass scaling factor= 1.6e14

va
Punch speed=0.4 (μm/s)

nc
eV Mass scaling factor= 1.6e14
Punch speed=0.4 (μm/s)

iew
(a) (b)

Mass scaling factor= 1.6e14

No. of Elements=315842
Element type=Linear

Punch speed=0.4 (μm/s)

No. of Elements=315842
Element type=Linear

(c) (d)
Fig. 4 Sensitivity analysis of the FE model parameters: (a) the effect of element number on the analysis time, (b) the effect of element
number on the maximum punch force, (c) the effect of mass scaling factor on the pressure-deviatoric stress (p-q) diagram, and (d) the
effect of punch speed on the average equivalent plastic strain rate.

effect of model parameters has been examined. Figure 4(a) 1

and (b) show the effect of the number of elements and p ¼ ð· 11 þ · 22 þ · 33 Þ ð4Þ
3
element type on the maximum punch force and analysis time rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
1
for the elasto-plastic model, using linear and quadratic q¼ ½ð· 11  · 22 Þ2 þ ð· 33  · 22 Þ2 þ ð· 11  · 33 Þ2  ð5Þ
tetrahedral elements. 2
Figure 4(c) shows the p-q diagram for different mass where ·11, ·22, and ·33 are the three normal stress
scaling factor. The pressure (hydrostatic stress) ( p) and the components.
equivalent stress (q) are computed as functions of the main Figure 4(d) shows the average equivalent plastic strain rate
principal stresses of the stress tensor at different compaction (¾_
or EReq) versus punch speed curve. EReq can be calculated
stages: as follow:
4 P. Kahhal, J. Jung, H. Choi, P.-R. Cha and J.H. Kim

Table 4 Selected configurations of the finite element model. Table 5 Information of the initial RVE configurations.

rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
2 1
¾_
¼ ½ð_¾1  ¾_ 2 Þ2 þ ð_¾2  ¾_ 3 Þ2 þ ð_¾3  ¾_ 1 Þ2  ð6Þ
3 2
where ¾_ 1 ; ¾_ 2 , and ¾_ 3 are the three principal strain rates.
Considering all the described effects, Table 4 displays the
selected configurations for the finite element model.

Ad
3. Results and Discussion

3.1 Effect of initial configuration

Ten different initial configurations (based on experimental

va
size distribution) have been analyzed to study the influence of
geometry. Table 5 shows the properties of generated initial strain distribution frequency in the compaction, while Fig. 7
configurations. Figure 5 shows the ten different RVEs. The shows the effect of the initial configuration on the average

nc
edge length of the RVEs is 1015.9 µm. logarithmic strain distribution frequency.
Figure 6 shows the effect of different initial configurations As can be seen, the effect of different initial configurations
on the punch force, p-q diagram, and the average logarithmic on punch force and is negligible. The standard deviation of

eV
(a) (b) (c) (d)
iew (e)

(f) (g) (h) (i) (j)

Fig. 5 Initial RVE configurations: (a), (b), +, ( j) correspond to RVE1, RVE2, + , RVE10, respectively.

(a) (b)
Fig. 6 Effect of different initial RVE configurations on (a) the punch force, and (b) the p-q diagram.
 Analysis of Powder Compaction Process Using Multi-Particle Finite Element Method
Fig. 7 Average logarithmic strain for different initial RVE configurations.
Ad
the maximum punch force equals 5.22 kN, which is about
2.2% of the average maximum punch force (229.73 kN). On
va
the other hand, some deviations can be seen in the p-q
diagram, which shows the initial configuration affects the
stress state.
nc
3.2 Effect of wall friction
Three different wall friction has been analyzed in the
model to investigate the effect. Figure 8(a) shows the upper
and lower RVE face force of compaction die in different wall
frictions. As can be seen, the wall friction affects the punch
force, With the increase of the wall friction from 0.0 to 0.2,
the compaction force increases by 14.70%. Also, the
(a)
Fig. 8 Effect of wall friction on: (a) the punch force, (b) the stress components, and (c) the p-q diagram.
5
difference between the upper and lower RVE face forces
increases from 1.01% to 16.27% when the wall friction
coefficient rises.
Figure 8(b) shows the stress components of compaction
RVE in different wall frictions. Axial and transverse stresses
also slightly increase with the increase of friction coefficient,
which is due to the rise of the forces because of friction on
the stresses.
Figure 8(c) shows the p-q diagram for these cases. When
the relative density is about 0.33%, the q in the p-q diagram
is slightly smaller when the friction coefficient equals zero,
but this difference is negligible when the relative density
increases to 72%.
3.3 Effect of loading path
Twenty-one different speed ratios have been simulated to
investigate the loading path effect considering the loading
path parameter ¡ (the ratio of the transverse speed to the
axial speed, Fig. 3) equal as ¹1.0, ¹0.9, ¹0.8, + , 0.0, 0.1,
0.2, + , 1.0 (Fig. 3). Figure 9(a) shows the punch force
versus relative density diagram for three loading paths
(¡ = 0, 0.5, 1.0), respectively.
When ¡ increases from 0 to 1, the loading path changes
from compaction to hydrostatic compression. It can be seen
that punch force decreases by 57.70% in upper and 65.75%
in lower RVE faces with the increase of the ¡. The loading
path with ¡ = 0 has the highest punch force and axial stress.
eV Figure 9(b) shows the axial and transverse stresses versus
the relative density diagram of three loading paths (¡ =
0, 0.5, 1.0), respectively. When the ¡ changes from 0 to 1, the
decrease of axial stress (27.70%) accompanied by an increase
iew
(b)
(c)
6 P. Kahhal, J. Jung, H. Choi, P.-R. Cha and J.H. Kim

(a) (b)
Fig. 9 Effect of loading paths on the punch force: (a) the punch force, and (b) the stress components.

Ad
Initial, ρr=0.33 Final, ρr=0.72

Void
28.48%
4. Conclusion

Multi-particle finite element simulations of the powder

va
α = 0.0
Avg. vol. strain compaction process have been performed. Modules of
1.8461
particle generation, FE mesh generation, FE calculation,
postprocessing were developed using MATLAB, Python,

nc
Void and ABAQUS. An initial relative density of 26.7% was
28.02%
α = 0.5
Avg. vol. strain
achieved with 456 particles. The effect of model and process
1.2318 parameters has been examined. The following points can be
concluded:

α = 1.0
Void
28.00%
Avg. vol. strain
1.1958
eV
(1) Linear tetrahedral elements with similar sizes to the
mean radius were found to be effective in MPFEM.
(2) The effect of different initial configurations on punch
force is negligible. Initial configuration affects the stress

Fig. 10 Initial and final ZX section views of particles and average volume
strains at the relative density of 71% for three loading paths: ¡ = 0, 0.5,
and 1.0.
in the transverse stress (40.41%) leads to the increase of the
hydrostatic stress.
To better understand the morphology of particles, the
initial and final ZX section views of particles are shown in
Fig. 10, along with the void percentage and average volume
strain. The percentage of void marginally decreases with the
increase of the ¡. It can be concluded that the loading path
affects the plastic deformation; with the increase of ¡, the
amount of plastic deformation increases.
To investigate the springback phenomena in the compac-
tion process, the average logarithmic strain of particles is
calculated in three different load paths: ¡ = 0.0, ¡ = 0.5, and
¡ = 1.0 (Fig. 10). The average volume strain by 35.33% with
the increase of ¡.
As shown in Figs. 11(a) and (b), the p-q diagram and the
yield surface change dramatically with the change in
loading path; the main difference exists when ¡ = 0. The
average of three different initial configurations has been
considered to calculate the yield surface. Figure 11(c) is a
histogram of the average logarithmic strain that shows less
strain frequency with increasing ¡. Also, it can be seen in
Fig. 11(d) that level of logarithmic strain decreases with
increasing ¡.
iew
state. When relative density is about 40% of the p-q
diagram, the q is slightly smaller when the friction
coefficient is zero. Still, this difference is negligible
when the relative density increases to the maximum
value.
(3) With the increase of the wall friction from 0.0 to 0.2,
the compaction force increases by 14.70%.
(4) The difference between the upper and lower RVE face
forces increases from 1.01% to 16.27% when the wall
friction coefficient increases from 0.0 to 0.2.
(5) When the loading path changes from compaction to
hydrostatic compression, the punch force decreases by
57.70% in upper and 65.75% in lower RVE faces.
(6) When the loading path parameter or the velocity ratio,
¡, increased, the decrease of axial stress (27.70%)
accompanied by an increase in transverse stress
(40.41%), leads to the increase of the hydrostatic stress.
(7) The average logarithmic strain decreases with the
increase of ¡.
(8) The percentage of void marginally decreases from
28.48% to 28% with the increase of the ¡ due to
increased plastic deformation.
(9) The volume strain of compaction is more significant
than that of hydrostatic compression and decreases by
35.33% with the increase of ¡.
(10) The yield surface was successfully calculated utilizing
different loading paths.
 Analysis of Powder Compaction Process Using Multi-Particle Finite Element Method 7

(a) (b)

Ad
va (c)

nc (d)
Fig. 11 (a) The p-q diagram, (b) the yield surface, (c) the average logarithmic strain distribution, and (d) the average logarithmic strain of

eV
individual particles for different loading paths.

(1998) 291­328.
Acknowledgments
8) L.R. Akhmetshin, I.Y. Smolin and S.P. Buyakova: Mater. Sci. Eng.

This work was supported by the National Research
Foundation of Korea (NRF) Grant funded by the Korean
Government (MSIP) (No. Grant Number ­ NRF-
2021M3H4A6A01045764).
REFERENCES
1) S.C. Lee and K.T. Kim: Int. J. Mech. Sci. 44 (2002) 1295­1308.
2) M. Trunec and K. Maca: J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 90 (2007) 2735­2740.
3) P. Loidolt, M.H. Ulz and J. Khinast: Powder Technol. 336 (2018) 426­
440.
4) I.C. Sinka: Kona Powder Particle J. 25 (2007) 4­22.
5) I.C. Sinka, J.C. Cunningham and A. Zavaliangos: Powder Technol. 133
(2003) 33­43.
6) P. Redanz: J. Mech. Solids 18 (1999) 399­413.
7) R.W. Lewis and A. Khoei: Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 159
iew
1093 (2021) 012002.
9) P.A. Cundall: Proceedings of the Symposium of the International
Society for Rock Mechanics, Nancy, France, 1, (1971) pp. 2­8.
10) G. Gustafsson, H.-¡. Häggblad and P. Jonsén: Powder Technol. 239
(2013) 231­238.
11) P. Cundall and O. Strack: Geotechnique 29 (1979) 47­65.
12) J.H. Jeong and J. Choi: Powder Metall. 64 (2021) 241­247.
13) N. Zhang, Sh. Zhang, J. Tan and W. Zhang: Chin. Phys. B 31 (2022)
024501.
14) P. Redanz and N.A. Fleck: Acta Mater. 49 (2001) 4325­4335.
15) Z.Y. Xu and F.J. Men: J. Korean Phys. Soc. 79 (2021) 455­467.
16) B. Harthong, J.F. Jérier, V. Richefeu, B. Chareyre, P. Dorémus, D.
Imbault and F.V. Donzé: Int. J. Mech. Sci. 61 (2012) 32­43.
17) N. Abdelmoula, B. Harthong, D. Imbault and P. Doremus: IV
International Conference on Particle-based Methods­Fundamentals
and Applications, (2015).
18) A. Demirtas and G.R. Klinzing: Powder Technol. 391 (2021) 34­45.