See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/244157764

Rapeseed impact against a flat surface: Physical

testing and DEM simulation with two contact
models

Article in Powder Technology February 2010

Impact Factor: 2.35 DOI: 10.1016/j.powtec.2009.10.015

CITATIONS READS

21 94

4 authors, including:

J. Pecen Jzef Horabik

Czech University of Life Sciences Prague Polish Academy of Sciences
1 PUBLICATION 21 CITATIONS 71 PUBLICATIONS 351 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Marek Molenda
Polish Academy of Sciences
93 PUBLICATIONS 463 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate, Available from: Jzef Horabik
letting you access and read them immediately. Retrieved on: 01 June 2016
This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier. The attached
copy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial research
and education use, including for instruction at the authors institution
and sharing with colleagues.
Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or
licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party
websites are prohibited.
In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of the
article (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website or
institutional repository. Authors requiring further information
regarding Elseviers archiving and manuscript policies are
encouraged to visit:
http://www.elsevier.com/copyright
 Author's personal copy

Powder Technology 198 (2010) 6168

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Powder Technology
j o u r n a l h o m e p a g e : w w w. e l s ev i e r. c o m / l o c a t e / p ow t e c

Rapeseed impact against a at surface: Physical testing and DEM simulation with two
contact models
M. Wojtkowski a, J. Pecen b, J. Horabik a, M. Molenda a,
a
Institute of Agrophysics PAS, ul. Dowiadczalna 4, 20-290 Lublin 27, Poland
b
Department of Physics, Czech University of Life Sciences, ul. Kamck 129, CZ 16521 Prague 6 Suchdol, Czech Republic

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Efcient application of a discrete element method (DEM) in modeling the behavior of granular materials
Received 13 February 2009 requires contact models that reect real behavior and realistic material parameters. The mechanical behavior
Received in revised form 21 August 2009 of materials of biological origin is strongly inuenced by the moisture content, which changes the surface
Accepted 16 October 2009
and mechanical properties of seed endosperm and inuences the bulk behavior. Laboratory tests and
Available online 26 October 2009
numerical DEM simulations were conducted to evaluate regions of validity for two basic contact models to
Keywords:
describe the impact behavior of rapeseed at four moisture contents (5.5%, 7.5%, 14.7% and 34.0%). Seeds were
Impact mechanics allowed to free fall onto a at surface from a height of 21 cm. Forcetime waveforms were recorded using
Seed oscilloscope and rise and fall times were extracted for further analysis. DEM simulations were performed in
Contact models which material parameters determined by a standard method tted to two contact models were compared
DEM to experimental contact time measurements. The elastoplastic model was suitable for impact of dry seeds,
whereas the viscoelastic model gave a better t for wet seeds. An efcient criterion for model selection was
the ratio of the fall time to the rise time (TR) for the contact forcetime characteristic. For TR b 1 the
elastoplastic model is suitable, whereas for TR N 1 the viscoplastic model should be applied.
2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Understanding particle collisions is important for numerous applica-
tions covering wide elds of interest, such as exploring the rings of
Saturn [1], metal powder technology [2] and handling of agricultural
products [3]. Numerous investigations have addressed proper selection
of contact models for discrete element method (DEM) simulations.
Testing and model selection have been performed for numerous
materials, such as ice [1], rocks [4], brass and aluminum [5] and
thermoplastics [6]. Various contact models adequately describe the
behavior of colliding spheres, depending on the material and experi-
mental conditions, with impact velocity being the crucial factor.
The mechanical properties of seeds are strongly inuenced by the
moisture content (MC), which plays a role similar to that of temperature
for thermoplastics and metals. A simple explanation for ductile to brittle
transition in metals is that the stressstrain curve decreases with
increasing temperature [7]. Addition of water changes both the surface
and bulk properties of seeds by softening the seed structure and lling
internal air pores. Stpniewski [8] found that an increase in rapeseed MC
from 3% to 18% decreased the slope of the stressstrain curve during
quasi-static compression four-fold, whereas an increase in temperature
from 10 C to 50 C resulted in just a 1.3-fold decrease. Similar behavior
Corresponding author. Tel.: +48 81 7445061; fax: +48 81 7445067.
E-mail address: m.molenda@ipan.lublin.pl (M. Molenda).
of bulk seeds was observed by Stasiak and Molenda [9]. With an increase
in MC from 10% to 20% the modulus of elasticity of wheat in bulk
decreased from 22.4 to 11.1 MPa, whereas the modulus of elasticity of
rapeseed in bulk decreased from 9.0 to 6.6 MPa with an increase in MC
from 6% to 15%.
The MC and impact velocity determine the mode of reaction of seed
to impact and inuence its susceptibility to impact damage. Rapeseed
with high MC behaves like rubber because of its soft structure and
internal pores lled with capillary water. Rapeseed has an ellipsoidal
shape with an equivalent diameter of 1.53 mm. The length/width ratio
is usually b1.1. The integrity of the seed structure composed of an
endosperm layer, two leaets and an embryo root is maintained by a
seed coat of 0.040.06 mm in thickness, which is a very important
component from a mechanical point of view. The modulus of elasticity of
seed coats ranges from 50 to 200 MPa, whereas the tensile strength
ranges from 30 to 50 MPa [8]. The high fat content (4049%) of rapeseed
results in a softer structure compared to other seeds. The water content
strongly inuences the mechanical properties of rapeseed. Wet seeds
exhibit viscoelastic behavior. Davison et al. [10] applied a viscoelastic
model consisting of an elastic sphere lled with non-compressive liquid
to describe compression between parallel plates. The model properly
described the behavior of rapeseed with MCN 12%. The deformation was
reversible and rate-sensitive. With decreasing MC, capillary water is
removed from pores, resulting in permanent ductile deformation. Fig. 1
shows permanent deformation of rapeseed with MC of 11% affected by
storage under static pressure of 300 kPa for 40 days [11]. This type of

0032-5910/$ see front matter 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.powtec.2009.10.015
 Author's personal copy

62 M. Wojtkowski et al. / Powder Technology 198 (2010) 6168

damaged wheat kernels decreased from ~35% to ~3%. An increase in

Nomenclature
rapeseed MC from 5% to 13% resulted in a decrease in the percentage of
damaged seeds from ~50% to ~4%. The lower the MC, the lower the
a radius of the contact area
critical impact velocity resulting in seed cracking. Changes in the
ap radius of the contact area at yield
microstructure of rapeseed affected by overheating during post-harvest
ay radius of contact area on yield initiation
drying can also decrease its resistance to impact [13]. Seed damage is
Bi, Bj bulk viscosity
evident as cracking of the seed coat and separation of the two leaets.
B* effective bulk viscosity
Over the entire range of rapeseed MC, three reactions to impact are
c effective dissipative factor
possible: viscoelastic, ductile and brittle behaviors. The transition from
Ei, Ej Young's modulus
ductile to brittle rapeseed fracture can easily be detected as seed coat
E* effective Young's modulus
breakage. On the contrary, the transition from viscoelastic to elasto-
F normal contact force
plastic mode is diffuse. It is possible that an MC range exists for which
Fmax maximum normal contact force
both viscoelastic and elastoplastic behaviors occur simultaneously. The
kn spring stiffness
problem is how to determine effectively the transition between
mi, mj particle mass
viscoelastic and elastoplastic modes of rapeseed reaction to impact.
m* effective particle mass
Numerous contact models have been tested in numerical DEM
p(r) pressure on the contact area
simulations [14]. Simulations have been performed to study the
py yield pressure
consequences of incorporating particular contact models on collision
r radius
properties during normal impact [2,6]. Most frequently, a spring
Ri, Rj particle radius
dashpot combination has been used with linear or non-linear in-
R* effective particle radius
teraction. In the case of elastic models the contact displacement is
t time
reversible and independent on the displacement rate [15]. In the case
t time increment
of viscoelastic models the contact deformation is reversible and
tCorr time correction for loadingunloading switch
dependent on the displacement rate. The most popular approach is a
TR ratio of fall time to rise time for the contact force
Hertz-type force law including a non-linear dissipative term [16,17].
v1 impact velocity
Elasticplastic models provide permanent deformation of the contact
v2 rebound velocity
and are independent of the displacement rate [18,19]. Thornton and
vy yield velocity
Ning [18] suggested that evolution of the contact pressure distribution
x overlap
from elastic to elasticplastic behavior could be approximated by an
xCorr overlap correction for loadingunloading switch
elastic phase during which the pressure distribution is Hertzian
xy overlap at yield
followed by a plastic phase during which the pressure distribution is
xmax maximum overlap
described by a truncated Hertzian pressure distribution by dening a
xresidual residual overlap
limiting contact pressure py. The assumption by these authors of a
uniform distribution of yield pressure py over the plastic part of the
Greek symbols
contact area was investigated numerically. Wu et al. [20] concluded
i, j Poisson ratio
that the magnitude of the maximum contact pressure remained
i, j bulk viscosity
approximately equal to 2.7 times the yield stress once a attened
pressure prole was fully established, which is in good agreement
with experimental results [21]. Two distinct regimes for plastic
behavior occurs at intermediate MC (512%). For very low MC the impacts with a critical impact velocity were distinguished: elasto-
reaction of rapeseed to impact changes to brittle behavior. Szwed and plastic impact and nite-plastic-deformation impact. A sharper
ukaszuk [12] determined the percentage of damaged seeds at decrease in the coefcient of restitution with increasing impact
prescribed MC when subjected to an impact load with velocity of 27 velocity is observed for nite-plastic-deformation impacts than for
and 22 m s 1 for wheat kernels and rapeseed, respectively. The authors elastoplastic impacts (Wu et al., 2003) [20]. Li et al. [22] observed
found that when the MC increased from 8% to 24% the percentage of good agreement between Thornton and Ning [18] model predictions
and nite element analysis (FEA) results for both the force
displacement relationship and the coefcient of restitution of the
impact of an elasticperfectly plastic sphere with a rigid wall. Li et al.
[23] found that for impact velocity b20 m s 1 the restitution
coefcient calculated by FEA for an elasticperfectly plastic spheres
with typical steel parameters is intermediate between values
predicted by the fully plastic models of Johnson [21] and Thornton
and Ning [18]. Mesarovic and Fleck [24] reported that in frictionless
normal contact of elasticplastic spheres, the effects of elasticity,
strain hardening rate, relative size of the spheres and their relative
yield strength should be considered. Etsion et al. [25] applied an
elastic linear hardening model to investigate elasticplastic spherical
contact. The authors suggested an elasticplastic loading index based
on the dimensionless residual interference as a measure of the level of
plasticity of the loaded spheres.
Various models can adequately describe the impact behavior of
spheres made of different materials under various experimental
conditions [14]. There are still doubts about which contact model
should be adopted for DEM simulations of bulk rapeseed to describe
precisely the physics of particle interactions. Efcient DEM simula-
Fig. 1. Effect of storage conditions on permanent deformation of rapeseed [11]. tions require possibly simple models of interactions.
 Author's personal copy

M. Wojtkowski et al. / Powder Technology 198 (2010) 6168 63

Based on reports published by other researchers [2,15,26] and

our own laboratory experience of seed impacts [27], the objec-
tive of the present study was to examine two efcient contact
models for DEM applications: the elasticperfectly plastic contact
model of Thornton and Ning [18] for relatively dry rapeseed and
the viscoelastic contact model of Kuwabara and Kono [16] for wet
rapeseed.

2. Procedures and material

2.1. Free fall experiments

The material used for testing was rapeseed of the Nektar variety.
Sets of six seeds were selected from samples with differing MC (5.6%,
7.5%, 14.7% and 34.2%) and their MC was measured following impact
Fig. 3. Forcedisplacement relationships for elasticperfectly plastic contact between
tests. Tests were performed in which seed was allowed to free fall spheres [18].
from a height of 21 cm onto a force transducer, with ten replicates for
each sample. The transducer was a piezoelectric sensor (Kistler 9213
sp0.13) having steel ground faces and rigidity of approximately Ei Ej
400 N/m. It was connected to a signal amplier and digital storage E* =
Ei 12j + Ej 12i
oscilloscope and calibrated over the range 0250 N. The charge signal
of the transducer was transformed into voltage signal that was
processed by a digital storage oscilloscope (LeCroy 9310A) with a Ri Rj
R* =
bandwidth of 400 MHz and a sample rate of 100 MSa s 1. In this type Ri + Rj
of oscilloscope the time base is swept only once on receipt of a trigger
signal and the input data are captured in the acquisition memory for
where x is the relative approach (overlap) of the two spheres.
viewing, measurement and analysis. The equipment has been
The radius a of the contact area between two spheres is given by:
described in more detail by Pecen [27].
p
2.2. Contact models for DEM simulations a= R*x 2

Based on previous experience in testing various grains and seeds
[28] we selected elastoplastic and linear viscoelastic contact models
for simulations in which model parameters were changed stepwise to
determine the closest agreement in rise and fall times between
experimental and estimated values.
2.2.1. Elastoplastic contact model
During the elastic mode of loading for two contacting spheres, the
contact is treated as elastic and is governed by the Hertz formula [29]
and the normal contact force F is given by:
The pressure distribution over the contact area is then:
  r 2 1 = 2
3F
pr = 2
1 3
2a a
If the contact pressure during loading is less than the limiting
contact pressure py, the contact is treated as elastic and is governed by
the Hertz formula. For a given value of py the radius of the contact area
corresponding to yield initiation (ay) at the center of the contact area
p(r = 0) = py can be determined using Eqs. (1)(3):

3=2
F = kn x ; 1 R*py
ay = 4
2E*
where the spring stiffness kn is related to the elastic modulus (Ei, Ej),
Poisson ratio (i, j) and radius (Ri, Rj) of the two spheres:

4 1=2
kn = E*R*
3

Fig. 2. Pressure distribution for elasticperfectly plastic contact between spheres Fig. 4. Typical forcetime characteristics for ten replicate collisions between rapeseed
according to Thornton and Ning [18]. with 5.5% moisture content and a at surface.
 Author's personal copy

64 M. Wojtkowski et al. / Powder Technology 198 (2010) 6168

the actual maximum normal force Fmax corresponds to the maximum

overlap xmax (Fig. 3):

3Fmax 2 = 3
xresidual = xmax 7
4ER*1 = 2

Consequently, collisions involve through four cycles: elastic loading,

perfectly plastic loading, elastic unloading, and, after full recovery of the
elastic fraction of the contact, zero normal force until contact is broken
(x = 0):

8
>
> k x3 = 2 v N 0 x b xy
Fig. 5. Pulse parameters used for analysis of the test results [27]. > n 3=2
<
Fn = kn xy + py R*xxy v N 0 x xy 8
>
> 3=2
: kn xxresidual
> v b 0 x xresidual
The corresponding yield overlap is: 0 v b 0 x b xresidual

 
py 2
xy = R*
2E*
After yield occurs, the resulting contact force is the sum of the
equivalent elastic force for the fraction of the contact area for which
pressure is below the limiting contact pressure and the plastic
component for the fraction of the contact area at which yield occurred.
Fig. 2 shows the radial distribution of normal traction for an
elasticplastic contact area between spheres. The radius of the contact
area is a, ay is the radius of the contact area on yield initiation and ap
is the radius of the contact area over which a uniform pressure py is
assumed. In the simplied perfectly plastic behavior mode, the
resulting normal contact force is the sum of the elastic and plastic
forces acting on the elastic ((a2a2p)) and plastic (a2p) fractions of
the contact area, respectively (Fig. 2). The resulting forcedisplace-
ment relationship for a loadingunloading loop for the contact area is
shown in Fig. 3.
The impact velocity for yield initiation at the contact area is related to
the limiting contact pressure according to the following formula [18]:
v to the lack of more detailed information on the bulk viscosity B and
u 5 3
u p R*
vy = 3:194t 4
y
E* m*
where m* is related to particle masses mi according to:
mi mj
m* =
mi + mj
During unloading the forcedisplacement behavior is assumed to
be elastic and follows a Hertz formula until the contact force reaches
zero. The repulsive force during unloading (Fig. 3) results from the
normal force acting on the elastic fraction of the contact area.
Deformation remaining after the contact force reaches zero is
considered permanent. After recovery of the elastic part of the contact
area, the residual deformation due to plastic deformation caused by
2.2.2. Viscoelastic contact model
5
The viscoelastic contact model of Kuwabara and Kono [16] was
used as implemented in the PAPA program [30]:
3=2 1=2
F = kn x + cx v 9
where c is the effective dissipative factor related to the bulk viscosity
Bi, Bj, i, j and the radius of curvature of the colliding bodies:
1=2
c = 2B*R*
Bi Bj
B* =
Bi 1j2 + Bj 1i2
The rst term of the expression is the normal force acting between
two perfectly elastic spheres according to the Hertz theory. The
second is the non-linear dissipative part in an approach similar to the
original Hertz theory based on the bulk viscosity parameters. Owing
[14], the effective dissipative factor c was treated as an adjustable
6 simulation parameter in the present study.
During loading, the elastic and viscous components of the contact
force act in the same direction. During unloading, the velocity vector is
oriented in the opposite direction to that of the overlap, so the two
components of the contact force act in opposite directions. The force
during unloading is lower than that during loading and changes sign
in the nal stage of rebounding when the viscous component is
greater than the elastic one. As a consequence, unloading lasts longer
than loading during collision. This is contrary to the elastoplastic
contact model, in which, as a result of elastoplastic hysteresis, the
duration of loading is longer than that of unloading. This clear
difference in forcetime relationship observed in results of impact
testing was used as the criterion for selection of contact models for
seeds collision: the viscoelastic model was applied to wet seeds and
the elastoplastic model to seeds with low MC.

Table 1
Experimental and simulated rise and fall times of impact force.

Experiment Simulation

Seed moisture content [%] Impact force rise Impact force fall Fall/rise ratio Contact model Impact force rise Impact force fall Fall/rise ratio
[s] [s] [s] [s]

5.5 11.1 1.1 9.6 1.7 0.865 Elastoplastic 1 11.1 9.6 0.865
7.5 10.3 1.1 8.9 0.5 0.864 Elastoplastic 2 10.3 8.8 0.854
14.7 15.8 1.3 19.0 3.5 1.203 Viscoelastic 1 15.8 19.1 1.209
34.0 20.5 1.1 22.4 1.8 1.093 Viscoelastic 2 20.6 22.5 1.092
 Author's personal copy

M. Wojtkowski et al. / Powder Technology 198 (2010) 6168 65

Table 2
Parameters of the elastoplastic and viscoelastic contact models estimated based on conformity of simulation and experimental rise and fall times of impact force vs. time curves.

Seed moisture content Seed mass Seed radius Contact model Modulus of elasticity Stiffness Yield limit Dissipative factor
[%] [mg] R [mm] E [MPa] kn [N m 3/2] py [MPa] c [kg m 1/2 s 1]

5.5 7.4 1.19 Elastoplastic 1 440 2.10 107 16.2

7.5 5.2 1.06 Elastoplastic 2 410 1.85 107 15.3
14.7 7.4 1.19 Viscoelastic 1 73 3.55 106 16.2
34.0 6.2 1.12 Viscoelastic 2 44 2.14 106 5.99

3. Results
3.1. Impact testing
Fig. 4 shows typical test results for ten replicate free fall experiments
on seed with MC of 5.5%. Below the forcetime experimental curves,
statistics for four parameters describing the shape of impact curves as
computed by the equipment are shown on the oscilloscope screen. The
four parameters are width (pulse width), rise (rise time), fall (fall time)
and delay. Width is the duration between the pulse start (median point,
i.e. the 50% transition point on the leading edge) and the pulse stop
(median point on the trailing edge) of the pulse waveform. Rise time is
the time for a pulse waveform transition with a positive slope. Fall time
is the time for a pulse waveform transition with a negative slope. Delay
is the time from the trigger point to the rst 50% transition crossing i.e.
the pulse start. The geometric meaning of these parameters is shown in
Fig. 5.
The pulse width increased with seed MC from ~ 17 s for 5.5% to
~ 40 s for 34%. Drier seeds (5.5% and 7.5%) exhibited different pulse
characteristics to those of wetter seeds (14.7% and 34.2%) (Table 1).
For drier seeds the rst force peak was followed by a series of force
uctuations that slowly ceased with time. For wetter seeds only weak
uctuations or no uctuations were observed after the rst force peak.
The difference in response of vibrating system reected difference in
excitation, contact time of wetter seeds was longer while the
amplitude was lower. The effect of MC was also reected in computed
rise and fall times. The rise time was longer than the fall time in all
tests for the two drier seed samples, while for the wettest seeds
(34.2% MC) the rise time was always shorter than the fall time. In the
six series of tests on seeds with MC of 14.7% the rise time was shorter
in four cases and was longer in the remaining two.
These results point to a change in the material properties of the
seeds with an increase in MC. The effects reect a difference in the
mode of energy absorption in the two groups: wetter seeds exhibited
a stronger damping action than that observed for drier seeds. The
results justify a decision on the application of the two contact models
to the two groups of seeds examined.
3.2. DEM simulations
Simulations of the free fall of rapeseed from a height of 21 cm onto
a surface in the shape of a sphere of radius R = 200 m and elastic
parameters E = 2 104 MPa and = 0.24 were performed. Poisson's
ratio of the seed was of 0.24 after Wicek [31] and radius was
measured for each seed as shown in Table 1.
The collision force was negligible compared to the yield strength of
the material. A time step t of 10 7 s was applied for all simulations.
To improve the calculation accuracy for xmax in a given time step,
correction of the time for the switch from loading to unloading and
overlap xmax described in the Appendix [Eqs. (10) and (11)] was
applied.

Fig. 6. Force vs. normal displacement relationships obtained in DEM simulations for elastoplastic and viscoelastic models.
 Author's personal copy

66 M. Wojtkowski et al. / Powder Technology 198 (2010) 6168

3.2.1. Normal forcedisplacement relationships

Fig. 7. Impact force vs. contact time relationships obtained in DEM simulation for
rapeseed with four levels of moisture content.
For the viscoelastic model, parameters of the bulk viscosity of the
sphere were assumed to be the same as for rapeseed. The bulk
viscosity was set to i = 0.15 following the value used in the PAPA
code [30].
It was assumed that the residual overlap [Eq. (7)] governing the
unloading part of the collision is valid only for current contact
between particles. In other words, the residual overlap disappears
when contact is broken (x b 0) and particles recover to their original
shape.
For the elastoplastic model, E and py for rapeseed were adjusted to
t the best rise and fall times of collision obtained in the experiment.
Approximation was performed in two steps: rst E was determined to
t the best fall time of the collisionelastic part of the process, next for
given E value py was adjusted to t the best rise time of the collision.
In the case of viscoelastic model in the rst step Young modulus E and
the bulk viscosity B were adjusted step by step determined to t the
best experimental values of rise and fall time of the collision. Then the
effective dissipative factor c [Eq. (9)] was calculated.
A summary of the simulation results is presented in Table 1. Fairly
good agreement between physical and numerical values of TR was
obtained for the model parameters presented (Table 2). The results
point to the suitability of the elastoplastic model for dry seeds (MC
5.5% and 7.5%), whereas for wet seeds (MC 14.7% and 34.2%) the
viscoelastic model gave a better t. Values of E corresponding to the
best model tting results were in the range from 44 to 440 MPa, in
reasonable agreement with the values measured by Sykut [32]
according to standard S368.4 [33], which ranged from 159 to
75 MPa for rapeseed with MC of 7.5% and 11.8%, respectively.
Fig. 6 shows the relationships between force and normal
displacement obtained in DEM simulations. For seed with MC of
5.5% (Fig. 6a) both the maximum force and displacement are greater
than for seed with MC of 7.5% (Fig. 6b). For the elastoplastic model
(Fig. 6a,b) the overlap on yield initiation was 3.7and 3.4 m for seeds
with MC of 5.5% and 7.5%, respectively. For the viscoelastic model
(Fig. 6c,d) the contact force during the nal stage of rebounding
decreased to less than zero. This part of the forcetime relationship
was not considered in further analyses as it did not originate from
attraction of seeds but is the inherent property of the differential
equation for large value of dissipative factor c.
With the rapeseed MC increased from 5.5% to 34% the maximum
impact force decreased from approximately 1.4 to 0.6 N and the
collision time increased from 30 to 68 s (Fig. 7). This difference in the
magnitude of the contact force and the slope of the forcetime
relationship results from the ten-fold difference in the elasticity of dry
and wet seeds and the magnitude of the yield limit of dry seeds. The
coefcient of restitution determined for an impact velocity of 2 m s 1
(Table 3) indicates that wet seeds dissipate more energy than dry
seeds.
3.2.2. Modulus of elasticity
Simulation results for the impact of spheres against another sphere
or a at surface have been published for particles of different

Table 3
DEM estimation results for collision parameters: velocities, coefcient of restitution, maximum force, overlap and relative deformation.

MC [%] Impact velocity Yield velocity Rebound velocity Coefcient of restitution Maximum contact force Maximum deformation Maximum deformation
v1 [m s 1] vy [m s 1] v2 [m s 1] v2/v1 F [N] xmax/R at v1 = 2 m s 1 xmax/R at v1 = 20 m s 1

5.5 2.024 0.244 1.533 0.757 1.35 0.019 0.187

7.5 2.024 0.204 1.532 0.757 1.04 0.020 0.192
14.7 2.024 1.491 0.737 0.711 0.028 0.182
34.0 2.024 1.725 0.852 0.616 0.039 0.239

Table 4
Material properties recommended by standards, adopted or estimated by various authors.

Material Elastic modulus Poisson's ratio Yield strength Yield velocity Reference
[MPa] [MPa] [m s 1]

Steel 1.93 105 0.3 310 0.0085 [6]

Soda lime glass 7.1 104 0.22 [34]
Aluminum alloy 7.0 104 0.3 100 [19]
Agricultural material 3.5 103 0.3 [35]
Polystyrene 3.35 103 0.33 [6]
Cellulose acetate 3.2 103 0.28 [34]
Polycarbonate 2.42 103 0.36 68 2.89 [6]
HDPE 1.07 103 0.46 18.6 0.53 [6]
Corn 2.03 103 [33]
Wheat 0.62.02 103 [36]
Pea 0.55 103 0.26 [31]
Bean 0.53 103 0.26 [31]
Wheat 0.480.87 103 0.180.20 [31]
Wheat 0.470.69 103 [37]
Rapeseed 0.0750.16 103 0.240.16 [31]
Soybeans 0.126 103 [33]
Rapeseed 0.03 103 [38]
Apple 0.0016 103 0.35 [26]
 Author's personal copy

M. Wojtkowski et al. / Powder Technology 198 (2010) 6168 67

Table 5 the percentage of damaged seeds observed by Szwed and ukaszuk

Parameters of Thornton and Ning [18] and Kuwabara and Kono [16] normal force [12] when the MC decreased from 13% to 5%.
models of colliding spheres.

Thornton KuwabaraKono Reference 4. Conclusions

Radius Stiffness Yield limit Dissipative factor
R [mm] kn [N m 3/2] py [MPa] c [kg m 1/2 s 1] 1. Distinct differences in the behavior of dry compared to wet seeds
Ice 20 7.48 108
5.16 9.99 104
[14] were observed in impact testing. The pulse width (contact time)
Lead 20 1.35 109 35.4 2.15 105 was approximately twice as long for seeds with MC of 34.2% MC
Rubber 25 7.34 105 1.08 103 [26] compared to those with MC of 5.5%. For the wettest seeds (MC
Tomatoes 25 1.41 105 680 34.2%) the fall time was longer than the rise time in all tests,
Potatoes 25 6.54 105 1.59 103
Apples 25 7.53 105 1.52 103
whereas for seeds with MC of 5.5% and 7.5% the opposite effect was
observed. This result suggests that different contact models should
be used for numerical simulations.
materials. The parameter values adopted or estimated are summa- 2. An elastoplastic model was efcient for simulation of the behavior
rized in Table 4. Depending on the material, Young's modulus varies of dry rapeseed, whereas a viscoelastic model gave closer estimates
from 1.93 105 MPa for steel to 1.6 MPa for apple. Values of E for seeds of experimental forcetime relationships for wet seeds. The TR
reported range from 2.03 103 MPa for corn to 30 MPa for rapeseed ratio was an efcient criterion for model selection. The elastoplastic
and are comparable to values reported for some polymers such as model should be used for TR b 1, whereas for TR N 1 the viscoelastic
polystyrene (E = 3.35 103 MPa) and HDPE (E = 1.07 103 MPa). Our model should be applied.
E values estimated numerically from impact tests range from 44 to 3. Material parameters estimated in DEM simulations reected
440 MPa (Table 1) and are in reasonable agreement with those experimental impact forcetime curves fairly closely and are in
reported in the literature. reasonable agreement with ndings reported in the literature.

3.2.3. Viscous dissipation
Values of the dissipative factor c of the KuwabaraKono model (6
16 kg m 1/2 s 1) in our simulations for rapeseed are approximately
100-fold lower than the value determined by Van Zeebroeck et al. [26]
for fruits and vegetables (Table 5). Considering the approximate 10-
fold difference in the radius of the colliding objects (Tables 1 and 5)
and difference in structure of materials the 30-fold lower value of B
compared to that reported by Van Zeebroeck et al. [26] for tomatoes
seems to be acceptable.
3.2.4. Coefcient of restitution
Relationships between the coefcient of restitution e and the
impact velocity obtained in simulations are shown in Fig. 8. Very close
curves in the elastoplastic part of the deformation for two MC values
(5.5% and 7.5%) are a result of nearly identical values of the material
multiplier (p5y/E*4)1/8, where is the density, in the formula [18]
relating the restitution coefcient to the impact velocity. For low
values of the impact velocity the value of e obtained was higher for
the elastoplastic than for the viscoelastic model. The decrease in e
with increasing velocity is faster for the elastoplastic than for the
viscoelastic model. For impact velocity of 20 m s 1 we obtained
e = 0.52 for the elastoplastic model, whereas values of 0.63 and 0.78
were obtained using the viscoelastic model for seeds with MC of 14.7%
and 34%, respectively. Large normalized deformation x/R (0.190.24;
Table 3) at impact velocity of 20 m s 1 together with the low e value
for the elastoplastic model for dry rapeseed could result in seed
damage. This is the most probable reason for the ten-fold increase in
Appendix A
Five states of elastoplastic contact are possible:
1. Elastic deformation below the plastic yield [Eq. (8.1)];
2. Elastic unloading below the plastic yield [Eq. (8.1)];
3. Plastic loading deformation [Eq. (8.2)];
4. Elastic unloading/reloading above the plastic limit and below the
maximum overlap [Eq. (8.3)]; and
5. Deformation below the residual overlap, F = 0 [Eq. (8.4)].
The normal force for contacting particles is computed depending
on the actual state of the contact. The following algorithm was
implemented in the PAPA code to calculate elasticperfectly plastic
collision. The calculation accuracy for xmax (Fig. 3) depends on the
time step t applied. To improve the accuracy without decreasing t,
the search for xmax must be within the time increment t. Thus, the
nal time increment (t t, t) is searched for the change in impact
velocity sign:
vt t N 0 and vt 0:
Correction of the time for switch tCorr based on the old vt t and
current vt velocities
tvt
tCorr = 10
vtt + jvt j
is used for correction of the maximum overlap:
tCorr jvt j
xCorr = 11
2

A.1. Pseudocode

IF value maximum overlap is greater or equal to value current

overlap THEN
checking for switch from collision to rebound
IF (OldVelocity N 0 AND CurrentVelocity 0)
compute Overlap Correction (Eq. (11))
IF (current overlap+ Overlap Correction N maximum overlap)
maximum overlap=current overlap+ Overlap Correction
ENDIF
Fig. 8. DEM simulated coefcient of restitution vs. impact velocity. ENDIF
 Author's personal copy
68 M. Wojtkowski et al. / Powder Technology 198 (2010) 6168
IF value maximum overlap is greater than value of overlap at
yield limit THEN
compute residual plastic overlap [Eq. (7)]
IF value current overlap is greater than residual plastic
overlap THEN
state no. 4
normal force equal to Hertz unloading force [Eq. (8.3)]
ELSE
state no. 5
normal force equal to 0 [Eq. (8.4)]
ENDIF
ELSE
state no. 2
normal force equal to Hertz loading force [Eq. (8.1)]
ENDIF
ELSE
maximum overlap = current overlap
IF value current overlap is greater than value of overlap at yield
limit
state no. 3
normal force equal to plastic loading force [Eq. (8.2)]
ELSE
state no. 1
normal force equal to Hertz loading force [Eq. (8.1)]
ENDIF
ENDIF
References
[1] K.D. Supulver, F.G. Bridges, D.N.C. Lin, The coefcient of restitution of ice particles in
glancing collisions: experimental results for unfrosted surfaces, Icarus 113 (1995)
188199.
[2] A.B. Stevens, C.M. Hrenya, Comparison of soft-sphere models to measurements of
collision properties during normal impacts, Powder Technology 154 (2006)
99109.
[3] M. Van Zeebroeck, E. Tijskens, E. Dintwa, J. Kafashan, J. Loodts, J. De Baerdemaeker,
H. Ramon, The discrete element method to simulate fruit impact damage during
transport and handling: case study of vibration damage during apple bulk
transport, Postharvest Biology and Technology 41 (2006) 92100.
[4] D. Zhang, W.J. Whitten, The calculation of contact forces between particles using
spring and damping model, Powder Technology 88 (1996) 5964.
[5] G. Weir, S. Tallon, The coefcient of restitution for normal incident, low velocity
particle impacts, Chemical Engineering Science 60 (2005) 36373647.
[6] P.A. Moysey, M.R. Thompson, Determining the collision properties of semi-
crystalline and amorphous thermoplastics for DEM simulations of solids transport
in an extruder, Chemical Engineering Science 62 (2007) 36993709.
[7] A. Pineau, Modeling ductile to brittle fracture transition in steelsmicromechanical
and physical challenges, International Journal of Fracture 150 (2008) 129156.
[8] A. Stpniewski 1997. [Inuence of moisture content and temperature on
variability of mechanical properties of rapeseeds]. PhD dissertation. Institute of
Agrophysics, Lublin, Poland (in Polish).
[9] M. Stasiak, M. Molenda, Determination of elastic constants of cereal grains in a
uniaxial compression test, International Agrophysics 16 (2002) 6165.
[10] E. Davison, A.G. Meiering, F.J. Middendorf, A theoretical stress model of rapeseed,
Canadian Agricultural Engineering 21 (1) (1979) 4546.
[11] J. Tys, R. Rybacki, Quality of rapeseed, harvest, drying and storage, Acta
Agrophysica 44 (2001) 173 (in Polish).
[12] G. Szwed, J. ukaszuk, Effect of rapeseed and wheat kernel moisture on impact
damage, International Agrophysics 21 (2007) 299304.
[13] J. Fornal, J. Sadowska, R. Jaroch, B. Kaczyska, T. Winnicki, Effect of drying of
rapeseeds on their mechanical properties and technological usability, Interna-
tional Agrophysics 8 (2) (1994) 215224.
[14] H. Kruggel-Emden, E. Simek, S. Rickelt, S. Wirtz, V. Scherer, Review and extension of
normal force models for the discrete element method, Powder Technology 171 (2007)
157173.
[15] E. Dintwa, E. Tijskens, H. Ramon, On the accuracy of the Hertz model to describe
the normal contact of soft elastic spheres, Granular Matter 10 (2008) 209221.
[16] G. Kuwabara, K. Kono, Restitution coefcient in a collision between 2 spheres,
Japanese Journal of Applied Physics 26 (1987) 12301233.
[17] Y. Tsuji, T. Kawaguchi, T. Tanaka, Discrete particle simulation of two-dimensional
uidized bed, Powder Technology 77 (1993) 7987.
[18] C. Thornton, Z. Ning, A theoretical model for the stick/bounce behaviour of
adhesive, elasticplastic spheres, Powder Technology 99 (1998) 154162.
[19] L. Vu-Quoc, X. Zhang, An elastoplastic contact forcedisplacement model in the
normal direction: displacement-driven version, Proceedings of the Royal Society
of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences 455 (1999) 40134044.
[20] C.Y. Wu, L.Y. Li, C. Thornton, Rebound behaviour of spheres for plastic impacts,
International Journal of Impact Engineering 28 (9) (2003) 929946.
[21] K.L. Johnson, Contact Mechanics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1985.
[22] L.Y. Li, C.Y. Wu, C. Thornton, A theoretical model for the contact of elastoplastic
bodies, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. Part C, Journal of
Mechanical Engineering Science 216 (4) (2002) 421431.
[23] L.Y. Li, C. Thornton, C.Y. Wu, Impact behaviour of elastoplastic spheres with a rigid
wall, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. Part C, Journal of
Mechanical Engineering Science 214 (8) (2000) 11071114.
[24] S.D. Mesarovic, N.A. Fleck, Frictionless indentation of dissimilar elasticplastic
spheres, International Journal of Solids and Structures 37 (2000) 70717091.
[25] I. Etsion, Y. Kligerman, Y. Kadin, Unloading of an elasticplastic loaded spherical
contact, International Journal of Solids and Structures 42 (2005) 37163729.
[26] M. Van Zeebroeck, E. Tijskens, P. Van Liedekerke, V. Deli, J. De Baerdemaeker, H.
Ramon, Determination of the dynamic behaviour of biological materials during
impact using a pendulum device, Journal of Sound and Vibration 266 (2003)
465480.
[27] J. Pecen, Parameters of impact load of wheat kernels, Acta Agrophysica 6 (2)
(2005) 485-496.
[28] M. Molenda, J. Horabik, Mechanical properties of granular agro-materials and food
powders for industrial practice. Part I. Characterization of mechanical properties
of particulate solids for storage and handling, Institute of Agrophysics PAS, Lublin,
Poland, 2005.
[29] S. Timoshenko, J.N. Goodier, Theory of Elasticity, 3rd edMcGraw-Hill, New York,
1970.
[30] S. Schwartzer, PAPA: parallel algorithm for particle ow problems. July 25, 2008.
http://www.ica1.uni-stuttgart.de/Research/Software_P3T/papa.html.
[31] J. Wicek, 2008. Discrete element modeling of quasi-static effects in grain
assembly. PhD dissertation. Institute of Agrophysics, Lublin, Poland.Wu C.Y., Li L.Y.,
Thornton C. 2003. Rebound behaviour of spheres for plastic impacts. International
Journal of Impact Engineering 28(9), 929946.
[32] J. Sykut, 2008. Modeling of quasi-static effects in grain using discrete element
method. PhD thesis. Institute of Agrophysics PAS, Lublin, Poland.
[33] ASAE, Standard S368.4. Compression test of food materials of convex shape, 2006.
[34] S.F. Foerster, M.Y. Louge, H. Chang, K. Allia, Measurements of the collision
properties of small spheres, Physics of Fluids 6 (3) (1994) 11081115.
[35] M.H. Abbaspour-Fard, Theoretical validation of a multi-sphere, discrete element
model suitable for biomaterials handling simulation, Biosystems Engineering 88 (2)
(2004) 153161.
[36] G.M. Glenn, F.L. Younce, M.J. Pitts, Fundamental physical properties characterizing
the hardness of wheat endosperm, Journal of Cereal Science 13 (1991) 179194.
[37] S. Grundas, P. Hnilica, Typy endospermu ziarna pszenicy a jego waciwoci
mechaniczne (Types of wheat endosperm and their mechanical properties),
Zeszyty Problemowe Postpw Nauk Rolniczych 320 (1987) 127133.
[38] A.O. Raji, J.F. Favier, Model for the deformation in agricultural and food particulate
materials under bulk compressive loading using discrete element method. I. Theory,
model development and validation, Journal of Food Engineering 64 (2004) 359371.