Particuology 12 (2014) 107112

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Particuology
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/partic

DEM speedup: Stiffness effects on behavior of bulk material

Stef Lommen , Dingena Schott, Gabriel Lodewijks
Department of Maritime and Transport Technology, Delft University of Technology, 2628CD Delft, The Netherlands

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history:
Received 21 December 2012
Received in revised form 20 March 2013
Accepted 26 March 2013
Keywords:
Discrete element method
Speedup
Stiffness reduction
Limit
Overlap

a b s t r a c t
A number of techniques exist for minimizing the computational cost of discrete element simulations
(DEMs). One such method is a reduction of particle stiffness, which allows for bigger time steps and
therefore fewer iterations in a simulation. However, the limits and drawbacks of this approach are still
unclear, and may lead to invalid results. This paper investigates the effect of a stiffness reduction on bulk
behavior by examining three case studies. Two cases demonstrate that particle stiffness can be reduced
without affecting the bulk material behavior, whereas the third test shows that a stiffness reduction
inuences the bulk behavior.
2013 Chinese Society of Particuology and Institute of Process Engineering, Chinese Academy of
Sciences. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Users applying the discrete element method (DEM) to largescale industrial processes involving hundreds of thousands of
particles are constantly searching for ways to decrease the computation time. Even with the considerable increase in computational
power over recent decades, large-scale simulations still require a
considerable amount of time. One of the possibilities for speeding
up DEM simulations is a reduction in particle stiffness (Malone &
Xu, 2008). By making particles less stiff or softer, a larger time step
can be used, resulting in a shorter computation time.
Many studies have investigated contact models describing
the collisions between particles (Tsuji, Tanaka, & Ishida, 1992;
Zhang & Vu-Quoc, 2000; Zhu, Zhou, Yang, & Yu, 2007). Extensive comparisons between contact models have been reported
(Kruggel-Emden, Simsek, Rickelt, Wirtz, & Scherer, 2007; KruggelEmden, Wirtz, & Scherer, 2008), including both normal and
tangential models. The stiffness of contacts has been identied as
an important parameter in DEM simulations (Huang, Tutumluer,
Hashash, & Ghaboussi, 2008; Masson & Martinez, 2000), although
other researchers have shown that a stiffness reduction does not
affect results (Hrtl & Ooi, 2008). A study by Malone and Xu (2008)
concluded that lower stiffness values can benet users without
signicantly altering results. An overview of DEM predictions by
Cleary (2010) states that Long experience has shown that average
overlaps of 0.10.5% are required to ensure that the ow behavior

Corresponding author. Tel.: +31 152787294.

E-mail address: s.w.lommen@tudelft.nl (S. Lommen).

is not dependent on the spring stiffness. However, the pitfalls of a

large reduction are still unclear, possibly inuencing the simulation
results and invalidating the predictions made by DEM.
The goal of this paper is to investigate and quantify the effects
of particle stiffness on bulk material behavior. To what extent can
a lower stiffness still result in accurate predictions while reducing computational costs? First, the particle behavior is observed by
means of a single contact pair. Next, we examine the bulk behavior by applying angle of repose tests, a separation process, and a
tri-axial compression test, with each test studying a different particle process. Only particle processes involving a high coordination
number are studied, because these processes are likely to benet
most from a decrease in computation time.
2. Single contact
Before investigating the inuence of particle stiffness on an
assembly of particles, we study the effect on a single contact pair,
which is the simplest particle process. This is done by examining the effect of stiffness on the interaction forces and particle
displacements of particlewall contacts. As interaction forces and
particle displacements are both dependent on the chosen contact
model, we investigate the popular HertzMindlin contact model.
The EDEM software package, developed by DEM-Solutions, Ltd.,
is chosen to conduct the simulations.
EDEMs built-in HertzMindlin contact model computes the
normal contact forces Fn in a similar manner to Tsuji, Tanaka, and
Ishida (1992):
3/2
1/4
 )n
,
Fn = Fn,k + Fn,d = (kHM n + cHM vn n n

(1)

1674-2001/$ see front matter 2013 Chinese Society of Particuology and Institute of Process Engineering, Chinese Academy of Sciences. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.partic.2013.03.006

108

S. Lommen et al. / Particuology 12 (2014) 107112

where kHM is the normal stiffness; n is the normal overlap; cHM is

the normal damping coefcient, which is a function of the coef is
cient of restitution CR ; n is the normal relative velocity; and n
the unit vector from the center of the colliding particle. The stiffness of contact is sometimes directly adjustable in DEM codes, but
most codes derive the stiffness from the properties of the material
and colliding particles. The stiffness of the HertzMindlin model is
given by:
kHM =


4
Reff ,
E
3 eff

(2)

where Eeff is the effective Youngs modulus and Reff is the particle
radius, calculated as:
1
1
1
=
+ ,
Reff
Ri
Rj

(3)

1 j2
1 i2
1
=
+
,
Eeff
Ei
Ej

(4)

where  is Poissons ratio and E is the Youngs modulus. EDEM uses

the shear modulus G and Poissons ratio  to compute the Youngs
modulus:
E = 2G(1 + ).

Fig. 1. Average normal elastic force vs. shear modulus during single contact.

3. Methods

(5)

By lowering the shear modulus G, the effective Youngs modulus

will decrease, resulting in a reduced stiffness constant kHM .
The contact behavior is also dependent on the momentum of
the colliding particles, determined by parameters such as the density and size of the particles, as well as the impact velocity. When
considering a reduction in particle stiffness, the momentum of the
particles should also be taken into account. According to a previous
study (Malone & Xu, 2008), this can be done by investigating the
amount of overlap between the particles, which results from the
momentum and stiffness of the contact. By comparing the amount
of normal overlap instead of the shear modulus, particle properties
such as velocity, size, density, Poissons ratio, friction, and restitution coefcient are considered in the decision to reduce the particle
stiffness. When users want to determine a feasible amount of stiffness reduction for their model, they should compare the normal
overlaps and not the stiffness or shear modulus, as the latter two
do not take differences in the process and particle properties into
account.
To examine the effects of stiffness on single contacts, simulations were performed with a shear modulus of between 104 and
1011 Pa. The upper value of 1011 Pa was based on the 80 GPa shear
modulus of steel. The lower limit was set to 104 Pa to investigate
a stiffness reduction factor of 107 . Three different sizes of spherical particles (d = 4, 8, 16 mm) were modeled to study the effect
of kinetic energy. Other particle parameters were kept constant at
 = 0.25,  = 1500 kg/m3 , and CR = 0.5. Particles approached the wall
with a velocity of 1 m/s, and gravity was neglected because of the
short simulation time.
Figs. 1 and 2 show the dependence of average elastic contact
force and contact time of a single contact on stiffness. It can be
observed that when the stiffness of the particle is reduced, the average contact force decreases. At the same time, the contact time
increases to conserve the collision energy. The higher mass, and
therefore kinetic energy, of the larger particles led to larger contact
forces, suggesting that the kinetic energy of the colliding bodies
may inuence the effect of stiffness reduction. This implies that
stiffness is an important parameter during impact collisions, and
will thus affect the simulation results if a substantial number of
collisions with large relative velocities are present in the system.

In this paper, three processes are studied: bulk compression,

angle of repose, and penetration. The bulk compression tests determine the effects of stiffness on the packing of particles and the
bulk modulus. The angle of repose test is used to study the shearing behavior of an assembly of particles. In the penetration tests,
the interaction between bulk material and equipment is investigated. In these tests, the effects of reducing the particle stiffness
are studied with the aim of lowering the computational costs of
DEM simulations.
3.1. Bulk compression test
The bulk compression test, shown in Fig. 3, consists of a square
oor plate with sides of 0.3 m wide. The contacts between this plate
and the particles are subject to the same parameters as the interparticle contacts. The boundaries in both the X and Y directions
are periodic, allowing particles to exit on one side and to enter

Fig. 2. Average contact time vs. shear modulus during single contact.

S. Lommen et al. / Particuology 12 (2014) 107112

109

Fig. 4. Angle of repose test rig.

Fig. 3. Bulk compression test rig during compression.

on the opposite side. The bulk compression test is performed with

18,000 particles, modeled with a Poissons ratio of 0.25, coefcient
of restitution of 0.5, a Coulomb friction coefcient s of 0.5, and a
rolling friction coefcient r of 0.04. These values have been chosen to match the properties used during the single contact tests.
The effect of the normal stiffness is studied using different shear
moduli, ranging from 104 to 1011 Pa.
The simulation setup is lled with particles using a dynamic
particle generator at a rate of 20,000 particles per second. The particles are allowed to settle before a 50 kg block is dropped on them
from a height of 0.2 m above the top surface of the bulk material,
where the vertical velocity is limited to 1 m/s. After releasing the
cube (i.e. the 50-kg block), we measure the trajectory of the cube
as well as the particle behavior. Based on this response, the bulk
stiffness and bulk coefcient of restitution can be derived. The bulk
stiffness was computed by determining the eigenfrequency of the
motion and taking the mass of the cube into account. By measuring the entry and exit velocities of the block for each collision, the
coefcient of restitution for each collision was derived.

to ve times the particle size. This allows the particles to enter

the lower chamber, leaving a pile in the upper chamber. The angle
of the pile is computed from the particle positions using a linear
curve tting to the surface of the slope. The tted curve does not
take into account the bottom and top parts of the slope, as these
are positioned at a different angle. Areas near the walls are also
excluded to remove any wall-effects from the measured angle of
repose.
3.3. Penetration test
In the penetration test (Lommen, Schott, Rahman, & Lodewijks,
2011), we measure the force required for a tool to penetrate a bed
of particles at a constant velocity (Fig. 5). The purpose of this test
is to investigate the effect of single particletool contacts on the
total force acting on the tool. The test consists of a box lled with
particles whose parameters are selected to simulate the properties of iron ore pellets (Lommen et al., 2011), as listed in Table 2.
Particles are prohibited from rolling to reduce the effect of their
spherical shape. After the particles settle in the 300 mm 400 mm

3.2. Angle of repose test

In this test, the effect of the stiffness on the angle of repose is
examined. The model setup is shown in Fig. 4. The width of the
chambers is set to 160 mm. Particles are modeled according to the
properties listed in Table 1. These are different from those used in
the previous two tests, and are selected to match the properties of
glass beads. After lling the upper chamber, both side panels are
lowered at a speed of 10 mm/s, gradually enlarging the opening
Table 1
Particle properties for the angle of repose test.
Particle diameter, d (mm)
Poissons ratio, 
Particle density,  (kg/m3 )
Coefcient of restitution, CR
Coulomb friction coefcient, s
Rolling friction coefcient, r

4
0.22
2470
0.9
0.5
0.01

Fig. 5. Penetration test.

110

S. Lommen et al. / Particuology 12 (2014) 107112

Table 2
Particle properties for the penetration test.
Shear modulus (Pa)
Poissons ratio, 
Particle density,  (kg/m3 )
Particle shape
Particle diameter, d (mm)
Coefcient of restitution, CR
Interparticle static friction
Boundary-particle static friction
Number of particles

1 108
0.2
3500
Spherical
15
0.6
0.51.5
0.51.5
5000

box, a wedge-shaped tool penetrates the particles at a velocity of

8 mm/s. The base of the wedge is set to 40 mm, and the angle of
the wedge is 30 . When the tool touches the particles and a force
of 0.5 N is measured, the penetration depth is set to 0 mm and we
begin recording the force required by the tool.
4. Results
4.1. Bulk compression test
Releasing the 50 kg cube created a mass-damper system (see
Fig. 3), with the bulk material acting as the spring-damper. Based
on the motion of the cube, as displayed in Fig. 6, we derived the
characteristics of the system, such as the bulk stiffness and bulk
restitution coefcient. Fig. 7 shows a linear correlation between the
shear modulus of the particles and the bulk stiffness. A simulation
using a shear modulus of 1 104 Pa turned out to be impossible,
as the contacts could not generate enough force to reverse the
direction of the mass motion.
The damping behavior was studied by examining the rst six
collisions between the block and the particles. The coefcients of
restitution derived from different shear moduli are displayed in
Fig. 8, from which it can be observed that most bulk restitution
coefcients are higher than the particle restitution coefcient of
0.5. On the rst collision, however, simulations with a high stiffness
(corresponding to a shear module G 1 109 Pa) showed a much
lower bulk restitution coefcient than those with a low stiffness
(G 1 107 Pa). This is likely to be caused by the presence of large
voids that are reduced in the rst collision for the stiff particles,
but do not decrease so signicantly in the case of the soft particles.

Fig. 6. Motion of the mass using a particle shear modulus of 1 108 Pa.

Fig. 7. Values of bulk stiffness derived using different particle shear moduli in the
bulk compression test.

As a result, the smaller voids lead to a more efcient second

collision and a high restitution coefcient. Softer bulk materials
showed signicantly less damping than the stiff materials, with
coefcients of restitution of up to 0.9, as well as smaller differences
between the six collisions. An attempt to reduce the restitution
coefcient of the softer bulk materials by reducing the particle
restitution coefcient to 0.01 led to a bulk restitution coefcient
of 0.7 (cf. the last row of the legend to Fig. 8). It is possible that this
was caused by the large number of parallel springs and dampers,
as well as the size of the normal overlaps (10%) at this low stiffness (G = 1 106 Pa). The average normal overlap during the rst
impact of the cube amounted to 1% of the particle radius in the
1 108 Pa simulation, and 0.33% in the case of a shear modulus of
1 109 Pa.
4.2. Angle of repose test
The stiffness effect on the angle of repose became apparent
when the shear modulus dropped to 107 Pa, as can be observed

Fig. 8. Restitution coefcients of bulk material for different collisions derived using
different particle shear moduli in the bulk compression test.

S. Lommen et al. / Particuology 12 (2014) 107112

111

Fig. 9. Effect of stiffness on (a) angle of repose and normal overlap and (b) bulk density.

in Fig. 9. Shear modulus between 107 and 1011 Pa appears to have

no inuence on the angle of repose. An increase in the bulk density was detected at the same moment the angle of repose began to
decrease. This means that changing the stiffness from 1011 to 107 Pa
can decrease the computation time by up to a factor of 100 without signicantly altering the results. At the moment at which the
angle of repose and bulk density changed, the average of the normal overlaps of the contacts was 0.34% of the particle radius. This
value could be used as a limit for the maximum particle softness.
We have conrmed this value in a second series of angle of repose
tests using a particle density of 7800 kg/m3 instead of 2470 kg/m3
(not shown).
4.3. Penetration test
In the penetration test, the use of a lower stiffness resulted in a
lower penetration resistance, as can be seen in Fig. 10. The normal
overlap increased from 0.013% for 1 1010 Pa to 8% for 1 105 Pa.

Fig. 10. The work done to penetrate a wedge into the bulk material during penetration test.

Simulations using a shear modulus of 1 108 Pa or higher, resulting

in a normal overlap of 0.3% or less, did not exhibit large differences in average penetration resistance. Moreover, the condence
interval of the mean turned out to be much smaller for softer particles. Simulations for all stiffness coefcients were repeated 10
times, resulting in different condence intervals. The cause of this
phenomenon is the difference between the average and maximum
contact forces. In the case of stiff particles, a few particles make a
large contribution to the penetration resistance, with up to 30% of
the total force due to a single particle. When softer particles were
used, the maximum contact force was much closer to the average contact force, reducing the variation between simulations and
overall penetration resistance. The decrease in penetration resistance can, however, be compensated by increasing the coulomb
friction (Lommen et al., 2011), although this might affect other
aspects of the simulation.

5. Conclusion
This research has shown that a reduction in particle stiffness can lead to undesirable effects, and has identied properties
of bulk material that may be affected by a stiffness reduction. Properties such as the bulk stiffness and bulk restitution
changed as a result of the stiffness reduction. When studying
interaction forces between equipment and materials, a distinction can be made based on the normal overlaps. Simulations with
a normal overlap above 0.3% of the particle radius resulted in
a smoother interaction, albeit with reduced interaction forces.
An angle of repose test showed that a stiffness reduction can
be applied without altering the simulation results if the shear
modulus is kept above 107 Pa or the average normal overlaps
are kept below 0.3% of the particle radius. This value is comparable to the 0.10.5% limit suggested by Cleary (2010). The
ndings of this paper indicate that when applying a particle stiffness reduction in models related to the bulk stiffness and bulk
restitution, shearing behavior, and the interaction between material and equipment, users should be cautious and verify their
approach.
Particle scaling could be an alternative to particle stiffness
reduction for speeding up simulations. Future work should focus on
the combination of these techniques to lower computational costs.

112

S. Lommen et al. / Particuology 12 (2014) 107112

Acknowledgements
The work described here was supported by grab manufacturer
NEMAG, the Netherlands. Their support is gratefully acknowledged.
References
Cleary, P. W. (2010). DEM prediction of industrial and geophysical particle ows.
Particuology, 8(2), 106118.
Hrtl, J., & Ooi, J. (2008). Experiments and simulations of direct shear tests: Porosity,
contact friction and bulk friction. Granular Matter, 10(4), 263271.
Huang, H., Tutumluer, E., Hashash, Y. M. A., & Ghaboussi, J. (2008). Contact stiffness
affecting discrete element modelling of unbound aggregate granular assemblies. In Advances in transportation geotechnics. CRC Press. Retrieved from
http://www.crcnetbase.com/doi/abs/10.1201/9780203885949.ch21
Kruggel-Emden, H., Simsek, E., Rickelt, S., Wirtz, S., & Scherer, V. (2007). Review
and extension of normal force models for the discrete element method. Powder
Technology, 171(3), 157173.

Kruggel-Emden, H., Wirtz, S., & Scherer, V. (2008). A study on tangential force laws
applicable to the discrete element method (DEM) for materials with viscoelastic
or plastic behavior. Chemical Engineering Science, 63(6), 15231541.
Lommen, S. W., Schott, D. L., Rahman, M., & Lodewijks, G. (2011). The penetration
of iron ore pellets: Calibrating discrete element parameters using penetration
tests. In Proceedings of the 11th Particulate System Analysis Conference Edinburgh,
UK, (p. 5).
Malone, K. F., & Xu, B. H. (2008). Determination of contact parameters for discrete
element method simulations of granular systems. Particuology, 6(6), 521528.
Masson, S., & Martinez, J. (2000). Effect of particle mechanical properties on silo ow
and stresses from distinct element simulations. Powder Technology, 109(1-3),
164178.
Tsuji, Y., Tanaka, T., & Ishida, T. (1992). Lagrangian numerical simulation of plug
ow of cohesionless particles in a horizontal pipe. Powder Technology, 71(3),
239250.
Zhang, X., & Vu-Quoc, L. (2000). Simulation of chute ow of soybeans using an
improved tangential forcedisplacement model. Mechanics of Materials, 32(2),
115129.
Zhu, H. P., Zhou, Z. Y., Yang, R. Y., & Yu, A. B. (2007). Discrete particle simulation
of particulate systems: Theoretical developments. Chemical Engineering Science,
62(13), 33783396.