All Figures

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7.5cm,clip]{9262fig1.eps}\end{figure}$ Figure 1: Critical velocity as a function of a grain size. Squares indicate the model without additional dissipation process, diamonds show the present model with the energy dissipation by plastic deformation of surface roughness and triangles show experimentally determined values by Poppe et al. (2000) with error bars.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=17cm,clip]{9262fig2.eps}\end{figure}$ Figure 2: The total energy is redistributed between the kinetic energy (dashed line) and the potential energy (dotted line). At the maximum and minimum separations the potential energy is maximum, while the kinetic energy is at its highest in the equilibrium position. The kinetic energy was shifted down for a better overview (see text). No damping case - a), and the energy leak form the system due to the damping force - b).
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=16.5cm,clip]{9262fig3.eps}\end{figure}$ Figure 3: The setup of the experiment. The dust cake in the center is compressed with different pressure. Initial arrangement (a), results of compression at $2 \times 10^2$ Pa (b), $2 \times 10^3$ Pa (c), $5 \times 10^3$ Pa (d), $1 \times 10^4$ Pa (e).
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8cm,clip]{9262fig4.eps}\end{figure}$ Figure 4: The ratio of the cross-section of the dust cake to the initial cross-section as a function of the applied compressive pressure. The data presented here is from a single experiment. Each point is plotted with a 40% uncertainty in determination of the crosssection (see text).
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8cm,clip]{9262fig5.eps}\end{figure}$ Figure 5: The volume-filling factor vs. normal pressure. The solid line indicates the results of the laboratory experiment by Blum & Schräpler (2004). The dashed area is the error to that data. Squares show the results of our single simulation. Error bars are due to difficulty determining of the volume of the final aggregate.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.5cm,clip]{9262fig6.eps}\end{figure}$ Figure 6: Sketch of a sound wave propagation in a linear aggregate (a) and in a porous aggregate (b).
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7.5cm,clip]{9262fig7.eps}\end{figure}$ Figure 7: Sound velocity in m/s versus distance from the plane that hits the aggregate. Squares indicate an applied force of $5 \times 10^{-8}$ N and triangles $5 \times 10^{-6}$ N. The left panel a) shows the results of sound speed determination in a RBD aggregate, while the right one b) in a CCP aggregate. The inset image shows the CCP aggregate placed in between two planes. The lines indicate sound velocities determined theoretically using vertical force in a linear chain of monomers (dashed line) and using rolling friction (solid line). The dashed area limited by dotted lines indicates the sound-speed range determined experimentally by Teiser (2007).
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7.5cm,clip]{9262fig1.eps}\end{figure}$	Figure 1: Critical velocity as a function of a grain size. Squares indicate the model without additional dissipation process, diamonds show the present model with the energy dissipation by plastic deformation of surface roughness and triangles show experimentally determined values by Poppe et al. (2000) with error bars.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=16.5cm,clip]{9262fig3.eps}\end{figure}$	Figure 3: The setup of the experiment. The dust cake in the center is compressed with different pressure. Initial arrangement (a), results of compression at $2 \times 10^2$ Pa (b), $2 \times 10^3$ Pa (c), $5 \times 10^3$ Pa (d), $1 \times 10^4$ Pa (e).
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8cm,clip]{9262fig4.eps}\end{figure}$	Figure 4: The ratio of the cross-section of the dust cake to the initial cross-section as a function of the applied compressive pressure. The data presented here is from a single experiment. Each point is plotted with a 40% uncertainty in determination of the crosssection (see text).
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8cm,clip]{9262fig5.eps}\end{figure}$	Figure 5: The volume-filling factor vs. normal pressure. The solid line indicates the results of the laboratory experiment by Blum & Schräpler (2004). The dashed area is the error to that data. Squares show the results of our single simulation. Error bars are due to difficulty determining of the volume of the final aggregate.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.5cm,clip]{9262fig6.eps}\end{figure}$	Figure 6: Sketch of a sound wave propagation in a linear aggregate (a) and in a porous aggregate (b).
Open with DEXTER