materials process design and control laboratory multiscale modeling of solidification of...
Post on 20-Jan-2018
219 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
MULTISCALE MODELING OF SOLIDIFICATION OF MULTICOMPONENT ALLOYS
LIJIAN TANPresentation for Thesis Defense (B-exam)
Date: 22 May 2007
Sibley School of Mechanical and Aerospace EngineeringCornell University
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
SPECIAL COMMITTEE: Prof. Nicholas Zabaras, M & A.E., Cornell University Prof. Subrata Mukherjee, T & A.M., Cornell University Prof. Stephen Vavasis, C.S., Cornell University Prof. Doug James, C.S., Cornell University
FUNDING SOURCES: National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), Department of Energy (DoE) Sibley School of Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering Cornell Theory Center (CTC)
Materials Process Design and Control Laboratory (MPDC)
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
OUTLINE OF THE PRESENTATION
Introduction – alloy solidification processes.
Micro-scale mathematical model Applications
Interaction between multiple dendrites during solidification Multi-scale modeling of solidification
Suggestions for future study
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Introduction and objectives of the current research
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Introduction
Castings since 5500 BC…
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Will it break?
Different microstructures
Microstructure
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Alloy solidification process
solidMushy zone liquid ~10-1 - 100 m
(b) Microscopic scale
~ 10-4 – 10-5m
solid
liquid(a) Macroscopic scale
qos g
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Micro-scale mathematical model
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
2
2
( , ) 0, ,( , ) ( , ) ( , )
( , ) ( , ) , ,
( , ) ( , ), ,
( , ) ( , ) ( , ), ,
( , )
l
l
l
s s s s
l l l l
li
t xt t t p
t
t t b
T tc k T tt
T tc T t k T tt
C tt
v xv x v x v x I
v x v x x
x x x
x v x x x
x v 2( , ) ( , ), , 2,3,... .l l l li i iC t D C t i n x x x
Two main difficulties
Mathematical model
Applying boundary conditions on interface for heat transfer, fluid flow and solute transport.
Multiple moving interfaces (multiple phases/crystals).
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
( ) /( ), s l s slV q q L on
Jump in temperature gradient governs interface motion
Gibbs-Thomson relation
0, slon v No slip condition for flow
* ( ) ( ) , l slI m c VT T T mC V on n n
Solute rejection flux
(1 ) , l
l i l slii p i
CD k C V on
n
n
Complexity of the moving interface
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
| |, n n
History: Devised by Sethian and Osher (1988) as a mathematical tool for computing interface propagation.
Advantage is that we get extra information (distance to interface).This information helps to compute interfacial geometric quantities, define a novel model, doing adaptive meshing, and etc.
( , ) ( , ) 0
( , )
d x t xx t x
d x t x
Level Set Method
| | 0t V
We pay additional storage and extra computation time to maintain the above signed distance by solving
Level set variable is simply distance to interface
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Assumption 1: Solidification occurs in a diffused zone of width 2w that is symmetric around the zero level set. A phase volume fraction can be defined accordingly.
0, ( , )
( , ) 1, ( , )
0.5 (2 ), ( , ) [ , ]
x t w
x t x t w
w x t w w
2 2
20
( ) 0,
( ) (1 )( ) [ ( ( ) ( ))] ,
( ) ,
( ) ( )
ll T l l
gl l l l l l l
l s l
l l l l lii i i
tpp g
t KTc c T k T Lt
CC D C
t
v
v vv vv I v v e
v
v
This assumption allows us to use the volume averaging technique.
(N. Zabaras and D. Samanta, 2004)
Present Model
Don’t need to worry about boundary conditions of flow and solute any more!
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
*( )IN I
dT k T Tdt
*( )s l
sN Iss s
wckq q TL
TL
V
%
Unknown parameter kN. How will selection of kN affect the numerical solution?
Assumption 2: The solid-liquid interface temperature is allowed to vary from the equilibrium temperature in a way governed by
Gibbs-Thomson condition has to be satisfied (one of the major difficulties)
*IT T
Extended Stefan Condition
Do not want to apply this directly, because any scheme with essential boundary condition is numerically not energy conserving. Introduce another assumption:
Temperature boundary condition is automatically satisfied. Energy is numerically conserving!
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Effect of kN
X
T
-100 -50 0 50 100-0.5
-0.45
-0.4
-0.35
-0.3
-0.25
-0.2
-0.15
-0.1
-0.05
0
t=1080
t=3.9
t=197
t=21547
t=4273
t=8122
t=12327
t=47
X
T
-100 -50 0 50 100-0.5
-0.45
-0.4
-0.35
-0.3
-0.25
-0.2
-0.15
-0.1
-0.05
0
t=1072
t=3.5
t=197
t=21250
t=4204
t=8018
t=12178
t=48
X
T
-100 -50 0 50 100-0.5
-0.45
-0.4
-0.35
-0.3
-0.25
-0.2
-0.15
-0.1
-0.05
0
t=1062
t=22981
t=4362
t=8320
t=12365
t=305
kN=0.001 kN=1 kN=1000
Conclusion: Large kN converges to classical Stefan problem.
T=-0.5 Ice T=-0.5 Water T=0 Ice
Initial Steady stateNumerical Solution For A Simple Problem
If L=1, C=1
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
*( )IN I
dT k T Tdt
In the simple case of fixed heat fluxes, interface temperature approaches equilibrium temperature exponentially.
Stability requirement for this simple case is
2tkN
Although this is only for a very simple case, we find that selection of
is stable for all problems we have considered.
tkN 1
Stability Analysis
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
-2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
-2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
Initial crystal shape (0.1 0.02cos 4 )cos(0.1 0.02cos 4 )sin
xy
Domain size [ 2, 2] [ 2,2]
Initial temperature ( ,0) 0
( ,0) 0.5 s
T x x
T x x
Boundary conditions adiabatic
With a grid of 64by64, we get
: 0.002 : 0.002
Surface tensionKinetic undercooling coeff
Results using finer mesh are compared with results from literature in the next slide.
Benchmark problemConvergence Behavior
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
-2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
-2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
-2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
Our method Osher (1997)
Top 400 400Middle 200 200Bottom 100 100
Different results obtained by researchers suggest that this problem is nontrivial.
All the referred results are using sharp interface model.
Triggavason (1996)
Benchmark problem: Crystal growth with initial perturbation.
Convergence Behavior
Energy conserving makes the difference!
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
* 0 0
30 0.55 / 0.65: 400 400, 1 15 cos(4 ) , 0.5, 0.05, 1
Crystal with initial radius growing in domain with initial undercoolingdomain T d d other parameters normalized to
. . , . (2002)
Y T KimN Goldenfield
& (1998)Karma Rapel
0 100 200 300 4000
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
~ 3000hours on DEC Alpha
:~ 20Mesh element size
CPUT 1 2~ minute on a GHz PC
Our diffused interface model with tracking of interface
Phase field model without tracking of interface
:1Mesh element size
:~ 270node no :~ 160000node no
Computation Requirement
Tracking interface makes the difference!
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
* 0 1 15 cos(4 )T d * 0 1 15 cos(4( ))4
T d
Rotated surface tensionNormal surface tension
Mesh Anisotropy Study
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
483 2
:(0.1 0.02cos 4 )cos(0.1 0.02cos 4 )sin
:
0.001{1 0.4[ sin 3( ) 1]}: 0.8
Initial shapexySurface tension
Undercooling
4 6 fold initial crystal grow with fold Surface tension
Crystal shape mainly determined by the anisotropy in surface tension not the initial perturbation.
Mesh Anisotropy Study
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Applications
1. Pure material 2. Crystal growth with convection3. Binary alloy4. Multi-component alloy
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Effects of Undercooling
(1) A small change in under-cooling will lead to a drastic change of tip velocity. (consistent with the solvability theory)
(2) Increased undercooling leads to sharper dendrite shape and more obvious secondary dendrites.
* 0 0
30 0.55 / 0.65: 400 400, 1 15 cos(4 ) , 0.5, 0.05, 1
Crystal with initial radius growing in domain with initial undercoolingdomain T d d other parameters normalized to
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Applicable to low under-cooling (at previously unreachable range using phase field method, Ref. Karma 2000) with a moderate grid.
4 4 4* 1 2 3
3
(1 3 )(1 4 ( ) /(1 3 )) , 0.025, 0.05
[ 20000, 20000] , 120 120 120
T n n n T
Domain size Mesh size
Extension to three dimension crystal growth
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Velocity of inlet flow at top: 0.035 Pr=23.1
Other Conditions are the same as the previous 2d diffusion benchmark problem.
Crystal Growth with Convection
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Similar to the 2D case, crystal tips will tilt in the upstream direction.
Distribute work and storage. (12 processors are used in the below example)
Crystal Growth with Convection in 3D
Thermal boundary layer
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Difference between thermal boundary layer and solute boundary layer ~ 100Lewis number Le
D
Alloy solidification
Tree type data structure for mesh refinement
Coarsen
Refine
For alloys, uniform mesh doesn’t work very well due to the huge difference between thermal boundary layer and solute boundary layer.
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Initial crystal shape (0.1 0.02cos 4 )cos(0.1 0.02cos 4 )sin
xy
Domain size [ 10,10] [ 10,10]
Initial temperature ( ,0) 0
( ,0) 0.5 s
T x x
T x x
Boundary conditions no heat/solute flux
Initial concentration ( ,0) 2.2
( ,0) 2.2 sp
C x x
C x k x
: 0.035 : 0.312
: 0.1 : 0
Liquidus slopPartition coefficientLiquid mass diffusivitySolid mass diffusivitySurface ten
: 0.002 : 0.002
: 1 : 0.002
sionKinematic undercooling coeffThermal conductivityLatent heat
-10 -5 0 5 10-10
-5
0
5
10
-2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
Simple Adaptive Mesh Test Problem
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Le=10 (boundary layer differ by 10 times) Micro-segregation can be observed in the crystal; maximum liquid concentration about 0.05. (compares well with Ref Heinrich 2003)
( )Adaptive mesh for solute concentrationColor of mesh represents concentration
Results Using Adaptive Meshing
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Effects Of Refinement Criterion
( )
( )
(| |)
e
e
T
C
e
Error e T d tol
Error e C d tol
h element size upper bound
Interface position (curved interface) is the solved variable in this problem.
Carefully choosing the refinement criterion leads to the same solution using a full grid.
: 256 256Full mesh
Element size invisible
no variations seen in most of the elements here
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Crystal Growth of Alloy in 3D
Ni-Cu alloy Copper concentration 0.40831 at.frac.Domain: a cube with side length 35m
Difficulties in this problemHigh under-cooling: 226 KHigh solidification speedHigh Lewis number: 14,860
Simulation of crystal growth of alloy in 3D is computationally very intensive. Our solution is to use both techniques of domain decomposition and adaptive meshing!
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Adaptive Domain Decomposition (Mesh Partition)
12
345
12
345
1
2
3
45
1
2
3
45
Mesh
Dual graph
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Technique Issues about Mesh PartitionEfficient: Require mesh partition very frequently (adaptive). Slow is
unacceptable.
Maintain neighboring information using link list, e.g. for a node, there is a link list for its neighboring elements, and a link list for its neighboring edges.
Still linear in storage; greatly speed up the mesh partition procedure.
Parallel: Keep data distributed, work distributed. (Need to handle huge data)
Defined a global address (process id + pointer)
Batch way: (From + To) + Message Type + Message Length + Message content
Put all messages in a link list, and send them out together
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Colored by process id
Demonstration of adaptive domain decomposition
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
3D CRYSTAL GROWH (Ni-Cu Alloy)
3 million elements (without adaptive meshing 200 million elements)
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
3D CRYSTAL GROWTH WITH CONVECTION
Comparing with the pure material case, the growth for alloy is much more unstable due to the rejection of solution.
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Multi-component alloy system
We use a signed distance function for each phase.
( , ) ( , ) 0
( , )
d x t xx t x
d x t x
: 0 , l lAt P
Multi-phase system: one liquid phase + one or more than one solid phases.
Relation between the signed distances:
(1) Exactly one signed distance would be negative
(2) The smallest positive signed distance has same absolute value of the negative signed distance
l
P
( )l
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Stable growth with 4 seeds
Unstable growth with 2 seeds
Unstable to stable growth with 10 seeds
Compute Eutectic Growth with Multiple Level Sets
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Solute concentration for peritectic growth of Fe – 0.3wt% C alloy at time 0.6s, 1.5s, 1.8s, and 2.4s.
Compute Peritectic Growth with Multiple Level Sets
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Interaction between multiple crystals
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
( , )
( , ) 0
( , )
d x t x
x t x
d x t x
l
P
( )l
Method 2: Markers to identify different region
Method 1: A signed distance function for each phase.
Each color (orientation of the crystal) is used as a marker.
Efficient, appropriate for hundreds of crystals.
Handle Multiple Interfaces
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Different crystal orientation leads to different growth velocity.
Crystal orientation
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
As a feature of level set method, interface velocity must be evaluated at nodes near interface on both sides. Crystal orientation needs to be extended a certain distance away from the crystal to the liquid region.
Extension of crystal orientation
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
The purpose of this study is to verify the accuracy of using markers.Simple numerical study
Growth of 9 initial seeds (circular shape) with different orientation.
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Comparison with method using multiple level sets
Dashed line: method with multiple level set functions.
Solid line: method with a single level set function (using markers).
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Nucleation modelCrystals are not nucleated simultaneously.
To simulate nucleation, we use the following model:
Nucleation sites: density ρ, location of each nucleation site totally random (uniformly distributed in the domain).
Orientation angle: orientation angle of each nucleation site totally random (uniformly distributed between 0 and 2π).
Each nucleation site becomes an actual seed iff the required undercooling is satisfied. The required undercooling is modeled to be a fixed value or as a random variable.
We assume the nucleation sites fixed (do sampling first and then run the micro-scale model deterministically).
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Signed distance change due to nucleationWe update the signed distance function at each node y, after a circular seed with radius R0 is generated at location xi.
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
CET transition study of Al-3%Cu alloyFollow conditions in Beckermann (2006).
Relation between microstructure and processing parameters:
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Randomness effects
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Interaction between a large number of crystals
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Multi-scale modeling
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
An example which requires multi-scale modeling
2
0
2* 3
: 100
( ) ~ (1.5,0.2 )1, 100
0, 0.1, 10, 0.1
1, 100{1 cos[4( )]}
n
n
m l p
m l l
Potential nucleation sites density
p Nc L
C m k
k Lem C I V
Material properties:
Boundary conditions:
Initial condition:
: : 50exp( /10) 40b
Right side AdiabaticOther sides T t
10T 0 10 20 30 400
10
20
30
40
CFL
Adaptive meshing with smallest 0.0098Adaptive time stepping with 0.125
x
~ 25 Millon elements~ 33,000 time steps
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Computational results using adaptive domain decomposition
Computation time: 2 days with 8 nodes (16 CPUs).
Cannot wait so long!
Can we obtain results in a faster way (multi-scale modeling)?
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
What we can expect from multi-scale modeling
Microstructure features are often of interest, e.g. 1st/2nd arm spacing, Heyn’s interception measure, etc. Let us denote these features as:
( , ) ( , )
( , ) ( , )( , ) ( 0 | , )
T x t x t
C x t C x tf x t p x t
( ) ( , , , )x x C
Of course, we cannot expect microscopic details. But
We want to know macroscopic temperature, macroscopic concentration, liquid volume fraction.
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Widely accepted assumptions
2Tc k T Lft
Assumption 1: Without convection, macroscopic temperature can be modeled as
Assumption 2: At a reasonably high solidification speed and without fluid flow, macroscopic concentration constant.
0C C
Assumption 4: Volume fraction only depends on microstructure, and temperature.
,f f T
Assumption 3: Microstructure depends on macroscopic cooling history and thermal gradient history.
( , ) R G ,T Tt
R G
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Macro-scale model
Temperature
Liquid volume fraction
Microstructure features
2Tc k T Lft
,f f T
( , ) R G
Unknown functions:
( , ) R G
First two equations coupled.
Microstructure features determined as a post-processing process.
,f f T
,T Tt
R G
Solve sample problems using the fully-resolved model (micro-scale model) to evaluate them!
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Relevant sample problemsInfinite number of sample problems can be selected.
How to select the ones related to our problem of interest is the key!
Use a very simple model to find relevant sample problems.
Model M:
(1) treat material as pure material (sharp and stable interface)
(2) do not model nucleation
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Comparison of three involved models
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Solution features of model MDefine solute features of model M to be the interface velocity and thermal gradient in the liquid at the time the interface passes through.
, lM M MF V G
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Given any solution feature of model M,
we can find a problem, such that features of model M for this problem equals to the given solution feature.
Selection of sample problems , l
M M MF V G
/( ), /s lM M Mk c G G LV k
Chose a domain (rectangle is used) with initial and boundary condition form the following analytical solution:
( )1 exp , <
( )1 exp ,
sM M M
MM
lM M M
MM
G V x V t when x V tV
TG V x V t when x V t
V
Sample problem:
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Multi-scale framework
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Solve the previous problem
2
0
2* 3
: 100
( ) ~ (1.5,0.2 )1, 100
0, 0.1, 10, 0.1
1, 100{1 cos[4( )]}
n
n
m l p
m l l
Potential nucleation sites density
p Nc L
C m k
k Lem C I V
Material properties:
Boundary conditions:
Initial condition:
: : 50exp( /10) 40b
Right side AdiabaticOther sides T t
10T 0 10 20 30 400
10
20
30
40
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Step 1: Get solution features of model M
MV
lMG
Plot solution features of model M for all nodes in the feature spaces
lMG
MV
10-2 10-1 100
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.10.12
lMG
MV
10-2 10-1 100
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.10.12
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Step 2: Fully-resolved solutions of sample problems
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Obtained liquid volume fraction
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Use iterations to obtain temperature, volume fraction, microstructure features
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Temperature at time 130
Macro-scale model result with Lever rule
Fully-resolved model results with different
sampling of nucleation sites.
Average
Data-base approach result
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Liquid volume fraction at time 130
Left: temperature field and volume fraction contours (0.95 and 0.05)Right: volume fraction contour on top of fully-resolved model interface position
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Predicted microstructure features
Results in rectangle: predicted microstructure Results in the middle: fully-resolved model resultsBlack solid line: predicted CET transition location
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Solidification of Al-Cu alloy0q
650exp(- ) 320bT t
100mm100mm
( ,0) 970T x K
1%Al Cu
bT
bT
bT
Domain for sample problem (solve with fully-resolved model)
50 36 2 sd
120 2 sd
9.7sd m
2
3
2
0.14, 2.6 / .%, 3000 , 933.47 , 0.24 , 0.01,
2400 / , 1.06 /( ), 82.61 /( ), 397.5 / ,
7.5 , 1.25
p l l m c
n
k m K wt D m s T K K m
kg m c KJ kg K k W m K L KJ kg
T N K K
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
0 20 40 60 80 1000
20
40
60
80
100
0 20 40 60 80 1000
20
40
60
80
100 angle
4000380036003400320030002800260024002200200018001600140012001000
solidtime
0.0050.00450.0040.00350.0030.00250.0020.00150.0010.0005
MG MV
Step 1: Solution features of model M
0 0.002 0.004
1000
2000
3000
4000
0 0.002 0.004
1000
2000
3000
4000
1 2
3
45 6
7 8
910
11
MG
MV
MG
MV
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
0 0.002 0.004
1000
2000
3000
4000
Step 2: Fully-resolved solution of sample problems
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Periodic boundary condition for the sample problem
Top half: results copied from belowBottom half: Computational domain
Periodic boundary condition to minimize effects of boundary on directional solidification solution
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Temperature (K)
Liqu
idvo
lum
efra
ctio
n
915 920 925 9300
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1 Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3Sample 4Sample 5Sample 6Sample 7Sample 8Lever rule
Lquid volume fraction for different microstructure features
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Iterative process for convergence
Left half (black points):
results after iter 0.
Right half (green points):
results after iter 3.
angle
4000380036003400320030002800260024002200200018001600140012001000
solidtime
0.0050.00450.0040.00350.0030.00250.0020.00150.0010.0005
0 20 40 60 80 1000
20
40
60
80
100
0 20 40 60 80 1000
20
40
60
80
100
MG MV 0 0.002 0.004
1000
2000
3000
4000MV
MG
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
0 20 40 60 80 1000
20
40
60
80
100
945940935930925900850800750700650600550500450400350
Comparison with Lever rule (temperature at t=12.7s)
Left: Lever rule Right: Database approach
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
ABCD
A (95mm,75mm)B (90mm,75mm)C (75mm,75mm)D (60mm,80mm)
Microstructure in the domain
0 0.002 0.004
1000
2000
3000
4000
1 2
3
45 6
7 8
910
11
MG
MV
EF
G
H
E (90mm,10mm)F (80mm,20mm)G (65mm,35mm)H (50mm,50mm)
A
B
CD
E
F
G
H
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
ABCD
Fine columnar coarse columnar Equiaxed
Microstructure from side to center
A
B
C
D
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Microstructure from corner to center
EF
G
H
Fine equiaxed Coarse equiaxed
E
F
G
H
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Suggestions for future research
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Consider flow effects in the multi-scale model
The computationally efficient model we used to identify relevant sample problems (with its analytical solution) is not applicable for problems with convection effects. Extension of the current technique or other techniques would be necessary to efficiently consider convection effects in a multi-scale framework.
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Modeling fluid structure interaction in micro-scale
In our current micro-scale model, the crystal is assumed static after nucleation. In reality, the crystals would move, rotate, compact and break into fragments.
Recently, there are lots of advances in fluid-structure interaction. These advances can be used to improve the micro-scale model.
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Atomic scale computation
Our current micro-scale model relies on input from phase-diagram and a few parameters to mimic the crystal orientation anisotropy, surface tension effects, kinetic under-cooling effects and nucleation.
Computation in the atomic scale (not continuum any more) and related multi-scale techniques to use atomic scale computation results are of great significance.
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
Solid-Solid phase transformationIn our current model, only liquid to solid phase transformation is considered. After this phase transformation, solid-solid transformation is also very crucial to the final microstructure.
Modeling solid-solid phase transformation after solidification and study of the properties of the final microstructure is an open area.
Materials Process Design and Control LaboratoryMaterials Process Design and Control Laboratory
CCOORRNNEELLLL U N I V E R S I T Y
THANK YOU FOR YOURATTENTION
top related