Search found 215 matches
- Wed Jun 05, 2019 7:11 am
- Forum: solidification
- Topic: Simulation of solidification of Gamma prime alloy during SLM process
- Replies: 43
- Views: 131266
Re: Simulation of solidification of Gamma prime alloy during SLM process
Regarding getting larger undercooling (around 18K) for nucleation of FCC_L12#3.... Nucleation for FCC_L12#3 was set at the S/L interface. so using analytical_curvature was giving error, and therefore I had to use stabilization model. but I tried analitical_curvature model changing the FCC_L12#3 nucl...
- Wed Jun 05, 2019 7:06 am
- Forum: solidification
- Topic: Error: Solidification in Martensitic tool steel during Selective Laser Melting (SLM) process
- Replies: 12
- Views: 10398
- Wed Jun 05, 2019 7:06 am
- Forum: solidification
- Topic: Simulation of solidification of Gamma prime alloy during SLM process
- Replies: 43
- Views: 131266
Simulation of solidification of Gamma prime alloy during SLM process
Hi Bernd,
I think its good to create a new topic for this since it might be valuable in future.
I think its good to create a new topic for this since it might be valuable in future.
- Tue Jun 04, 2019 8:07 am
- Forum: solidification
- Topic: Error: Solidification in Martensitic tool steel during Selective Laser Melting (SLM) process
- Replies: 12
- Views: 10398
Re: Error: Solidification in Martensitic tool steel during Selective Laser Melting (SLM) process
Thanks Bernd. For the phase 2, during nucleation, I get initial undercooling around 18K. I guess this is too high. ? Problem here is that the gird resolution is 2.5nm and It gives high undercooling value. Alternative would be to use a smaller interfacial energy value. but then I have to artificially...
- Mon Jun 03, 2019 3:25 pm
- Forum: solidification
- Topic: Error: Solidification in Martensitic tool steel during Selective Laser Melting (SLM) process
- Replies: 12
- Views: 10398
Re: Error: Solidification in Martensitic tool steel during Selective Laser Melting (SLM) process
Dear vamsi, The error you show are not very characteristic. I would look first for the following: 1.) Thermodynamic problems like apparent demixing due to the pseudo-binary approximation, or solidus/liquidus slopes which are close to 0. To find this problem, you need to check the .TabLin output. Re...
- Mon Jun 03, 2019 1:53 pm
- Forum: solidification
- Topic: Error when linearisation!
- Replies: 41
- Views: 32241
Re: Error when linearisation!
Hi,
What are the possible reasons to get the error " Thermo-Calc error 1611 MICRESS error 22 phases 1/ 1"
phase 1 is FCC_L12
BR
Chamara
What are the possible reasons to get the error " Thermo-Calc error 1611 MICRESS error 22 phases 1/ 1"
phase 1 is FCC_L12
BR
Chamara
- Wed May 29, 2019 2:01 pm
- Forum: solidification
- Topic: unusually high simulation time
- Replies: 10
- Views: 12544
Re: unusually high simulation time
I took the GB energy data form literature for Ni. There the highest value is around 1.2E-04 J/cm^2.
if it is round 8 times, is it still high?
if it is round 8 times, is it still high?
- Wed May 29, 2019 9:00 am
- Forum: solidification
- Topic: Error when linearisation!
- Replies: 41
- Views: 32241
Re: Error when linearisation!
Hi Bernd,
How can we locate error position "zp" in DP_MICRESS?
How can we locate error position "zp" in DP_MICRESS?
- Wed May 29, 2019 8:00 am
- Forum: solidification
- Topic: unusually high simulation time
- Replies: 10
- Views: 12544
Re: unusually high simulation time
Hi Bernd Thanks again. When I check the .TabTQ, I can see 0/1 interaction time increases significantly compare to 0/2 and 1/2. I used misorientation model with constant factor (0.1) for low angle GB. My 0/1 interface energy is 1.2E-05 and 1/1 interface energy is 1.2E-04. I did not use any stabilizat...
- Tue May 28, 2019 2:10 pm
- Forum: solidification
- Topic: unusually high simulation time
- Replies: 10
- Views: 12544
Re: unusually high simulation time
Hi Bernd, Thanks a lot. I just checked .TabT and .TabP files between two simulations. In HAGB simulation during the time where the grains meet up the time step is in E-08 range (mostly) where as for the LAGB it varies between E-07 and E-08. I see very strong increase in TQ and PF times in HAGB simul...