Austenite → lamellar pearlite

solid-solid phase transformations, influence of stresses and strains
Post Reply
shaojielv
Posts: 100
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2021 2:16 pm
anti_bot: 333

Austenite → lamellar pearlite

Post by shaojielv » Fri Mar 18, 2022 8:43 am

hi.everyone
About austenite to lamellar pearlite transformation, I have the following questions to consult you. I want to simulate lamellar pearlite, as shown in the picture. The following is the driver file I established, but why does not evolution occur? I can't find the reason for the error. Maybe there is something wrong with the establishment of my driver file. I hope to get your help.
Attachments
PROBLRM.png
PROBLRM.png (87.14 KiB) Viewed 10588 times
Lamellar_Pearlite_TQ.dri
(28.82 KiB) Downloaded 223 times

shaojielv
Posts: 100
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2021 2:16 pm
anti_bot: 333

Re: Austenite → lamellar pearlite

Post by shaojielv » Fri Mar 18, 2022 10:00 am

The following is part of my supplement. The following situation occurred when T=14s and 18s, and this phenomenon will disappear with the evolution of time. However, I have not found the reason for the error.
Attachments
T=18.png
T=18.png (11.36 KiB) Viewed 10587 times
T=14.png
T=14.png (13.09 KiB) Viewed 10587 times

Bernd
Posts: 1504
Joined: Mon Jun 23, 2008 9:29 pm

Re: Austenite → lamellar pearlite

Post by Bernd » Fri Mar 18, 2022 4:56 pm

Hi shaojielv,

I can see some major issues in your setup:

- The initial composition is not a typical eutectic composition. As a consequence, you get γ-α transformation before, and only part of the domain can transform to eutectic (i.e. you are not the monovariant line).

- You define a very small temperature gradient which accounts for a temperature difference between bottom and top of only 6 mK. This is not sufficient for having stationary growth conditions.

- You use nucleation of "big" grains of α and cementite. This is not allowed in case of concentration coupling (although not explicitly forbidden), because the nucleated phases don't have the correct composition (and the others go to strongly negative in case of stoichiometric cementite). Normally, "small" with radius r=0 are used (or at least r <<interface thickness).

- Don't use "stoich_enhanced_on" (you probably copied that from older input files).

Bernd

shaojielv
Posts: 100
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2021 2:16 pm
anti_bot: 333

Re: Austenite → lamellar pearlite

Post by shaojielv » Sat Mar 19, 2022 11:44 am

Dear,Bernd
First of all, thank you very much for your suggestions. According to your suggestions, I modified some parameters and checked other problems. Therefore, I basically started a new driver file, but the organization did not evolve under the driver file. This is very difficult for me, so I have to turn to you again. I hope you can take part of your time to help me solve this problem, I will be very grateful.
Attachments
Lamellar_Pearlite_TQ.dri
(29.68 KiB) Downloaded 228 times

Bernd
Posts: 1504
Joined: Mon Jun 23, 2008 9:29 pm

Re: Austenite → lamellar pearlite

Post by Bernd » Sun Mar 20, 2022 12:03 pm

Dear shaojielv,

Can you please describe what is not evolving as you expected?

Bernd

shaojielv
Posts: 100
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2021 2:16 pm
anti_bot: 333

Re: Austenite → lamellar pearlite

Post by shaojielv » Sun Mar 20, 2022 12:56 pm

Dear,Bernd
I'm sorry for not clarifying my question. Relevant documents have been sent to you. Thank you very much .

Ali
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2021 10:56 pm
anti_bot: 333

Re: Austenite → lamellar pearlite

Post by Ali » Mon Jun 13, 2022 11:44 pm

Dear Bernd,

I have a problem with the phase simulation in MICRESS, it would be nice if you could give me a hint.

I am trying to simulate pearlite formation from austenite phase and compare with experimental results. But based on experimental results, I should get the best pearlite formation at 580 C (or 853 K), and as the temperature increases or decreases, the pearlite formation or volume fraction should decrease. But based on my simulation results, I can get the best results at 700 C (or 970). I have changed several parameters for the phases interaction, but there were no particular changes in the microstructure. Could you please tell me what could be the reason for this discrepancy and which parameters I should change to achieve the experimental results?

I sent you per email the experimental results and dri file.

Thank you very much in advance.

Best regards,
Ali
Attachments
970.png
under 970 K
970.png (428.99 KiB) Viewed 10266 times
850.png
under 850 K
850.png (160.09 KiB) Viewed 10266 times

shaojielv
Posts: 100
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2021 2:16 pm
anti_bot: 333

Re: Austenite → lamellar pearlite

Post by shaojielv » Tue Jun 14, 2022 10:49 am

Dear Ali

I am very excited to see your simulation results. Could I ask you for some advice on the pearlite randomly generated at austenite grain boundaries? If it is convenient, can you share how you do the modeling?

Thank you very much.
Lv

Ali
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2021 10:56 pm
anti_bot: 333

Re: Austenite → lamellar pearlite

Post by Ali » Mon Jul 18, 2022 3:33 pm

Dear Friend,

sorry for my late reply, i missed your message.
If your are interested i can send to you.
Please find below my email address:

ch.darabi@gmail.com

Best regards,
Ali

shaojielv
Posts: 100
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2021 2:16 pm
anti_bot: 333

Re: Austenite → lamellar pearlite

Post by shaojielv » Mon Jul 18, 2022 3:59 pm

Dear Ali,

I am very happy to receive your reply, I have sent you a private email, please check it.

lv

Post Reply