Hi,
I’m trying to figure out the differences between fixed Miller index “HKL” such as “100”, “200”and “111”and random Miller index of nucleation phase orientation in the drive file on the solidification analysis of SCS13 stainless cast using MICRESS.
All calculations completed successfully but there seemed no difference between fixed and random Miller index on the value of the phase fraction and the phase map of the material so far.
On the other hand, I tried to alter the Miller index with the different temperatures referring drive files previously presented but no calculations completed.
I wonder if I’m doing wrong and how to fix the problem to complete the calculation.
Regards,
Amark
Nucleation phase orientation
Re: Nucleation phase orientation
Hi A-mark,
welcome to the MICRESS forum!
The first question to be answered in your case is whether it is a problem of orientation input, or whether the simulation setup is not sensitive to orientation differences. Therefore, please check first with the .orie output whether your choice (fixed or random orientations) is correctly applied to the nucleated grains!
If this is the case, the numerical conditions probably are chosen such that anisotropy is not taking effect. This could be e.g. due to too high driving forces as a consequence of a too low interface mobility.
If the .orie output looks identical for random and fixed orientation, then perhaps the input is chosen wrongly (we still do not want to think of a MICRESS bug at this stage...).
Please attach or paste the driving file to your answer in this thread, if there is no confidential information contained. Otherwise please remove the confidential information before or send it to me as PM - of course I will treat it confidentially. Without seeing the input file, it is difficult to find the reason for your problem!
Best regards
Bernd
welcome to the MICRESS forum!
The first question to be answered in your case is whether it is a problem of orientation input, or whether the simulation setup is not sensitive to orientation differences. Therefore, please check first with the .orie output whether your choice (fixed or random orientations) is correctly applied to the nucleated grains!
If this is the case, the numerical conditions probably are chosen such that anisotropy is not taking effect. This could be e.g. due to too high driving forces as a consequence of a too low interface mobility.
If the .orie output looks identical for random and fixed orientation, then perhaps the input is chosen wrongly (we still do not want to think of a MICRESS bug at this stage...).
Please attach or paste the driving file to your answer in this thread, if there is no confidential information contained. Otherwise please remove the confidential information before or send it to me as PM - of course I will treat it confidentially. Without seeing the input file, it is difficult to find the reason for your problem!
Best regards
Bernd