Seed-density and seed-undercooling models
Posted: Mon Mar 15, 2021 3:44 pm
Dear Bernd,
Thank you for your detailed response. It has been of great support.
With the intention to consolidate expertise on MICRESS, I departed from T002_AlCu_Equiaxed and A006_CMSX4 as examples to understand how to implement the seed-density and seed-undercooling models to mimic eventually dendrite evolution of a Ni-based superalloy under rapid cooling.
I utilized the T002_AlCu_Equiaxed as template to begin simulations. As a start, I only modified the corresponding sections where needed to include all the constituents of my system and of course being careful to follow the structure of the input data in MICRESS, e.g., component, diffusion, initial concentrations sections and so on. At the moment, it is worth to mention that I am only focusing on the liquid-to-solid transition without contemplating formation of secondary phases such as gamma-prime and/or borides/carbides, which I presume might be extremely difficult due to how Thermo-Calc treat composition sets for distinct phases in heavily alloyed systems. Anyways, when running the simulation with only adapting nominal composition of my system, the outcome is quite similar to the original case, i.e. formation of equiaxed grains. However, when I decided to modify the simulation domain to 15 micrometers x 15 micrometers with 0.1 grid spacing, no outcome is generated. Thus, I presume that the seed-density distribution needs to be re-adapted. So, I am wondering if there is way to do the latter according to the information that MICRESS generates in the different Tabs, i.e. TabC, TabD, TabF and TabK to construct a more appropiate seed-density distribution?
Regarding the A006_CMSX4 example, I also utilized this as template to grasp a better understanding on how to implement the seed-undercooling model to perform the liquid-to-solid transition as previously mentioned. By trying again to only adapt the nominal composition of my system, the outcome of this simulation is shown in the series of snapshots attached to this message. I am wondering if previously assistance on a similar outcome has been requested from MICREES by their multiple users. So far, I started to approach this issue by manipulating parameters of the DeltaG options, however, still cannot certify if this is the correct way. No errors are indicated when the simulation is progressing. So, may I ask you for assistance or any idea of what could be happening? and how again to use the multiple taps to spot errors and generate solutions?
Thank you for taking the time to read this.
Best regards,
Mauro
Thank you for your detailed response. It has been of great support.
With the intention to consolidate expertise on MICRESS, I departed from T002_AlCu_Equiaxed and A006_CMSX4 as examples to understand how to implement the seed-density and seed-undercooling models to mimic eventually dendrite evolution of a Ni-based superalloy under rapid cooling.
I utilized the T002_AlCu_Equiaxed as template to begin simulations. As a start, I only modified the corresponding sections where needed to include all the constituents of my system and of course being careful to follow the structure of the input data in MICRESS, e.g., component, diffusion, initial concentrations sections and so on. At the moment, it is worth to mention that I am only focusing on the liquid-to-solid transition without contemplating formation of secondary phases such as gamma-prime and/or borides/carbides, which I presume might be extremely difficult due to how Thermo-Calc treat composition sets for distinct phases in heavily alloyed systems. Anyways, when running the simulation with only adapting nominal composition of my system, the outcome is quite similar to the original case, i.e. formation of equiaxed grains. However, when I decided to modify the simulation domain to 15 micrometers x 15 micrometers with 0.1 grid spacing, no outcome is generated. Thus, I presume that the seed-density distribution needs to be re-adapted. So, I am wondering if there is way to do the latter according to the information that MICRESS generates in the different Tabs, i.e. TabC, TabD, TabF and TabK to construct a more appropiate seed-density distribution?
Regarding the A006_CMSX4 example, I also utilized this as template to grasp a better understanding on how to implement the seed-undercooling model to perform the liquid-to-solid transition as previously mentioned. By trying again to only adapt the nominal composition of my system, the outcome of this simulation is shown in the series of snapshots attached to this message. I am wondering if previously assistance on a similar outcome has been requested from MICREES by their multiple users. So far, I started to approach this issue by manipulating parameters of the DeltaG options, however, still cannot certify if this is the correct way. No errors are indicated when the simulation is progressing. So, may I ask you for assistance or any idea of what could be happening? and how again to use the multiple taps to spot errors and generate solutions?
Thank you for taking the time to read this.
Best regards,
Mauro