I set up a simulation for AlMgSi alloy. I want to measure the PDAS for different solidification conditions. I started off with a smaller simulation domain (108x1x408) with a grid resolution of 0.07. I still think that the simulation is not valid yet regarding the numerical parameters. I still think that the interface at the tip is not stable and coarsens. Below I describe my simulation set-up. Attached is the IN-File.
I use a rectangular grain as the starting grain. There is only 1 phase forming FCC_L12, because other phases do not have a major impact on the PDAS. I use "redistribution_control" for the interaction of phase "0 1" to ensure diffusion-control solidification as described in https://board.micress.de/viewtopic.php? ... trol#p2055. Furthermore, as discussed in the aforementioned link I use "interface stabilization" with interfacial energy x10.
I started with a mobility coefficient of 1.0 and lowered it step-by-step until I got a different solidification behavior (overtime increasing driving force, artifacts in dG-output). The images posted have a kinetic coefficient of 0.7. Which is in the same order of magnitude as Bernd once mentioned inhttps://board.micress.de/viewtopic.php? ... ameter#p49:
I am not quiete sure, why the interface looks like this. I do not have enough experience to say if this is a coarsening effect or not. How would you go from here?interface mobility (cm4/(Js):
- solid liquid interface for solid solution phase (e.g. fcc-liq): 0.1-0.01
1) Increase the interface thickness from 3 cells to 4, in order to allow more curvature undercooling?
2) Increase averaging of the driving force from 0.9 to 0.95? This would stabilize the interface as well, right?
3) Something completely different.
Thanks for your help.