2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.actamat.2018.05.032
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Growth competition between columnar dendritic grains – Cellular automaton versus phase field modeling

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

7
64
1

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

2
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 73 publications
(72 citation statements)
references
References 42 publications
7
64
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Such an extension would allow for mapping of entire ranges of crystalline orientations, as well as amplitudes and relative orientations of the temperature gradient and gravity. One could thus investigate the influence of these processing conditions upon the selection of inner grain spacings [18] and that of orientation and roughness of grain boundaries [88][89][90].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Such an extension would allow for mapping of entire ranges of crystalline orientations, as well as amplitudes and relative orientations of the temperature gradient and gravity. One could thus investigate the influence of these processing conditions upon the selection of inner grain spacings [18] and that of orientation and roughness of grain boundaries [88][89][90].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Chen et al (2016) extend similar methodology to simulate welding processes in a level set approach and model epitaxial grain growth with relevant results. More recently, Pineau et al (2018) compared boundary orientation obtained after grain growth competition to phase field simulations in a wide range of grain orientation angles. The efficiency of CAFE models to mimic these competition mechanisms was demonstrated when relevant cell size is preliminary chosen.…”
Section: A Presentationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Growth of the diagonals is computed by integration over time of a growth kinetic law that is either related to experimental measurements or to theories. For instance, in case of dendritic microstructures [44], a dendrite tip growth kinetic model is well established and could be fitted by a simple power law between the velocity along the h10i directions, v h 10 i n (v h 100 i n along h100i directions in 3D), and the tip undercooling [44], DT, the latter defined by the difference between the melting point of the material, T M , and the tip temperature, T. For silicon growth [45], a linear law is appropriate. Experimental observations, within the spatial resolution of the set-up, also show that the rough part of the solidification front growing directionally remains smooth, grooves solely locally destabilizing the s/l interface due to the presence of {111} facets [42].…”
Section: Ca Growth and Capture Algorithmsmentioning
confidence: 99%