2007
DOI: 10.1063/1.2751913
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Large-Scale Numerical Modeling of Melt and Solution Crystal Growth

Abstract: We present an overview of mathematical models and their large-scale numerical solution for simulating different phenomena and scales in melt and solution crystal growth. Samples of both classical analyses and state-of-the-art computations are presented. It is argued that the fundamental multi-scale nature of crystal growth precludes any one approach for modeling, rather successful crystal growth modeling relies on an artful blend of rigor and practicality.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 62 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…At the macroscopic level, the transport of solute (and impurities) toward the crystal−solution interface, the relative significance of convection and diffusion, and their interactions with crystal surfaces are relatively well-understood. 21 −28 These insights have allowed control over the development of growth instabilities and defects, 29−35,28,36−38 which can substantially alter the material properties. At the mesoscopic scale, crystal faceting is attributed to the high surface free energy of the crystal−solution interface, which explains the relative significance of the individual crystal faces in the equilibrium crystal shape through the surface free energy anisotropy.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…At the macroscopic level, the transport of solute (and impurities) toward the crystal−solution interface, the relative significance of convection and diffusion, and their interactions with crystal surfaces are relatively well-understood. 21 −28 These insights have allowed control over the development of growth instabilities and defects, 29−35,28,36−38 which can substantially alter the material properties. At the mesoscopic scale, crystal faceting is attributed to the high surface free energy of the crystal−solution interface, which explains the relative significance of the individual crystal faces in the equilibrium crystal shape through the surface free energy anisotropy.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Traditional crystallization procedures employ aqueous solutions where the corresponding mechanisms have been studied in detail at all relevant length scales: macroscopic, mesoscopic, and molecular. At the macroscopic scale we now understand the transport of solute and impurities toward the crystal–solution interface, the relative significance of convection and diffusion, , and their effect on crystal surfaces that may provoke growth instabilities and engender defects. At the mesoscopic scale, we attribute the faceted morphology of the majority of solution-grown crystals to the high surface free energy of the crystal–solution interface and explain the relative significance of the individual crystal faces in the equilibrium crystal shape through the surface free energy anisotropy. , At the molecular length scale, a fundamental property of water to form a three-dimensional network of hydrogen bonds, molded around solute molecules and along the crystal surface, has been identified as a major factor that determines the thermodynamic and kinetic parameters of solute incorporation into growth sites , and, correspondingly, the pathways and the rates of crystallization from aqueous solvents. …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The first one (front-tracking methods) is based on a multi-domain approach and defines a discrete moving surface to separate the interface between crystal and melt. The second category (diffuse-interface methods) is based on a single-domain approach where a system of momentum and energy equations is solved in the entire physical domain, and treats the interface as a region (mushy zone) of finite thickness across which physical properties vary rapidly but continuously from one bulk value to the other [7]. In contrast to the front-tracking methods, such as the widely used isotherm method, in a single-domain approach the thickness of the so-called mushy zone is very large compared to the width of a phase boundary of one or two layers of computational cells [8].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%