13.07.2015 Views

Phase-field modeling of diffusion controlled phase ... - KTH Mechanics

Phase-field modeling of diffusion controlled phase ... - KTH Mechanics

Phase-field modeling of diffusion controlled phase ... - KTH Mechanics

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Acta Materialia 51 (2003) 1327–1339www.actamat-journals.comThe <strong>phase</strong>-<strong>field</strong> approach and solute drag <strong>modeling</strong> <strong>of</strong> thetransition to massive g → a transformation in binary Fe-CalloysI. Loginova a , J. Odqvist b,∗ , G. Amberg a ,J.Ågren baDepartment <strong>of</strong> <strong>Mechanics</strong>, <strong>KTH</strong>, 100 44 Stockholm, SwedenbDepartment <strong>of</strong> Materials Science and Engineering, <strong>KTH</strong>, 100 44 Stockholm, SwedenReceived 18 April 2002; accepted 25 October 2002AbstractThe transition between <strong>diffusion</strong> <strong>controlled</strong> and massive transformation g →α in Fe–C alloys is investigated bymeans <strong>of</strong> <strong>phase</strong>-<strong>field</strong> simulations and thermodynamic functions assessed by the Calphad technique as well as <strong>diffusion</strong>almobilities available in the literature. A gradual variation in properties over an incoherent interface, having a thicknessaround 1 nm, is assumed. The <strong>phase</strong>-<strong>field</strong> simulations are compared with a newly developed technique to model solutedrag during <strong>phase</strong> transformations. Both approaches show qualitatively the same behavior and predict a transition toa massive transformation at a critical temperature below the T 0 line and close to the a/a + g <strong>phase</strong> boundary. It isconcluded that the quantitative difference between the two predictions stems from different assumptions on how theproperties vary across the <strong>phase</strong> interface yielding a lower dissipation <strong>of</strong> Gibbs energy by <strong>diffusion</strong> in the <strong>phase</strong>-<strong>field</strong>simulations. The need for more detailed information about the actual variation in interfacial properties is emphasized.© 2003 Acta Materialia Inc. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.Keywords: Diffusion; Thermodynamics; Gibbs energy; Dissipation; Interfacial properties1. IntroductionIf austenite (g) in low-carbon iron alloys isquenched to sufficiently low temperatures, but stillabove the martensite start temperature M s , it willbe decomposed by a massive transformation thatyields a characteristic blocky or massive microstructure.The massive transformation is partitionlesslike the martensitic transformation, i.e. it∗Corresponding author. Fax: +46-8-100411.E-mail address: joakim@met.kth.se (J. Odqvist).does not involve any composition change, and thuslong-range <strong>diffusion</strong> is unnecessary. The growth <strong>of</strong>massive ferrite (a) occurs with a constant growthrate that is more or less independent <strong>of</strong> crystallographicorientation relationships in contrast to themartensitic transformation. Thermodynamically apartitionless transformation g →a is possiblebelow the T 0 temperature, at which a and g <strong>of</strong> thesame composition have same Gibbs energy. However,at what temperature the massive transformationreally becomes kinetically possible has beena matter <strong>of</strong> considerable controversy over theyears. It may be argued that if the interfacial reac-1359-6454/03/$30.00 © 2003 Acta Materialia Inc. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.doi:10.1016/S1359-6454(02)00527-X

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!