2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmps.2018.02.007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Rate-independent dissipation in phase-field modelling of displacive transformations

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
8
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 63 publications
1
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Anisotropy, the habit is a constant plane, which is consistent with the classic WLR and BM theory . In the last few decades, the phase field method has shown tremendous capabilities of predicting Martensitic phase transformation . When the martensite transformation model is solved based on the phase field method, the values of various parameters will directly affect the final calculation results.…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 72%
“…Anisotropy, the habit is a constant plane, which is consistent with the classic WLR and BM theory . In the last few decades, the phase field method has shown tremendous capabilities of predicting Martensitic phase transformation . When the martensite transformation model is solved based on the phase field method, the values of various parameters will directly affect the final calculation results.…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 72%
“…Within this work, a small deformation framework is applied, so that there is no difference between the current, deformed configuration of B$\mathcal {B}$, and its reference state. The evolution of both degrees of freedom is then obtained through thermodynamically consistent phase‐field modeling based on a micro‐force balance, as outlined in [2–4]. The resulting system of coupled partial differential equations ·bold-italicσ=bold0,$$\begin{align} \bm{\nabla }\cdot \bm{\sigma } &= \bm{0} \ , \end{align}$$ Mη̇=F(δηg),$$\begin{align} M\;\!\dot{\eta } &= \mathcal {F}(\delta _{\eta }\widetilde{g}) \ , \end{align}$$is subject to δηtrueg-0.16em·-0.16emscriptF(δηg)0$\delta _{\eta }\widetilde{g}\!\cdot \!\mathcal {F}(\delta _{\eta }\widetilde{g}) \ge 0$ in order to fulfill the dissipation inequality.…”
Section: Phase‐field Modeling Of Shape Memory Alloysmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although this formulation is physically justified and valid for many material systems, it could be inadequate for displacive phase transformations due to their essential rate‐independent feature as observed experimentally. In this context, a thermomechanically coupled—and variationally consistent—Allen–Cahn type phase‐field approach incorporating both rate‐dependent and ‐independent dissipation potentials, as introduced in [2], is proposed in this work. Incorporating a rate‐independent dissipation formulation provides a more realistic representation of the thermoelastic hysteresis behavior of SMAs and overcomes the limitations of typical phase‐field formulations.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this approach, the complete evolution problem is formulated in a rate form as an (unconstrained) minimization problem, which is then consistently transformed into an incremental (time-discrete) problem, again in the form of a minimization problem. Consideration of the physical inequality constraints on the order parameters leads to a constrained minimization problem [19], see also [51] for the case with a mixed viscous and rate-independent dissipation. Here, we skip the formulation of the rate evolution problem and directly introduce the problem in an incremental setting.…”
Section: Incremental Energy Minimization Frameworkmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Additional simulations are carried out for different values of , namely = 0.75, 2 and 4 nm, and the results are compared to those of our reference study (for = 1 nm). To keep a consistent rate of interface propagation as increases (decreases), the mobility parameter m must decrease (increase) by the respective factor, see the related discussion in [51]. Therefore, m = 1.33, 0.5 and 0.25 (MPa s) −1 are adopted, respectively, for computations with = 0.75, 2 and 4 nm.…”
Section: Parametric Studymentioning
confidence: 99%