JI4GI9161556A

Butterworth:AMM

05-13-92 14-24-24 ds

Art. 1736

A comparison of source term and enthalpy

approaches to the numerical simulation of the
solidification of ductile irons
F. J. Bradley
Department of Materials Science and Engineering, University o f Wisconsin-Madison,
Madison, WI, USA

M. Samonds
Universal Energy Systetns, Arnold, MD, USA
Key considerations in developing practically usefid design so.ftwareJbr optimization based on shrinkage
are (1) the development of a kinetic model of ductile iron solMific'atioa that realistically accoants fbr
the effects of metathn'gical processhtg on the mode and sequence o.f solidification and thus on the
rate of evolution of latent heat; (2) application of the model to estimating the volume changes that
occur during fieezing, (3) computational efficiency, and (4) development of mnnerical simulation-based
shrinkage prediction criteria that account for the role o.f alh)y chemisto, and other processing variables
in shrinkage. A combined micromodellhzg/thermal analysis-based approach to solidification modelling
has been adopted. In this paper, several issues related to sinudating the solidification of commercial
near-eutectic ductile irons are examined. In particular, resahs oJfinite element shntdations of a
commercial ductile iron thermal analysis specimen, obtained by using a source term algorithm and
an enthalpy-based formulation, are presented. Advantages and disadvantages of the two approaches
b~ terms of computational efficiency and metallurgical c'onsideratians are discussed.

Keywords: numerical simulation, eutectic solidification, ductile iron, finite element, latent heat evolution,
source term algorithm, enthalpy formulation

Introduction
Numerical simulation of solidification essentially involves solution of the governing partial differential
equation subject to the appropriate boundary and initial conditions? TM Progress in the development of efficient algorithms for numerical simulation of freezingrange alloys has been facilitated by the availability of
various solute diffusion models (e.g., equilibrium solidification and Scheil equation), from which temperature-dependent fraction solidified relationships can be
obtained to determine modified specific heat and enthalpy-temperature variations. In the case of freezingrange alloys the freezing range is explicitly specified
as part of the initial problem formulation, with the start
and end of freezing temperatures and equilibrium parAddress reprint requests to Dr. Bradleyat the Dept. of Materials
Science and Engineering, Universityof Wisconsin-Madison,1509
UniversityAve., Madison,WI 53706, USA.
Received25 July 1991;revised27 February 1992:accepted2 March
1992

534

Appl. Math. Modelling, 1992, Vol. 16, October

titian ratio being obtained from the pertinent phase

diagram. In general, the methodologies and models for
handling the latent heat of evolution of freezing-range
alloys are not applicable to the case of eutectic casting
alloys.
This paper concerns the numerical simulation of solidification of near-eutectic ductile iron alloys, which
is somewhat more difficult than simulation of freezingrange alloys from a number of standpoints, particularly
in the case of graphitic cast irons, which may solidify
according to the stable austenite-graphite system or
the metastable austenite-carbide system. Commercial
neaf-eutectic ductile irons are often of slightly hypereutectic composition. For such irons the start of solidification temperature is difficult to determine from
thermal analysis data, since the evolution of latent heat
associated with graphite precipitation in the primary
solidification range is generally insufficient to produce
a distinct arrest in the cooling curve. Similarly, the end
of solidification temperature is difficult to precisely
determine because of segregation effects. While most
solidification takes place over a narrow temperature
range associated with the eutectic plateau, ductile iron

]992 BuUerworth-Heinemann

Numerical simulation of solidification: F. J. Bradley and M. Samonds

may in fact freeze over quite a wide range of temperature. In general, the start and end of solidification, as
well as the rate of evolution of latent heat, are strongly
dependent on metallurgical processing. Furthermore,
ductile iron cooling curves are often characterized by
undercooling and recalescence, the nature of which is
strongly dependent on cooling rate, melt chemistry,
inoculation and treatment practice, and other processing variables.
If numerical simulation of solidification is to be usefully applied to the optimization of casting design, particularly with regard to shrinkage prediction, then individual alloy solidification characteristics must be
accounted for in the problem formulation. In general,
an important issue in the numerical simulation of commercial alloys is whether the methodology chosen to
handle latent heat in fact realistically reflects the effects of metallurgical processing on heat generation
during solidification. A related important practical consideration is computational efficiency. The choice of
approach to handling latent heat has implications with
regard to both the usefulness of predictions based on
simulation results and computational efficiency, and
often tradeoffs involving model assumptions and numerical algorithms must be made in order to obtain,
within a reasonable time, simulation results upon which
design or process control decisions can be made.
In this paper, two approaches to handling latent heat
evolution associated with the solidification of commercial ductile iron alloys are investigated--a source
term approach that utilizes heat generation functions
derived from cooling curve data and an enthalpy approach that utilizes empirical temperature-dependent
fraction solid relationships. Results of finite element
simulations of a commercial near-eutectic ductile iron
thermal analysis specimen are presented. Advantages
and disadvantages of each approach with respect to
computational efficiency and metallurgical considerations are discussed.

Mathematical formulation
For the case of no convective flow of liquid or solid,
the governing equation for the solidification heat transfer problem can be expressed as
OT

V (kVT) + g = pc~-t

df, dT
g = pL dT dt

(3)

Alternatively, an effective heat capacity or enthalpy-based formulation can be employed to eliminate

the source term from equation (l). In the enthalpy
formulation of the solidification problem, ~ the governing differential equation is
(4)

V (kVr) = pH

where H is the enthalpy per unit mass, or in the case

of solidification over a temperature range as
dH.
7 (kVT) = p - ~ T

(5)

The enthalpy gain of a volume element in the mushy

zone relative to that of a volume element at the solidus
temperature T, is
7"

H = [~dT+

(6)

(1 - f , ) L

-/,

where ~ is the specific heat of the mushy element.

Expressing ? as the weighted average of the specific
heats of the liquid and solid phases, c,. and q, respectively, differentiation with respect to temperature of
equation (6) yields the rate of change of enthalpy with
temperature over the freezing range, which is commonly referred to as the effective or enhanced specific
heat c*:
dH = c* = c,f.,. + c,(l - f.,) - L dr.,
dT

(2)

where L is the latent heat of fusion per unit mass. In

the case of solidification over a temperature range, the
chain rule can be utilized to express the source term

(7)

dT

Substitution of the expression for dH/dT in equation

(7) into equation (5) yields the governing equation for
the effective heat capacity method of handling latent
heat. Rappaz ~summarizes the essential features of the
effective heat capacity and enthalpy-based approaches
and outlines the relative merits of each.
The finite element method is commonly applied in
the numerical simulation of solidification. Discretization by finite elements and utilization of the Galerkin
procedure yield the following system of equations:
I C ] { ~ + [KI{T} = {n}

(I)

where k is thermal conductivity, T is temperature, p is

density, c is specific heat per unit mass, t is time, and
g is the rate of heat generation per unit volume. The
heat generation source term can be expressed in terms
of the rate of change of fraction solidified, f., as
g = pL of"
Ot

as

(8)

where the capacitance matrix [C] is

the conductance matrix [K] is

[K] = [K,] + [K,,]

(10)

where the thermal conductivity and convective boundary condition contributions are, respectively,
[K,.] = ( [B]T[k][B] dfl

Appl. Math. Modelling, 1992, Vol. 16, October

(1 l)

535

Numerical simulation of solidification: F. J. Bradley and M. Samonds

and

[K,,] = f h{N}[NI dS

(I 2)

.91,

and the thermal load vector is

{R} = {R~} + {R,}

(13)

where the heat generation source term and convective

boundary condition contributions are, respectively,

{Ra'} = I g{N} dfl

(14)

and

{R,,} -- ~ hT~{N} dS

The perceived improvement in computational efficiency was attributed to the reduction in the number
of matrix retormations required to satisfy a specified
convergence criterion.

Thermal analysis-based approach to simulating

latent heat evolution
In the thermal analysis approach, a lumped system
analysis of cooling curve data is utilized to estimate
the rate of evolution of latent heat associated with cast
iron solidification. For the case of Newtonian cooling,
a lumped system heat balance of the thermal analysis
specimen 24 yields the following expression for g, the
rate of heat generation per unit volume:

(15)

fir) = p c [ ~ +

Sh

where {N} is the vector of shape functions, [B] is the

shape function gradient matrix, D, is the volume of the
element, and Sh is the area over which convective heat
transfer occurs.
In an alternative approach to the mathematical formulation of the solidification heat transfer problem,
othersJO.~.2., have preferred to start with equation (4),
the enthalpy equation, and, with a suitable definition
for enthalpy, derive equation ( I ), the source term form
of the governing equation. When this approach is
adopted, the term "enthalpy" has been used to refer
to a numerical method that is based directly on equation (4). However, in this paper the term "enthalpybased" approach to handling latent heat is meant specifically to refer to the finite element methodology based
on equation (5) (described by Lewis and Roberts, ~-~in
which the latent heat evolution is handled in the capacitance matrix as indicated in equation (9). Three
cases are considered in which different models are employed to obtain enthalpy-temperature relationships.
To further clarify the terminology, a source term
scheme is simply taken to be one in which the evolution
of latent heat is accounted for directly in terms of the
rate of heat generation per unit volume g, which is the
source term in equation (I]. Three cases are considered
in which different heat generation functions are derived
from experimental cooling curve data. Alternatively,
a micromodeling approach could be utilized to derive
a more general expression for g.23 In the source term
algorithm described in this paper the evolution of latent
heat during solidification is handled in the thermal load
vector {R~}, equation (14). With regard to the "'enthalpy-based" and source term schemes described
above, an important point to note is that the former
handles latent heat in the global matrix, while the latter
handles latent heat in the load vector. In recent work
concerning finite element simulation of ductile iron solidification a heat generation function algorithm and a
temperature recovery algorithm were compared. -',2~
Both algorithms handled latent heat in the thermal load
vector. In conducting the investigation it was observed
that both algorithms appeared to be more efficient than
those that handle latent heat in the capacitance matrix.

536

Appl. Math. Modelling, 1992, Vol. 16, October

O(T T.~)1

(16)

where h is the constant heat transfer coefficient for the

system. A is the effective surface area over which heat
transfer occurs, T~ is the ambient temperature, and V
is the volume of the thermal analysis cup. The Newtonian cooling curve parameter 0 is defined by

hA
pcV

0 = --

(17)

Equation (16) is applicable only for the range over

which solidification occurs. An estimate of the Newtonian cooling curve parameter 0Lc;in the liquid cooling
range and of 0v~-in the solid cooling range can be obtained directly from the time-temperature cooling curve
data by doing a least squares linear regression of
In IT - T~I versus t using the appropriate data of each
range, with the slope of the regression equation giving
directly. Details of various algorithms for determining the heat generation function and delineating the
solidification range are discussed in Ref. 25.
Figure I shows the cooling curve and corresponding
heat generation functions of a commercial near-eutectic ductile iron (CE = 4.42 based on CE = %C +
:~%Si). The difference in the two heat generation func-

1300,
3
C)
"-'1200

s I
t/

""'-~2

I;

~.~..
." ...... ..
~x

Jl

2#.

"

to

-6

.;

E 11oo
II

I--

1;

-- li
10Q0 I
0

I
100

I
200

-1
300

Time (s)
Figure 1. Cooling curve and lumped model heat generation
functions for a commercial near-eutectic ductile iron

Numerical simulation of solidification: F. d. Bradley and M. Samonds

Table I. Thermal analysis estimates and start and end of
solidification, solidification time, and latent heat of fusion of a
commercial hypereutectic ductile iron
Freezing range
criterion [0 variation]

Tbg,
(C)

Tona
(C)

~
(s}

L
(cal/g)

9 = 0 [constant 0]
g = 0 [linear e(t}]
Derivative [linear O(t)]

1168
1191
1155

1112
1121
1093

209
213
210

58.8
61.6
58.1

tions is a consequence of the way in which the Newtonian cooling curve parameter varies over the solidification range. In one case, 0 is constant during
solidification and is given by

= OLQ + Oss

(18)

2
and in the other case the Newtonian cooling curve
parameter varies linearly with time over the range of
solidification and is given by

O(t) =

OLQ(I -- 7"*) + Oss~'*

(19)

where dimensionless solidification time "r* is defined

as
,/.

~-* = -

(20)

r is the local solidification time relative to the start of

solidification, and r~ is the duration of solidification.
As is apparent from Figure I, the effect of time-dependent 0 is to shift the solidification start and end
temperatures to higher values and to skew the heat
generation function toward the start of solidification.
Table I contains thermal analysis-based estimates
of the start and end of solidification, solidification time,
and latent heat for these two cases, as well as for the
case in which a derivative criterion is used to delineate
solidification range. 25 The estimate of the latent heat
of fusion is obtained by integrating the heat generation
function g(t) over the duration of solidification ~,, that
is,

pL = / g(t) dt

(21 )

The estimate of L ~ 60 cal/g for the slightly hypereutectic ductile iron specimen is in reasonable agreement with the results of other investigators who have
utilized lumped system analysis of cooling curve data
to estimate latent heats associated with cast iron solidification. '-6--'9

Finite element simulations of thermal

analysis specimen
Finite element simulations of the solidification of the
commercial near-eutectic ductile iron thermal analysis
specimen for which the cooling curve is shown in Figure 1 were carried out by using the ProCAST TM com-

li
0

<

>r

>

Figure 2. Schematic of finite element mesh showing locations

at which cooling curves are simulated

mercial solidification analysis software. The program

utilizes an implicit-explicit two-step predictor-corrector time marching algorithm in which the time step is
increased or decreased during the course of a simulation, depending on the number of iterations required
to reach a specified convergence limit. A convergence
limit of 0.5C was utilized in this study. Details concerning time marching and other features of the software are given in Refs. 7 and 30.
Figure 2 is a vertical cross-section of the thermal
analysis specimen showing a schematic of the mesh.
Locations 1, 2, and 3 lie on a horizontal plane at halfheight H/2 and correspond to the tip of the thermocouple, the midradius, and the outer surface of the
specimen, respectively. A 15 pie-shaped segment of
the thermal analysis specimen was considered and enmeshed with 200 three-dimensional elements, six-noded
wedges along the centerline and eight-noded bricks
elsewhere. Element dimensions in the r- and z-directions are Ar = 0.2 cm and fi,z = 0.24 cm, and the total
number of nodes is 442. The initial and boundary con-

Appl. Math. Modelling, 1992, Vol. 16, October

537

Numerical simulation of soh'dification: F. J. Bradley and M. Samonds

ditions are
T = Tp
OT

O<r<R,O<z<H;t

=0

(22)
(23)

r = O,O<z<H;t>O

--=0

Or

- k aT = h ( r -

1"=)

Or

r= R,O<z<H;t>O

z = 0,0<r<R;t >0

(24)

z = H,O<r<R;t>O
Table 2 contains material property data, the ge-

ometry of the thermal analysis cup, and Newtonian

cooling curve parameters for the liquid and solid cooling ranges obtained for the experimental cooling curve
in Figure t. Table 3 summarizes the pertinent solidification-related data for each of the three source term
(A-C) and three enthalpy (D-F) cases considered in
this study. In the source term approach, the nonlinearity due to the evolution of latent heat during solidification is handled in the source term {Rx,}in the thermal load vector, equation (13). The algorithm is as
follows. The centroid of each element has associated
with it a local solidification time clock that is activated
when the centroid temperature falls to the solidification
start temperature. Once the centroid temperature falls
within the freezing range, the elemental contribution
to the heat generation vector at any instant is computed
by using the heat generation function, which is expressed in terms of the local solidification time, g(-r).
When the accumulation of solidification time for an
individual element reaches z, the duration of solidification as determined from the cooling curve data,
solidification is complete.
A piecewise linear approximation over 5-second intervals is utilized to represent the heat generation functions in Figure 1, which correspond to the cases of
Table 2.

= 4.8 cm

=
=
=
=

c, = ct
Ps =

Pt

OLO
Oss

Table 3.

Case
A
B
C
D
E
F

When experimental phase transition data are not available, Stafford, Klahs, and Pinella 3~ recommend a rule
of mixtures and universal curve (RoM/UO model, which
relates fraction solid and dimensionless temperature
T* as follows:
f., = 1 - e -a-5l'

(27)

Summary of latent heat, freezing range, and solidification time data for numerical simulation runs
Algorithm

L
(ca[/g)

Tbg,
(C)

Tend
(C)

A T,o,
(C)

7"s
(s)

Source Iconstant 01
Source [linear 0(t}]
Source [g = gl
Enthalpy [PLR]
Enthalpy [RoM/UC]
Enthalpy [NFRI

58.8
61.6
60.0
60.0
60.0
60.0

1168
1191
1168
1168
1168
1155

*
*
*
1112
1112
1154

*
*
*
56
56
1

209
213
*
*
*
*

* Numerically computed parameter

538

(26)

TL- Ts

2.0 cm
0.71 cm
1253C
0.17 cal/g/C
0.07 cal/s/cmtC
6.9 g/cm 3
= 0.00233 s -~
= 0.00111 s

k,

The latent heat evolved at each time step is accumulated, and solidification is complete when the cumulative latent heat evolved, expressed on a per weight
basis, reaches the specified value of L = 60.0 cal/g.
For Case C, both end of solidification temperature and
local solidification time are determined in the course
of the simulation.
Three cases that utilize an enthalpy-based approach
to handling latent heat are also considered. The enthalpy-temperature relationship for each case is obtained by using the empirical fraction solid relationships given below in conjunction with equation (6),
taking c, = c~. Case D corresponds to what is termed
the pseudo-lever rule (PLR) model. For this model the
fraction solid varies with the temperature drop in the
freezing range as follows:
f,,. = -

Tp

%.

TL-T

Data for numerical simulations

VIA

constant 0 (Case A) and linear O(t) (Case B). For these

two cases the input data consist of start of solidification
temperature and solidification time, and the simulation-computed parameter is end of solidification temperature. This is in conWast to the enthalpy-based cases,
in which the start and end of solidification temperatures are specified and the simulation-computed parameter is solidification time.
Since solidification is strongly dependent on cooling
rate and metallurgical processing, an inherent limitation of the thermal analysis-based source term approach is that a heat generation function g(t) derived
on the basis of thermal analysis data is strictly valid
only for the cooling path for which it applies. Further,
it is clearly unacceptable to constrain the solidification
time a priori. For Case C the constraint of fixed solidification time is removed, with the rate of heat generation per unit volume being held constant at an average value ,~ = 2.0 cal/s/cm 3, which is obtained from

Appl. Math. Modelling, 1992, Vol. 16, October

Numerical simulation of soh'dification." F. J. Bradley and IV/. Samonds

1300

where
T*-

~ermocouple $[mulations

Tz.- T

TL- Ts

The RoM/UC empirical relationship is the basis for

handling latent heat in Case E. In Case F, latent heat
evolution is constrained to occur over a narrow freezing range (NFR) of IC, an approach that has been
commonly utilized to simulate the solidification of pure
metals and eutectic alloys. The pseudo-lever rule model
is used to obtain the enthalpy-temperature variation
for case F.

'1200

~ 1100

A first-order estimate of the heat transfer coefficients

for the liquid and solid cooling ranges can be obtained
by using the values of the Newtonian cooling curve
parameters for each range given in Table 2 and the
definition of 0, that is,
V

h = pcO~

(29)

The temperature dependence of the heat transfer coefficient, which is assumed to be constant in the liquid
and solid cooling ranges and to vary linearly with temperature over the range of solidification, is given by

h = hL)
h-ht<j(I - T*)+ h.~.,.T*
h=h,.,

T> TL
T~<T<TL
T<T~

(30)

where T* is given by equation (28). It is noted that for

the purpose of evaluating the heat transfer coefficient
the values of TL = 1168C and /~, = 1112C were
utilized for each simulation, even in Cases A - C and
Case F, for which the actual freezing range over which
latent heat was liberated is somewhat different. Substitution of the appropriate data given in Table2 into
equation (29) yields the following estimates of the heat

Therrnocoupte Simulations
t)

"11200

Q.

E 1~oo
I-

50

- -

C~se D

. . . . C~se r
50

100

I
150

\
200

250

q~
500

Time(s)

Discussion of results

I00C

I
I

",,

1000

1300

(28)

1-

100

150

P
200

250

300

Time (s)
Figure 3. Experimental and simulated cooling curves at thermocouple location for source term cases A - C (hm = 0.00194

calls/cm2/C, k~ = 0.07 cal/s/cm/C)

Figure 4. Experimental and simulated cooling curves at thermocouple location for enthalpy cases D-F (hLo = 0.00194
cal/s/cm2/C, kt = 0.07 cal/s/cm/C)

transfer coefficient for the liquid and solid cooling ranges,

respectively: hL~ = 0.00194 cal/s/cm:/C and h~.s =
0.000924 cal/s/cm-'/C.
Figures 3 and 4 show the results of an initial set of
simulations of the cooling curve at the thermocouple
location (location I in Figure 2) for the six cases A - F . n
For these simulations the above values of heat transfer
coefficients and a value of liquid thermal conductivity
of k~ = k.~ = 0.07 cal/s/cm/C were used. It is clear
from a comparison of the portion of the experimental
and simulated cooling curves in the liquid cooling range
for all cases that the rate of heat extraction from the
thermal analysis cup has been underestimated. Heat
transfer associated with the thermal analysis specimen
is exceedingly complex, involving nonlinear effects associated with radiation, heat transfer across a gap, and
thermal capacitance of the cup, as well as fracture of
the cup during solidification and cooling. With regard
to the procedure for estimating the heat transfer coefficient, a low estimate of hLo may result, owing to a
poor estimate of the effective volume to area ratio for
the cup (see equation 29). The initial estimate of
ViA = 0.71 represents the actual volume of the cup
divided by the wetted perimeter. Furthermore, the value
of liquid thermal conductivity may also be underestimated. It is common practice in numerical simulations
to enhance the value of kt relative to that of k, in order
to account for convection in the liquid.
Figures5 and 6 show the results of a second set of
thermocouple cooling curve simulations using a value
of hLQ = 0.00300 cal/s/cm-'/C and a value of liquid
thermal conductivity twice that of the solid, that is,
k~ = 0.14 cal/s/cm/C, with all other data unchanged.
Tables 4 and 5 summarize input and computed solidification parameters, including start and end of solidification temperatures, freezing range, and local solidification time, associated with the thermocouple
simulation at location 1 for each of the six cases for
the initial runs and the subsequent higher heat extraction rate simulations, respectively. Simulation-determined parameters for each case are underlined. Also

Appl. Math. Modelling, 1992, Vol. 16, October

539

Numerical simulation of solidification: F. J. Bradley and M. Samonds

contained in Tables 4 and 5 are various parameters
related to computational efficiency, including number
of time steps, total number of iterations, CPU time,
and normalized CPU time. The last column in these
tables is simply the CPU time of each case divided by
that of Case A. The simulations were run on a SUN
SPARC 4/330 workstation.
1300
Thermocouple 5irnulations

~"1200

Q.

E 11oo

....... c_~,eB
. . . . _Coee.C

I-

x,,~
. .

\'"

Experimental I

tOOl

~o

too

15o 2oo
Time (s)

;~o

~oo

Figure 5. Experimental and simulated cooling curves at thermocouple location for source term cases A-C (hLe = 0.00300
cal/s/cm2/C, kj = 0.14 cal/s/cm/C)

1300
Thermocouple Sirnukflions
c~
"-'1200

11oo

Case O

I-

Experlmen(c/
I00C

50

100

150

-,,~
I

200

250

300

Time (s)
Figure 6. Experimental and simulated cooling curves at thermocouple location for enthalpy cases D-F (hLo = 0.00300

cal/s/cm2/C, kj = 0.14 cal/s/cm/C)

From a comparison of results in Figures 3 and 4

with those in Figures 5 and 6, increasing the rate of
heat extraction via an increased value of hLQ and enhanced k~ results in a good simulation of the experimental cooling curve in the liquid cooling region. With
regard to the source term cases, an associated consequence of the higher rate of heat extraction is to
simultaneously lower the simulated curves over the
range of the eutectic plateau, such that reasonable
agreement with the experimental curve is obtained.
This downward shift in the eutectic plateau with increasing rate of heat extraction, which is observed experimentally, is associated with the fact that the solidification range is unconstrained in the case of the
source term simulations. The enthalpy cases, on the
other hand, are constrained with respect to solidification range, so the effect of increased rate of heat
extraction is p,imarily to decrease the solidification
time without significantly altering the shape of the simulated curve or the specified range of solidification.
Ductile iron cooling curves obtained by using conventional sand eutectometer cups, as were used to obtain the experimental curve shown in Figure /, characteristically exhibit undercooling and recalescence,
the nature of which is strongly dependent on prior
metallurgical processing. Of the thermocouple simulations for the six cases shown in Figures 3-6, only
the curves for Cases A and B exhibit both undercooling
and recalescence. The lesser undercooling and greater
recalescence of Curve B reflects the skewness of the
heat generation function for the linear O(t) case (see
Figure 2). The curve for Case C exhibits undercooling,
but heat generation at the constant rate of E = 2.0
cal/s/cm 3 is insufficient to produce recalescence.
As expected, none of the thermocouple simulation
curves for the enthalpy cases exhibits recalescence.
Of the three enthalpy cases considered, the curve for
Case E, the RoM/UC model, provides the most reasonable simulation of the experimental curve in terms
of shape, with the Case E curves possessing an extended, essentially horizontal, eutectic plateau and a
smooth transition at the end of solidification to the solid
cooling range. It is interesting to note that the form of
equation (27) is similar in nature to an Avrami-type
correction expression for grain impingement if T* is
regarded as an estimate of fraction solid, as it is in the
case of the pseudo-lever rule model. While the NFR

Table 4. Summary of input and computed parameters for the thermocouple simulations and estimates of computational efficiency
for cases A-F (hLo = 0.00194 calls/cmZ/C, k = 0.07 cal/s/cm/C)
Thermocouple simulation

Computational efficiency

Case

TuQo
(C)

Ten~
(C)

A Tsol
(C)

ts
(s)

Time
steps*

Iterations*

CPU time
(s)

Normalized
CPU time

A
B
C
D
E
F

1168
1191
1168
1168
1168
1155

1126
1120
1105
1112
1112
1154

42
71
63
56
56
1

209
213
213
250
19:3
200

58
58
96
63
65
106

126
124
281
144
151
390

177
181
485
200
210
520

1.00
1.02
2.74
1.13
1.19
2.94

* Number of time steps and iterations required to reach simulation time of 300 seconds

548

Appl. Math. Modelling, 1992, Vol. 16, October

Numerical simulation of solidification: F. J. Bradley and M. Samonds

Table 5.

Summary of input and computed parameters for the thermocouple simulations and estimates of computational efficiency
for cases A - F
0.003 calts/cm2/C, kj = 0.14 cal/stcm/C)

(hm=

Thermocouple simulation

Computational efficiency

Case

Tbg.
(C)

T..d
(%)

~ Tso=
[%)

~',
(s)

Time
steps

Iterations

CPU time
(s)

Normalized
CPU time

A
B
C
D
E
F

1168
1191
1168
1168
1168
1155

1116
1112
1i36
1112
1112
1154

52
79
32
56
56
1

209
213
202
224
16__Z
7
131

61
61
66
67
66
88

134
136
149
155
153
285

179
183
239
196
195
350

1.00
1.02
1.34
1.10
1.09
1.96

1300

1300

"~)
~-~
P1200.,.,~o.

"'"1200

tO100 ~ ~ ~ e ! i d ~ u , ~"'-"~":~."
'~"~
':""

E11oo
1ooo

s'o

i~o

,~0
2~o
Time (s)

2~o

1ooc

300

Figure 7. Experimental and simulated cooling curves at various

location for Case A (hm - 0.00300 calts/cm2/C, kt = 0.14

cal/s/cm/C)

s~

1~o

'
1,50
260
Time (s)

2~0

300

Figure 9. Experimental and simulated cooling curves at various

location for Case C (hLa : 0.00300 cal/stcm2/C, k, = 0.14
cal/s/cm/C}

1300

1300

0
~'~1200

"~'1200

Q.

E1100

Case
D
anthalpy

E 1100

I--

10006

sb

r
1oo

~
ISO

Time (s)

i
200

i
2so

~oo

IOOG

. . . . centerline
\ \
-experimental
\
100Time150(s) 200 250 300

Figure 8.

Experimental and simulated cooling curves at various

locations for Case B (hLo = 0.00300 cal/s/cm2/C, k, = 0.14
cal/s/cm/C)

Figure 10. Experimental and simulated cooling curves at various locations for Case D (hLo = 0.00300 cal/s/cm21C, kt = 0.14
cal/s/cm/C}

model constrains the solidification to occur in the plateaulike manner associated with near-eutectic ductile
alloys, the end of the freezing portion of the simulated
curve is unrealistically abrupt, being almost rightangled.
With regard to the optimization of casting design,
an important application of numerical simulation of
solidification is shrinkage prediction. In previous work,

investigators have suggested shrinkage prediction criteria based on computed parameters such as local solidification time, thermal gradient, cooling rate, solidus
velocity, and fraction solidified. 33-38 Figures 7-12 show
the experimental and simulated cooling curves for location 1 (centerline), location 2 (midradius), and location 3 (surface) for the six cases of the higher rate
of heat extraction simulations. It is evident from a

Appl. Math. Modelling, 1992, Vol. 16, October

541

Numerical simulation of solidification: F. J. Bradley and M. Samonds

1300

"-"120(

0
0.

E 1101
I--

1000

5o

ioo

iso
200
Time (s)

2so

3oo

Figure 11.

Experimental and simulated cooling curves at various location for Case E (hm = 0.00300 cal/s/cm2/C, k~ = 0.14
cal/s/cm/C)

visual examination of the cooling curves in Fig,res

3-12 and the results for local solidification time in Tables 4 and 5 that the magnitude of any numerical simulation-based shrinkage prediction criterion containing derivative parameters, solidus velocity, and/or local
solidification time is dependent on the algorithm used
to handle latent heat. The same can be inferred for
criteria based on fraction solidified relationships. This
indicates a need to calibrate specific numerical simulation shrinkage prediction criteria with respect to solidification model, as well as alloy family and processing practice.
The results in Tables 4 and 5 indicate that the source
term approach to handling latent heat in Cases A and
B is slightly more computationally efficient in terms of
number of time steps, total number of iterations, and
CPU time than the enthalpy approach utilized in Cases
D and E. This slight increase in computational efficiency is attributed to handling the latent heat in the
thermal load vector {Re} rather than the capacitance
matrix [C]. A more significant gain in computational
efficiency was not observed because a temperaturedependent heat transfer coefficient boundary condition
was utilized for all cases, and temperature-dependent
thermal conductivity was used for the higher heat extraction rate simulations. This requires computation of
the conductance matrix [K] at each iteration in a time
step for both the source term and enthalpy approach
cases and thus reformation of the global matrix.
Lewis '9 recently reported on a comparison of an
enthalpy method and a source term algorithm for handling latent heat based on the Rolph and Bathe 3 "fictitious heat source" method, which lumps all the latent
heat available at the nodes and releases it as an internal
source at the appropriate temperature or range of temperatures. A standard one-dimensional solidification
test problem was considered, and while the enthalpy
method was found to be more accurate, the source
term method gave reasonable results in less than 5
percent of the time. It was noted that the source term
method gives reasonable results even for large time

542

Appl. Math. Modelling, 1992, Vol. 16, October

steps and coarse meshes, while for problems with narrow freezing ranges the enthalpy method either converges very slowly, using very small time steps, or
does not converge at all. However, Comini et al. 3~have
developed a conservative algorithm that bridges the
gap between "full enthalpy" and "equivalent heat capacity" methods and apparently overcomes the limitations of the enthalpy method noted above.
Finally, it is noted that. with the given temperaturedependent fraction solid models, the source-based enthalpy methods described in a comprehensive review
of fixed grid techniques for phase change problems by
Voller et al. '~ could also be used for Cases D-F. However, Swaminathan and Voller ~ point out that for cases
in which the form of the liquid fraction temperature
curve is not known a priori or when the liquid fraction
temperature curve is not single-valued (as in the case
of near-eutectic ductile iron considered in this paper)
the problem is more challenging and in need of further
research. Bradley and co-workers have work in progress in this area in which a one-dimensional implicit
finite difference source term algorithm is being developed that incorporates a micromodel of the solidification of near-eutectic ductile iron? -47 The approach
essentially involves coupling the finite difference macromodel with a temperature-dependent "micromodel" heat generation function g(T) of the general
form
g(T) = pLN(T)Ko47r R~,R. AT" qJ(R)

R~ - R(;

(31)

where p is density, L is latent heat per unit mass, N(T)

is a temperature-dependent function for number of
nodules per unit volume, Ko is a rate constant that is
dependent on the diffusivity of carbon in the austenite
and compositions obtained from the phase diagram, R~
is the radius of the austenite shell, R , is the radius of
the graphite nodule, AT = T~,t - Tis the undercooling,
T~,.t is the eutectic temperature, and $(R) is a weighting
function that accounts for the reduction in solid-liquid
inteffacial area due to grain impingement (see Ref. 23).
1300

""120(

Q.

E 110[

10006

Figure 12.

50

Ioo

~5o
200
Time (s)

2so

300

Experimental and simulated cooling curves at various locations for Case F (hLe = 0.00300 cal/s/cm2/C, k~ = 0.14
cal/slcm/C}

Numerical simulation of solidification: F. J. Bradley and M. Samonds

Recently, S a m o n d s et al. 48 have followed the source
term a p p r o a c h described in this paper to couple a micromodel for ductile iron solidification to the ProCAST*" finite e l e m e n t program via the heat generation
function in the thermal load v e c t o r and t h e r e b y simulate the release o f latent heat during the solidification
of T-plate shrinkage test castings.

9
10

II
Summary
Source term and e n t h a l p y - b a s e d a p p r o a c h e s to handling latent heat have been applied in the numerical
simulation o f the solidification o f a c o m m e r c i a l neareutectic ductile iron thermal analysis s p e c i m e n . In the
source term a p p r o a c h , lumped s y s t e m analysis of cooling curve data is used to derive explicit t i m e - d e p e n d e n t
functions for the rate o f heat generation per unit volume during solidification. In the enthalpy a p p r o a c h .
empirical " p s e u d o - l e v e r r u l e " and " r u l e o f mixtures/universal c u r v e " t e m p e r a t u r e - d e p e n d e n t fraction solid models are used to derive e n t h a l p y - t e m p e r ature relationships for handling latent heat. O f the six
cases c o n s i d e r e d , simulation o f undercooling and recalescence, characteristic features o f near-eutectic
ductile iron cooling curves, was observed only for Cases
A and B, for which thermal a n a l y s i s - d e r i v e d heat generation functions were used to handle latent heat. The
results o f the numerical simulation o f the thermal analysis s p e c i m e n p r e s e n t e d here serve as a practically
useful b e n c h m a r k for evaluating algorithms for handling the evolution o f latent heat o f eutectic alloys
w h o s e solidification b e h a v i o r is typically c h a r a c t e r i z e d
by undercooling and r e c a l e s c e n c e .

12
13
14

15
16
17
18
19

20

6th International Conference on Numerical Methods in ThermalProblems, ed. R. W. Lewis and K. Morgan, Pineridge Press.

Acknowledgments

2I

The support o f National Science Foundation Grant Nos.

DDM-8910418 and DDM-9102682; Grede. N e e n a h , and
John Deere foundries; and Universal Energy S y s t e m s
is gratefully a c k n o w l e d g e d .

22

References
I
2

3
4
5
6

7
8

Rappaz, M, Modeling of microstructure formation in solidification processes. Internat. Materials Roy. 1989.34, 93-123
Comini, G., Del Guidice, S.. Lewis. R. W., and Zienkiewicz,
O. C, Finite element solution of nonlinear heat conduction
problems with special reference to phase change. Imernat. J.
Namer. Methods Engrg. 1974, 8, 613-624
Rolph, W. D. and Bathe, K. J. An efficient algorithm lor analysis of nonlinear heat transfer with phase change, lnternat. J.
Namer. Methods Engrt,. 1982, 18, 119-134
Clyne. T. W. The use of heat flow modeling to explore solidification phenomena. Metatlurg. Trans, B 1982 13B, 471-478
Roose, J. and Storrer, O. Modelization of phase changes by
fictitious heat flow Internut. J. Namer. Methods Engrg. 1984,
20, 217-225
Thomas, B. G., Samarasekera, I. V., and Brimacombe. J. K.
Comparison of numerical modeling techniques for complex,
two-dimensional, transient heat-conduction problems. Metallure. Trans. B 1984, 15B, 307-318
Samonds, M., Morgan, K., and Lewis, R. W. Finite element
modeling of solidification in sand castings employing an implicit-explicitalgorithm. AppL Matin. Modelling 1985,9, 170-174
Dantzig, J. A. and Lu, S. C. Modeling of heat flow in sand

castings. 1: The boundary curvature method. Metallurg. Trans.

B 1985. laB, 195-202
Beffel, M. J., Wilkes, J. O., and Pehlke, R. D. Finite element
simulation of casting processes, AFS Trans. 1986, 94, 757-764
Swaminathan. C. R. and Voller, V. R. A general numerical
methodology for modeling latent heat evolution during solidification of binary alloys. Materials Processing in the Computer
Age. ed. V. R. Voller, M. S. Stachowicz, and B. G. Thomas.
TMS. New Orleans. LA, 1991, pp. 259-271
Voller. V. R., Swaminatban, C. R.. and Thomas, B. G. Fixed
grid techniques for phase change problems: A review, Internat.
J. Namer. Methods Engrg. 1990, 30, 875-898
Morgan, K., Lewis, R. W., and Zienkiewicz, O. C. An improved algorithm for heat conduction problems with phase
change, hJternat. J. Namer. Methods Engrg. 1987.12, 1191-1195
Lewis. R. W. and Roberts, P. M. Finite element simulation of
solidification problems. Appl. Sei. Res. 1987, 44, 61-92
Bennon, W. D, and Incropera, F. P. A continuum model for
momentum, heat, and species transport in binary solid-liquid
phase change systems. 11: Application to solidification in a
rectangular cavity. Internat. J. Heat Mass Transfer 1987.30,
2171-2187
Beckerman, C. and Viskanta. R. Double-diffusive convection
during dendritic solidification of a binary mixture. PhysicoChemical Hydrodynamics 1988, 10, 195-213
Salcudean, M. and Abdullah, Z. On the numerical modeling of
heat transfer during solidification processes. Internat. J. Namer. Methods Engrg. 1988, 28, 445-473
Voller, V. R.. Brent, A. D., and Prakash. C. The modelling of
heat. mass. and solute transport in solidification systems./nternat. J. Heat Transfer 1989, 32, 1719-1731
Dantzig, J. A. Modeling liquid-solid phase changes with melt
convection, lnternat, d. Namer. Methods Eagrg. 1989. 28,
1769-1785
Lewis, R. W. Advances in finite element simulation of solidification. Modelhtg of Casting. Welding. attd Advanced Solid~ificathm Processes, V. ed. M. Rappaz, M. R. Ozgu, and K.
W. Matin. TMS, Davos, Switzerland. 1990, pp. 3-14
Bradley, F. J., Cai, J., and Zmerli, M. H. Numerical simulation of the solidification of eutectic ductile iron casting alloys.

23
24
25

26
27
28

29

Swansea, UK. 1989, pp. 320-330

Bradley, F, J., Zmerli, M. H., and Cai, J. Finite element modeling of ductile iron solidification in thermal analysis cups and
T-plate shrinkage test castings. 4th International Conference
on the Physical Metalhtrgy of Cast Iron, Tokyo, September
1989. pp. 495-504
Shamsundar, N. and Rooz, E. Numerical methods for moving
boundary problems. Handbook of Numerical Heat Transfer.
ed. W. J. Minkowycz, E, M. Sparrow, G. E. Schneider, and
R. H. Plelcher. John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1988, pp.
747-786
Bradley. F. J. On micro-modeling of euteclic ductile iron solidification. Scripta Metallurgica Materiulia 1991.25, 2091-2096
Bradley, F. J. and Fung. C. A. Thermal analysis for shrinkage
prediction in commercial ductile iron castings. Canad. Metalhtr~t. Quart. 1991, 30(4), 251-260
Bradley. F. J. On simulating latent heat evolution during ductile iron solidification. Materials Processhtg in the Computer
Age, ed. V. R. Voller. M. S. Stachowicz, and B. G. Thomas.
TMS, New Orleans, LA, 1991, pp. 361-376
Ekpoom, U. and Heine, R. W. Thermal analysis (DHA)ofcast
iron. AFS Trans. 1981, 89, 27-38
Chen, I. G. and Stefanescu. D. M. Computer-aided differential
thermal analysis of spheroidal and compacted graphite cast
irons. AFS Trans. 1984, 92,947-964
Ableidinger. K. and Raebus. D. ThermoanalyticaI computer
control and correction of SG iron melts with constant feeding
conditions. British Founds. man 1986, August/September,
321-324
Sivula, A. J., Rantala, T., and Louvo, A. Possibility of controlling the quality of SG-irons by computerized thermal analysis. FOCOMP '86 Conference, Krakow, Poland, June 1986

Appl. Math. Modelling, 1992, Vol. 16, October

543

Numerical simulation of solidification: F. J. Bradley and M. Samonds

30
31

32

33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40

544

ProCAST'" User's Manual. Universal Energy Systems, Arnold, MD, 199I

Stafford, R. O., Klahs. J. W.. and Pinella. D. F. Numerical
methods for solidification simulation. Numerical Methods in
Thermal Problems, ed. R. W. Lewis, K. Morgan, and W. G.
Habashi. Pineridge Press, Montreal, 1987, pp. 62-83
Bradley, F. J. and Samonds, M. Issues in the numerical simulation of ductile iron solidification. TMS Symposium on N,merical Simulation of Casting Solidification in Automotive Applications. East Lansing, Michigan, May 1991
Davies, V. de L. Feeding range determination by numerically
computed heat distribution, AFS Cast Metals Rcs. J. 1975,
June. 33-44
Niyama, E,, Uchida, T., Morikawa, M., and Saito, S. A method
of shrinkage prediction and its application to steel castings.
49th International Foundry Cottgress. Chicago, 1982. pp. I- 12
Minakawa, S., Samarasekera. I. V., and Weinberg. F. Centerline porosity in plate castings. Metallnrg. Trans. B 1985,
16B, 823-829
Moosbrugger, J. C. and Berry. J. T. Calculation of feeding
range data for hypoeutectic A-357 alloy using FEM solidification model results. AFS Trans. 1986, 94, 373-380
Kubo, K. and PehLke.R, D. Mathematical modeling of porosity
formation in solidification. Metalhtrg. Trans. B 1985, 16B,
359-366
Poirier, D, R., Yeum, K., and Maples, A. L. A thermodynamic
prediction for microporosity formation in aluminum-rich AICu alloys. Metallurg. Trans. A 1987, 18A, 1979-1987
Comini, G., Del Giudice, S., and Sara, O. A conservative
algorithm for multidimensional conduction phase change. Internal. J. Numer. Methods Engrg. 1990, 30,697-709
Wetterfall, S. E., Fredriksson, H.. and Hillert, M. Solidifica-

Appl. Math. Modelling, 1992, Vol. 16, October

41
42
43
44

45

46
47
48

tion process of nodular cast iron. J. Iron and Steel Inst. 1972,
May, 323-333
Owadano, T., Yamada. K., and Torigoe, K. Quantitative metallographie study of the solidification of spheroidal graphite
east iron. Trans. Japan Inst. Metals 1977, 18, 871-878
Fredriksson, H. and Svcnssou. 1. Computer simulation of the
structure formed during solidification of cast iron. Mat, Res.
Sac'. Syrup. Proc, 1985, M, 273-284
Su, K., Ohnaka. I., Yamauchi. I.. and Fukusako. T, Computer
simulation of solidification of nodular cast iron. Mat. Res, Sac'.
Syrup. Proe. 1985, M, 181-189
Stefanescu. D. M. and Kanetkar, C. S. Computer modeling of
the solidification ofeutectic alloys: Comparison of various models
for eutectic growth of cast iron. State ~fthe Art o.fCompttter
Shmdation of Casting and Solidifieatioll Processes, ed. H.
Fredriksson. E-MRS, Strasbourgh, 1986, pp. 255-266
Castro, M.. Alexandre. P,. Lacaze, .I., and Lesoult. G. Microstruetures and solidification kinetics of cast irons: Experimental study and theoretical modeling of equiaxcd solidification of S.G. and grey cast iron. 4th International Conference
on the Physical Metallurgy ~f Cast Iron. Tokyo, 1989, pp.
433-440
Lesouh, G. Modeling the solidification of cast irons: State-ofthe-art and usefulness. 4th International ConJerence on the
Physical Metallurgy of Cast Iron. Tokyo, 1989, pp. 413-422
Rappaz, M., Richoz. J. D., and Thevoz, P. Modelling of solidification of nodular cast iron. Earomat 89. E-MRS, AachenRFA, November 1989. pp. I-6
Samonds, M. T., Waite. D. M.. and Banerjee, D. K. Finite
element simulation of mold filling, solidification, and feeding
of ductile iron castings. AFS Trans., 1992, 100