Professional Documents
Culture Documents
www.elsevier.com/locate/ijplas
Abstract
This paper presents a large strain thermoviscoplastic formulation for the analysis of the
solidi®cation process of spheroidal graphite (S.G.) cast iron in a green sand mould. This for-
mulation includes two dierent non-associate constitutive models in order to describe the
thermomechanical behaviour of each of such materials during the whole process. The perfor-
mance of these models is evaluated in the analysis of a solidi®cation test. # 2001 Elsevier
Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Cast iron and green sand constitutive behaviours; A. Phase transformation; A. Solidi®cation;
A. Thermomechanical processes; B. elastic-viscoplastic material
1. Introduction
In this context, the aim of this paper is to present a large strain thermoviscoplastic
formulation which includes microstructural liquid±solid and solid±solid phase-
change eects, incorporates volumetric expansions due to the metallurgical trans-
formations, deals with temperature-dependent hardening laws and describes the
hygrometric and damage phenomena experienced by the sand. In particular, the
thermomechanical formulation is presented in Section 2 while Sections 3 and 4
describe the S.G. cast iron and sand constitutive models, respectively. These
descriptions start with the choice of the viscoplastic and phase-change internal
variables with their respective evolution equations. Afterwards, a speci®c free energy
function intended to predict the material behaviour during the whole solidi®cation
and cooling process is proposed as a function of the Almansi strain tensor, the
internal variables and the temperature. This de®nition is an extension, considering
large strains, microstructural phase-changes, mixed response for the dierent phases
and damage eects, of the speci®c free energy function developed, used and partially
validated with experiments by Celentano et al. (1995) and Celentano (1997). At this
point, the standard procedures in thermodynamics allow to derive all the con-
stitutive equations involved in the formulation, namely the stress-strain law, the
entropy function, the tangent conjugate of the thermal dilatation tensor, the internal
heat source, the conjugate of the internal variables and the expression of the dis-
sipation. As a consequence of this proposed free energy function, it is possible to
de®ne the elastic contribution of the Almansi strain tensor and thus to recover the
additive decomposition of such tensor which, in turn, it is shown to be consistent
with a particular kinematic decomposition of the deformation gradient tensor. As
reported by Lubliner (1990), this approach is equivalent to other thermomechanical
theories that consider the kinematic decomposition and the speci®c free energy
function written in terms of the elastic part of a strain measure as starting points to
derive the constitutive equations of the formulation (Wriggers et al., 1989; Armero
and Simo, 1993; Levitas, 1998).
Solid±solid phase-transformations are very important processes that have been
extensively analysed by dierent researchers (see Fischer et al., 1996; Levitas, 1998;
Levitas et al., 1998; Cherkaoui et al., 1998 and references therein) with particular
emphasis to martensitic phase transitions. Some complex aspects of these phenom-
ena, such as transformation-induced plasticity, nucleation criterion, interface propa-
gation, nucleus nondissappearance conditions and displacements discontinuities, have
been recently taken into account in the development of dierent thermomechanical
formulations (see e.g. Levitas, 1998). In the present work, however, a more simpler
model is adopted due to the fact that low temperatures rates are considered during the
solid-solid phase-change and, therefore, it can be modelled by means of nucleation
and growth laws together with a transformation-induced plasticity equation already
used by Hamata (1992) and Celentano (1997) for ferritic S.G. cast iron.
The motivation to include large deformation concepts in this proposed formula-
tion is based on the invalidity in a strict sense of the in®nitesimal strain assumption
made by some existing models (Celentano et al., 1996, 1999) that may occur when
describing the quasi-incompressible material behaviour in the liquid phase or in the
mushy zone at high temperatures.
D.J. Celentano / International Journal of Plasticity 17 (2001) 1623±1658 1625
2. Thermomechanical formulation
J 0 1
together with appropriate boundary and initial conditions and the constitutive rela-
tions given by: @ =@e is the Cauchy stress tensor, @ =@T is the speci®c
entropy function, c T@2 =@T2 is the tangent speci®c heat capacity, q krT is
the heat ¯ux vector de®ned according to the Fourier law (k being the conductivity
tensor), b @2 =@e@T @=@T is the tangent conjugate of the thermal dilata-
tion tensor, rint 10 T@qk =@T qk Dk =Dt is the speci®c internal heat source
and Dint qk Dk =Dt is the internal dissipation where qk 0 @ =@k are the con-
jugate variables of k . According to the nature of each internal variable, the symbols
* and D
=Dt
appearing in the previous expressions respectively indicate an appro-
priate multiplication and a time derivative satisfying the principle of material frame-
indierence (Malvern, 1969). Further, r is the spatial gradient operator, bf is the
speci®c body force, the superposed dot indicates time derivative, r is the speci®c heat
source, u is the displacement vector, J > 0 is the determinant of the deformation
gradient tensor F(F 1 1 ! u, with 1 being the unity tensor) and d is the rate-
:
of-deformation tensor (d 1=2
r v v r, where v u is the velocity vector).
Instead of Eq. (4), an additional more restrictive dissipative assumption reads: q
rT50 and Dint 50 (see Coleman and Gurtin, 1967). The ®rst condition is auto-
matically ful®lled for a semi-positive de®nite conductivity tensor (in the isotropic con-
text assumed in this work, this condition leads to a non-negative conductivity
coecient) while the second imposes restrictions over the constitutive model de®nition.
It is seen that the de®nition of and consequently of Dk =Dt are essentials fea-
tures of the formulation in order to describe the thermomechanical/microstructural
behaviour of the materials involved in the solidi®cation process. To this end, the
following split is proposed: nint nvp pc vp pc
int nint , where nint and nint refer to the number
D.J. Celentano / International Journal of Plasticity 17 (2001) 1623±1658 1627
S.G. cast iron (usually called ductile or nodular iron) has become an engineering
material of major importance since this ternary alloy has many of the mechanical
advantages of steel with the processing economies of cast iron. In this type of cast
iron, the adding of magnesium causes the graphite ¯akes to form in shape of spheres
frequently called spherulites. In spite of decades of study, not all the kinetic
mechanisms involved in the S.G. cast iron solidi®cation are actually known (Flem-
ings, 1974). However, several models have been recently proposed in order to predict
the microstructure formation in castings (see Banerjee and Stefanescu, 1991; Chang
et al., 1991; Goettsch and Dantzig, 1994; Celentano and Cruchaga, 1999; Onsùien et
al., 1999 and references therein).
In a hypoeutectic S.G. cast iron, liquid-solid and solid-solid phase-changes take
place during solidi®cation and cooling. As the temperature of the melt decreases
below the liquidus temperature, primary austenite dendrites are formed. Then, gra-
phite and cementite eutectic grains are developed through nucleation and growth as
the respective eutectic temperatures are reached. The solid-solid or eutectoid trans-
formation is also a competitive growth process consisting of two reactions: auste-
nite-ferrite and austenite-pearlite. Below the stable eutectoid temperature, the ferrite
begins to form. If the transformation has not been completed before the metastable
eutectoid temperature is attained, pearlite starts to form and grows competitively
with ferrite. Therefore, the following relation is assumed to hold:
1628 D.J. Celentano / International Journal of Plasticity 17 (2001) 1623±1658
fl fa fg fc ff fp 1 5
fl fa fg fc 1 6
whereas for the solid±solid phase change (fl 0, fg cte, i.e. neglecting secondary
and eutectoid graphite precipitations and fc cte) it becomes:
fa ff fp 1 fg fc 7
such that only the variable fractions for the respective phase-changes are written on
the left-hand side of these two last expressions. In this context, the full description of
the material behaviour considering the particular response of these constituents in a
uni®ed formulation using standard concepts of the mixing theory is the main feature
of the present constitutive model. Thus, any mixed variable jmx of this composite
material can be de®ned by weighting the dierent contributions of each constituent
or component as:
jmx fl jl fa ja fg jg fc jc ff jf fp jp 8
As usual, in this mixing approach jmx and, therefore, dierent densities can
be considered for each constituent. The density at the initial con®guration is also
de®ned by Eq. (8) but taking the initial volumetric fractions in its calculation.
Moreover, the computation of jcp
cp l; a; c; f; p could be carried out by con-
sidering additional mass balances between the dierent constituents. Note, however,
that in the constitutive equations described below there is no need to compute jcp as
they may only depend on which is, in fact, obtained through Eq. (1).
It should be mentioned that this approach is a generalization of that de®ned in
mixed form in terms of the following macroscopic phases (Celentano, 1997): 1)
liquid, 2) mushy zone (liquid+austenite+graphite+cementite), 3) solid (austeni-
te+graphite+cementite), 4) (austenite+graphite+cementite+ferrite+pearlite) and
5) solid (graphite+cementite+ferrite+pearlite).
In what follows any phase-change variable denoted as pc will be decomposed as:
where the ``a, g, c'' and ``f, p'' terms are respectively related to the liquid±solid and
solid±solid phase-changes.
D.J. Celentano / International Journal of Plasticity 17 (2001) 1623±1658 1629
A possible choice for the viscoplastic internal variables is: 1 evp , 2 #vp ,
vp vp
3 , 4 nint 4 with q1 , q2 C , q3 Kvp , q4 T where evp is the
vp vp
Almansi viscoplastic strain tensor, #vp is the viscoplastic isotropic hardening vari-
able, vp is the viscoplastic kinematic hardening tensor, vp is the viscoplastic yield
entropy, J is the Kirchho stress tensor, Cvp is the viscoplastic isotropic hard-
ening function and Kvp is the back stress tensor. This choice is an adaptation to the
present viscoplastic context of that considered by Celentano et al. (1999) for elasto-
plasticity. The corresponding evolution equations, assuming k 1 and
gk @=@qk , are de®ned as:
@
Lv
evp
10:1
@
: @
#vp vp
10:2
@C
@
Lv
vp
10:3
@Kvp
: @
& vp
10:4
@T
where the symbol Lv denotes the well-known Lie derivative (Marsden and Hughes,
1983). Note that Eq. (10.1) de®nes in fact the evolution of the viscoplastic rate-of-
deformation tensor dvp Lv
evp . The evolution equation for vp originally proposed
within a thermoplasticity framework as consistent with the principle of maximum
plastic dissipation (Armero and Simo, 1993) and extensively used in solidi®cation
problems (Celentano et al., 1996, 1999), is also adopted here.
The viscoplastic potential is assumed to be given by (Hamata, 1992; Celentano,
1997):
where tp jmx and pc are the thermoviscoplastic and phase-change parts of ,
respectively. The ®rst term accounts for classical viscoplastic phenomena and is
written in mixed form through Eq. (8). The phase-change term describes the solid±
solid phase transformation viscoplasticity eect during the ferrite and pearlite
transformations occuring in the macroscopic phase 4).
For each component, tp jcp
cp l; a; g; c; f; p is written as:
1nv jcp
Fjcp
tp jcp n j
12
1 nv jcp Kv jcp v cp
1630 D.J. Celentano / International Journal of Plasticity 17 (2001) 1623±1658
such that Kv jcp Kv jcp
T is the viscosity, nv jcp nv jcp
T is a material parameter, hi
denotes de MacAuley symbol and Fjcp is the von Mises temperature-dependent yield
function de®ned as:
p
Fjcp 3J2k Cjcp
13
where J2K 1=2 Kvp 0 : Kvp 0 is the second invariant of the deviatoric tensor
0 Kvp 0 and Cjcp Cjcp
Cvp ; T is the total hardening function given by:
with Cth jcp Cth jcp
T being thermal hardening function which, in absence of visco-
plastic eects, establishes the elastic domain for a given temperature. It should be
noted that, in general, Cth jcp could be dierent for each component.
As stated above, the phase change term pc is de®ned according to Eq. (9) where a
simpler model, originally validated with experiments by Hamata (1992) for the aus-
tenite-ferrite transformation, is considered choosing cp jph 0
ph a; g; c while the
solid-solid phase-change contribution pc jph
ph f; p takes the form:
p1nt jph
J2K :
pc jph nt f ph
15
1 nt jph Kt jph
where, once more, the viscosity Kt jph and the material parameter nt jph characterize
the coupled solid viscous behaviour during the ferrite and pearlite transformations.
Note that Eq. (15), which leads to a non associate constitutive model, states that this
phase transformation is considered as a perfect viscoplastic eect that only takes
place when fph
ph f; p evolves and, moreover, it aects the evolution laws for evp
and vp given by Eqs. (10.1) and (10.3), respectively. Further, the evolution of evp
due to the solid-solid phase-change is, essentially, very similar to dierent simple
transformation-induced plasticity models reviewed by Fischer et al. (1996), i.e. such
evolution is proportional to the deviatoric stress plus the rate of the volumetric
fraction.
enveloped within a sphere for the dendritic grains. Although dierent microstructure
models for S.G. cast iron have been proposed taking into account particular kinetic
aspects occuring during the solidi®cation and cooling process (Banerjee and Stefa-
nescu, 1991; Chang et al., 1991), a simpler microstructure model to describe both the
liquid±solid and solid±solid phase-changes is considered in this work. This model
includes primary austenite dendrites formation, nucleation and growth laws for the
graphite eutectic, cementite eutectic, ferrite and pearlite fractions.
Considering that during the austenite solidi®cation the carbon diuses very
rapidly in iron, the austenite volumetric fraction can be directly determined by the
inverse lever rule as (Goettsch and Dantzig, 1994):
1 T Tl
fa
16
1 k0 T T
0
:
subject to the condition f a 50, where k0 k0 (%Si) is the equilibrium distribution
coecient which is the relationship between the slope of the liquidus and solidus
curves of the Fe-C diagram, Tl Tl (%C, %Si) is the liquidus temperature, T
0
T
0 (%C, %Si) is the temperature corresponding to the intersection of the liquidus
and solidus temperature curves and %C and %Si denote the carbon and silicon
contents, respectively. It is important to mention that the evolution of fa directly
derived from Eq. (16) does not take into account neither the in¯uence of the cooling
rate nor the remelting eect (Celentano and Cruchaga, 1999).
The eutectic fractions fg and fc can be determined through a nucleation and
growth laws. Assuming a quasi-instantaneous nucleation and a subsequent spherical
growth, the expression for such fractions is (Goettsch and Dantzig, 1994):
4
fph Njph R3 jph
17
3
where Njph is the grain density and Rjph is the grain size
ph g; c. These variables
are respectively obtained with the nucleation and growth models brie¯y presented
below. For simplicity, the grain impingement eect is not included in Eq. (17) (for
more details, see Chang et al., 1991).
The following nucleation law is adopted in the present work:
:
nj 1 D : E
N jph Ajph njph Tjph T ph T
18
where Ajph and njph
ph g; c are nucleation parameters which depend on %C, %Si
and the inoculant content. In Eq. (18), Tg and Tc denote the graphite (stable) and
cementite (metastable) eutectic temperatures, respectively, which also depend on
%C and %Si. It is well-known that the major eect of silicon is to widen the range
Tg Tc (Flemings, 1974). As this range increases, the probability of forming gra-
phite eutectic rather than a cementite eutectic is also increased. Hence, %Si pro-
motes the formation of graphite. Moreover, Eq. (18) clearly states that the grain
1632 D.J. Celentano / International Journal of Plasticity 17 (2001) 1623±1658
density is constrained
to increase
and this fact is only possible for positive under-
coolings (indicated by Tjph T ) and negative cooling rates. Between Tg and Tc only
the graphite eutectic may nucleate while below Tc the cementite eutectic may also
nucleate. As can be seen, distinct nucleation rates are obtained for graphite and
cementite eutectics due to the dierences in the respective undercoolings.
The grain size evolution equation is de®ned as:
:
mj
Rjph Bjph Tjph T ph
19
where Bjph and mjph (ph g; c) are growth parameters. Once again, note that in the
temperature range Tg Tc only the graphite eutectic evolution takes place and,
therefore, Tc can be considered as the transition temperature for the solidi®cation of
gray to white iron. Further, Bjg 1=10Bjc is chosen in order to represent the
experimental fact showing that the growth rate of graphite is about 1=10 of that of
cementite for equal respective undercoolings (Flemings, 1974). According to Eq. (6),
the liquid-solid phase-change ends once fl 0, i.e. fa fg fc 1.
In the solid-solid phase-change, the modelling of ferrite and pearlite can be also
described by a law similar to Eq. (17) where, in this case, ph f; p. For the ferrite
transformation, in particular, the assumptions leading to this expression can be
found in Chang et al. (1991). It should be noted that for low temperature rates
(approximately less than 0.2 C) a simpli®ed model of ferrite, based on the Avrami±
Johnson±Mehl equation, can be considered (Hamata, 1992). Moreover, an Avrami
equation can be also used to compute the fraction of pearlite (Chang et al., 1991).
However, for simplicity, the uni®ed expression given by Eq. (17) is retained.
The nucleation and growth laws for the ferrite and pearlite transformation are
assumed to be respectively given by expressions similar to Eqs. (18) and (19) written,
for these cases, in terms of the ferrite and pearlite undercoolings and using particular
nucleation and growth parameters
ph f; p. These undercoolings are de®ned with
the ferrite (stable) eutectoid temperature Tf and the pearlite (metastable) eutectoid
temperature Tp . It should be mentioned that other nucleation and growth laws have
been proposed in the literature where the more relevant are a diusion-controlled
growth-rate equation for the ferrite (Chang et al., 1991) and exponential laws based
on the eutectoid undercooling for the nucleation and growth of pearlite (Goettsch
and Dantzig, 1994). Finally, the solid±solid phase-change ®nishes, as stated by Eq.
(7), when fa 0, that is ff fp 1 fg fc .
where te jmx ; tp jmx and pc are the thermoelastic, thermoviscoplastic and phase-
change parts of . This partially coupled additive form of is assumed to describe
the isotropic material behaviour in all the above mentioned macroscopic phases
D.J. Celentano / International Journal of Plasticity 17 (2001) 1623±1658 1633
present in the solidi®cation process. In all the equations to be described below, the
subscript 0 indicates the value of the variables at the initial con®guration and the
superscript s refers to secant thermomechanical properties measured at the spatial
con®guration with respect to the reference temperature Tref . Additionally, e0 0 is
considered.
The thermoelastic part te jcp
cp l; a; g; c; f; p of each component is:
1 1
te jcp
e evp : Cs jcp :
e evp
e evp : Cs jcp : eth jcp
20 0
1
c jcp c0 jcp
e evp : 0 0
T T0 0 jcp
21
0
where Cs jcp Cs jcp
T is the secant elastic isotropic constitutive tensor and eth jcp is
the Almansi thermal strain tensor given by:
1h 2=3 i
eth jcp 1 1 ath jcp 1
22
2
where ath jcp sth jcp
T Tref sth0 jcp
T0 Tref with sth jcp sth jcp
T being the
secant volumetric thermal dilatation coecient. Note that if ath jcp 1, eth jcp
ath jcp =31 which is, in fact, the classical expression for the in®nitesimal thermal strain
tensor. The term c jcp is:
T
c jcp Ac jcp d
23
Tref
where Ac jcp is a function that can be de®ned in terms of the secant speci®c heat
capacity cs jcp cs jcp
T (Celentano et al., 1996).
As usual, the secant elastic isotropic constitutive tensor can be decomposed into
its deviatoric and volumetric parts (Malvern, 1969). According to Celentano et al.
(1996), a particular de®nition of Cs jl is adopted here which consists of neglecting its
deviatoric contribution assuming, therefore, a purely elastic volumetric behaviour
for this phase.
The thermoviscoplastic part of is
cp l; a; g; c; f; p:
1 1 1
tp jcp hC jcp
#vp 2 hK jcp vp : vp T& vp
24
20 20 0
where hC jcp hC jcp
T and hK jcp hK jcp
T are the viscoplastic isotropic and kine-
matic hardening moduli, respectively.
The phase-change part of is given by Eq. (9) assuming similar expressions for
the liquid-solid and solid±solid phase-changes, that is
ph a; g; c; f; p:
1634 D.J. Celentano / International Journal of Plasticity 17 (2001) 1623±1658
with
1
jph
e evp : Cs jph : epc jph
27
0
where Ls jph Ls jph
T is the secant speci®c latent heat and epc jph is the Almansi
phase-change strain tensor both associated to the volumetric fraction fph . This
phase-change strain tensor is similarly de®ned as the Almansi thermal strain tensor
[Eq. (22)] in the form:
1h 2=3 i 2=3
epc jph 1 1 apc jph 1 ath jph 1
28
2
where apc jph spc jph fph and spc jph spc jph
T is the secant phase-change volumetric
deformation. As it can be seen, Eqs. (26) and (27) account for latent heat release and
phase-change volumetric deformation, respectively (see Flemings, 1974, for a further
discussion on the physical aspects of these phenomena).
The de®nition of the dierent contributions of given by Eqs. (21), (24) and (27)
consider the density at the initial con®guration 0 instead of its current value . This
simpli®cation is consistent with the Doyle±Ericksen approach (1956) commented in
Section 2. In the constitutive equations, however, any density change is given by J.
Moreover, as mentioned above, the present de®nition of is an extension, con-
sidering large strains, microstructural phase-changes and mixed response, of the
speci®c free energy function proposed and used by Celentano et al. (1999).
It should be noted that this large strain context allows to predict the external
(surface) shrinkage occuring in some casting situations. A simple internal shrinkage
prediction criterion due to liquid contraction (Celentano, 1998a) could be included
in Eq. (27) of the present formulation but, for simplicity, is not considered in this
work.
The proposed de®nition of allows the derivation of all the constitutive equations
and the internal dissipation described in Section 2. Some details are discussed below.
With the considerations given above, the Cauchy stress tensor is given by:
1
te jcp Cs jcp : e evp eth jcp
30
J
and the phase-change term ph a; g; c; f; p is once more splitted as in Eq. (9) with:
1 s
pc jph C j : epc jph
31
J ph
1990; Baldoni and Rajagopal, 1997) consisting of adding the term 2d ( being the
dynamic viscosity of the ¯uid) to the expression given by Eq. (29) for cp l would
allow to include this eect. In this context, the resulting viscous term 2d : d should
be added to the internal dissipation equation. For simplicity, however, this viscosity
eect is not considered in the ¯uid phase throughout this work.
Further, the expressions for the speci®c entropy function, the tangent speci®c heat
capacity, the tangent conjugate of the thermal dilatation tensor, the internal heat
source and the conjugate of the internal variables (note that the relations for and T
are identically ful®lled) can be straightforwardly derived considering the de®nition
of given above. Such expressions can be found in Box 1
1 @Cs jcp 1
te jcp
e evp : :
e evp
e evp : Cs jcp : eth T jcp 1
20 @T 0
1 @Cs jcp th
e evp : e jcp Ac jcp
0 @T
1 @hC jcp vp 2 1 @hK jcp vp vp 1 vp
tp jcp
# : &
20 @T 20 @T 0
s
@Ls jph 1 @C j ph 1
pc jph fph
e evp : : epc jph
e evp : Cs jph : epc
T jph 1
@T 0 @T 0
where
1 1=3 @s jcp
eth
T jcp 1 ath jcp asth jcp th
T Tref
3 @T
and
s h 2=3 i th
1 1=3 @pc jph j 2=3
epc
T jph 1 apc jph 1 ath jph fph 1 1 apc jph eT jph
3 @T
Box 1 (continued)
with
cp l; a; g; c; f; p and ph a; g; c; f; p
T @2 hC jcp vp 2 T @2 hk jcp vp vp
ctp jcp
# :
20 @2 T 20 @2 T
te jmx pc
1 1 @Cs jcp
te jcp Cs jcp : eth
T jcp 1 : e evp eth jcp
J J @T
1 @Cs jph pc 1
pc jph : e jph Cs jph : epc
T jph 1
J @T J
Box 1 (continued)
"
@Ls jph T @Cs jph pc
rpc
int jph T Ls jph
e evp : : ef jph 1
@T 0 @T
1
e evp : Cs jph : epc
f jph 1
0
#
T vp @epc
f jph
s
:
e e : C jph : 1 f ph for ph a; g; c; f; p
0 @T
and
1 1=3
epc
f jph 1 apcjph spc jph
3
Cvp Cvp vp vp
tp jmx where Ctp jcp hC jcp # for cp l; a; g; c; f; p
Kvp Kvp vp
tp jmx where Ktp jcp hK jcp vp for cp l; a; g; c; f; p
It has been shown (Celentano et al., 1996, 1999) that the condition Dvp int 50 is
satis®ed if two sucient conditions related to the isotropic hardening behaviour and
the thermal softening eect are assumed: (i) hC 50 and (ii) @Cth jcp =@T50
cp l; a; g; c; f; p. Knowing that the ®rst term in Eq. (33) (with Ls jph 50
ph a; g; c; f; p) is in general more relevant that the second one in many casting
situations, the ful®llment of the condition Dvp pc
int Dint 50 can be guaranteed.
Moreover, it should be noted that the second term of Eq. (33) contains a trans-
formation (phase-change) work since it can be written, with the help of Eq. (30), as:
1=3 s
J=3 te jph 1=JCs jph : eth jph : 1 apc jph pc jph 1, where the product of mean ther-
moelastic stress and phase-change volumetric deformation for each phase can be
seen. A similar expression of this conjugate variable to fph using dierent state vari-
ables in the speci®c free energy de®nition has been reported by Levitas (1998) for
martensitic and other transformations.
Finally, a mixed form for the conductivity coecient is assumed, i.e. k kjmx ,
such that kjcp 50
cp l; a; g; c; f; p in order to verify the thermal dissipation men-
tioned in Section 2.
Green sand, as usually prepared and used in foundries, is a ®ne porous mixture of
approximately 87 wt.% of silica grains, 7 wt.% of clay, 3 wt.% of carbon black and
3 wt.% of free water. Thus,
fm fv 1 34
Once more, the speci®c free energy function is additively decomposed into a
thermoelastic, thermoplastic and hygrometric contributions. Moreover, a non
associate form of the viscoplastic potential , assumed to be independent on the
hygrometric eect, is considered for the viscoplastic evolution equations (Azzouz,
1995; Celentano, 1997). For simplicity, the eect of the free water is neglected in the
de®nition of te and tp and it is only considered in pc . As no mixing law is applied
to those terms, the variations of the thermomechanical properties with fw are simply
taken into account by means of temperature-dependent laws.
@
Lv
evp
35:1
@
: @
dvp vp
35:2
@Y
: @
& vp
35:3
@T
where, as shown below, both isotropic and kinematic hardening eects are not
de®ned by evolution laws because they can be considered as a function of and dvp .
The function is de®ned as:
hF in v
36
Kv
such that Kv Kv
T is the viscosity, nv nv
T is a material parameter and F is the
yield function given by:
F f1 I21 f2 J2 f3 I1 C 37
where I1 tr
(tr being the trace symbol), J2 1=2 0 : 0 is the second invariant of
the deviatoric tensor 0 , f1 12 K
1 dvp 2 , f2 3=G
1 dvp 2 , f3 hK =
1 dvp (K,
G and hK being the bulk, shear and kinematic hardening moduli, respectively) and
C C
dvp ; T is the total hardening function given by:
with Cth Cth
T being the thermal hardening function and hC is the isotropic hard-
ening modulus. Note that for small values of Kv , i.e. Kv ! 0, the rate-independent
plasticity is directly recovered. This expression of F corresponds to an ellipsoid in
the Westergaard stress-space. Conversely to a classical Drucker±Prager criterion,
this yield function is able to describe the inelastic behaviour which is induced by the
degradation of the material observed in the case of loadings close to the hydrostatic
pressure. The term linearly dependent on I1 introduces a non-symmetric elastic
domain in tension and compression (Azzouz, 1995).
The viscoplastic potential is:
F hd Yvp 39
: H
fw fw0 D : E
fw T
40
Tv T0
where H is the Heaviside function and Tv is the water vaporization temperature. The
irreversible evolution of fw can clearly be noted in this expression.
As mentioned above, the proposed speci®c free energy function that governs the
isotropic material behaviour during the process is written as:
te tp pc 41
1 1
te
e evp :
1 dvp Cs :
e evp
e evp :
1 dvp Cs : eth
20 0
1
c c0
e evp : 0 0
T T0 0
42
0
which is, in fact, similar to Eq. (21) for a single-component material taking into
account the degradation factor
1 dvp in the elastic constitutive tensor.
1642 D.J. Celentano / International Journal of Plasticity 17 (2001) 1623±1658
1
tp T& vp
43
0
pc L L0 44
with
L Ls fw 45
1
e evp :
1 dvp Cs : epc
46
0
where the expressions of the variables involved correspond to those presented above
for a single-component material. As in the previous constitutive model, Eqs. (45)
and (46) include the latent heat release and hygrometric volumetric deformation,
respectively. In this case, note that the initial hygrometric eect is explicitly con-
sidered in Eq. (44) and, therefore, is not included in the initial stress of Eq. (42).
Further, the consideration of 0 in Eqs. (42), (43) and (46) is based on the same
arguments stated above for the S.G. cast iron model.
Once more, as shown below, with the proposed de®nition of it is possible to
obtain all the constitutive equations and the internal dissipation corresponding to
this model.
Making use of the proposed speci®c free energy function the Cauchy stress tensor
results:
1
1 dvp Cs : e evp eth epc 0
47
J
where the thermoelastic and hygrometric terms can easily be identi®ed and, further,
the additive decomposition of the Almansi strain tensor is apparent, that is, ee
e evp eth epc derived from F Fe Fp Fth Fpc taking into account the same
arguments commented for the S.G. cast iron described above. Once again, Eq. (47)
is only valid for small elastic strains and, therefore, this restriction is assumed in the
deformation of the sand during the casting process.
The expressions for the speci®c entropy function, the tangent speci®c heat capa-
city, the tangent conjugate of the thermal dilatation tensor, the internal heat source
and the conjugate of the internal variables can be found in Box 2.
D.J. Celentano / International Journal of Plasticity 17 (2001) 1623±1658 1643
with
1 @Cs 1
te
e evp :
1 dvp :
e evp
e evp :
1 dvp Cs : eth
T1
20 @T 0
1 @Cs th
e evp :
1 dvp : e Ac
0 @T
1
tp & vp
0
@Ls 1 @Cs pc 1
pc fw
e evp :
1 dvp : e
e evp :
1 dvp Cs : epc
T1
@T 0 @T 0
where
1 1=3 @s
eth
T
1 ath sth th
T Tref
3 @T
and
s h 2=3 i
1 1=3 @pc
epc
T 1 apc
1 ath fw 1 1 apc eth
T
3 @T
with
1 @2 C s 2T @Cs
cte
e evp :
1 dvp :
e evp
e evp :
1 dvp
20 @T2 0 @T
T @eth T @2 Cs
: eth
T1
e evp :
1 dvp Cs T 1
e evp :
1 dvp
0 @T 0 @T2
@cs
: eth cs
T Tref
@T
Box 2 (continued)
ctp 0
@2 L s T @2 Cs pc 2T @Cs
cpc T fw
e evp :
1 dvp :e
e evp :
1 dvp
@T 0 @T2 0 @T
T @epc
: epc
T1
e evp :
1 dvp Cs : T
1
0 @T
te pc
with
1 1 @Cs
te
1 dvp Cs : eth
T1
1 dvp : e evp eth
J J @T
1 @Cs pc 1 s pc
pc
1 dvp : e C : eT 1
J @T J
1
rvp
int
T : Lv
evp
0
@Ls T @Cs pc 1
rpc
int T Ls
e evp :
1 dvp : e 1
e evp
@T 0 @T f 0
pc
T s @ef
:
:
1 dvp Cs : epc
f 1
e evp :
1 vp
d C : 1 fw
0 @T
and
1 1=3 s
epc
f 1 apc pc
3
which clearly shows the viscoplastic and hygrometric contributions. Similar con-
siderations to those commented in Section 3.5 are also valid for the ful®llment of
this dissipation inequality and the transformation work included in the conjugate
variable to fw .
This section brie¯y describes the ®nite element equations derived from the pro-
posed thermomechanical/microstructural formulation presented above and, further,
some speci®c details of the solution strategy followed to solve the resulting coupled
system of discretized equations.
Assuming standard spatial interpolations for the displacement and temperature
®elds and following the typical procedures within the ®nite element context (Zien-
kiewicz and Taylor, 1989), the global discretized thermomechanical equations (also
including microstructural eects) can be written in matrix form for a certain time t
as:
RU FU Ff MU F 0
: :
RT FT CT KT Lint GU 0
49
where RU and RT are the mechanical and thermal residual vectors, respectively.
Moreover, FU is the external force vector, Ff is the mechanical contact vector, M is
the mass matrix, U is the nodal displacement vector, F denotes the internal force
vector, FT is the external heat ¯ux vector, C is the capacity matrix, T is the nodal
temperature vector, K is the conductivity matrix, Lint is the internal heat ¯ux vector
(which can be decomposed into Lint Lvp pc
int Lint according to the de®nition of rint )
and G is the thermoelastic coupling matrix. The element expressions of these matri-
ces and vectors are very similar to those derived by Celentano et al. (1996) in an
in®nitesimal context using dierent material constitutive models. Nevertheless, the
extension of such expressions to the formulation presented in this work can be
straightforwardly performed.
The integration of the terms containing time derivatives of U and T in system (49)
is carried out with the Newmark method and the generalized mid-point rule algo-
rithm, respectively (Zienkiewicz and Taylor, 1989). The latter has been also used to
1646 D.J. Celentano / International Journal of Plasticity 17 (2001) 1623±1658
integrate all the rate equations involved in the S.G. cast iron and green sand models
presented above. Note that in this phenomenological approach the time integration
of both the viscoplastic and phase-change internal evolution laws is performed at the
same integration points.
A detailed description of the mechanical and thermal boundary conditions is also
reported by Celentano et al. (1996). It is important to remark, however, the con-
sideration of a gap and/or pressure dependent heat transfer coecient between the
casting and the mould. This coupling eect can be an extremely important fact in
many casting simulations.
The numerical solution of system (49) is achieved using a staggered scheme con-
sidering an improved isothermal split (Celentano et al., 1999). In this context, dif-
ferent ways to solve the mechanical and thermal problems (given by RU and RT ,
respectively) are available. In this work, in particular, the well-known total Lagran-
gean approach under isothermal conditions has been considered for the mechanical
problem while the solution of the thermal problem is done at the spatial con®gura-
tion assuming ®xed elastic con®gurations for each component of the S.G. cast iron
and the sand. This methodology is stable and preserves the coupling degree of the
formulation, i.e., the evaluation of the coupling terms is not shifted in time in order
to obtain ®xed contributions.
Finally, in order to overcome the volumetric locking eect on the numerical
solution when incompressible viscoplastic ¯ows are considered, an improved strain-
displacement matrix is proposed in this work. Based on the deformation gradient
multiplicative standard decomposition into deviatoric and volumetric parts, and
assuming a selective (or averaged or smoothed) numerical integration for the volu-
metric part of F, the derived strain-displacement matrix, directly obtained by line-
arization of the Green-Lagrange strain tensor, can be classi®ed within the so-called
B-bar methods originally developed for in®nitesimal strains by Hughes (1980). The
expressions of this matrix for the 2D, axisymmetric and 3D cases are given in Box 3.
!2=3
J
B Bst Bim
J
where:
J det F with F Fdev F vol such that:
Fdev J 1=3 F : deviatoric part of F
F vol J 1=3 1: volumetric part of F numerically integrated in a selective
(or averaged or smoothed) form (continued on next page)
D.J. Celentano / International Journal of Plasticity 17 (2001) 1623±1658 1647
Box 3 (continued)
Bst : standard strain±displacement matrix for large strain analysis (see Bathe,
1981)
Bim : improved contribution
2 3
C A C11 AV2D
1 4 11 U2D
Bim C22 AU2D C22 AV2D 5
2D case
3
2C12 AU2D 2C12 AV2D
2 3
C11 AUax C11 AVax
16 C 22 AUax C22 AVax 7
Bim 6 7
axisymmetric case
3 4 2C12 AUax 2C12 AVax 5
C33 AUax C33 AVax
2 3
C11 AU C11 AV C11 AW
6 C22 AU C22 AV C22 AW 7
6 7
1 6 2C12 AU 2C12 AV 2C12 AW 7
Bim 6 7
3D case
366 C33 AU C33 AV C33 AW 77
4 2C13 AU 2C13 AV 2C13 AW 5
2C23 AU 2C23 AV 2C23 AW
with
As recently reported by Celentano (1998b), this proposed approach has been suc-
cessfully checked in the analysis of classical large strain benchmark problems.
Moreover, it can be demonstrated that this matrix recovers the corresponding
expression of the in®nitesimal case, based on the additive decomposition of the
strain tensor into deviatoric and volumetric parts, when F ! 1.
1648 D.J. Celentano / International Journal of Plasticity 17 (2001) 1623±1658
Table 1
Material propertiesa of S.G. cast iron
Table 1 (continued)
186 at 1375 C 25 at 600 C
280 at 1400 C 32 at 700 C
Secant latent heat (J/kg): 263,000 (a), 233,000 (g), 213,000 (c), 16,300 (f) 85,800 (p)
Composition: 3.5%C, 2.0%Si, 0.0% inoculant
Equilibrium temperatures ( C): 1588 (
0 ), 1179 (1), 1155 (g), 1056 (c), 768 (f), 740 (p)
Partition coecient: 0.46
Nucleation constants:
Parameter (nuclei/m3 C3.61): 7.1210 3
(g, c, f, p)
Exponent: 3.61 (g, c, f, p)
Growth constants:
Parameter (m/s C2): 1.610 6
(g,f), 1.610 5
(c,p)
Exponent: 2.0 (g, c, f, p)
a
The variations of these properties with the temperature have been assumed to be piecewise linear
within the mentioned temperatures. Below the lowest and above the highest temperatures, the properties
are assumed to remain constant at the same value de®ned for the extreme temperature.
The material thermomechanical properties for the S.G. cast iron and green sand
can be found in BRITE/EURAM Synthesis Report (1994), Hamata (1992) and
Azzouz (1995). The constants involved in the microstructural model for the S.G.
cast iron are equivalent to those used by Chang et al. (1991), Hamata (1992),
Goettsch and Dantzig (1994) and Celentano and Cruchaga (1999). According to
Schmitt at al. (1997), the elastic mechanical properties (Young's modulus and Pois-
son ratio) of cementite, ferrite and pearlite have been assumed to be equal in the
present analysis. For the steel, the same S.G. cast iron model was used considering a
single-component material without, for simplicity, hardening and phase-change
eects. All the material properties considered in the simulation are shown in
Tables 1±4.
The axisymmetric numerical computation used 540 four-noded isoparametric ele-
ments and a time step of 50s. The analysis starts with the mould cavity completely
®lled with molten metal at rest at 1250 C (i.e. instantaneous ®lling is assumed) and
22 C for the sand and steel moulds. The mould is simply supported at the bottom
and convection±radiation conditions have been considered between the external face
of the mould and the environment. The boundary conditions and the ®nite element
mesh used are plotted in Fig. 2.
The experimental temperature evolution at dierent radial positions are plotted in
Fig. 3. The numerical results obtained with the proposed formulation are also
included for comparison. A good overall agreement can be observed where, more
speci®cally, the liquid-solid and solid±solid phase-changes in the casting are reason-
ably well described.
Moreover, the experimental and numerical radial displacement evolutions at the
casting-mould interface are shown in Fig. 4. The dierent expansion/contraction
behaviours related to the phase-changes occuring during the process can clearly be
seen: (a) contraction till the beginning of the solidi®cation, (b) expansion during
D.J. Celentano / International Journal of Plasticity 17 (2001) 1623±1658 1651
Table 2
Material propertiesa of green sand
solidi®cation (graphite precipitation), (c) contraction from the end of the solidi®ca-
tion up to the beginning of the eutectoid transformation, (d) second expansion dur-
ing the eutectoid transformation and (e) ®nal contraction to room temperature.
Almost identical behaviours have been observed for the three directions mentioned
above. Some dispersion in the experimental results was detected, however, and an
average curve has been included in Fig. 4. The diculties in the measurement tasks
may be presumably attributed to dierential vertical dilatation between the casting
and sand mould (see Fig. 5) leading to a unacceptable shear force in the silica rods.
Although the numerical ®tting is only qualitative, the response provided by the S.G.
1652 D.J. Celentano / International Journal of Plasticity 17 (2001) 1623±1658
Table 3
Material properties of steel
Table 4
Properties at the interfacesa
model proposed in this work correctly reproduces the distinct behaviours observed
at dierent stages of the process. Further, the dierence between the displacement
curves corresponding to the casting and sand gives the normal gap evolution which,
as mentioned in Section 5, usually aects the heat transfer conditions at the casting-
sand interface. This last eect can be also seen in Fig. 5 which depicts the deformed
con®gurations at four times of the analysis.
The volumetric fraction evolutions of the casting for two radial distances at the
midheight of the specimen are plotted in Figs. 6 and 7. The liquid±solid and solid±
solid phase-changes are apparent. It should be mentioned that a low cooling rate has
been obtained promoting the formation of graphite at the expense of cementite and,
moreover, completely inhibiting the development of pearlite since all the austenite is
transformed into ferrite.
D.J. Celentano / International Journal of Plasticity 17 (2001) 1623±1658 1653
Fig. 2. Solidi®cation test: (a) boundary conditions and (b) ®nite element mesh.
Fig. 3. Solidi®cation test: temperature evolutions for dierent radial positions at the midheight of the
specimen.
1654 D.J. Celentano / International Journal of Plasticity 17 (2001) 1623±1658
Finally, Fig. 8 shows the free water volumetric fraction evolution for two radial
positions in the sand mould at the same height mentioned above. As expected, the
vaporization starts in regions near the casting-mould interface and progressively
advances towards the outer surface.
Fig. 4. Solidi®cation test: radical displacement evolutions at the midheight of the casting±sand interface.
Fig. 5. Solidi®cation test: deforned con®gurations at times (a) 200 s; (b) 500 s; (c) 1000 s and (d) 3500 s
(ampli®cation factor=10).
D.J. Celentano / International Journal of Plasticity 17 (2001) 1623±1658 1655
Fig. 6. Solidi®cation test: volumetric fractions in the casting for radius=0 mm at the midheight of the
specimen.
Fig. 7. Solidi®cation test: volumetric fractions in the casting for radius=30 mm at the midheight of the
specimen.
1656 D.J. Celentano / International Journal of Plasticity 17 (2001) 1623±1658
Fig. 8. Solidi®cation test: free water volumetric fraction in the sand for r=45 mm and r=75 mm at the
midheight of the specimen.
7. Conclusions
Acknowledgements
References
Agelet de Saracibar, C., Cervera, M., Chiumenti, M., 1999. On the formulation of coupled thermoplastic
problems with phase-change. Int. J. Plasticity 15, 1.
Ami Saada, R., Bonnet, G., Bouvard, D., 1996. Thermomechanical behavior of casting sands: experi-
ments and elastoplastic modeling. Int. J. Plasticity 12, 273.
Armero, F., Simo, J., 1993. A priori stability estimates and unconditionally stable product formula algo-
rithms for non-linear coupled thermoplasticity. Int. J. Plasticity 9, 149.
Arnold, S., Saleeb, A., 1994. On the thermodynamic framework of generalized coupled therrnoelastic-
viscoplastic-damage modeling. Int. J. Plasticity 10, 263.
Azzouz, F., 1995. Modelisation du comportement thermo-hydro-mecanique d'un sable de fonderie, TheÁse
de Doctorat, Universite Paris 6, France.
Baldoni, F., Rajagopal, K., 1997. A continuum theory for the thermomechanics of solidi®cation. Int. J.
Non-Linear Mechanics 32, 3.
Bammann, D., Chiesa, M., Johnson, G., 1995. A state variable damage model for temperature and strain
rate dependent metals. In: Rajendran, A., Batra, R. (Eds.), Constitutive Laws: Theory, Experiments
and Numerical Implementation. CIMNE, pp. 84±95.
Banerjee, D., Stefanescu, D., 1991. Structural transitions and solidi®cation kinetics of SG cast iron during
directional solidi®cation experiments. AFS Transactions 104, 747.
Bathe, K., 1981. Finite Element Procedures in Engineering Analysis. Prentice-Hall.
Bellet, M., Decultieux, F., MeÂnal, M., Bay, F., Levaillant, C., Chenot, J., Schmidt, P., Svensson, I., 1996.
Thermomechanics of the cooling stage in casting processes: three-dimensional ®nite element analysis
and experimental validation. Metall. Trans. B 27B, 81.
BRITE/EURAM Synthesis Report, 1994. Development of a user-oriented CAB system for simulating the
forming of ductile iron parts (Project No. BE-4596).
Casey, J., 1998. On elastic-thermo-plastic materials at ®nite deformations. Int. J. Plasticity 14, 173.
Cassenti, B., Annigeri, B., 1989. Thermodynamic constraints on stress rate formulations in constitutive
models. Comput. Mech. 4, 429.
Celentano, D., 1997. A thermomechanical formulation for the solidi®cation process of S .G. cast iron in a
green sand mould. Proceedings of COMPLAS V, p. 1284.
Celentano, D., 1998a. Shrinkage prediction in the thermomechanical analysis of castings. In: Proceedings
of the VIIIth Engineering Foundation Conference on Modeling of Casting, Welding and Advanced
Solidi®cation Processes, The Minerals, Metals and Materials Society, London.
Celentano, D., 1998b. VULCAN: coupled thermomechanical ®nite element analysis for solidi®cation
problems. User's and Veri®cation Manuals (version 2.3).
Celentano, D., Cruchaga, M., 1999. A thermally coupled ¯ow formulation with microstructural evolution
for hypoeutectic cast-iron solidi®cation. Metall. Trans. B 30B, 731.
Celentano, D., Gunasegaram, D., Nguyen, T., 1999. A thermomechanical model for the analysis of light
alloy solidi®cation in a composite mould. Int. J. Solids Struct. 36, 2341.
Celentano, D., Oller, S., OnÄate, E., 1996. A coupled thermomechanical model for the solidi®cation of cast
metals. Int. J. Solids Struct. 33, 647.
Celentano, D., Visconte, D., Dardati, P., Oller, S., OnÄate, E., 1995. A thermomechanical model for
solidi®cation problems: experimental validation. Proceedings of COMPLAS IV, p. 2385.
Coleman, B., Gurtin, M., 1967. Thermodynamics with internal state variables. The Journal of Chemical
Physics 47, No. 2.
Chang, S., Shangguan, D., Stefanescu, D., 1991. Prediction of microstructural evolution in SG cast iron
from solidi®cation to room temperature. AFS Transactions 99, 531.
1658 D.J. Celentano / International Journal of Plasticity 17 (2001) 1623±1658
Cherkaoui, M., Berveiller, M., Sabar, H., 1998. Micromechanical modeling of martensitic transformation
induced plasticity (TRIP) in austenite single crystals. Int. J. Plasticity 14, 597.
Doyle, T., Ericksen, J., 1956. Nonlinear elasticity. Advances in Applied Mechanics 4.
Fischer, F., Sun, Q., Tanaka, K., 1996. Transformation-induced plasticity (TRIP). Appl. Mech. Rev. 49,
317.
Flemings, M., 1974. Solidi®cation Processing. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Garcia Garino, C., Oliver, J., 1992. A numerical model for elastoplastic large strain problems funda-
mentals and applications. Proceedings of COMPLAS II, p. 117.
Garcia Garino, C., 1993. A numerical model for the analysis of elastoplastic solids subjected to large
deformations. PhD thesis (in Spanish), Universidad PoliteÂcnica de CatalunÄa, Spain.
Goettsch, D., Dantzig, J., 1994. Modeling microstructure development in gray cast irons. Metall. Trans.
A 25A, 1063.
Green, A., Naghdi, P., 1971. Some remarks on elastic-plastic deformation at ®nite strains. International
Journal of Engineering Sciences 9, 1219.
Hamata, N., 1992. Modelisation du couplage entre l'elasto-viscoplasticite anisotherme et la transfor-
mation de phase d'une fonte G.S. ferritique. TheÁse de Doctorat, Universite Paris 6, France.
Hughes, T., 1980. Generalization of selective integration procedures to anisotropic and nonlinear media.
Short Communications, 1413.
Inoue, T., Ju, D., 1992. Simulation of solidi®cation and viscoplastic stresses during vertical semicontinuous
direct chill casting of aluminium alloy. Int. J. Plasticity 8, 161.
Kleiber, M., 1975. Kinematics of deformation processes in material subjected to ®nite elastic-plastic
strains. International Journal of Engineering Sciences 13, 155.
Levitas, V., 1996. Large Deformation of Materials with Complex Rheological Properties at Normal and
High Pressure. Nova Science, New York.
Levitas, V., 1998. Thermomechanical theory of martensitic phase transformation in inelastic materials.
Int. J. Solids Struct. 35, 889.
Levitas, V., Idesmas, A., Stein, E., 1998. Finite element formulation of martensitic phase transitions in
elastoplastic materials. Int. J. Solids Struct. 35, 855.
Lubliner, J., 1985. Thermomechanics of Deformable Bodies. Department of Civil Engineering, University
of California, Berkeley.
Lubliner, J., 1990. Plasticity Theory. Macmillan, New York.
Malvern, L., 1969. Introduction to the Mechanics of a Continuous Medium. Prentice-Hall, Englewood
Clis.
Marsden, J., Hughes, T., 1983. Mathematical Foundations of Elasticity. Prentice Hall, Englewood Clis.
Murnagaham, F., 1937. Finite deformations of an elastic solid. Am. J. Math. 59, 235.
Onsùien, M., Grong, é., Gundersen, é., Skaland, T., 1999. A process model for the microstructure
evolution in ductile iron: Part I. The model. Metall. Trans. A 30A, 1053.
Perzina, P., 1971. Thermodynamic theory of viscoplasticity. Advances Appl. Mech. 9, 243.
Schmitt, C., Lipinski, P., Berveiller, M., 1997. Micromechanical modelling of the elastoplastic behavior of
polycrystals containing precipitates-application to hypo- and hyper-eutectoid steels. Int. J. Plasticity 13,
183.
Simo, J., Ortiz, M., 1985. A uni®ed approach to ®nite deformation elastoplastic analysis based on the use
of hyperelastic constitutive equations. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 49,
221.
Trovant, M., Argyropoulos, S., 1996. Mathematical modeling and experimental measurements of
shrinkage in the casting of metals. Canadian Metallurgical Quaterly 35, 75.
Wriggers, P., Miehe, C., Kleiber, M., Simo, J., 1989. On the coupled thermomechanical treatment of
necking problems via ®nite-element-methods. Proceedings of COMPLAS II, p. 527.
Zabaras, R., Ruan, Y., Richmod, O., 1990. Front tracking thermomechanical for hypoelastic-viscoplastic
behavior in a solidifying body. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 81, 333.
Zienkiewicz, O., Taylor, R., 1989. The ®nite element method, 4th Edition. McGraw-Hill, London (Vols. 1
and 2).