Centre Sciences des matériaux et des structures Département Rhéologie, Microstructures,...

35
Centre Sciences des matériaux et des structures Département Rhéologie, Microstructures, Thermomécanique FR CNRS 3410 – CIMReV UMR CNRS 5307 Laboratoire Georges FRIEDEL 11&12 Sept. 2014 (v1) David PIOT 1 Workshop on Mean Field Modelling for Discontinuous Dynamic Recrystallization Fréjus Summer School Recrystallization Mechanisms in Materials

Transcript of Centre Sciences des matériaux et des structures Département Rhéologie, Microstructures,...

Centre Sciences des matériaux et des structuresDépartement Rhéologie, Microstructures, Thermomécanique

FR CNRS 3410 – CIMReV

UMR CNRS 5307Laboratoire Georges FRIEDEL

11&12 Sept. 2014 (v1) David PIOT 1

Workshop onMean Field Modelling for

Discontinuous Dynamic Recrystallization

Fréjus Summer SchoolRecrystallization Mechanisms in

Materials

David PIOT 2

Workshop on Mean-Field Modelling Introduction

Motivation+ Illustration of mean-field modelling dedicated

to discontinuous dynamic recrystallization (DDRX)

+ Theoretical derivations related to ergodicity

Outline+ How to average dislocation densities? How to

keep constant the volume?+ How to test an assumption about the

dependency of parameters?+ Impact of the constitutive equation choice

David PIOT 3

Abstract 1/3Structure of a mean-field model for DDRX

Mean-field = mesoscopic description+ Description at the grain scale+ Inhomogeneities at microscopic scale are averaged+ Dislocation density homogeneous within each grain+ Localization / Homogenization

Assumptions to simplify (but not mandatory)+ No topological features+ Distribution of spherical grains of various diameters+ Localization: Taylor assumption

+ Homogenization: b

David PIOT 4

Abstract 2/3Structure of a mean-field model for DDRX

Variables for describing microstrcurure+ As no stochastic is considered, all grains of a given

age have the same diameter and dislocation density because they have undergone identical evolution → one-parameter (nucleation time ) distributions (for non initial grains)

+

Grain number nucleated at time : ,

Plastic strain (stain rate for each grain)

, d

Dislocation density: ,

Grain diameter: ,

t

N t

t u u t

t

D t

&

& &

David PIOT 5

Abstract 3/3Structure of a mean-field model for DDRX

Evolution of grain-property distributions+ 1. Equation for strain hardening and dynamic

recovery giving the evolution of dislocation densities

+ 2. Equation for the grain-boundary migration governing grain growth or shrinkage

+ 3. A nucleation model predicting the rate of new grains

+ 4. Disappearance of the oldest grains included in (2) when their diameter vanishes

David PIOT 6

1. Strain hardening anddynamic recovery

Constitutive model for+ Strain hardening+ Dynamic recovery+ In the absence of recrystallization

General equation+ Each grain behaviour is described by the same equation

+ Several laws can be used, e.g.:

+ The parameters are temperature and strain-rate dependent

dd

Hi

1

Yoshie Laasraoui Jonas

Kocks Mecking

Power law

h r

h r

H

H

H

H

i

i

i

David PIOT 7

2. Grain-boundary migration

Mean-field model+ Each grain is inter-

acting with an equiv-alent homogeneousmatrix

Migration equation

+

+ M grain-boundary mobility, T line energy of dislocations

: growth

matrix

D

matrix

: shrinkage

, 2 ,

Dt M t t

tT

David PIOT 8

3. Nucleation equation

Various nucleation models available “Simplest” equation tentative

+ Nucleation of new grains ( = t) is assumed to be proportional to the grain-boundary surface

+

+ Here, p = 3 is assumed It is the unique integer value for p compatible with

experimental Derby exponent d in the relationship between grain size and stress at steady state using the closed-form equation between p and d in the power law case

,N

t t f t S tt

NIn practice, is specified as pff k

David PIOT 9

Exercise 1 1/3Mean dislocation-density

Discrete description of grains (Di)

3+Volume is kept const t ani

i

V D

David PIOT 10

Exercise 1 1/3Mean dislocation-density

Discrete description of grains (Di)

3+Volume is kept const anti

i

V D

2+By derivatio n, 0i i

i

D D &

David PIOT 11

Exercise 1 1/3Mean dislocation-density

Discrete description of grains (Di)

3+Volume is kept const anti

i

V D

2+By derivatio n, 0i i

i

D D &

2+With migration eq., 0 i i

i

D

David PIOT 12

Exercise 1 1/3Mean dislocation-density

Discrete description of grains (Di)

+ I.e. average weighted by the grain-boundary area

3+Volume is kept const anti

i

V D

2+By derivatio n, 0i i

i

D D &

2+With migration eq., 0 i i

i

D 2

2+Leading to the definition, i i

i

ii

D

D

Annex: On the rush…

What about grain growth?+ Hillert (Acta Metall. 1965)

2

1

1 10

N

i ii

D D DD D

& &

Annex: On the rush…

What about grain growth?+ Hillert (Acta Metall. 1965)

2

12

2

1 1

1 10

1

N

i ii

N Ni

i ii i i

D D DD D

DD D D

D D

& &

Annex: On the rush…

What about grain growth?+ Hillert (Acta Metall. 1965)

Mixed formulation+ With stored energy: average dislocation-

density+ With surface energy: average grain-size

2

12

2

1 1

1 10

1

N

i ii

N Ni

i ii i i

D D DD D

DD D D

D D

& &

David PIOT 16

Exercise 1 2/3Mean dislocation-density

Continuous description for a volume unit+ After vanishing of the initial grains 3

0+

6 , , , d 1

tt N t D t

David PIOT 17

Exercise 1 2/3Mean dislocation-density

Continuous description for a volume unit+ After vanishing of the initial grains 3

0+

6 , , , d 1

tt N t D t

3

3 2

0

+ , , 0, 0 with 0

, , 3 , , , d 0t

N t t D t t t nuclei D

DNt D t N t t D t

t t

David PIOT 18

Exercise 1 2/3Mean dislocation-density

Continuous description for a volume unit+ After vanishing of the initial grains

Nucleation is ocurring (t = ) and D = 0 Disappearance of old grains (t = + tend) and also D =

0

3

0+

6 , , , d 1

tt N t D t

3

3 2

0

+ , , 0, 0 with 0

, , 3 , , , d 0t

N t t D t t t nuclei D

DNt D t N t t D t

t t

0 if onlyNt

David PIOT 19

Exercise 1 3/3Mean dislocation-density

Volume constancy

2

0 , , , d 0

t DN t t D t

t

David PIOT 20

Exercise 1 3/3Mean dislocation-density

Volume constancy

2

0 , , , d 0

t DN t t D t

t

2 (migra t n io )D MT&

David PIOT 21

Exercise 1 3/3Mean dislocation-density

Volume constancy

2

0 , , , d 0

t DN t t D t

t

2 (migra t n io )D MT&

20

20

, , d

, , , d

t

t

N t t D t

N t t D t

David PIOT 22

Exercise 1 3/3Mean dislocation-density

Volume constancy

2

0 , , , d 0

t DN t t D t

t

2 (migra t n io )D MT&

20

20

, , d

, , , d

t

t

N t t D t

N t t D t

2

0

2

0

, , , d

, , d

t

t

t N t D tt

N t D t

David PIOT 23

Exercise 2 1/2Ergodicity and averages

Steady state = dynamic equilibrium+ Ergodicity postulate when S. S. is

established + Averages over the system = averages over

time for a typical element of the system

+ All characteristic and their distribution does not depend on time and the only variable to label grains is their strain/age (current – nucleation time)

end

01 end

1 1 X d

N t

ii

X X t tN t

?

David PIOT 24

Exercise 2 1/2Ergodicity and averages

Steady state = dynamic equilibrium+ Ergodicity postulate when S. S. is

established + Averages over the system (constant) =

averages over time for a typical element of the system

end

01 end

1 1 X d

N t

ii

X X t tN t

end

end

22

1 0

220

1

d

d

Nt

i ii

N t

ii

D t D t t

D t tD

2014 David PIOT 25

Exercise 2 2/2Ergodicity and averages

n: average dislocation-density weighted by Dn

+ + Steady-state case

2

end

end

0

0

d

d

t n

n t n

D t

D t

David PIOT 26

Exercise 2 2/2Ergodicity and averages

n: average dislocation-density weighted by Dn

+ + Steady-state case

2

end

end

0

0

d

d

t n

n t n

D t

D t

end end

0 0 d d

2

t tn nDD t D t

MT

&

David PIOT 27

Exercise 2 2/2Ergodicity and averages

n: average dislocation-density weighted by Dn

+ + Steady-state case

2

end

end

0

0

d

d

t n

n t n

D t

D t

end end

end end

0 0

0 0

d d2

d d 2

t tn n

t D tn n

D

DD t D t

M

D t D D M

T

T

&

David PIOT 28

Exercise 2 2/2Ergodicity and averages

n: average dislocation-density weighted by Dn

+ + Steady-state case

2

end

end

0

0

d

d

t n

n t n

D t

D t

end end

end end

0 0

0 0

d d2

d d 2

t tn n

t D tn n

D

DD t D t

M

D t D D M

T

T

&

, nn

David PIOT 29

Exercise 2 2/2Ergodicity and averages

n: average dislocation-density weighted by Dn

+ + Steady-state case

2

end

end

0

0

d

d

t n

n t n

D t

D t

end end

end end

0 0

0 0

d d2

d d 2

t tn n

t D tn n

D

DD t D t

M

D t D D M

T

T

&

end

0 end 0 , 1 d (steady state only)

t

nn t t

David PIOT 30

Exercise 3 1/3Strain-hardening law influence

Comparison YLJ / PW (/KM)+ PW tractable with closed forms+ Physically still questionable+ Easy to switch data from one to another law

MONTHEILLET et al. (Metall. and Mater. Trans. A, 2014)

David PIOT 31

Exercise 3 2/3Strain-hardening law influence

David PIOT 32

Exercise 3 3/3Strain-hardening law influence

Alternative codes, both for nickel+ DDRX_YLJ+ DDRX_PW+ Parameters in drx.par

Pure nickel strained at 900 °C and 0.1 s–1

For YLJ: example For PW: example Grain-boundary mobility and nucleation

parameter obtained (direct closed form for PW) from steady-state flow-stress and steady-state average grain-size

Comparison ReX Frac. / Soft. Frac.

It depends on… Nb content and what else?

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0Stra in

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0Pure N i0 .1 s -1

900 °C

F ractionR ecrysta llized

Fractiona l Soften ing

0 1 2 3Stra in

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0N i-0.1 N b0.1 s -1

900 °C

F ractionR ecrysta llized

Fractiona l Soften ing

Exercise 4 1/1Impact of the initial microstructure

Comparison quasi Dirac / lognormal+ Initial average grain-size : 500 µm+ Flag 0

Initial grain-size distribution: Gaussian “Standard deviation”: Variation coefficient (SD/mean) Quasi Dirac : variation coefficient 0.05 (already done)

+ Flag 1 Initial grain-size distribution: lognormal “Standard deviation”: ln-of-D SD (usual definition,

dimensionless) Parametric study (e.g. 0.1, 0.25, 0.5, 1)

Exercise 5 1/1Test of models for parameters

Mean field models+ Relevant tools to test assumptions for

modelling the dependence of parameters with straining conditions

Exemple : strain-rate sensitivity+ Rough trial

GB mobility, nucleation, recovery, only depend on temperature

Strain hardening: power law

+ Screening by comparing 0.1 with 0.01 and 1 s–1

0 0

mh h &&