MICRESS Forum

Dear Bernd,

Recently I am trying to run the CMSX-4 DRVing file. We already installed MICRess 6.001 and TCCS software. We bought TTNI8 database, but do not have the MOBNI1 database. So I type in the diffusional data manually and used linear TQ mode to read the thermodynamic data from TTNI8. Also, I eliminated the nucleation mode of 'add to grain', since MICRess 6.001 does not support such a nucleation mode. But this nucleation mode only affect of solidification in the final stage, and such a change would not be fatal.

Unfortunately, numerical error appears when I try to run the DRV file. The error hint is attached, together with the DRV files and GES files. It seems that relinearization fails to be established around the newly formed particles. Is it something related to thermodynamic database? Would you please help me on this problem?

Best regards!
Yang

Dear Yang,

MICRESS 6.001 is pretty old (from 2011), and I am not sure whether it will be possible to run the CMSX-4 example with this old version. This example has been created much later for version 6.200. Did you think about updating to the current version of MICRESS?

Another problem you need to consider is whether your TTNI8 license agreement with ThermoTech allows for use with MICRESS. It is up to you or your organisation to check that out.

I you want to go forward nevertheless, I can at least give you some advice. The "error messages" are no errors but come from the old "automatic" update scheme which is not very helpful in this case. You should put "-1 " instead of "10" in the phase diagram data for interface 1/2 to switch it of. You anyway defined a "global" relinearisation rate which is sufficient.
Furthermore I saw that you put negative activation energies when manually defining diffusivities. This will lead to extreme values which screw up the simulation.

Bernd

Dear Bernd,

Thanks for your kind instruction. I should have typed in positive values for the activation energy of diffusion.
Now the program works. The morphology evolution is slightly different from the example, which might be caused by the deviation of diffusivity values.

Best regards!
Yang