Modelling the mushy region in a binary alloy

V. R. Voller and A. D. Brent*

Department of Civil and Mineral Engineering, Mineral Resources Research Center,

University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA

C. Prakash

General Electric Corporate Research Center, Schenectady, NY, USA

In developing models of solidification systems a central element is the treatment of the mushy region.
The aim of this paper is to investigate a number of alternative approaches to account for the nature
of the mushy region in a model of a solidification system. Starting from two limiting assumptions for
the nature of the mushy region, a number of alternative physical situations are identified from which
one-phase models can result. These models are compared in the context of a simple test problem.

Keywords: binary alloy, mushy region, phase change, solidification

Introduction what physical situations one model would be more

Recently, there have been a number of numerical mod-
elling studies in the area of solidification of binary alloy
systems. 1-8 This is a complex problem, a full analysis
of which involves the solution of coupled heat, mass,
momentum, and species transport equations.4-8
A central issue in the modelling of binary alloy sys-
tems is the treatment of the so-called “mushy” region,
that is, a region that consists of a “mixture” of solid
and liquid components. For example, consider a binary
alloy contained within a two-dimensional square cavity
with a cold (below solidus) left wall, a hot (above li-
quidus) right wall, and insulated top and bottom. Within
this cavity the alloy can exist in three states: a fully
solid state, the mushy state, and a fully liquid state
(Figure I). A rigorous computational fluid dynamics
treatment of the mushy region would require a two-
phase analysis. In all the modelling studies carried out
to date,re8 however, appropriate assumptions have been
invoked, and limiting one-phase models have been de-
veloped.
The aims of this paper are to list the possible one-
phase assumptions that can be made and to investigate
the effects of the resulting models on the shape of an
evolving mushy region. The object is to establish under
* Currently at BHP Central Research Laboratories, Newcastle,
Australia.
Address reprint requests to Dr. Voller at the Department of Civil
and Mineral Engineering, Mineral Resources Research Center, Uni-
versity of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA.
Received 31 January 1989; accepted 8 September 1989
appropriate than another. The emphasis of the study
is on the coupling between the assumed nature of the
mushy region and the energy (enthalpy) equations. It
will be demonstrated that the manner in which the
mushy region is modelled has a potentially dramatic
effect on predicted results. Although recent studies
implement full heat, mass, momentum, and species
models,4-s to the authors’ knowledge, no detailed study
of the effect of the mushy region assumptions, along
the lines proposed here, has been undertaken. The
central issue of this study is the nature of the modelling
approach as opposed to the modelling of binary alloy
systems that has been attempted elsewhere.4-8
In the next section a simple solidification test prob-
lem involving a mushy region is proposed. Then two
basic limiting assumptions on the nature of the two-
phase mushy region are discussed. This is followed by
the development of appropriate governing energy and
momentum transport equations based on the given as-
sumptions. The result is the proposal of alternative
one-phase modelling approaches. These approaches are
compared and discussed in the context of a simple test
problem.
A test problem
The chosen test problem is the relatively simple two-
NSW, dimensional mushy phase change problem introduced
by Voller and Prakash.’ The problem domain is iden-
tical to that shown in Figure 2 (that is, cold left wall,
hot right wall, and insulated upper and lower walls),
and the problem specifications are given in Table 1.
Note that in this problem the solidus and liquidus tem-
peratures are fixed (T, = -0.1 and TI = 0.1, respec-

320 Appl. Math. Modelling, 1990, Vol. 14, June 0 1990 Butterworth Publishers
 Modelling the mush region: V, R. Voller et al.

tively), and hence solute redistribution (i.e., species Limiting assumptions

transport) is not considered. In addition, a linear liquid
fraction versus temperature relationship (gl versus T) The mushy region is a two-phase region. In a general
is chosen within the mushy region (TI I T % Ts):
system with randomly nucleating equi-axed grains the
solid will be located throughout the liquid, and both
gl = (T - T,))/~E (I) phases will have distinct velocities. Such a system is
where E is the half temperature range for the mushy illustrated in Figure 2~. In a physical sense this figure
region (i.e., 2~ = Tl - T.y).From a physical viewpoint represents a mushy region in which the solid comprises
this problem represents an oversimplification, but it is equi-axed grains. The analysis of such a system will
an appropriate test case for demonstrating the essential require a two-phase modelling approach. As was noted
differences between the models that will be developed. by Voller et al.,s however, there are two limiting cases
under which the general model given in Figure 2a will
reduce to situations for which a one-phase model based
on mixture quantities can be developed.
Case I: A mushy fluid. In this case the solid is fully
THOT
dispersed in the liquid phase, and the solid and liquid
velocities are equal (see Figure 26). An example would
be a wax.
TCOLD
Case 2: A columnar zone. In this case the solid
matrix is distinct from the liquid, and the matrix either
is fixed (i.e., u, = 0) or moves with a prescribed ve-
locity (Figure 2~). An example would be a columnar
crystal zone in a static or continuous casting.
In each of the above cases the essential step is the
identification of a system velocity, u. For a mushy fluid
Figure 1. Test problem geometry we have
u=u[=u s (2)
where II/ and u, are the liquid and solid phase velocities,
Table 1. Data for test problem one respectively. For a columnar zone, in a static casting
Initial temperature T,,t = 0.5 (u, = 0), we have
Hot wall temperature Thor = 0.5 u = glul (3)
Cold wall temperature TCO,d= -0.5
Reference temperature Tref = 0.5
Half mushy temperature range E = 0.1 The governing equations
Cavity dimensions w=l
Density p=l Full and detailed derivations of the appropriate gov-
Permeability coefficient K,, = 1.6 x lo3 erning equations have been presented elsewhere. *-*
Specific heat c=l Only the details that have a direct impact on the re-
Liquid viscosity I*/ = 1
Solid viscosity
sulting predicted shape of the mushy region will be
LLs = 100,250, 1000
Thermal conductivity K = 0.001 given here. The underlying approach is the develop-
Coefficient of thermal expansion p = 0.01 ment of equations that are valid for the entire domain
Gravity g1 = 1000 (i.e., solid, mush, and liquid).
Latent heat L =5
Liquidus temperature T, = 0.1 Conservation of mass
Solidus temperature T, = -0.1
Under the assumption of constant density the mass
So that: conservation equation takes the form
Raleigh number Ra = lo4
Prandtl number Pr = lo3 V(u) = 0 (4)
Stefan number Ste = 5 where u is the appropriate system velocity given by
equation (2) or (3).

(a) General Mushy Region Lb) Mushy Fluid (c) Columnar Zone

Figure 2. The nature of the mushy region. (a) A general model, (b) the mushy fluid, (c) the columnar zone

Appl. Math. Modelling, 1990, Vol. 14, June 321

Modelling the mush region: V. R. Voller et al.
Conservation of momentum
Since any momentum equations need to be valid for
the entire domain, an essential feature is that the pre-
dicted system velocities become zero as the liquid frac-
tion, g,, becomes zero and the fully solid region is
reached. Depending on the assumed nature of the
mushy region, two forms of the momentum equation
have been proposed that will have this required fea-
ture.
For a mushy fluid, one can appeal to the “homo-
geneous” fluid concept used in two-phase flow and
introduce an effective viscosity, for example,
Pmix = PstTs + CL/g/ (5)
where CL,is the solid viscosity, p1 is the liquid viscosity,
and g, is the solid fraction. In this way, on setting a
large value for the solid viscosity, pS, the binary alloy
will become progressively “stiffer” as the solid frac-
tion increases. This is an obvious approach and has
been used or suggested by previous authors for both
mushy and isothermal phase changes.3*6,8.” The result-
ing ~1momentum equation has the form
$pU) + V'(pUU)= $ + V’(/.Lmi,VU)
where u(u, u) is the system velocity defined by equation
(2) and P is pressure. A similar equation can be de-
veloped for the u momentum that includes the follow-
ing buoyancy term (added to the right-hand side) based
on the Boussinesq approximation:
L%[P(T - ~R-A (7)
where g, is gravity, p is the thermal coefficient of ex-
pansion, and Tref is a reference temperature.
In the case of a fixed columnar zone it is appropriate
to consider the mushy zone as a porous medium and
introduce source terms, F, and FY, so that the mo-
mentum equations mimic a Darcy equation as the solid
fraction increases. In terms of real alloys that exhibit
a columnar zone, the use of a Darcy equation has been
experimentally validated. lo Using this approach, a
number of authors have developed mushy region mo-
mentum equations. ***ss In terms of the u momentum
z (pg,H,) + V.(pgSu,HS) = V*(g,KVT) + [interphase terms],
$ (pglH[) + V*(pg,ulH1) = V*(g,KVT) - [interphase terms],
where, for simplicity, a constant specific heat, c, has
been assumed. The liquid enthalpy is given by Hi =
CT + L, and the solid enthalpy is given by H, = CT
where L is the latent heat. On defining the sensible
enthalpy as h = CT the two-fluid enthalpy equations
can be combined so that the interphase terms cancel
out and a general enthalpy equation results:
322 Appl. Math. Modelling, 1990, Vol. 14, June
(note that u in this case is defined by equation (3)) the
form taken is
$4 + V(puu) = - g + V&Vu) + F, 03)
As before, a similar equation can be developed for the
u momentum along with the Boussinesq source given
by equation (7). Appropriate forms for the “Darcy”
source terms F, and FY can be identified by reference
to the Carman-Kozeny equation, as suggested by Voller
and Prakash,’
Fx = - WoU - gJ2/g:lu
F, = - Wo(l - gJ2/g:b (9)
where K. is a permeability constant. Note that these
source terms will have the desired effect in that they
become zero in fully liquid regions, override the other
terms in the mushy region to force the momentum
equations to mimic the Carman-Kozeny equations, and
dominate all terms when fully solid to ensure zero ve-
locities.
Conservation of enthalpy
Both forms of the momentum equation developed
above exhibit similar behavior. The principal features
are that (I) as the liquid fraction, gl, decreases, so does
the system velocity, and (2) the equations are identical
in the fully liquid and essentially identical in the fully
solid regions. It could be argued that the limiting as-
sumption of the nature of the mushy region would have
little influence on the flow in the region and hence the
shape. In terms of the momentum equations alone,
such arguments may be valid. The shape of the mushy
region, however, is also controlled by the transport of
enthalpy, and it is in the development of the enthalpy
equations that differences between the two limiting
assumptions become apparent. It is therefore neces-
sary to provide a detailed development of the enthalpy
equations.
In the spirit of the two-fluid model (see Refs. 11 and
12, for example) a two-phase description of enthalpy
transport in the mushy region is
(IO)
(11)
K
$ph) + VQuh) = V. -Vh + S/, (12)
( C >
The source term Sh will depend on the assumed nature
of the mushy region. In the case of a mushy fluid,
Sh = $%,L) - V(pg,u0 (13)

In the case of a columnar zone,
Sh = $%%QL) - VQuL) (14)
In reading equations (13) and (14), recall that the ve-
locity is defined in the case of a mushy fluid by equation
(2) and in the case of a columnar zone by equation (3).
The differences between the mushy fluid and col-
umnar zone assumptions become apparent on noting
the form of the convective component of the source
term Sh. In the case of a mushy fluid, both solid and
liquid move with the same velocity. Furthermore, the
solid fraction is a function of space. Mass flow of liquid
is thus not necessarily conserved across a given control
volume, and since the latent heat is associated with
the liquid phase, the latent heat is convected with the
flow. In the case of a fixed columnar zone, however,
the solid flow is zero, and no net latent heat is con-
vected. This is clear on noting that owing to the mass
conservation, equation (4), the convective part of the
fixed columnar source term in equation (14) is zero. It
will be seen that the convection or lack of convection
of latent heat has a dramatic effect on the shape of the
evolving mushy region.
The modelling approaches
From the governing equations presented above, three
alternative modelling approaches can be developed.
These are outlined below.
Approach I : Mushy jluid
In this modelling approach, the mushy fluid as-
sumption is invoked, that is, the mushy region is taken
to be a homogeneous mixture. This approach would
be suitable for “waxy” materials and in a limited sense
the equi-axed zone of a casting when the grains are
small. In this model the system velocity is defined by
equation (2). The momentum equations take the form
given by equation (6) with the effective viscosity de-
fined by equation (5). Enthalpy transport is governed
by equation (12) along with the source term defined in
equation (13). Note that the effective viscosity does
not have to be of the form given in equation (5); any
form in which the p,ix increases as solidification pro-
ceeds is appropriate.
Approach 2: Columnar zone
In this modelling approach, the mushy region is as-
sumed to have a fixed columnar crystal structure. This
approach is appropriate for an analysis of the columnar
zone of a static casting and with slight modification
(i.e., the introduction of a specified velocity), a con-
tinuous casting. The system velocity is defined by
equation (3). The momentum equations take the form
given by equation (8) along with the “Darcy” source
term F defined in equation (9). As before, the enthalpy
transport is governed by equation (12), but the Sh source
term is now given by equation (14).
Modelling the mush region: V. R. Voller et al.
Approach 3: The mixed model
In using the mushy fluid model, specification of the
enhanced viscosity could be inconvenient. This is par-
ticularly true in using control volume-based codesI
in which the viscosity may need to be interpolated over
four node points. l4 A way around this is to adopt a
mixed modelling approach in which the enthalpy source
term is given by the mushy fluid model, that is, equa-
tion (13), but the momentum is modelled on using the
Darcy source term F from equation (9). In this way
the important elements of the mushy fluid model are
retained in the enthalpy equations, and the required
nature of the flow is achieved on specifying the Darcy
source term. Note that in a control volume code, spec-
ification of such a source is straightforward. In prac-
tice, it would be expected that the mixed model will
predict results of a similar nature to those predicted
by the fully mushy fluid model (Approach I).
Numerical investigations
The numerical scheme
The focus of this paper is on the alternative mod-
elling approaches for dealing with mushy regions; hence
only a brief account of the numerical implementation
of the models is given. The numerical scheme used
is based on a control volume formulation, and the
SIMPLE algorithm is applied to resolve the pres-
sure/velocity coupling. ll\ A major driving feature in
the overall numerical scheme is the liquid frac-
tion/enthalpy iterative update procedure. This is es-
sentially the technique previously proposed and de-
veloped by the authors. Full details of the method can
be found in Ref. 1. The test problem used in this work
is defined in Figure I and Table 1. In all the numerical
runs, a fixed uniform grid of 40 x 40 control volumes
was employed along with a time step of 10. Grid in-
dependence and convergence studies have been car-
ried out for the specific case of the mixed model. These
studies are reported in Ref. 1.
Effect of models on the shape of the mushy region
Figure 3a shows the direction of the flow field and
predictions for the solidus and liquidus isotherms (i.e.,
T = 0.1 and T = - 0.1) at time t = 250 s using the
mixed modelling approach in which a value of 1.6 x
lo3 is used for the permeability constant, KO, in the
Darcy source term (equation (9)). The effect of the net
latent heat convection term in the Sh source (equation
(13)) is clearly observed on noting the bulge in the
mushy region formed toward the bottom of the cavity.
It would be expected that changes in the value of K0
will produce changes in the shape of the mushy region.
A preliminary analysis along these lines was attempted
by Voller and Prakash.’ For example, if the value of
K0 is raised, the flow in the mushy region will be re-
tarded, leading to a reduction in the latent heat con-
vected and a flatter shape for the liquidus front.
Using the columnar zone modelling approach with
the same Darcy source term (KO = 1.6 x 103) results
Appl. Math. Modelling, 1990, Vol. 14, June 323
Modelling the mush region: V. R. Voller et al.

in a dramatically different shape for the mushy region

at t = 250 (Figure 3b). The reason for the flatter shape
of the columnar mushy region, in this case, is the ab-
sence of a latent heat convection term in the Sh source
defined by equation (14). It would be expected that the
shape of a columnar zone mushy region would not
be influenced by the choice of the permeability con-
stant, &.
In the mushy fluid model, convection of the latent
heat in the mushy region will occur. Figure 4a shows
the predictions of the mushy region shape at t = 250,
assuming a solid viscosity of pu, = 250 in equation (5).
This prediction clearly shows the influence of the latent
heat convection on the shape of the mushy region.
(a) Mixed, Ko= 1.6 x lo3 Further, as expected, the shape of the region is rela-
tively similar to that obtained with the mixed model,
Figure 3~. Increasing the solid viscosity to a larger
value reduces the extent of deformation of the phase
change area. Figure 46 depicts the shape of the mushy
region at t = 250 when CL, = 1000. The reduction in
deformation is due to the much lower flow velocities
in the mushy region arising from the “stiffer” solid
fraction. Note that although the shape in Figure 4b is
similar to the columnar zone model shape, Figure 36,
the flow in the mushy fluid (pS = 1000) mushy region
is much smaller than the flow in the columnar zone
region. The flat shape in Figure 3b is due to the lack
of net latent heat convection in the source term (S,),
whereas the flat shape in Figure 4b is due to the low
flow velocities in the mushy region.
In using the mushy fluid model, care must be taken
in choosing the value of the enhanced viscosity. Figure
(b) Columnar, K,= 1.6 x lo3 4c shows that when Jo, = 100, the morphology of the
mushy fluid mushy region at t = 250 is very pro-
Figure 3. Comparison of mixed and columnar models on pre- nounced. The reason for this deformation is that the
diction of shape of mushy region at t = 250 seconds. (a) Mixed solid viscosity is so low that a relatively significant
model (showing direction of flow), (b) columnar model
flow occurs in the fully solid (gS = 1) region. Although
such flows might not be physically realistic in most
solidification systems, they may arise in waxes or
glasses.

(a) Mushy fluid, p = 250 (b) Mushy fluid, p = 1000 (c) Mushy fluid, p = 100

Figure 4. Effect of the solid viscosity, ps, on the shape of the mushy fluid mushy region at t = 250 seconds

324 Appl. Math. Modelling, 1990, Vol. 14, June

 Modelling the mush region: V. R. Voller et al.

Conclusions
Two limiting assumptions on the nature of a mushy
region in a binary alloy solidification have been iden-
tified. From this, three alternative modelling ap-
proaches have been proposed: mushy fluid, columnar
zone, and mixed. The mushy fluid approach would be
suitable for modelling the solidification of waxy ma-
terials. The columnar zone approach is directed at
problems with columnar crystal structures. The mixed
approach offers a convenient means by which the
mushy fluid approach can be easily implemented in a
control volume code. In terms of the shape of the
evolving mushy region, the following observations are
made.
Convective effects within the mushy region have
little influence in determining the shape of the mushy
region in a columnar zone model. Further, the shape
of the mushy region is not influenced by the choice of
permeability.
In the mixed and mushy fluid models, mushy region
convection effects will play a role in determining the
shape of the mushy region. The choice of the perme-
ability (in the case of a mixed model) or the choice of
the solid viscosity (in the case of a mushy fluid model)
is a major parameter in determining the shape.
Other factors may also take a role in determining
the shape of a mushy region. For example, solute re-
distribution could locally change the solidification con-
ditions and thereby the shape of the solidus and liqui-
dus isotherms. However, considerations of this nature
are beyond the scope of the present paper.
In conclusion, even in the simple case of no solute
transport, the results presented in this paper indicate
that the modelling approach used in a solidification
analysis can have a dramatic effect on the predictions
obtained. In essence, care needs to be taken in match-
ing the physics of the system in question with the choice
of modelling approach. We hope that the work in this
paper might aid in making such a choice.
Acknowledgments
C. Prakash’s participation in this research was made
possible by a Small Business Innovative Research Grant
from NASA-Lewis (Contract No. NASA-25331, con-
tract manager Dr. Amon Chait). A. D. Brent was funded
by a Doctoral Dissertation Fellowship from the Grad-
uate School of the University of Minnesota. The sup-
port by NASA-Lewis and the Graduate School of the
University of Minnesota is gratefully acknowledged.
Computations were carried out on an AT&T 3b2/400
microcomputer and a Cray 2. The support of both AT&T
Information Systems, Inc. and the Minnesota Super-
computer Institute is gratefully acknowledged.
Nomenclature
c specific heat
g volume fraction
gravity
E thermal conductivity
U velocity vector
u x-direction velocity
u y-direction velocity
t time
T temperature
melting point of pure solute
TM
F external body force ensuring satisfaction of
two-phase momentum equations
P pressure
h sensible enthalpy
H phase enthalpy
L latent heat of fusion
& permeability coefficient in Carman-Kozeny
equations
S source term in conservation equations
W width and height of cavity
coordinate directions
XT Y
density
thermal coefficient of volume expansion
;
dynamic viscosity
p
Superscripts/Subscripts
cold conditions at cold wall
hot conditions at hot wall
mix effective value of transport coefficients for
mushy fluid model
ref reference conditions (T,,-- = T,, and Cref =
Cc)
int initial conditions
solid phase
s liquid phase
References
Voller, V. R. and Prakash, C. A fixed grid numerical modelling
methodology for convection-diffusion mushy region phase-
change problems. Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 1987,30, 1709-1720
Szekely, J. and Jassal, A. S. An experimental and analytical
study of the solidification of a binary dendritic system. Met.
Trans. B 1978, 9B, 389-398
Dantzig, J. A. Modeling liquid-solid phase changes with melt
convection. ht. J. Numer. Methods Engrg. 1989, 28, 1769-1785
Viskanta, R. and Beckermann, C. Mathematical modelling of
solidification. Paper presented at Symposium on Interdiscipli-
nary Issues in Materials Processing and Manufacturing, ASME
Annual Meeting, Boston, Mass., December 14-18, 1987
Beckermann, C. and Viskanta, R. Double-diffusive convection
during dendritic solidification of a binary mixture. PCH 1988,
10, 195-213
Bennon, W. D. and Incropera, F. P. A continuum model for
momentum, heat and species transport in binary solid-liquid
phase change systems. I: Model formulation. Znt. J. Heat Mass
Transfer 1987, 30, 2161-2170
Bennon, W. D. and Incropera, F. P. A continuum model for
momentum, heat and species transport in binary solid-liquid
phase change systems. 2: Application to solidification in a rec-
tangular cavity. Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 1987,30,2171-2187
Voller, V. R., Brent, A. D. and Prakash, C. The modelling of
heat, mass and solute transport in solidification systems. Znt.
J. Heat Mass Transfer 1989, 32, 1719-1731.
Gartling, D. K. Finite element analysis of convective heat transfer
problems with change of phase. Comput. Methods Fluids, eds.
K. Morgan et al. Pentech, London, UK 1980, 257-284

Appl. Math. Modelling, 1990, Vol. 14, June 325

Modeling the mush region: V. R. Voller et al.
10 Poirier, D. R. Permeability for flow of interdendritic liquid in constitutive relations. N&ear Engrg. Design 1984, 82, 107-126
columnar-dendritic alloys. Metallurg. Trans. B 1987, 18B, 13 Patankar, S. V. Numerical Heat Transfer and Fluid Flow.
245-256 Washington, D.C., Hemisphere, 1980
11 Carver, M. B. Numerical computation of phase separation in 14 Voller, V. R., Cross, M. and Markatos, N. C. An enthalpy
two fluid flow. J. FIuids Engrg. 1984, 106, 147-153 method for convection/diffusion phase change. Int. J. Numer.
12 Ishii, M. and Mishima, K. Two-fluid model and hydrodynamic Methods Engrg. 1987, 24, 271-284

326 Appl. Math. Modelling, 1990, Vol. 14, June