49 views

Uploaded by Alex Escobar Urrutia

- Module 06 Material and Hardware.docx
- Exp 6 phase equilibrium eutectic system.docx
- Duplex Stainless Steel 3rd Edition (1)
- jjj
- Ch16 Linear Tetrahedron
- 15-7 Mo Data Bulletin
- LAB 1 Strain Measurement
- Teach Ur Self Phase Diagrams
- Materials Ch11: Phase Xfrms
- I 27-03-13 Introduction
- Stainless Steel
- 2 Marks With Answers
- bahuti
- Physical Processes
- Hume
- Duplex Stainless Steels
- binaryphasediagrams-131111025620-phpapp02
- Lutsyk-Zelenaya2018 Article 2
- Notes on Selection of Materials
- ARL Summer Student Report CROSS DAVID

You are on page 1of 36

www.elsevier.com/locate/ijplas

for the solidi®cation of S.G. cast iron in a

green sand mould

Diego J. Celentano

Departamento de IngenierõÂa MecaÂnica, Universidad de Santiago de Chile, Av. Bdo. O'Higgins 3363,

Santiago de Chile, Chile

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

been formulated during the last years (see Zabaras et al., 1990; Inoue and Ju, 1992;

Bellet et al., 1996; Celentano et al., 1996; Trovant and Argyropoulos, 1996 and

references therein). In particular, some of them have been used to analyze the soli-

di®cation and subsequent cooling of spheroidal graphite (S.G.) cast iron in green

sand moulds considering relatively simple constitutive models for these materials

(Celentano et al., 1995; Agelet de Saracibar et al., 1999). Although they predicted a

satisfactory agreement between experimental and numerical results, it has been long

recognized that the use of more sophisticated models is necessary to represent in a

more realistic form some particular physical aspects involved in this process

(Hamata, 1992; Azzouz, 1995; Ami Saada et al., 1996; Celentano, 1997).

0749-6419/01/$ - see front matter # 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

PII: S0749-6419(00)00095-4

1624 D.J. Celentano / International Journal of Plasticity 17 (2001) 1623±1658

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

aspects for both the liquid±solid and solid±solid phase-changes in this thermo-

mechanical context in a coupled form is also a relevant feature of the present for-

mulation. This phenomenological approach includes the de®nition of evolution laws

for the S.G. cast iron phase-change internal variables that are assumed to describe

the average microstructure formation occurring in a certain volume at the macro-

scopic level avoiding in this form a microscopic scale modelling of the micro-

mechanisms involved in the phase transformation. Hence, the aim of considering

this assumption in the thermomechanical/microstructural formulation proposed in

this work is to describe in a phenomenological way such complex eects in solidi®-

cation problems.

Although little rate-sensitiveness of green sand behaviour could be observed dur-

ing the experiments conducted by Azzouz (1995) and Ami Saada et al. (1996) and

taking into account that the rate-independent plasticity can be considered as a par-

ticular case of viscoplasticity (Lubliner, 1990), a thermoviscoplasticity framework

has been chosen for both the S.G. cast iron and sand models in order to simplify

their presentations.

All these features have been implemented in a coupled thermomechanical/micro-

structural ®nite element model brie¯y described in Section 5. Further, a strain-dis-

placement matrix able to deal with large strain situations avoiding numerical locking

due to the incompressibility of viscoplastic ¯ows is also proposed. Finally, Section 6

presents the analysis of a solidi®cation test where some available experimental

measurements are compared with the numerical results obtained using this proposed

formulation.

2. Thermomechanical formulation

energy function E E E; k ; T can be assumed as a function of the Green-

Lagrange strain tensor E, the nint -dimensiona1 vector ®eld k 1; . . . ; nint ; nint 51

of phenomenological internal state variables k (usually governed by evolution

equations with zero initial conditions) and the temperature T (see Coleman and

Gurtin, 1967; Lubliner, 1990; Levitas, 1996, 1998 and references therein for this and

other equivalent expressions for the speci®c free energy function). With this de®ni-

tion of E , the Second Piola±Kirchho stress tensor S can be derived using the

classical constitutive relation (Coleman and Gurtin, 1967): S 0 @ E =@E, where 0

is the density at the material (initial) con®guration. As pointed out by Doyle and

Ericksen (1956), an equivalent stress de®nition is obtained in the form: 0 @ e =@e

(see also Lubliner, 1985 for further details in the derivation of this expression),

where is the Kirchho stress tensor ( FSFT , F being the deformation gradient

tensor and T the transpose symbol), e is the Almansi strain tensor and e

e e; F; k ; T is the reformulated speci®c free energy function written in terms of

Eulerian arguments. Therefore, the Cauchy stress tensor , de®ned by =0

(Malvern, 1969), can be computed in this framework as @ e =@e, where is the

1626 D.J. Celentano / International Journal of Plasticity 17 (2001) 1623±1658

small elastic strains and isotropic material response (usually accepted for metals and

other materials; see Murnagaham, 1937; Garcia Garino and Oliver, 1992; Garcia

Garino, 1993 and references therein), the speci®c free energy function may be writ-

ten as e; k ; T. This last simpli®ed form of is adopted in the formulation to

be described below.

Taking into account the previous considerations, the existence of a speci®c

Helmholtz free energy function e; k ; T leads to the following form of the

governing local equations (all of them valid in

where

is the spatial con®g-

uration of a body and denotes the time interval of interest with t 2 ) expressed

by the mass conservation, the equation of motion, the energy balance and the dis-

sipation inequality (Malvern, 1969):

J 0 1

:

cT rq r T : d rint 0 3

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

material) and phase-change (for S.G. cast iron) or hygrometric (for green sand)

eects, respectively. In this context, this assumption leads to rint rvp vp

int rint and

vp pc

Dint Dint Dint . The evolution equations for the viscoplastic internal variables are

de®ned within the non associate thermoviscoplasticity theory framework (Perzina,

1971) as Dk =Dt gk where gk k @=@qk (no sum on k) are known functions

de®ned in terms of a function k and a viscoplastic potential which in turn may

depend (among other variables) on a yield function F F e; k ; T k 1; . . . ; nint

such that no viscoplastic evolutions occur when F < 0 (Perzina, 1971; Hamata,

1992; Arnold and Saleeb, 1994; Azzouz, 1995; Celentano, 1997). On the other hand,

the rate equations for the phase-change internal variables of the S.G. cast iron are

given by microstructural models based on kinetics considerations (Banerjee and

Stefanescu, 1991; Chang et al., 1991; Goettsch and Dantzig, 1994; Celentano and

Cruchaga, 1999; Onsùien et al., 1999) and the hygrometric internal variable

accounts for the water content existing in the sand (Azzouz, 1995). Moreover, the

speci®c free energy function is decomposed into a thermoelastic, thermoviscoplastic

and phase-change (for S.G. cast iron) or hygrometric (for green sand) contributions.

The viscoplastic potential is also proposed in additive form for the S.G. cast iron

considering a thermoviscoplastic and phase-change terms while a purely thermo-

viscoplastic behaviour is assumed for the sand (Celentano, 1997). Some details of

the S.G. cast iron and green sand constitutive models are given below.

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

eutectic, ferrite and pearlite volumetric fractions, respectively. For the liquid±solid

phase-change ff fp 0 , Eq. (5) reads:

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.

internal variables are:

1 fa , 2 fg , 3 fc , 4 ff , 5 fp npc

int 5 with q1 qa , q2 qg , q3 qc ,

q4 qf , q5 qp . As mentioned above, the austenite, graphite and cementite frac-

tions are associated to the liquid phase-change while the ferrite and pearlite evolve

during the solid-solid transformation.

In the liquid-solid phase-change, experimental observations suggest that both the

dendritic and eutectic grains are equiaxed except over a small region located near the

mould walls where columnar grains appear (Chang et al., 1991). In this work all

grains formed are assumed to be equiaxed and spherical in shape for the eutectics or

D.J. Celentano / International Journal of Plasticity 17 (2001) 1623±1658 1631

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:

D.J. Celentano / International Journal of Plasticity 17 (2001) 1623±1658 1635

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

dynamic constraints (see Cassenti and Annigeri, 1989), exclusively depends on the

thermoelastic and phase-change terms of the free energy function and, according to

the de®nition of , is valid to describe the material behaviour during the whole

solidi®cation and cooling process.

In the classical ®nite deformation elastoplasticity theory, the additive decomposi-

tion of the Almansi strain can be deduced from the multiplicative decomposition of

the deformation gradient into the elastic and plastic parts F Fe Fp where, for this

case, the link between the multiplicative theory and the additive decomposition of e

is the elastic Finger tensor (see Green and Naghdi, 1971; Kleiber, 1975; Simo and

Ortiz, 1985). In the present formulation, however, it should be noted that the addi-

tive decomposition of the Almansi strain is only recovered for each component as:

ee jcp e eth jcp for cp 1 and ee jcp e evp eth jcp epc jph for cp ph a; g; c; f; p

where ee jcp is the Almansi elastic strain tensor. These decompositions are respec-

tively deduced from the multiplicative decompositions of the deformation gradient

tensor given by: F Fe jcp Fth jcp for cp 1 and F Fe jcp Fth jcp Fpc jph Fvp for cp

ph a; g; c; f; p considering for such cases the assumption of small elastic strains. In

this context, note that the thermal part of e [Eq. (22)] depends exclusively on the

1=3

temperature through Fth jcp1 1 ath jcp 1 while in the de®nition of the phase-

1=3

change contribution epc [Eq. (28)] both Fth jcp1 and Fpc jph1 1 apc jph 1 are

involved. Although the split of F into elastic, thermal and viscoplastic contributions

has been already proposed in the literature (Wriggers et al., 1989; Bammann et al.,

1995; Casey, 1998) as well as recent extensions to include the deformation due to the

martensitic transformation in steels (Levitas, 1998), the consideration of the phase-

change eects in such de®nition for solidi®cation problems is an original feature of

the present work. Furthermore, the multiplicative decomposition assumed in this

formulation is consistent with the arguments discussed in detail by Levitas (1998)

regarding to the contradictions associated to the dierent possible combinations to

de®ne F.

It should be noted again that the constitutive law (29) is only valid for small elastic

strains. This constraint, however, is not a strong restriction of the model since either

the viscoplastic, thermal or phase-change parts of e usually predominate over ee in

the deformation of S.G. cast iron occuring during the solidi®cation and cooling

process.

As mentioned above, the deviatoric response in the liquid phase is neglected with

the adopted de®nition of Cs jl . Nevertheless, an additional assumption (see Lubliner,

1636 D.J. Celentano / International Journal of Plasticity 17 (2001) 1623±1658

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

(continued on next page)

D.J. Celentano / International Journal of Plasticity 17 (2001) 1623±1658 1637

Box 1 (continued)

with
cp l; a; g; c; f; p and ph a; g; c; f; p

cte jcp e evp : : e evp e evp :

20 @T2 0 @T

T @eth jcp T @Cs jcp

: eth

T jcp 1 e evp : Cs jcp : T 1 e evp :

0 @T 0 @T2

s

@c jcp

: eth jcp cs jcp T Tref

@T

T @2 hC jcp vp 2 T @2 hk jcp vp vp

ctp jcp
# :

20 @2 T 20 @2 T

cpc jph T fph e evp : : e jph e evp :

@T 2 0 @T 2 0 @T

2T @Cs jph pc

vp T vp s @epc

T jph

:1 e e : : eT jph 1 e e : C jph 1

0 @T 0 @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

1 @Cvp : @Kvp

rvp

int T : Lv evp T C #vp

vp

T K vp vp

: Lv

0 @T @T

1638 D.J. Celentano / International Journal of Plasticity 17 (2001) 1623±1658

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

f jph 1 for ph a; g; c; f; p

: : vp

Dvp vp vp vp vp vp

int : Lv e C # K : Lv T& 32

pc s 1 vp s

1=3 s :

Dint jph 0 L jph e e : C jph : 1 apc jph pc jph 1 f ph 33

30

int Dint 50. It is worth noting that the volumetric

fraction derivatives of te jmx and tp jmx have not been considered in Eq. (33) as they

are assumed to be negligible in comparison to the latent heat and phase-change

volumetric conjugate variables of fph indicated in the bracketed terms.

D.J. Celentano / International Journal of Plasticity 17 (2001) 1623±1658 1639

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

and pore volumetric fractions. Typical compaction (the compaction of sand during

the manufacturing process of the mould is not studied here) corresponds to an

overall density of 1600 kg/m3, an average value of the porosity fv of 0.26 and a water

saturation of 0.18 (Azzouz, 1995). Considering that the pores are partially ®lled with

water, the value fw0 0:26 0:18 0:0468 is therefore taken as an initial condition

for the free water volumetric fraction fw which approximately leads to a maximum

stress peak in the compression test.

Complex phenomena occur in the sand when it is subjected to thermomechanical

loading imposed during casting (Azzouz, 1995; Ami Saada et al., 1996). As a ®rst

approach to the problem, however, most of them are considered through the

dependence of the constitutive laws upon temperature and only the vaporization of

free water as an eect related to the disappearing of initial humidity will be included

in the model. Moreover, an eventual condensation of water steam is not considered.

In this green sand constitutive model, the viscoplastic and phase-change eects are

mainly related, respectively, to damage (degradation of the material) and hygro-

metric (matrix suction due to the presence of free water) phenomena occuring in the

material during the process.

1640 D.J. Celentano / International Journal of Plasticity 17 (2001) 1623±1658

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.

3 vp nvp vp

int 3 with q1 , q2 Y , q3 T where the same notation of previous

Sections is used and, additionally, d is the viscoplastic damage variable and Yvp is

vp

gk @=@qk are

@

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:

D.J. Celentano / International Journal of Plasticity 17 (2001) 1623±1658 1641

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

1995).

The vaporization of free water is described by 1 fw npc

int 1 with q1 qw . The

evolution of fw is assumed to depend exclusively on T. Hence,

: 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

parts of .

The thermoelastic part te is:

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

simply written as:

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

1644 D.J. Celentano / International Journal of Plasticity 17 (2001) 1623±1658

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

1

Yvp e evp : Cs : e evp e evp : Cs : eth e evp : Cs : epc

2

qw 0 Ls e evp : 1 dvp Cs : epc

f 1

D.J. Celentano / International Journal of Plasticity 17 (2001) 1623±1658 1645

: :

Dint : Lv evp T& vp Yvp dvp

1 1=3 s :

0 Ls e evp : 1 dvp Cs : 1 apc pc 1 f w 50 48

30

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

1 @J 1 @J

A U; V; W

J @ J @

U; V; W: components of the nodal displacement vector U

A2D A jF13 F23 F31 F32 0;F33 1 U; V

Aax A j NU U; V (U: radial nodal displacement)

F13 F23 F31 F32 0;F33 1

X

N: shape function for displacements

X: radial material coordinate

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

and height=140 mm) in a green sand mould surrounded by a steel shell (internal

diameter=185 mm, thickness=30 mm and height=260 mm) is performed. This

problem has been extensively studied using simpli®ed in®nitesimal strains con-

stitutive models for the materials involved (Celentano et al., 1995; Celentano, 1997).

The experimental apparatus is schematically shown in Fig. 1. Both temperature and

radial displacement evolutions have been measured during solidi®cation and cooling

approximately at the midheight of the specimen (BRITE/EURAM Synthesis

Report, 1994). Thermocouples were placed on three radial directions at 0, 120 and

240 , starting from the cylinder central axis to the surrounding sand mould in order

to visualize the thermal gradient evolution. Radial displacement were measured at

the same directions on the cylinder external skin using silica rods.

D.J. Celentano / International Journal of Plasticity 17 (2001) 1623±1658 1649

Table 1

Material propertiesa of S.G. cast iron

10 at 1150 C (1) 44,260 at 750 C (a) 500 (g) 163,471 at 20 C (c, f, p)

10 at 1400 C 43,790 at 770 C 163,113 at 100 C

44,360 at 800 C 160,174 at 200 C

45,935 at 830 C 151,650 at 300 C

42,935 at 850 C 135,276 at 400 C

35,435 at 900 C 110,898 at 500 C

28,435 at 1000 C 81,386 at 600 C

5000 at 1100 C 52,021 at 700 C

46,668 at 720 C

Poisson ratio: 0.33 (1, a, g, c, f, p)

Secant thermal dilatation coecient (1 /C):

20.010 6 at 1155 C (1) 13.010 6 at 20 C (a, g, c, f, p)

20.010 6 at 1400 C 12.010 6 at 750 C

12.010 6 at 800 C

17.010 6 at 1000 C

Thermal hardening function (MPa):

0.000 1 (1), 260 at 20 C (a, g, c, f, p)

250 at 200 C

210 at 400 C

60 at 600 C

50 at 700 C

30 at 900 C

20 at 1000 C

2 at 1141 C

0.1 at 1155 C

Viscoplastic parameters:

Viscosity (MPa s): 100.0 (1, a, g, c, f, p)

Exponent: 1.0 (1, a, g, c, f, p)

Solid±solid phase-change parameters:

Viscosity (MPa s): 0.0 (f, p)

Exponent: 1.0 (f, p)

Isotropic hardening modulus (MPa): 0.0 (l, a, g, c), 300 (f, p)

Kinematic hardening modulus (MPa): 0.0 (l, a, g, c, f, p)

Secant phase-change volumetric deformation: 0.01 (a, g, c), 0.005 (f, p)

Density (initial) (kg/m3): 6700 (1)

Secant speci®c heat (J/kg C):

917 (1) 740 at 732 C (a) 705 (g, c) 540 at 25 C (f, p)

705 at 1136 C 732 at 723 C

917 at 1145 C

Conductivity (J/m s C):

33 at 1250 C (1) 35 at 750 C 30 (g, c) 27 at 20 C (f, p)

33 at 1300 C 33 at 1140 C 30 at 328 C

92 at 1350 C 30 at 500 C

(continued on next page)

1650 D.J. Celentano / International Journal of Plasticity 17 (2001) 1623±1658

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

Poisson ratio: 0.33

Secant thermal dilatation coecient (1/ C): 13.010 6

Viscoplastic parameters:

Viscosity (MPa s): 0.0

Exponent: 1.0

Isotropic hardening modulus (MPa): 0.0

Secant phase-change volumetric deformation: 0.01

Density (initial) (kg/m3): 1550

Secant speci®c heat (J/kg C):

917 at 20 C

917 at 200 C

1025 at 400 C

1063 at 700 C

1100 at 1000 C

1100 at 1300 C

Conductivity (J/m s C):

0.86 at 20 C

0.72 at 200 C

0.52 at 400 C

0.61 at 700 C

0.78 at 1000 C

0.78 at 1300 C

Secant latent heat (J/kg): 3750

Vaporization temperature ( C): 100

Initial free water volumetric fraction: 0.0468

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.

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

Poisson ratio: 0.3

Secant thermal dilatation coecient (1/ C): 12.010 6

Isotropic hardening modulus (MPa): 0.0

Kinematic hardening modulus (MPa): 0.0

Density (initial) (kg/m3): 7900

Conductivity (J/m s C): 35

Table 4

Properties at the interfacesa

1000 at gn=0.000 m (gn=normal gap)

100 at gn=0.001 m

Heat transfer coecient at the sand±steel interface (J/m2 s C): 2000

Heat transfer coecient at the steel±air interface (J/m2 s C): 20

Environmental temperature ( C): 20

Normal asperity at the casting±sand and sand±steel interfaces (MPa/m): 10.010 (high value to avoid

penetration between bodies, see Celentano et al., 1996)

a

The variation of the heat transfer coecient with the normal gap has been assumed to be piecewise

linear within the mentioned normal gaps. Below the lowest and above the highest normal gaps, the

properties are assumed to remain constant at the same value de®ned for the extreme normal gap.

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

process of S.G. cast iron in green sand moulds have been presented. This formula-

tion accounts for thermomechanical as well as microstructural behaviours of these

materials in an uni®ed framework allowing, therefore, to analyze the dierent

coupled phenomena occuring in complex casting problems. Several original aspects

of such formulation have been discussed. For the S.G. cast iron model, in parti-

cular, the incorporation of latent heat release and volumetric expansions due to all

metallurgical transformations existing during the solidi®cation and cooling pro-

cesses are relevant features of the presented formulation. On the other hand, the

consideration of the hygrometric and damage phenomena stands out in the green

sand model.

The corresponding ®nite element model has been also derived and brie¯y pre-

sented. Some strategies to achieve the numerical solution have been also proposed.

This formulation has been used in the analysis of a solidi®cation test of S.G. cast

iron in a green sand mould. The model has been partially validated with some

available experimental measurements where reasonable agreement between numer-

ical and experimental results can be observed. However, the diculties associated to

the full material characterization lead to a further research in the thermomechanical/

microstructural simulation of solidi®cation processes with the sake of constituting a

robust tool for casting design.

D.J. Celentano / International Journal of Plasticity 17 (2001) 1623±1658 1657

Acknowledgements

DICYT-USACH are gratefully acknowledged.

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, UniversiteÂ 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-viscoplasticiteÂ anisotherme et la transfor-

mation de phase d'une fonte G.S. ferritique. TheÁse de Doctorat, UniversiteÂ 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).

- Module 06 Material and Hardware.docxUploaded byshoaibame
- Exp 6 phase equilibrium eutectic system.docxUploaded byNur Fadhilah
- Duplex Stainless Steel 3rd Edition (1)Uploaded byPhani Sridhar Ch
- jjjUploaded byJom Noe
- Ch16 Linear TetrahedronUploaded bylittle-wing
- 15-7 Mo Data BulletinUploaded bymsdohar
- LAB 1 Strain MeasurementUploaded bySiew Lyn
- Teach Ur Self Phase DiagramsUploaded bymrslayerdude
- Materials Ch11: Phase XfrmsUploaded byJohn Miller
- I 27-03-13 IntroductionUploaded byJanith
- Stainless SteelUploaded byiuli55
- 2 Marks With AnswersUploaded byKarthik Soundarrajan
- bahutiUploaded byEgwuatu Uchenna
- Physical ProcessesUploaded byZeuruel Lee
- HumeUploaded byAshok Pradhan
- Duplex Stainless SteelsUploaded byRizalzi Bachtiar
- binaryphasediagrams-131111025620-phpapp02Uploaded byjonathan_dian
- Lutsyk-Zelenaya2018 Article 2Uploaded byJoan Sebastian Ruiz
- Notes on Selection of MaterialsUploaded byNosakhare
- ARL Summer Student Report CROSS DAVIDUploaded bySrivathsa Sharma
- fema403_apc.pdfUploaded byJeffPrager
- v099n06p333Uploaded bytechzones
- Important 12Uploaded byaman mahar
- 1-s2.0-S0168874X06000151-mainUploaded byKarol Viri
- thesis_c.pdfUploaded byppgl
- Effects of Shear Coupling on Shear Properties of WoodUploaded byChandra Clark
- Steel.pdfUploaded byJerry Andrews
- Week 8 Strain Energy Part 2Uploaded bydansade
- Permeabilitatea magnetica a otelurilor inoxUploaded bycriuvos
- ARTICULO .pdfUploaded byCristian Vera

- API 934 Minutes Stress Eng ATT EUploaded byMahendra Rathore
- cobol ansi-85.pdfUploaded byVictor Alberto Lopez Lagos
- FORMULA_ERBS_C_1_0Uploaded byCesar
- MFCSEUploaded bySrikanth Malladi
- msi medication admin errorUploaded byapi-288536467
- OTG 05_Temporary Equipment(Jan2007)_tcm4-460304.pdfUploaded byqwerty_qwerty_2009
- AP Wh Unit 1 StandardsUploaded byGracie Bihun
- OOTify Finishes as Finalist at USC SLAM Center for Body Computing Competition to Cap Schedule of CompetitionsUploaded byPR.com
- PRINCE2 Risk and Issue Management Explained _ PRINCE2Uploaded byFrancisco Jose Viejo Payan
- Thermal PhysicsUploaded byMahtab Alam
- Consumer Buying Behaviour of LubricantUploaded byHarsh Mody
- annualreport10-11Uploaded byElangovan Nagavel
- Psychometric SuccessUploaded bydan west
- Computer Science AdvocacyUploaded byIswan Aulia
- Purchase Order ManagementUploaded bynaveenraj_a
- A Short History of WaterUploaded bymnettorg
- Web PortalUploaded byLeslie Bowman
- Smog Check OBD Reference GuideUploaded byArturo Torres
- 0610_w10_qp_11Uploaded byMohammed MaGdy
- Newsletter Oktober 2010 EnglischUploaded bykcim
- 1John a. Zacharias 313 West 7th Street Marysville, Ohio 43040Uploaded byJohn Zacharias
- BS1 2 Producing Goods and ServicesUploaded byMs. Yvonne Campbell
- A Christmas Journey (children play)Uploaded byVivek Justthink
- Camus v LewisUploaded byBrent Matheny
- Lab Quality ManualUploaded byjemms16
- Oposa vs. FactoranUploaded byDarl Yabut
- Aorn AttireUploaded byBingDelaCruz
- Mecha-Knight O.C.C.Uploaded byjester5
- victoria vigilante resumeportfolioUploaded byapi-274193657
- Dynalock 2012 PricebookUploaded bySecurity Lock Distributors