So, Cahn-Hilliard is the first "benchmark" problem on the PFHub website. After that, maybe try working on some of the other benchmarks. The dendrite problem is a good one as it has quite a lot of example codes available.
Hello everyone, I wonder is there some book about phase field that has exercises? I've read books <Phase-field methods in Material Science and Engineering> written by Nikolas Provatas and I also downloaded some sample code to play with but I still feel that I don't really understand phase field, I think I may need some exercises to help me understand.
Also, see some of the links above to get started with implementing something
How do I get notifications about semianrs, workshops, events, etc in the future? Thanks
Hi @ahmad681, I think it's mostly by word of mouth, which isn't very open. This is unfortunate. We should probably mail out prospective dates to the pfhub mailing list. Probably best to sign up for the mailing list, https://pages.nist.gov/pfhub/mailing_list/
I'll try and ensure updates go the mailing list regarding future workshops.
@wd15 thanks a lot, I will do that. I am second year grad student at Purdue. What I am working on is developing phase field models for films growth. I would like to really get involved with the phase field community, collaborating, sharing ideas, and making connections as well.
I am new to phase field modelling. I wanted to know how can I install the commercial version of OpenPhase i.e., OpenPhase Studio. Can anyone please guide me through.
OpenPhase clearly is not supported in the same way as a regular open source code (i.e. github presence, submit issues, user engagement). If you are set on using OpenPhase then maybe concact the authors via the form on their webpage, https://openphase-solutions.com/.
Hello, I am wondering whether there is open source code which support compressible navier stokes and phase field model ? I am looking forward a tool for simulating the cavitation in rarefaction wave.
Hello, I am currently working on some phase field problems using MEMPHIS; to that end, I would like to submit our benchmark results for 6.a (electrostatics). When I tried to submit, there was an issue with the portal. Is it still possible to submit results for this problem? Thanks!
Yes, it is possible to submit. Submit with a pull-request on github.
Hello Dr. Daniel Wheeler, Hope you are keeping well.
I have one question regarding the Benchmark 3a.1 (dendritic growth in 2D), what is the value of timestep and mesh size (I assume dx==dy=1) used in the benchmark problem
Kindly let me know thank you in Advance
Abdur, PhD student, University College Dublin, Ireland
@wd15@Rahman786Foam Hello Dr. Daniel Wheeler, Hope you are keeping well. I have one question regarding the Benchmark 3a.1 (dendritic growth in 2D), what is the value of timestep and mesh size (I assume dx==dy=1) used in the benchmark problem Kindly let me know thank you in Advance Abdur, PhD student, University College Dublin, Ireland
Hi @Rahman786Foam, the question depends a lot on which type of numerical scheme is used. The dendrite benchmark paper has some discussion in the "Numerical Methods" section, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.commatsci.2018.03.015. On the PFHub website, https://pages.nist.gov/pfhub/simulations/3a.1/, there are a number of different implementations. You can follow the links to get the implementation details for each of those to try and figure out what time step and grid spacing was used. Some of those are adaptive so won't have a fixed time step or grid spacing. I've run the dendrite simulation with a grid spacing of 1 and a time step of 0.1 with an implicit, fixed grid scheme. Looking at the paper, for an explicit scheme with dx=0.4, the maximum dt is 0.009. I hope that helps.
Dear Dr. Wheeler, are there any thoughts for expanding the list of benchmarks? I have been working on multi-phse field model including inclination dependence of interface energy. When validating my implementation I simulated the Wulff shape in 2-phase system and developed a quantitative methodology applicable to any model simulating the anisotorpic isolated particle. Besides that, I think that there should be a benchmark comparing results of triple junction angles among different models (also worked on that). Would you or somebody else be interested in hearing more? Kind regards, Martin Minar, PhD student @ KU Leuven, Belgium
Hi @dudris, yes, I would be interested in hearing more. Could we perhaps move this discussion to a GitHub discussion as I think it's a little easier to have a more context based discussion (we're going to close down Gitter soon). I've taken the liberty of copying and pasting your question into that forum -- https://github.com/usnistgov/pfhub/discussions/1415