Descriptive Approaches to Crystallization and Recrystallization Front Transformations

CHORNOIVANENKO K.O., UZLOV K.I., POVZLO Ye.L., and MAZORCHUK V.F.

Ukrainian State University of Science and Technologies, 2 Lazariana Str., UA-49010 Dnipro, Ukraine

Received / final version: 02.03.2026 / 30.09.2026 Download PDF logo PDF

Abstract
The paper presents a comprehensive analysis of physical, mathematical, and computational approaches used to describe the transformation and propagation of crystallization and recrystallization fronts. The discussion begins with classical sharp-interface models, where the Stefan’s model serves as the fundamental description of phase-front transformation governed by heat conduction and solutal diffusion. Extensions of this model, via the Gibbs–Thomson relation, incorporate interfacial curvature and interfacial velocity effects, which are necessary for accurate modelling of interfacial-transformation processes. The Mullins–Sekerka theory examined in this work describes the morphological instability of the crystallization front, identifying the conditions, under which a planar interface loses stability and evolves into cellular or dendritic morphology. This theory accounts for impurity diffusion, undercooling, and surface energy, enabling the determination of critical growth rates and characteristic perturbation wavelengths. The Jackson–Hunt theory is considered as classical model of eutectic transformation, describing lamellar or rod-like structures and determining the optimal spacing between lamellae based on the minimal undercooling condition. The work also discusses diffuse interface (phase field) models, emphasizing their advantages for describing complex morphologies and topological changes. The thin-interface analysis is presented as a mathematical framework ensuring quantitative consistency between phase-field simulations and sharp-interface models. Corrections such as antitrapping fluxes guarantee modelling accuracy, even when the interfacial thickness and curvature are increased. The chapters describe finite-difference and finite-element schemes, stability conditions, adaptive meshing, and the role of multilevel and GPU-accelerated solvers in achieving high-accuracy simulations of crystallization and recrystallization processes. Classical theories including interface-motion kinetics description, the Mullins–Sekerka stability limits, and Jackson–Hunt law reproduction are regarded as essential tools for validating quantitative models. Finally, the work offers practical recommendations for selecting between sharp-interface models, phase-field models, multiphase approaches, cellular automata, and hybrid approaches depending on material system complexity, required accuracy, and available computational resources. The presented general concept integrates theory, asymptotic analysis, and modern computational methods to support predictive modelling of interfacial transformations under contemporary materials-processing conditions.

Keywords: crystallization front, recrystallization front, phase-field modelling, thin interface analysis, diffuse interface, microstructure evolution, solidification modelling, curvature effects, interface kinetics, numerical simulation, multigrid methods, GPU acceleration, dendritic growth, eutectic crystallization.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.15407/ufm.27.04.***

Citation: K.O. Chornoivanenko, K.I. Uzlov, Ye.L. Povzlo, and V.F. Mazorchuk, Descriptive Approaches to Crystallization and Recrystallization Front Transformations, Progress in Physics of Metals, 27, No. 4: ***–*** (2026)


References  
  1. L.I. Rubinstein, The Stefan Problem, Vol. 27 (Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society: 1971); https://doi.org/10.1090/mmono/027
  2. H.S. Carslaw and J.C. Jaeger, Conduction of Heat in Solids (Oxford: Oxford University Press: 1959).
  3. J. Crank, Free and Moving Boundary Problems (Oxford: Clarendon Press: 1987).
  4. S.H. Davis, Theory of Solidification (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 2001); https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511546747
  5. W.W. Mullins and R.F. Sekerka, J. Appl. Phys., 35: 444 (1964); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1713333
  6. W.W. Mullins and R.F. Sekerka, J. Appl. Phys., 34, No. 2: 323 (1963); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1702607
  7. A. Karma, Phys. Rev. Lett., 87: 115701 (2001); https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.87.115701
  8. N. Provatas and K. Elder, Phase-Field Methods in Materials Science and Engineering (Weinheim: Wiley-VCH: 2010); https://doi.org/10.1002/9783527631520
  9. A. Karma and W.-J. Rappel, Phys. Rev. E, 57: 4323 (1998); https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.57.4323
  10. M. Plapp, J. Indian Inst. Sci., 96: 179 (2016).
  11. M. Fleck and F. Schleifer, Eng. Comput., 39: 1699 (2023); https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-022-01729-z
  12. V. Alexiades and A.D. Solomon, Mathematical Modeling of Melting and Freezing Processes (Washington, DC: Hemisphere: 1993).
  13. W. Kurz and D.J. Fisher, Fundamentals of Solidification (Zurich: Trans Tech Publications: 1998); https://doi.org/10.4028/b-v7b35q
  14. R. Trivedi and M.C. Rohatgi, Solidification Processing (New York: McGraw-Hill: 1990).
  15. K.A. Jackson, Kinetic Processes: Crystal Growth, Diffusion, and Phase Transitions (New York: Wiley: 2004); https://doi.org/10.1021/cg058006t
  16. S.H. Davis, Theory of Solidification (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 2001); https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511546747
  17. J.S. Langer, Rev. Mod. Phys., 52: 1 (1980); https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.52.1
  18. M.E. Glicksman, Principles of Solidification (New York: Springer: 2010); https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-7344-3
  19. K.A. Jackson and J.D. Hunt, Trans. Metall. Soc. AIME, 236: 1129 (1966); https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-092523-3.50040-X
  20. H.F. Wang, F. Liu, and D.M. Herlach, J. Cryst. Growth, 389: 68 (2014); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrysgro.2013.11.080
  21. L.F. Donaghey and W.A. Tiller, Mater. Sci. Eng., 3: 231 (1968/69); https://doi.org/10.1016/0025-5416(68)90015-3
  22. K.A. Jackson and J.D. Hunt, Acta Metall., 14: 413 (1966).
  23. A. Karma and W.-J. Rappel, Phys. Rev. E, 53: R3017 (1996); https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.53.R3017
  24. W.J. Boettinger, J.A. Warren, C. Beckermann, and A. Karma, Annu. Rev. Mater. Res., 32: 163 (2002); https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.matsci.32.101901.155803
  25. B. Echebarria, R. Folch, A. Karma, and M. Plapp, Phys. Rev. E, 70: 061604 (2004); https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.70.061604
  26. G. Caginalp, Phys. Rev. A, 39: 5887 (1989); https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.39.5887
  27. S.M. Allen and J.W. Cahn, Acta Metall., 27: 1085 (1979); https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-6160(79)90196-2
  28. J. Crank, Free and Moving Boundary Problems (Oxford: Oxford University Press: 1984).
  29. R.J. LeVeque, Finite Difference Methods for Ordinary and Partial Differential Equations (Philadelphia: SIAM: 2007); https://doi.org/10.1137/1.9780898717839
  30. J.C. Strikwerda, Finite Difference Schemes and Partial Differential Equations (Philadelphia: SIAM: 2004); https://doi.org/10.1137/1.9780898717938
  31. N. Provatas, N. Goldenfeld, and J. Dantzig, J. Comput. Phys., 148: 265 (1998); https://doi.org/10.1006/jcph.1998.6120
  32. S.C. Brenner and L.R. Scott, The Mathematical Theory of Finite Element Methods (New York: Springer: 2007); https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-75934-0
  33. J. Donea and A. Huerta, Finite Element Methods for Flow Problems (Chichester: Wiley: 2003); https://doi.org/10.1002/0470013826
  34. H.C. Elman, D.J. Silvester, and A.J. Wathen, Finite Elements and Fast Iterative Solvers (Oxford: Oxford University Press: 2014); https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199678792.001.0001
  35. W. Hackbusch, Multi-Grid Methods and Applications (Berlin: Springer: 1985); https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-02427-0
  36. A. Brandt, Math. Comp., 31: 333 (1977); https://doi.org/10.1090/S0025-5718-1977-0431719-X
  37. Y. Saad, Iterative Methods for Sparse Linear Systems (Philadelphia: SIAM: 2003); https://doi.org/10.1137/1.9780898718003
  38. A. Yamanaka, T. Aoki, S. Ogawa, and T. Takaki, J. Cryst. Growth, 318: 40 (2011); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrysgro.2010.10.096
  39. J.D. Owens, M. Houston, D. Luebke, S. Green, J.E. Stone, and J.C. Phillips, Proc. IEEE, 96: 879 (2008); https://doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2008.917757
  40. U. Trottenberg, C.W. Oosterlee, and A. Schuller, Multigrid (San Diego: Academic Press: 2001).
  41. A. Zhang, Z. Guo, B. Jiang, S. Xiong, and F. Pan, Comput. Mater. Sci., 228: 112366 (2023); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.commatsci.2023.112366
  42. L. Vanherpe, F. Wendler, B. Nestler, and S. Vandewalle, Math. Comput. Simul., 80, No. 7: 1438 (2010); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matcom.2009.10.007
  43. R. Gandham, K. Esler, and Y. Zhang, Comput. Math. Appl., 68, No. 10: 1151 (2014); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.camwa.2014.08.022
  44. H. Liu, B. Yang, and Z. Chen, Comput. Math. Appl., 70, No. 5: 1162 (2015); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.camwa.2015.07.005
  45. E. Miyoshi and A. Yamanaka, Comput. Mater. Sci., 259: 114161 (2025); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.commatsci.2025.114161
  46. I. Steinbach, Modell. Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng., 17: 073001 (2009); https://doi.org/10.1088/0965-0393/17/7/073001
  47. N. Moelans, B. Blanpain, and P. Wollants, Calphad, 32: 268 (2008); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.calphad.2007.11.003
  48. M. Rappaz and C.-A. Gandin, Acta Metall. Mater., 41: 345 (1993); https://doi.org/10.1016/0956-7151(93)90065-Z
  49. C.-A. Gandin and M. Rappaz, Acta Mater., 45: 2187 (1997); https://doi.org/10.1016/S1359-6454(96)00303-5
  50. M.P. Anderson, D.J. Srolovitz, G.S. Grest, and P.S. Sahni, Acta Metall., 32: 783 (1984); https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-6160(84)90151-2
  51. E.A. Holm and S.M. Foiles, Science, 328: 1138 (2010); https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1187833
  52. B. Nestler, H. Garcke, and B. Stoth, Physica D, 208: 150 (2005);
  53. L.-Q. Chen, Annu. Rev. Mater. Res., 32: 113 (2002); https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.matsci.32.112001.132041
  54. W.J. Boettinger, S.R. Coriell, A.L. Greer, A. Karma, W. Kurz, M. Rappaz, and R. Trivedi, Acta Mater., 48: 43 (2000); https://doi.org/10.1016/S1359-6454(99)00287-6