This article was published in an Elsevier journal.

The attached copy

is furnished to the author for non-commercial research and
education use, including for instruction at the author’s institution,
sharing with colleagues and providing to institution administration.
Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or
licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party
websites are prohibited.
In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of the
article (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website or
institutional repository. Authors requiring further information
regarding Elsevier’s archiving and manuscript policies are
encouraged to visit:

http://www.elsevier.com/copyright
 Author's personal copy

Journal of Materials Processing Technology 192–193 (2007) 511–517

Solidification modeling in continuous casting by finite point method

Lei Zhang a,∗ , Yi-Ming Rong a , Hou-Fa Shen b , Tian-You Huang b
a Department of Manufacturing Engineering, Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester, MA 01609, United States
b Department of Mechanical Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, PR China

Abstract
In this paper, a meshless method, finite point method, is studied and applied to model metal solidification processes in continuous casting. An
additional term is added to stabilize the computation with Neumann boundary. The enthalpy method is used to calculate the latent heat and the
corresponding iterative solution is given. An iteration scheme for nonlinear material calculation is also constructed. The model is verified by the
classical Stefan problem and a 2D FEM solidification example. And then it is applied to the simulation of the solid shell growth in the continuous
casting of a large square bland in mold. The result is coincided with the measurement.
© 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Meshless method; Finite point method; Solidification; Stefan problem; Continuous casting

1. Introduction (FEM) based, are normally used to mathematically simulate the

Continuous casting is globally one of the most noted pro-
cesses for the production of metals. In 2003, the whole steel
production of China was 2.2 billion tonnes, and 95.3% of them
were made from continuous casting [1]. A typical continuous
casting process is shown in Fig. 1 where the molten metal is
poured from the ladle into the tundish and then runs through a
submerged entry nozzle into a mold cavity. The mold is water-
cooled so that enough heat is extracted to solidify a shell of
sufficient thickness. The shell is withdrawn from the bottom of
the mold at a “casting speed” that matches the inflow of the
liquid metal. The process is ideally operated at a steady state.
Below the mold, water is sprayed to further extract heat from the
surface of strand, which eventually becomes fully solid. Finally,
the solidified strand is straightened, cut, and then discharged.
Cracks due to thin thickness of the solid shell at mold exit is
the main defect that will not only decrease the production effi-
ciency and but also cause fatal accident. The crack is closely
related to the solidification process in mold [3]. Continuous
casting is operated at high temperature, which is usually above
the melting point of steel. Therefore the measurement of the
temperature variations is almost impossible. Meanwhile, phys-
ical simulation of continuous casting is very expensive too.
So numerical simulation tools, primarily finite element method
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 508 831 5825; fax: +1 508 831 6412.
E-mail address: lzhang@wpi.edu (L. Zhang).
process [3].
However, elements are the building blocks of FEM, and mesh
distortion will fail the computation when FEM treats the discon-
tinuities, i.e. the deformation of mesh which does not coincide
with the original mesh lines. The discontinuities are usually
observed in the large-scale deformation problem, and the pre-
diction of crack growth with arbitrary and complex paths. The
solution is to remesh in each step of the evolution. But this may
leads to degradation of accuracy and complexity in the computer
program, and the burden associated with the tedious adaptive and
interactive re-meshing. Compared with FEM, meshless method
dose not use elements. In meshless method, the approximation
is constructed entirely in terms of nodes. In result, the disconti-
nuities can be treated by free adding or deleting nodes whenever
and wherever needed to simulate the new deformation. There-
fore, it is possible to solve large classes of problems, such as
large-scale deformation and crack growth problems, which are
very awkward with mesh-based methods [4,5].
The meshless method, also called meshfree or element-free
method was developed about 20 years ago. It starts with the
establishment of the smooth particle (SPH) method [6], which
is used for modeling astrophysical phenomena without bound-
aries. Later, Belytschko et al. [7] developed the element-free
Galerkin method (EFG), and the successful application of EFG
also triggered the great research effort devoted to the meshless
method [8]. So far more than ten meshless methods or schemes
have been developed, and a few books on them are available (see
[9,10,5,8]).

0924-0136/$ – see front matter © 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2007.04.092
 Author's personal copy

512 L. Zhang et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 192–193 (2007) 511–517

Fig. 2. Schematic representation of FPM.

The boundary value problem can be expressed as

Lu(x) − q = 0, x ∈ Ω, Lt u(x) − t = 0, x ∈ Γt ,
u(x) − ud = 0, x ∈ Γd (1)
where unknown function u(x) here represent scalar function such
Fig. 1. Schematic representation of the continuous casting process [2]. as temperature in solving heat transfer problem, or vector func-
tion such as displacement, stress and strain in elastic problem,
L and Lt represent linear differential operators, ūd is the known
Among the meshless methods, finite point method (FPM) is boundary condition on Γ d , the subscripts d and t represent the
one of the easiest to implement [11,12] and one can expresses Dirichlet and Neumann boundary conditions, q, t, and x are
the really meaning of meshless. In fact, even be called mesh- variables.
less, but some methods still need “background cell”, which is In FPM, The solution area is represented by a series of nodes
required to evaluate the integration in the Galerkin weak-form. or collocation points which are scattered both in the area and on
Background cell is regular mesh, which will cover the whole its boundary, as shown in Fig. 2. And at point i, the unknown
solution area. EFG belongs to this catalog. Compared with these function u(x) is approximated by uh (x):
methods, FPM is a pure meshless method, because it dose not 
n
need background cell integration. FPM only needs nodes, so it u(x) ≈ uh (x) = ψI (x) · uI (2)
can totally escape from remeshing by free adding or deleting I
nodes whenever or wherever needed to treat the discontinuities.
where ψI is the shape function obtained using the moving least-
Therefore, it makes FPM efficient, and advantageous in solving
square (MLS) method [13].
large-scale deformation and crack growth problems.
Eq. (1) is implemented on all the points with substituting Eq.
Good understanding of the solidification is the fundamental
(2) into Eq. (1), then Eq. (1) becomes:
of solving crack problem in continuous casting. Therefore, in
this paper, FPM is applied to continuous casting where a solidifi- Luh (xi ) − qi = 0, xi ∈ Ω, Lt uh (xi ) − ti = 0, xi ∈ Γt
cation model is constructed based on FPM. The model is verified
first and then employed to simulate the solid shell growth of con- uh (xi ) − ūd = 0, xi ∈ Γd (3)
tinuous casting large square bland in mold. The predicted results Eq. (3) can be easily implemented in programming. And because
are coincided with the measurements. This indicates that mesh- there is no integration needed, this method is more efficient
less method is a potential numerical analysis tool and valuable compared with the ones that need “background cell” [4,5].
for the analysis of the continuous casting process.
3. Model descriptions

2. Finite point method 3.1. Equilibrium equation and boundary conditions

Finite point method was proposed by Onate et al. [11,12]. For The energy equilibrium equation and boundary conditions of
a typical boundary value problem, the weighted residual method solidification processes are [3].
and the idea of point collocation are used with the unknown func- Equilibrium equation:
tion replaced by the moving least-square (MLS) approximation.
Then the FPM collocation form of the differential equations can ∂T
ρcp − k∇ 2 T − qv = 0 (4a)
be obtained. ∂t
 Author's personal copy

L. Zhang et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 192–193 (2007) 511–517 513

Heat flux boundary condition: where θ is constant between 0 and 1, representing different
discretization form [15]:
∂T ⎧
−k + qn = 0 (4b)
∂n ⎪
⎨ 0, implicit
θ = 0.5, Crank–Nicolson (9)
Initial condition: ⎪
⎩
1, explicit
T |t=0 = Tin (4c)
3.5. Latent heat treatment
where T is the temperature (K), t the time (s), cp the specific
heat (J/kg K), ρ the density (kg/m3 ), k the thermal conductivity In Eq. (4a), if setting qv equal to zero, and importing enthalpy
(W/m K), qv the energy source term (W/m3 ), n the normal to the [16], the energy equilibrium becomes
boundary, qn the known heat flux at the boundaries (W/m2 ) and
Tin is the initial temperature (K). ∂h ∂T
k∇ 2 T = ρ (10)
∂T ∂t
3.2. Neumann boundary stabilization scheme where h is enthalpy.
Replacing ∂h/∂T with its difference form and ∂T/∂t with its
For solving convection and diffusion problems by FPM, Neu- implicit form of discretization in time, Eq. (10) becomes:
mann boundary needs to be stabilized first. For non-selfadjoint 
  
   ∼

T̃i t+t − Ti |t
problems such as convection-diffusion problems, the domina- h T̃i t+Δt − h T̃i t
tion of convection item will lead to unstable problems. So a ρ · − ri |t+t
special treatment is needed to stabilize the solution by applying T t
the standard conservation laws expressing balance of momen- =0 (11)
tum and mass over a control domain. The related works can be 
where ri |t+t = k∇ 2 T̃i t+t .
seen in Onate’s papers [11,12], and a stabilization item is added
Eq. (11) cannot be solved directly, so the corresponding iter-
to Neumann boundary:
ative solution is given as
∂T h   
−k + qn − r = 0

  m+1
∂n 2
(5)
h T̃i i − h ( Ti |t ) T̃i t+t − T̃i t
ρ · − ri |m+1
t+t = 0
T t
where r = k2 T + qv and h is the characteristic length [11,12].
(12)
 m+1
3.3. Discretization in space where ri |t+t = k∇ 2 T̃i t+t , and m is the number of iteration.
m+1

By using MLS [13], the approximation function of the 3.6. Nonlinear material treatment
unknown temperature T of node i at time t can be expressed
as If the material properties are functions of temperature, the
energy equilibrium equation for a solidification process can be
 
n
 expressed as
Ti |t ≈ Tih  = ψI · TI |t (6)
t
I ∂h ∂T
k(T )∇ 2 T = ρ(T ) (13)
Then the derivatives of T with respect to space become the ∂T ∂t
derivatives of the shape function ψ with respect to space: Same as Eq. (11), replacing ∂h/∂T and ∂T/∂t, and setting k and
ρ the function of the present temperature at time t + t, then
n
    
∇ 2 t T̃ |t =

∇ 2 ψI T h  .
    
 h T̃i t+t − h T̃i t T̃i t+t − T̃i t
(7a)
t

I ρ Ti |t+t · ·
 T t
∂ T̃ t n
 ∂ψI 
 − ri |t+t = 0 (14)
= · TIh  (7b)
∂n ∂n t   
I
where ri |t+t = k T̃i t+t · ∇ 2 T̃i t+t .Eq. (14) cannot be
3.4. Discretization in time solved directly either. The corresponding iterative solution is
  
   m 
  h T̃i m t+t
− h T̃ 
i t T̃ 
i t+t − T̃ 
i t
m
General two point difference format of T with respect to time ρ T̃i t+t · ·
t [14] is substituted into the energy equilibrium Eq. (4a), then it T t
becomes: − ri |m+1
t+t = 0 (15)
 
T̃i t+t − T̃i t  
m
m+1
ρcp − θ · ri |t+t − (1 − θ) · ri |t = 0 (8) where ri |m+1
t+t = k T̃i t+t · ∇ 2 T̃i t+t .
t
 Author's personal copy

514 L. Zhang et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 192–193 (2007) 511–517

Fig. 5. The isotherms at 150,000 s (unit: ◦ C).

Fig. 3. 1D Stefan solidification problem.

4. Verifications

4.1. 1D case

Since the theoretical solution of 1D solidification problem

can be derived from the analytical model, the FPM model is first
validated with a typical 1D solidification problem. Fig. 3 shows
a 1D Stefan problem. The problem is that the liquid metal in the Fig. 6. 2D solidification problem [19].
one-dimension unlimited-length mold is cooled by water on the
left side. The liquid metal solidifies as time goes by in x direction and
and the solid front (i.e., interface between liquid and solid) is
cp (Tl − T0 )
the function of time R(t), which can be exactly predicted. Ste = (17c)
This problem can be described by the following equations L
[17]: where L is the latent heat of solidification and T0 and Tl are the
boundary temperatures, T0 < Tl = melting point of the steel.
∂T ∂2 T The thermophysical properties used in this problem are that
cp ρ =k 2, T = T0 , t > 0, x = 0,
∂t ∂x specific heat cp is 1079 J/kg K, density ρ is 2700 kg/m3 , thermal
∂T conductivity k is 94 W/m K, Tl is 933 K, T0 is 893 K, and L is
= 0, t > 0, x = ∞, T = Tl ,
∂x 398 kJ/kg.
t = 0, 0<x<∞ (16) The FPM calculated results and the exact solid front locations
from Eq. (17a) are plotted in Fig. 4 for comparison. It shows that
The exact solution for the location of the solid front is first given the FPM predicted results matched very well with the precise
by Stefan [18]: solution.
 The isotherms at t = 150,000 s when the entire domain
kt becomes solid is shown in Fig. 5.
R(t) = 2γ (17a)
cp ρ
where γ is obtained from the root of the transcendental equation: 4.2. 2D case
√
πγ exp(γ 2 ) erf(γ) = Ste (17b)
An FEM solidification example is employed here to verify
the FPM model in 2D case. Fig. 6 is the quarter model of the

Table 1
Material properties [18]
Parameters Value

Conductivity of solid, ks (W/m K) 237.65

Conductivity of liquid, kl (W/m K) 94.14
Specific heat of solid, cp,s (J/kg K) 903.74
Specific heat of liquid, cp,l (J/kg K) 1079.47
Density, ρ (kg/m3 ) 2700
Latent heat, L (kJ/kg) 397.48
Melting point temperature, Tl (K) 933
Initial temperature, Tin (K) 973
Fig. 4. FPM predicted solid front locations with the precise solution.
 Author's personal copy

L. Zhang et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 192–193 (2007) 511–517 515

Fig. 7. Solid front locations calculated with FPM in comparison to FEM results. (a) Geometry model; (b) photograph of mold.

Table 2 problem. Liquid metal in a square mold is cooled by the constant

Production parameters flux (equal to 2000 MW/m2 ) at boundary and solidified.
Size of the mold (mm) 280 × 380 The computing parameters are shown in Table 1.
Bevel size (mm) 12 × 45◦ The solid front location at the diagonal and the y symmetrical
Meniscus (mm) 80 axial of the mold against time is calculated by the FPM model.
Length of mold (mm) 850
Casting speed (m/min) 0.7
The results are displayed in Fig. 7 with the comparison to the
Carbon percentage of steel (wt.%) 0.7 FEM predicted results.
Pouring temperature (◦ C) 1505

Fig. 8. Continuous casting of large bland. (a) Geometry model; (b) discretization
model (quarter). Fig. 9. Continuous casting large bland mold.
 Author's personal copy
516 L. Zhang et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 192–193 (2007) 511–517
In Fig. 7, the FPM results represented by lines and the FEM
results represented by symbols are well matched, that implies
the FPM model works in 2D case.
5. Application
Solid shell growth during a continuous casting process with
large square bland in mold is analyzed with the FPM model in
this research. The large square bland in continuous casting is
shown in Fig. 8.
And Fig. 9 is the shape and size of the mold and its quarter
node discretization model for calculation.
Based on the assumptions on the working conditions, the heat
transfer along the casting direction is very small and ignored.
And the heat flux on the surface of the solid shell will react on
the change of casting speed and is known. The solidification
process in the continuous casting in model can be mathemati-
cally described by Eqs. (4a)–(4c), and then it can be simulated
by the FPM model. The corresponding production parameters
are listed in Table 2.
In Fig. 10a, the chart shows the predicted thickness, which
is of the solidified shell at the narrow face center, against the
distance from meniscus along the casting direction. And below
the chart it shows the photo of the shell slice, which is chip
off at the narrow face center along the casting direction. The
Fig. 10. (a) Growth of the solid shell at narrow face center against the distance
from meniscus. (b) Growth of the solid shell at wide face center against the
distance from meniscus.
Fig. 11. Temperature contour at mold exit (unit: ◦ C).
corresponding thickness predictions and photo of the slice of
the shell at the wide face center are shown in Fig. 10b.
In continuous casting, the liquid metal is poured into the
water-cooling mold (see Fig. 8), and solidifies due to contact
with the mold. The solidification thickness increases from the
surface to the center of the liquid metal and forms a solid shell
with different thickness along the casting direction. Fig. 10a
shows the thickness of the shell grows along y axis, and Fig. 10b
shows the growth along x axis. It observed that the solid shell
evenly grows in x and y direction. And at the mold exit, the
thickness of the solidified shell at narrow face is 19.5 mm, and
the thickness of the shell at wide face center is 19.1 mm. These
predicted results are coincided with the measurements.
The uniform temperature distribution of solid shell can also
be seen in Fig. 11, which is the temperature contour at mold exit
calculated by FPM.
6. Summary
The meshless method, FPM, is studied for the first time in
the simulation of solidification in continuous casting. The FPM
solidification simulation model was developed with
• Onate stabilization scheme for Neumann boundary;
• nonlinear material treatment;
• solidification enthalpy treatment.
The model is validated with comparison to analytical solution
in 1D and 2D cases. Then the solid shell growth of a continu-
ous casting large square bland in mold is simulated by using the
model. The calculation results are coincided with the measure-
ment. Observations show that meshless method is a potential
numerical analysis tool and would be valuable for the analy-
sis of the continuous casting process with solving crack and
large-scale deformation problems in the future.
 Author's personal copy
L. Zhang et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 192–193 (2007) 511–517
References
[1] Chinese Steel Industry Statistics, Chinese Steel Industry Association, Bei-
jing, 2003.
[2] B.G. Thomas, Continuous Casting: Modeling’ The Encyclopedia of
Advanced Materials, 2, Pergamon Elsevier Science Ltd., Oxford, UK, 1999.
[3] Y. Gan, S. Chou, Z. Xiao, Numerical Simulation of Continuous Casting
Processes, Metallurgy Industry Press, Beining, 2001.
[4] T. Belytschko, Y. Krongauz, D. Organ, M. Fleming, P. Krysl, Meshless
methods: an overview and recent developments, Comput. Methods Appl.
Mech. Eng. 139 (1–4) (1996) 3–47.
[5] G.R. Liu, Mesh Free Methods: Moving Beyond the Finite Element Method,
CRC Press, Boca Raton, USA, 2002.
[6] L.B. Lucy, A numerical approach to the testing of the fission hypothesis,
Astron. J. 8 (12) (1977) 1013–1024.
[7] T. Belytschko, Y.Y. Lu, L. Gu, Element Free Galerkin Methods, Int. J.
Numer. Meth. Eng. 37 (1994) 91–100.
[8] X. Zhang, Y. Liu, Meshless Methods, Tsinghua Press, Beijing, 2004.
[9] S.N. Atluri, S. Shen, The Meshless Local Petrov–Galerkin (MLPG)
Method, Tech Science Press, Stuttgart, 2002.
[10] M. Griebel, M.A. Schweitzer, Meshfree Methods for Partial Differential
Equations, 26, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2002.
517
[11] E. Onate, S. Idelsohn, O.C. Zienkiewics, R.L. Taylor, A finite point method
in computational mechanics. Applications to convective transport and fluid
flow, Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng. 39 (1996) 3839–3866.
[12] E. Onate, S. Idelsohn, O.C. Zienkiewics, R.L. Taylor, S. Sacco, A stabilized
finite point method for analysis of fluid mechanics problems, Comput.
Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 139 (1996) 315–346.
[13] P. Lancaster, K. Salkauskas, Surfaces generated by moving least-squares
methods, Math. Comput. 37 (155) (1981) 141–158.
[14] X.Q. Kong, Application of FEM in Heat Transfer Process, Science Press,
Beijing, 1998.
[15] J. Crank, P. Nicolson, A practical method for numerical evaluation of
solutions of partial differential equations of the heat conduction type, in:
Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, vol. 43, 1947, pp.
50–64.
[16] N.R. Eyres, D.R. Hartree, The calculation of variable heat flow in solid,
Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 240 (1946) 1–57.
[17] J. Chen, Handbook of Continuous Casting of Steel, Metallurgy Industry
Press, Beijing, 1995.
[18] M.N. Ozisik, Heat Conduction, Wiley, New York, 1980.
[19] C.Y. Li, S.V. Garimella, J.E. Simpson, Fixed-grid front-tracking algorithm
for solidification problems, part I: Method and validation, Numer. Heat
Transfer Part B 43 (2) (2003) 117–141.