journal article·2023-12Open access

Review of Material Modeling and Digitalization in Industry: Barriers and Perspectives

Lucia Scotti, Hector Basoalto, James Moffat, Daniel Cogswell

Abstract

Abstract Materials modeling technologies are fundamental to explore, understand, and ultimately predict materials behavior. They are essential to solve challenges posed by the need to reduce human impact on the environment. Modeling and simulation of materials behavior have been recognized over the years as fundamental as an asset in industrial R & D, guiding the decision-making process regarding the design or optimization of new products and manufacturing processes. At the same time, it reduces product cost and development time. However, highlighting the revenue brought by using such tools is not trivial, especially because they mainly affect the complex activities such as the innovation process, whose return only becomes available in the long run and it is difficult to measure. This means that the materials modeling field is often overlooked in an industry setting, where it is not integrated in the company workflow. In some cases, modeling provides the potential to capture tacit knowledge preventing the loss of capability in an aging specialist community, that why its industrial integration is important. This paper explores the reason behind this dichotomy, presenting first what it is intended for the modeling process, and the main types used in materials application. The current industrial adoption is reviewed by outlining success stories, economic impact, business uptake, and barriers. Past and current approaches and strategies are also presented and discussed. In prospective, materials modeling plays a key role in developing material-centric industry for sustainable economy, providing physical understating (physics-based models) and fast approaches (data-driven solutions). Digitalization is the mean for the green economy and it needs to push for a more integration at the core of the business of materials modeling.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Machine Learning in Materials Science · Manufacturing Process and Optimization · Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

References (100+)

Show source-provided references
1. Materials Genome Initiative for Global Competitiveness (2011) Executive office of the president. National Science and Technology Council
2. National Research Council (2008) Integrated computational materials engineering: a transformational discipline for improved competitiveness and national security. National Academies Press, Washington
3. EMMC (2018) The EMMC roadmap for materials modelling and informatics. https://emmc.eu/emmc-roadmaps/
4. Liu X, Furrer D, Kosters J, Holmes J (2018) Vision 2040: a roadmap for integrated, mulitiscale modeling and simulation of materials and systems NASA report NASA/CR—2018–219771
5. Belouettar S, Kavka C, Patzak B, Koelman H, Rauchs G, Giunta G, Madeo A, Pricl S, Daouadji A (2018) Integration of material and process modelling in a business decision support system: case of COMPOSELECTOR H2020 project. Compos Struct 204:778–79010.1016/j.compstruct.2018.06.121 ↗
6. European Materials Modelling Council (EMMC). https://emmc.eu/
7. Sargent RG (1981) An assessment procedure and a set of criteria for use in the evaluation of 'computerized models and computer-based modelling tools’ Syracuse University Department of Engineering and Operations Research report ADA09878510.21236/ADA098785 ↗
8. Roache PJ (2002) Code verification by the method of manufactured solutions. J Fluids Eng 124(1):4–1010.1115/1.1436090 ↗
9. ASME (2020) Standard for verification and validation in computational solid mechanics. US Patent 3,120,606
10. Rasheed A, San O, Kvamsdal T (2020) Digital twin: values, challenges and enablers from a modeling perspective. IEEE Access 8:21980–2201210.1109/ACCESS.2020.2970143 ↗
11. Grong O, Shercliff HR (2002) Microstructural modelling in metals processing. Prog Mater Sci 47(2):163–28210.1016/S0079-6425(00)00004-9 ↗
12. Abadi M, Agarwal A, Barham P, Brevdo E, Chen Z, Citro C, Corrado GS, Davis A, Dean J, Devin M, Ghemawat S, Goodfellow I, Harp A, Irving G, Isard M, Jia Y, Jozefowicz R, Kaiser L, Kudlur M, Levenberg J, Mané D, Monga R, Moore S, Murray D, Olah C, Schuster M, Shlens J, Steiner B, Sutskever I, Talwar K, Tucker P, Vanhoucke V, Vasudevan V, Viégas F, Vinyals O, Warden P, Wattenberg M, Wicke M, Yu Y, Zheng X (2015) TensorFlow: large-scale machine learning on heterogeneous systems. Software available from https://www.tensorflow.org/
13. Pedregosa F, Varoquaux G, Gramfort A, Michel V, Thirion B, Grisel O, Blondel M, Prettenhofer P, Weiss R, Dubourg V, Vanderplas J, Passos A, Cournapeau D, Brucher M, Perrot M, Duchesnay E (2011) Scikit-learn: machine learning in Python. J Mach Learn Res 12:2825–2830
14. Ashoor BB, Giwa A, Hasan SW (2019) Full-scale membrane distillation systems and performance improvement through modeling: a review. Curr Trends Future Dev Bio Membr 2019:105–140
15. Cugnet M, Dubarry M, Liaw BY (2009) Secondary batteries–lead–acid systems–modeling. In: Garche J (ed) Encyclopedia of Electrochemical Power Sources. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 816–82810.1016/B978-044452745-5.00151-9 ↗
16. Raissi M, Perdikaris P, Karniadakis GE (2019) Physics-informed neural networks: a deep learning framework for solving forward and inverse problems involving nonlinear partial differential equations. J Comput Phys 378:686–70710.1016/j.jcp.2018.10.045 ↗
17. Sun L, Gao H, Pan S, Wang J-X (2020) Surrogate modeling for fluid flows based on physics-constrained deep learning without simulation data. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 361:112732
18. Smith WF, Hashemi J (2006) Foundations of materials science and engineering. McGraw-Hill Publishing, Sydney
19. Lahoz BKW, Menard R (2010) Data assimilation. Springer, Berlin10.1007/978-3-540-74703-1 ↗
20. White AA (2013) Big data are shaping the future of materials science. Mater Res Soc Bull 38(8):594–59510.1557/mrs.2013.187 ↗
21. Materials Genome Initiative. https://www.mgi.gov/
22. Himanen L, Geurts A, Foster AS, Rinke P (2019) Data-driven materials science: status, challenges, and perspectives. Adv Sci 6(21):190080810.1002/advs.201900808 ↗
23. Takamizawa H, Nishiyama Y, Hirano T (2020) Bayesian uncertainty evaluation of Charpy ductile-to-brittle transition temperature for reactor pressure vessel steels. In: Pressure vessels and piping conference, vol 83815. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, pp 001–0106510.1115/1.0000155V ↗
24. Dyson BF (1988) Creep and fracture of metals: mechanisms and mechanics. Revue Phys Appl 23(4):605–61310.1051/rphysap:01988002304060500 ↗
25. Beckermann C (2002) Modeling of solidification. Purdue Heat Transfer Celebration. April, 3–5
26. Van Der Giessen E, Schultz PA, Bertin N, Bulatov VV, Cai W, Csányi G, Foiles SM, Geers MG, González C, Hütter M et al (2020) Roadmap on multiscale materials modeling. Modell Simul Mater Sci Eng 28(4):04300110.1088/1361-651X/ab7150 ↗
27. Geers MGD, Kouznetsova VG, Matouš K, Yvonnet J (2017) Homogenization methods and multiscale modeling: nonlinear problems. In: Encyclopedia of computational mechanics, 2nd edn, (eds E. Stein, R. Borst and T.J.R. Hughes). https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119176817.ecm210710.1002/9781119176817.ecm2107 ↗
28. Mori T, Tanaka K (1973) Average stress in matrix and average elastic energy of materials with misfitting inclusions. Acta Metall 21(5):571–57410.1016/0001-6160(73)90064-3 ↗
29. Dyson BF (2009) Microstructure based creep constitutive model for precipitation strengthened alloys: theory and application. Mater Sci Technol 25(2):213–22010.1179/174328408X369348 ↗
30. Tong Q, Li S (2020) A concurrent multiscale study of dynamic fracture. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 366:11307510.1016/j.cma.2020.113075 ↗
31. Tadmor EB, Ortiz M, Phillips R (1996) Quasicontinuum analysis of defects in solids. Philos Mag A 73(6):1529–156310.1080/01418619608243000 ↗
32. Horstemeyer MF (2009) Multiscale modeling: a review. In: Leszczynski, J., Shukla, M. (eds) Practical aspects of computational chemistry. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-2687-3_410.1007/978-90-481-2687-3_4 ↗
33. Vassaux M, Sinclair RC, Richardson RA, Suter JL, Coveney PV (2020) Toward high fidelity materials property prediction from multiscale modeling and simulation. Adv Theory Simul 3(1):190012210.1002/adts.201900122 ↗
34. Panchal JH (2005) A framework for simulation-based integrated design of multiscale products and design processes. Georgia Institute of Technology
35. Weinan E, Engquist B (2003) Multiscale modeling and computation. AMS 50(9):1062–1070
36. Khaleel M (2004) Multiscale mathematics initiative: a roadmap. US Department of Energy
37. Olson GB (1997) Computational design of hierarchically structured materials. Science 277(5330):1237–124210.1126/science.277.5330.1237 ↗
38. de Baas AF (2017) What makes a material function? Let me compute the ways: modelling in H2020 LEIT-NMBP programme materials and nanotechnology projects
39. Schrödinger E (1926) An undulatory theory of the mechanics of atoms and molecules. Phys Rev 28(6):104910.1103/PhysRev.28.1049 ↗
40. Kohn W, Sham LJ (1965) Self-consistent equations including exchange and correlation effects. Phys Rev 140:1133–113810.1103/PhysRev.140.A1133 ↗
41. Anderson PW (1961) Localized magnetic states in metals. Phys Rev 124(1):4110.1103/PhysRev.124.41 ↗
42. Gavini V, Knap J, Bhattacharya K, Ortiz M (2007) Non-periodic finite-element formulation of orbital-free density functional theory. J Mech Phys Solids 55(4):669–69610.1016/j.jmps.2006.09.011 ↗
43. Radhakrishnan BG, Gavini V (2013) Electronic structure calculations at macroscopic scales using orbital-free DFT. World Scientific, Singapore
44. Svejstrup W, Maiani A, Van Hoogdalem K, Flensberg K (2023) Orbital-free approach for large-scale electrostatic simulations of quantum nanoelectronics devices. Semicond Sci Technol 38(4):04500410.1088/1361-6641/acbb9a ↗
45. Balian R, Bloch C (1974) Solution of the Schrödinger equation in terms of classical paths. Ann Phys 85(2):514–54510.1016/0003-4916(74)90421-7 ↗
46. Kristinsdóttir L, Skúlason E (2012) A systematic DFT study of hydrogen diffusion on transition metal surfaces. Surf Sci 606(17–18):1400–140410.1016/j.susc.2012.04.028 ↗
47. Zhao S, Liu X-W, Huo C-F, Li Y-W, Wang J, Jiao H (2015) Determining surface structure and stability of $$\varepsilon $$-Fe$$_2$$C, $$\chi $$-Fe$$_5$$C$$_2$$, $$\theta $$-Fe$$_3$$C and Fe$$_4$$C phases under carburization environment from combined DFT and atomistic thermodynamic studies. Catal Struct React 1(1):44–60
48. Wu HH, Wisesa P, Trinkle DR (2016) Oxygen diffusion in hcp metals from first principles. Phys Rev B 94(1):014307
49. Fomine S, Vargas SM, Tlenkopatchev MA (2003) Molecular modeling of ruthenium alkylidene mediated olefin metathesis reactions. DFT study of reaction pathways. Organometallics 22(1):93–9910.1021/om020581w ↗
50. Ghazisaeidi M, Hector LG Jr, Curtin W (2014) First-principles core structures of $$$$ edge and screw dislocations in Mg. Scr Mater 75:42–4510.1016/j.scriptamat.2013.11.013 ↗
51. Metropolis N, Rosenbluth AW, Rosenbluth MN, Teller AH, Teller E (1953) Equation of state calculations by fast computing machines. J Chem Phys 21(6):1087–109210.1063/1.1699114 ↗
52. Voter AF (2007) Introduction to the kinetic Monte Carlo method. In: Sickafus KE, Kotomin EA, Uberuaga BP (eds) Radiation effects in solids. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 1–23
53. Rahman A (1964) Correlations in the motion of atoms in liquid argon. Phys Rev 136(2A):40510.1103/PhysRev.136.A405 ↗
54. Herschberg R, Fu C-C, Nastar M, Soisson F (2019) Atomistic modelling of the diffusion of C in FeCr alloys. Acta Mater 165:638–65310.1016/j.actamat.2018.11.025 ↗
55. Ma B, Guye K, Dogruoz B, Agonafer D (2021) Molecular dynamics simulations of thin-film evaporation: the influence of interfacial thermal resistance on a graphene-coated heated silicon substrate. Appl Therm Eng 195:117142
56. Hoyt JJ, Asta M, Karma A (2003) Atomistic and continuum modeling of dendritic solidification. Mater Sci Eng R Rep 41(6):121–16310.1016/S0927-796X(03)00036-6 ↗
57. Becker C, Olmsted D, Asta M, Hoyt J, Foiles S (2007) Atomistic underpinnings for orientation selection in alloy dendritic growth. Phys Rev Lett 98(12):12570110.1103/PhysRevLett.98.125701 ↗
58. Sangid MD, Ezaz T, Sehitoglu H, Robertson IM (2011) Energy of slip transmission and nucleation at grain boundaries. Acta Mater 59(1):283–29610.1016/j.actamat.2010.09.032 ↗
59. Zhou XW, Sills RB, Ward DK, Karnesky RA (2017) Atomistic calculations of dislocation core energy in aluminium. Phys Rev B 95(5):054112
60. Frolov T, Asta M, Mishin Y (2016) Phase transformations at interfaces: observations from atomistic modeling. Curr Opin Solid State Mater Sci 20(5):308–31510.1016/j.cossms.2016.05.003 ↗
61. Fix GJ (1982) Phase field methods for free boundary problems. Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh
62. Neumann J, Burks AW (1966) Theory of self-reproducing automata. University of Illinois Press, Urbana
63. Sills RB, Kuykendall WP, Aghaei A, Cai W (2016) Fundamentals of dislocation dynamics simulations, pp 53–8710.1007/978-3-319-33480-6_2 ↗
64. McKay MD, Beckman RJ, Conover WJ (2000) A comparison of three methods for selecting values of input variables in the analysis of output from a computer code. Technometrics 42(1):55–6110.1080/00401706.2000.10485979 ↗
65. Eglajs V, Audze P (1977) New approach to the design of multifactor experiments. Probl. Dyn. Strengths 35(1):104–107
66. Hammersley JM, Handscomb DC (1964) General principles of the Monte Carlo method. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 50–7510.1007/978-94-009-5819-7_5 ↗
67. Karhunen K (1947) Ueber lineare methoden in der wahrscheinlichkeitsrechnung. Soumalainen Tiedeakatemia
68. Loève M (1955) MM, probability theory. Van Nostrand Company, Princeton
69. Whittle P (1951) Hypothesis testing in time series analysis. Almqvist & Wiksells Boktr, Stockholm
70. Tapia G, King W, Johnson L, Arroyave R, Karaman I, Elwany A (2018) Uncertainty propagation analysis of computational models in laser powder bed fusion additive manufacturing using polynomial chaos expansions. J Manuf Sci Eng 140(12):12100610.1115/1.4041179 ↗
71. Golub GH, Reinsch C (1971) Singular value decomposition and least squares solutions. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 134–151
72. Xie Z, Jiang W, Wang C, Wu X (2022) Bayesian inverse uncertainty quantification of a MOOSE-based melt pool model for additive manufacturing using experimental data. Ann Nucl Energy 165:108782
73. Cressie N (1990) The origins of kriging. Math Geol 22(3):239–25210.1007/BF00889887 ↗
74. Ghanem R, Spanos PD (1990) Polynomial chaos in stochastic finite elements. J Appl Mech 57(1):197–20210.1115/1.2888303 ↗
75. Xiu D, Karniadakis GE (2002) The Wiener–Askey polynomial chaos for stochastic differential equations. SIAM J Sci Comput 24(2):619–64410.1137/S1064827501387826 ↗
76. Tzinis I Technology readiness level. https://www.nasa.gov/directorates/heo/scan/engineering/technology/technology_readiness_level
77. McLelland AN (2013) Simulation and experimental predictions for the structural response of satellites. PhD thesis
78. Cowles B, Backman D, Dutton R (2012) Verification and validation of ICME methods and models for aerospace applications. Integr Mater Manuf Innov 1:3–1810.1186/2193-9772-1-2 ↗
79. Allison J, Li M, Wolverton C, Su X (2006) Virtual aluminum castings: an industrial application of ICME. JOM 58(11):28–3510.1007/s11837-006-0224-4 ↗
80. Anderson MJ, Panwisawas C, Sovani Y, Turner RP, Brooks JW, Basoalto HC (2018) Mean-field modelling of the intermetallic precipitate phases during heat treatment and additive manufacture of Inconel 718. Acta Mater 156:432–44510.1016/j.actamat.2018.07.002 ↗
81. Simperler A, Goldbeck G EMMC case study: optimisation of manufacturing conditions for gas turbine rotating components. https://emmc.eu/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/EMMC_RR_CASESTUDY.pdf
82. Goldbeck G, Court C (2016) The economic impact of materials modelling. Zenodo
83. Goldbeck G, Simperler A (2020) Materials modelling software market. Zenodo
84. Goldbeck G (2012) The economic impact of molecular modelling. Zenodo
85. Goldbeck G, Simperler A (2019) Strategies for industry to engage in materials modelling. Zenodo
86. Paulk MC, Curtis B, Chrissis MB, Weber CV (1993) Capability maturity model, version 1.1. IEEE Softw 10(4):18–2710.1109/52.219617 ↗
87. Shercliff HR (1997) Modelling of materials and processes. Department of engineering, University of Cambridge, technical report CUED/CMATS/TR 243
88. Goldbeck G, Simperler A Business models and sustainability for materials modelling software
89. Warren J.A, Ward C.H (2018) Evolution of a materials data infrastructure. JOM 70(9):1652–165810.1007/s11837-018-2968-z ↗
90. Materials engineering—metals and alloys. https://epsrc.ukri.org/research/ourportfolio/researchareas/matengmetal/
91. nanoHUB. https://nanohub.org/
92. Interdisciplinary centre for advanced materials simulation (ICAMS). http://www.icams.de/content/
93. github-interdisciplinary centre for advanced materials simulation (ICAMS). https://github.com/ICAMS
94. Centre national de la recherche scientifique (CNRS). https://www.cnrs.fr/en
95. Institut jean lamour (IJL). https://ijl.univ-lorraine.fr/
96. NIST, National institute of standards and technology. https://www.nist.gov/
97. Dassault systèmes. https://www.3ds.com/
98. QUESTEK. https://www.questek.com/
99. The university of Sheffield. Additive Manufacturing Research Centre. https://www.amrc.co.uk/
100. Rolls-Royce plc. https://www.rolls-royce.com/