the development of the phase - field method has led to tremendous progress in the modelling of pattern formation during solidification , due to its capability to simulate complex time - dependent and three - dimensional morphologies with relatively simple numerical codes @xcite .
the general principle of this method is to describe a multi - phase system by a set of phase fields which take constant values in each of the bulk phases and vary smoothly through interfaces of a characteristic thickness @xmath0 .
the equations of motion for the phase fields and their coupling to the local thermodynamic state variables ( temperature , density , composition etc . ) can be obtained , following the basic principles of out - of - equilibrium thermodynamics , by taking a variational derivative of a free energy functional , which is generally of the ginzburg - landau type .
mean - field approximations can be used to relate the parameters that appear in this functional to microscopic quantities , and the phase fields can often be interpreted as order parameters .    generally , the equations that result from the straightforward application of these principles are not suitable for obtaining quantitatively accurate simulation results on solidification microstructures .
the reason is that the characteristic natural thickness of the diffuse solid - liquid interfaces is a few times the interatomic distance , whereas solidification patterns typically exhibit length scales ranging from @xmath1 to @xmath2 @xmath3 m .
even with the help of modern computers and multi - scale algorithms , both of these scales can not be resolved at the same time .
therefore , in order to simulate solidification microstructures , the thickness of the diffuse interfaces in the phase - field model has to be artificially enlarged , sometimes by two or three orders of magnitude .
quantitative results can only be expected if both the equilibrium and kinetic properties of the interfaces remain unchanged under this procedure .    to achieve this goal ,
it is helpful to adopt a phenomenological point of view : the phase field is seen as a smoothed indicator function ( as opposed to a physical order parameter or density ) , and all equilibrium quantities and transport coefficients are interpolated between the phases with smooth functions of the phase fields that can be freely chosen .
this freedom can be exploited to construct phase - field models with special properties .
in particular , rescaling of the interface thickness is greatly simplified in models where bulk thermodynamics and interfacial properties can be controlled separately .
the phase - field models for the solidification of a pure substance published in the literature are all quite similar @xcite , in the sense that they use the same set of fundamental fields ( a phase field and the temperature field ) , and that the structure of the equations is the same .
one reason for this universality is that a simple and intuitive formulation of the model in terms of these fields yields indeed , as will be detailed below , a model in which this separation is achieved . therefore , the development of the `` thin interface limit '' @xcite which has paved the way to quantitative simulations of dendrites @xcite did not require a change in the model formulation .
the situation is more complicated for alloy phase - field models .
two different approaches with quite distinct philosophies have been pursued in parallel .
the first , which will be called the `` coarse - graining '' approach in the following , generalizes the pure substance model by introducing a concentration field in addition to the temperature field and by writing down a free energy functional that depends on the phase field , the temperature , and the concentration @xcite .
the local values of these three fields are  in principle  the coarse - grained counterparts of the microscopic structural order parameter , temperature , and concentration fields , and the interface is seen as a narrow region in space where all of these quantities can exhibit rapid spatial variations .
in contrast , the second approach , called `` two - phase '' approach in the following , treats the interfaces as a mixture of two phases , each of which retains its bulk properties even inside the interface @xcite . in this approach
, the phase field represents the volume fraction of one of the phases .
moreover , a separate concentration field is defined for each phase , and the physical concentration field is obtained by a weighted average depending on the value of the phase field .
the introduction of two separate concentration fields adds a supplementary degree of freedom which has to be removed from the problem ; this is done either by a specific partition relation @xcite or by the condition of local equilibrium between the coexisting phases @xcite .    in the models of the `` coarse - graining '' type
, the model structure generally leads to an intrinsic coupling between bulk and interface properties , which makes simulation results dependent on the chosen interface thickness . only for the case of dilute binary alloys ,
a specific interpolation of the thermodynamic properties through the interface has been developed @xcite which overcomes this constraint and makes quantitative simulations possible . in the two - phase approach , which is more phenomonological from the outset , bulk and interfacial properties
are decoupled by construction .
however , the removal of the extra degree of freedom introduced by the model formulation generally requires the solution of a nonlinear equation in each point of the interface , and thus adds significant computational complexity .    the purpose of the present paper is to show that the coarse - graining approach can be easily extended to more complex alloy systems if instead of a free energy functional a grand - potential functional is used to generate the equations of motion .
furthermore , an analysis of the resulting model shows that it is in fact perfectly equivalent to the two - phase model , which offers the possibility to reinterpret and simplify the latter .
the fundamentals underlying these findings can be stated quite simply .
the motion of interfaces is controlled by the transport of a conserved extensive quantity : energy for a pure substance , and chemical species for isothermal alloy solidification . in sharp - interface models ,
this fact is expressed by two separate laws : a transport equation in the volume and a conservation law of stefan type at the moving boundary .
in contrast , the two - phase equilibrium at interfaces is controlled by the intensive quantity that is conjugate to the conserved one : temperature for pure substances and chemical potential for alloys .
it turns out that the pure substance model has been formulated from the start in terms of a phase field and the intensive variable ( temperature ) , whereas alloy phase field models are traditionally formulated in terms of a phase field and the composition , which is a density of the extensive variable ( number of solute atoms ) . to obtain a model for alloys that has properties analogous to those of the pure substance model , it is sufficient to choose a formulation in terms of a phase field and the chemical potential , and to switch to the appropriate thermodynamic potential , which is the grand potential
of course , the fact that the quantity analogous to the temperature is the chemical potential is well known @xcite and has been extensively used in sharp - interface models as well as in a few specific phase - field models @xcite , but its general consequences have so far not been fully appreciated in the framework of phase - field models .    it should be mentioned that a second obstacle for obtaining quantitative results on alloys is the strong contrast of the solute diffusivities between solid and liquid , which generates spurious solute trapping when the interface thickness is scaled up .
this problem was solved by the so - called antitrapping current , which was introduced first in the coarse - graining approach @xcite , but has also been incorporated in the two - phase model @xcite . since the results of the present paper do not introduce major changes on this point , the results of ref .
@xcite will be taken over without a detailed discussion .
after a change of variables , the model is almost identical to the model of ref .
@xcite , such that the asymptotic analysis developed there remains valid .
this will be illustrated by numerical simulations that explicitly test the independence of simulation results of the interface thickness for the case of a lens - shaped phase diagram .
the remainder of the paper is structured as follows . in sec .
[ sec_pure ] , the standard phase - field model for the solidification of pure substances is reviewd for reference .
next , the grand potential formulation is introduced and motivated in sec .
[ sec_grand ] , and illustrated by several examples in sec .
[ sec_examples ] : a model with two parabolic free energy functions , a dilute alloy , and an alloy with a lens - shaped phase diagram .
the relation of this model to other phase - field models is clarified in sec .
[ sec_relations ] , and an example for numerical simulations is presented in sec .
[ sec_numerics ] . finally , the implications of the present findings for the further developments of alloy phase field models are discussed in sec .
[ sec_final ] .
the minimal model of solidification is considered , which implies some standard simplifications : the densities of the solid and the liquid are taken to be equal , and heat transport is assumed to take place by diffusion only . as a consequence , no motion of matter needs to be considered , and the only transported extensive quantity is heat .    under these assumptions , the state of an inhomogeneous two - phase system can be completely specified on a coarse - grained ( mesoscopic ) scale by two fields : a phase field @xmath4 which indicates the local state ( liquid or solid ) of matter , and the internal energy density @xmath5 .
the conservation law corresponding to heat transport is the conservation of energy , which writes _
t e = - j_e .
[ eq : heatconservation ] the heat current @xmath6 is given by fourier s law , j_e = - ( , e)t [ eq : heatcurrent ] where @xmath7 is the heat conductivity , which in general may depend on both variables , and @xmath8 is the local temperature .
if @xmath5 is chosen as dynamic variable , the corresponding thermodynamic potential is the entropy .
consequently , the system is naturally described by an entropy functional [ , e ] = _ v s(,,e , e ) where the local entropy density @xmath9 depends on the fields as well as their gradients . using the thermodynamic definition of the temperature , = ,
the evolution equations for the fields @xmath5 and @xmath4 can be written in a variational form , _
t = m _ _ t e = ( ( ) t ) = - ( ( ) t^2 ) .
[ eq : eeq ] the first equation expresses the local maximization of the entropy , which occurs at a rate given by the constant @xmath10 ; the second is identical to the conservation law , eq .
( [ eq : heatconservation ] ) .
while this is a perfectly viable starting point which has been explored by several authors @xcite , this formulation is rarely used in practice .
simulations are almost always carried out with models formulated in the variables @xmath4 and @xmath8 that can be obtained from free energy functionals .
besides historical reasons ( the first phase - field models for solidification were formulated in this language @xcite ) , there are also formal considerations which make this approach preferrable .
the main reason to choose the intensive variable @xmath8 instead of the extensive variable @xmath5 is that it directly controls the two - phase equilibrium , which makes it easier and more intuitive to identify the driving forces in the model .
this point will be illustrated by obtaining the equations of motion from a free energy functional that is constructed using a purely phenomenological point of view .
it will be shown below that the standard phase - field model of solidification is easily obtained as a special case .
let @xmath11 and @xmath12 be the free energy densities of pure solid and liquid , respectively , and let the corresponding equilibrium values of the phase field be @xmath13 .
the free energy is given by [ , t]=_v f(,,t ) = _ v f_int ( , ) + g_s ( ) f_s(t ) + ( 1-g_s ( ) ) f_l(t ) , [ eq : ffunctional ] where the weighting function @xmath14 is given by g_s ( ) = , with @xmath15 a function that satisfies @xmath16 and @xmath17 ; hence , @xmath18 in the solid and @xmath19 in the liquid .
the term @xmath20 is given by f_int = 12 ( ) ^2 + h f_dw ( ) , where @xmath21 and @xmath22 are constants of dimension energy per unit length and energy per unit volume , respectively , and @xmath23 is a double - well function with minima at @xmath24 .
the motivations for this formulation are easily understood and are common to many phase - field models .
the term @xmath20 creates domains where the phase field is close to its equilibrium values @xmath13 ( the minima of the double - well function ) , separated by diffuse interfaces .
therefore , far from the interfaces , the free energy density reduces to the one of the corresponding bulk phase .
the term @xmath20 contributes to the free energy only inside the interfaces ; this excess free energy represents the surface tension . the function @xmath14 interpolates between the two free energy densities through the diffuse interface .
a variation of the free energy functional with respect to the two fields @xmath4 and @xmath8 yields & = & _ v \{-^2 + hf_dw ( ) + } ( x ) + & & + \{g_s ( ) + ( 1-g_s ( ) ) } t(x ) , [ eq : fvariation ] where the prime stands for derivation with respect to @xmath4 .
the variation of @xmath25 with respect to @xmath4 is the driving force for the phase transition .
two features are noteworthy : ( i ) the requirement that @xmath17 ensures that the driving force vanishes outside of the interfacial regions , and ( ii ) since , at the melting temperature @xmath26 , @xmath27 , the `` thermodynamical '' part of the driving force is identically zero , independently of the value of @xmath4 .
the latter property implies that the equilibrium interface profile in @xmath4 can be calculated from the term @xmath20 alone .
this can be shown by seeking the equilibrium solution for a planar interface along the @xmath28 direction , which can be obtained from the condition that the variation of @xmath25 with repect to @xmath4 must vanish . at @xmath26 ,
this condition yields -_xx + hf_dw ( ) = 0 [ eq : intgood ] which implies that the solution of this equation is independent of the free energies @xmath11 and @xmath12 . as a consequence ,
the surface free energy @xmath29 ( defined as the excess free energy due to the presence of the interface ) is also independent of the bulk free energies and is given by =
i = i h w , [ eq : gammarelation ] where @xmath30 is a numerical constant that depends on the shape of the double well function @xmath31 , and the interface thickness @xmath0 is defined by w = .
[ eq : wdef ] therefore , the surface tension @xmath29 and the interface thickness @xmath0 can be freely chosen by appropriately fixing the two constants @xmath21 and @xmath22 , independently of the bulk properties .
as stated in the introduction , the interface properties can thus be controlled independently of the bulk thermodynamics .
the equation of motion for the phase field is obtained from the free energy functional by the standard variational procedure , _
t = - m _ , [ eq : phiequation ] which expresses the fact that the system seeks to minimize its local free energy at a rate which is controlled by the constant @xmath10 .    to obtain an evolution equation for the temperature field ,
the starting point is the observation that , by definition , the variation of @xmath25 with respect to @xmath8 is equal to the negative of the local entropy density , s(t , ) = - = - g_s ( ) - ( 1-g_s ( ) ) .
[ eq : sdensity ] since @xmath20 was chosen independent of temperature , @xmath9 is a _ local _ function of @xmath4 and @xmath8 ( no gradients are involved ) and can be simply seen as the interpolation of the bulk entropy densities , s(,t ) = g_s ( ) s_s(t ) + ( 1-g_s ( ) ) s_l(t ) .
[ eq : softandphi ] the use of the thermodynamic identity @xmath32 ( valid at constant density ) yields _ t e = t _ t s = t(_t + _ t t ) .
[ eq : eevolution ] note that in writing down the second equality , it is assumed that there is no entropy production due to local dissipation , which is equivalent to the hypothesis that the transformations are reversible on the mesoscopic scale of a coarse - graining cell .
furthermore , the definition of the specific heat per unit volume is ( , t ) = t = -t g_s ( ) - t ( 1-g_s ( ) ) .
[ eq : cdef ] the equations ( [ eq : eevolution ] ) and ( [ eq : cdef ] ) can be combined with the energy conservation law , eq .
( [ eq : heatconservation ] ) , where the heat conductivity @xmath33 now depends on the variables @xmath4 and @xmath8 , to yield ( , t)_t t = - t _
t + , which is the desired evolution equation for the temperature field .
this equation can be further simplified by writing the heat conductivity as the product of the specific heat and the thermal diffusion coefficient @xmath34 , and by using eq .
( [ eq : softandphi ] ) for the entropy density .
the result is _ t t = \ { + t[s_l(t)-s_s(t)]_t}. [ eq : tequation ] note that all quantities that appear in this equation except for the thermal diffusivity can be obtained from the bulk free energy densities @xmath11 and @xmath12 .
the free energy functional used in the standard formulation of the phase - field model can be obtained from eq .
( [ eq : ffunctional ] ) by linearizing the free energy density @xmath35 around the melting temperature @xmath36 , f(,,t ) = f(,,t_m ) + .|_t_m(t - t_m ) . using the definition of the latent heat per unit volume ,
@xmath37 $ ] , as well as the fact that the free energies of solid and liquid are equal at @xmath36 , @xmath27 , this expansion yields = _ v 12 ( ) ^2 + h f_dw ( ) + g()(t - t_m ) , [ eq : flinear ] where the constant @xmath38/2 $ ] has been disregarded for simplicity .
the equation of motion for the phase field is then obtained from this linearized functional by a variational derivative . to obtain an equation of motion for the temperature
, it is usually assumed that the specific heat is independent of both temperature and the phase field , @xmath39 .
then , it is easy to `` guess '' the correct equation by realizing that the latent heat released or consumed during the phase transformation appears as a source term in the diffusion equation for the temperature , _
t t = ( d_t(,t)t ) + _ t .
[ eq : tapprox ] this equation is indeed obtained from eq .
( [ eq : tequation ] ) when a constant specific heat is inserted and the approximation @xmath26 is made in the second term on the right hand side .
note that , in contrast , the correct general form could not have been easily guessed from eq .
( [ eq : tapprox ] ) .
the underlying reason is that the linearized free energy functional formally yields a specific heat which is zero since all second derivatives with respect to the temperature vanish ; therefore , thermodynamic consistency between the linearized functional , eqs .
( [ eq : flinear ] ) , and the evolution equation for the temperature , eq .
( [ eq : tapprox ] ) , has been lost .
the equations are nevertheless correct , since for the case of constant specific heat and constant latent heat , that is @xmath40=l$ ] , the internal energy density and the temperature are linearly related , e(,t ) = + ( t - t_m)- l. [ eq : etlinear ] then , eq .  ( [ eq : tapprox ] ) can be directly obtained by combining the time derivative of eq .
( [ eq : etlinear ] ) with the energy conservation law , eq .
( [ eq : heatconservation ] ) .
a binary alloy is a mixture of two pure substances a and b. for simplicity , it is assumed here that the atomic volume @xmath41 of both pure substances and of the mixture are all the same , and that hence the total number density of the alloy is a constant and equal in solid and liquid .
then , the only new field needed is the local composition ( atomic fraction ) @xmath42 of `` solute '' ( b ) atoms .
furthermore , for constant atomic volume the chemical potentials of a and b atoms are not independent since removal of an a atom implies the addition of a b atom .
this means that the only new intensive variable that needs to be considered is the chemical potential @xmath3 of the solute atoms .
the starting point of the coarse - graining approach , as pioneered in refs .
@xcite , is a free energy functional that depends on the variables @xmath4 , @xmath8 , and @xmath42 .
the chemical potential is then defined as the functional derivative of the free energy functional with respect to @xmath42 . since @xmath42 is dimensionless , the chemical potential obtained by this procedure has the dimensions of energy per unit volume .
this convention obscures the thermodynamic roles of the two variables : the relevant extensive variable from which a density should be defined is the number of b atoms .
therefore , the variable that is analogous to the internal energy density in the pure substance model is the number density of b atoms , = , [ eq : rhodef ] where @xmath41 is the atomic volume ( the constant volume occupied by one a or b atom ) .
then , the chemical potential defined by = = .
[ eq : mudef ] has the dimension of an energy , as is standard in basic thermodynamics .
since the nature of the variables is important for establishing the analogy between pure substance and alloy models , this convention for the chemical potential is adopted for the remainder of the paper . however , since it is customary to express free energy densities in terms of the composition rather than the number density , both @xmath43 and @xmath42 will be used in the following for ease of presentation , keeping in mind that the two variables are simply related by eq .
( [ eq : rhodef ] ) .
the number density is a conserved quantity , which implies _
t = -j _ , [ eq : massconservation ] where @xmath44 is the mass current . for isothermal solidification , where the only thermodynamic driving force for mass diffusion is the gradient of the chemical potential , the mass current is given by j_= - m(,t , c ) , [ eq : masscurrent ] where @xmath45 is the atomic mobility .
combining these equations and the definition of @xmath3 yields the equation of motion for @xmath43 , _
t = ( m(,t , c ) ) .
[ eq : ceq ]    it will now be shown that this approach generally leads to a model in which bulk and interface properties do not decouple . to this end , it is useful to start again from the variation of the free energy functional , now in the variables @xmath4 and @xmath43 . since isothermal solidification is considered , there is no variation with respect to temperature . in order to simplify the notations ,
the variable @xmath8 ( which becomes a simple parameter for isothermal solidification ) will be dropped from the free energy densities and the mobility from now on .
the variation of @xmath25 is & = & _ v \{-^2 + hf_dw ( ) + } ( x ) + & & + \{g_s ( ) + ( 1-g_s ( ) ) } ( x ) .
[ eq : fvariation2 ] a crucial difference which the pure substance case is obvious : there is no simple argument which ensures that the `` thermodynamic driving force '' term proportional to @xmath46 vanishes .
indeed , for two - phase equilibrium in an alloy , both the free energy density and the concentration vary across the interface . the value of all these quantities in the bulk phases at two - phase coexistence are obtained from two conditions : ( i ) the chemical potential must be the same in both phases , and ( ii ) the grand - potential density @xmath47 must also be the same . given the curves of free energy versus composition , the graphical interpretation of these two conditions is the well - known common tangent construction .
let us examine the consequence of these conditions for the phase - field model outlined above .
since the two variables  phase field and concentration  vary through the interface , the equilibrium interface profile is given by two coupled nonlinear differential equations .
one is obtained from the condition of constant chemical potential , which remains valid in the diffuse interface picture , and reads = g_s ( ) + ( 1-g_s ( ) ) = _ eq(t ) [ eq : mucondition ] where @xmath48 is the equilibrium value obtained from the common tangent construction .
this equation defines an implicit relation between the composition @xmath42 and the phase field @xmath4 .
the equation for the phase field , obtained as before from the condition that the variation of @xmath25 vanishes , is -_xx + hf_dw ( ) + = 0 , where @xmath49 denotes the `` thermodynamic part '' of the free energy density .
obviously , this equation becomes identical to eq .
( [ eq : intgood ] ) only if the third term is identically zero .
the physical meaning of this condition can be made transparent by remarking that , since the concentration and the phase field are not independent variables any more under the constraint of eq .
( [ eq : mucondition ] ) , the variation of @xmath50 with respect to @xmath4 , taking into account the constraint of eq .
( [ eq : mucondition ] ) , is = + = + .
therefore , if = ( f_th-_eq)0 , [ eq : grandcondition ] the equation for the equilibrium phase field profile reduces to eq .  (
[ eq : intgood ] ) ; in other words , the quantity @xmath51 must be constant through the interface .
far from the interfaces , where @xmath20 does not contribute , this quantity is equal to the grand potential density . note that the common tangent construction implies that the two _ bulk _ values of the grand potential must be equal .
however , for a general choice of free energy functions , there is no reason for this condition to be valid _ throughout the whole interface_. as a consequence , the interface equation and all quantities that are obtained from its solution ( surface tension , kinetic coefficients etc . )
depend on the bulk free energy densities .
for realistic values of the interface thickness , this dependence is small , but when the interface thickness is upscaled , large errors can occur .    this fact has been recognized by several authors , and so far two different strategies have been followed to cure this problem .
the first is to develop specifically designed free energy functionals that satisfy the condition of eq .
( [ eq : grandcondition ] ) , but are valid only for certain choices of bulk free energies ( see below ) .
the second strategy is the one of the two - phase model @xcite , in which two separate concentration fields , one for each phase , are used ; the supplementary degree of freedom is then eliminated in such a way that eq .
( [ eq : grandcondition ] ) is satisfied .
the new idea put forward here is that a general solution to this problem can also be obtained in the coarse - graining spirit ( using a single concentration field ) when the model is derived from a grand - potential functional instead of a free energy functional .
indeed , the model formulated in the variables @xmath4 and @xmath43 is equivalent to the pure substance model formulated in terms of @xmath4 and @xmath5 : it has the same variational structure [ compare eqs .
( [ eq : eeq ] ) and ( [ eq : ceq ] ) ] , and both @xmath43 and @xmath5 are densities of extensive variables . to obtain the equivalent of the more successful pure substance models formulated in the variables @xmath4 and @xmath8 , alloy models should be formulated in the variables @xmath4 and @xmath3 ; the corresponding thermodynamic potential is the grand potential .
grand - potential functionals have been used extensively in classical density functional theory ( see @xcite for a review ) . in the context of phase - field models , a grand potential
functional has been introduced to study solidification with density change @xcite .
however , in all the cited works , the density is retained as the fundamental field that is used to evaluate the functional .
in contrast , the grand potential in its role as a thermodynamic potential depends on the chemical potential . if the goal is to have a complete formulation of the problem in terms of the dynamical variable @xmath3 , the grand - potential functional @xmath52 should be a functional of the field @xmath3 .
in thermodynamic equilibrium , this field is just a constant which is equal to the thermodynamic equilibrium chemical potential , but out of equilibrium @xmath3 can depend on space and time .
therefore , the field @xmath43 that appears in the free energy density needs to be eliminated in favor of @xmath3 .
this is simple if the values of @xmath43 and @xmath3 are related by a local and invertible function .
a free energy functional of the form of eq .
( [ eq : ffunctional ] ) , taken with free energy densities that depend on @xmath8 and @xmath42 , is a good starting point since it contains no nonlocal terms in @xmath43 such as @xmath53 .
moreover , for functions @xmath54 and @xmath55 that are convex in @xmath42 , the relation between @xmath3 and @xmath42 is monotonous and hence invertible .
thus , it is possible to switch from @xmath42 to @xmath3 as the dynamic field . after this operation ,
the number density is not a fundamental free field any more , but is obtained as a local functional derivative of the grand - potential functional with respect to the local chemical potential , @xmath56}{\delta \mu}. \label{eq : rhodepdef}\ ] ] note that the above requirements ( no square gradient terms in @xmath42 and convex free energy functions ) implies that the present method can not be applied to systems that exhibit phase separation .    in analogy with eq .
( [ eq : ffunctional ] ) , the grand - potential functional is & = & _ v ( , , ) + & = & _ v _ int ( , ) + g_s ( ) _ s ( ) + ( 1-g_s ( ) ) _ l ( ) , [ eq : gfunctional ] where @xmath57 is identical to @xmath20 , and the grand potential densities of the bulk phases are obtained by a legendre transform of the free energies , _ ( ) = f_(c)-(=s , l ) .
[ eq : legendre ] this procedure can be easily performed for any convex free energy function , either analytically or numerically .
note that this transformation implicitly uses the equivalence between statistical ensembles ( canonical and grand canonical ) on the mesoscopic scale .
this is consistent with the general philosophy of the coarse - graining approach , which assumes that thermodynamic quantities can be defined on the scale of a coarse - graining cell .
the variation of the grand - potential functional ( at constant temperature ) is & = & _ v \{-^2 + hf_dw ( ) + } ( x ) + & & + \{g_s ( ) + ( 1-g_s ( ) ) } ( x ) .
[ eq : gvariation ] since , at solid - liquid coexistence , @xmath58 , the equilibrium interface equation obtained from the condition of vanishing variation with respect to @xmath4 is identical to eq .
( [ eq : intgood ] ) , as desired .    furthermore , using eq .
( [ eq : rhodepdef ] ) , the variation of @xmath52 with respect to @xmath3 yields ( , ) = - = - g_s ( ) - ( 1-g_s ( ) ) , [ eq : rhoofmu ] which is the equivalent of eq .
( [ eq : sdensity ] ) for the entropy density .
note that this can also be rewritten as ( , t , ) = g_s ( ) _ s(t , ) + ( 1-g_s ( ) ) _
l(t , ) [ eq : rhoofmuandphi ] with @xmath59 ( @xmath60 ) .
it is useful to restate this equation in terms of @xmath42 for future use , c ( , ) = ( , ) = g_s ( ) c_s ( ) + ( 1-g_s ( ) ) c_l ( ) , [ eq : cofmuandphi ] where obviously @xmath61 .
two - phase coexistence is characterized by a constant chemical potential , @xmath62 ; the corresponding composition profile through a solid - liquid interface is c_eq ( ) = c(,_eq(t ) ) = g_s ( ) c_s^eq(t ) + ( 1-g_s())c_l^eq(t ) .
[ eq : cprofile ]    the equations of motion for @xmath4 and @xmath3 are now formulated following the same steps as for the pure substance model .
the phase field evolves toward a minimum of the grand potential , _
t= -m _ = m _ ; [ eq : phievolution ] this equation shows that the thermodynamic driving force for the phase transition is the difference in grand potential densities .
the evolution equation for the chemical potential is obtained by taking the time derivative of eq .
( [ eq : rhoofmuandphi ] ) , which yields _ t
= ( _ t + _ t ) .
[ eq : rhoevolution ] it is useful to define the quantity ( , ) = = g_s ( ) + ( 1-g_s ( ) ) , [ eq : chidef ] which will play a role similar to the specific heat in the pure substance model . the symbol @xmath63 is chosen here because this quantity can be seen as a generalized susceptibility @xcite .
furthermore , the mobility can be written as the product of @xmath64 and a solute diffusion coefficient @xmath65 . indeed , in the bulk phases , for monotonous ( and hence invertible ) functions @xmath66 , _ ( ) = = = , [ eq : darken ] which is the well - known thermodynamic factor ( darken factor @xcite ) .
the combination of these definitions and eq .
( [ eq : rhoevolution ] ) with the mass conservation law , eq .
( [ eq : massconservation ] ) yields _ t= \{- _ t } , [ eq : muevolution ] an equation completely equivalent to eq .
( [ eq : tequation ] ) for the temperature in the pure substance model .
the model is completely specified for _ any _ set of free energy functions for solid and liquid by the definitions of the grand - potential functional , eqs .
( [ eq : gfunctional ] ) and ( [ eq : legendre ] ) , and the evolution equations ( [ eq : phievolution ] ) and ( [ eq : muevolution ] ) . in order to illustrate some of its properties , it is useful to work out several explicit examples . first , it is shown that the equivalent of the linearized pure substance model is obtained from parabolic free energies .
next , it will be shown that the dilute alloy model of ref .
@xcite can be recovered using this formalism .
finally , the more general case of an ideal solution model will be treated .
the simplest phenomenological approximation for free energy functions for fixed equilibrium compositions @xmath67 and @xmath68 at some temperature @xmath8 are two parabolas , f_(c ) = 12 _ ( c - c_^eq)^2 , ( = s , l ) where @xmath69 and @xmath70 are constants with dimension energy per unit volume .
the chemical potential in each phase is = = _ ( c - c _ ) , [ eq : muofc ] which can of course be inverted to yield @xmath42 as a function of @xmath3 in each phase , c= + c_^eq .
[ eq : cofmu ] the grand potential densities are then obtained from the legendre transform , @xmath71 , where eq .
( [ eq : cofmu ] ) is used to switch variables from @xmath42 to @xmath3 , _
( ) = -12 - c_^eq .
of course , the use of the definition @xmath72 together with @xmath73 yields again eq .
( [ eq : cofmu ] ) .
the equilibrium chemical potential for two - phase coexistence is obtained by the condition @xmath74 .
the solution @xmath75 corresponds to the common tangent between the bottoms of the parabolic wells , and the equilibrium compositions are equal to @xmath67 and @xmath68 . for @xmath76 ,
a second solution exists which corresponds to a common tangent that is tilted and yields different values for the equilibrium compositions ; this solution is not of interest here . since @xmath75
, we have @xmath77 , that is , in this model @xmath3 is directly the deviation from the equilibrium value of the chemical potential .    inserting these grand potential densities in eqs .
( [ eq : cofmuandphi ] ) and ( [ eq : chidef ] ) yields the expressions for @xmath42 and @xmath63 as a function of @xmath4 and @xmath3 , c ( , ) = + c_s^eqg_s()+c_l^eq(1-g_s ( ) ) [ eq : cofmuandphiparabolas ] ( , ) = g_s()+(1-g_s ( ) ) .
it is easy to see that when @xmath78 , the resulting model is equivalent to the standard pure substance model .
indeed , in this case the difference between the compositions in the two phases is independent of @xmath3 and identical to @xmath79 , and the susceptibility is just a constant , @xmath80 .
this corresponds to the approximations of constant latent heat and constant specific heat , respectively .
it is easily verified that eq .
( [ eq : cofmuandphiparabolas ] ) becomes identical to eq .
( [ eq : etlinear ] ) , with @xmath81 and @xmath63 replacing @xmath82 and @xmath83 , respectively .
this analogy has been used in several phase - field models @xcite .
the present formalism makes it possible to generalize this model and to use @xmath76 , that is , parabolas with different curvatures .      the phase - field model for a dilute alloy of ref .
@xcite starts from the free energy densities f_(t ,
c ) = f_^a(t ) + _ c + ( cc - c ) , (= s , l ) [ eq : fdensitydilute ] where @xmath84 and @xmath85 are the free energy densities of pure a , @xmath69 and @xmath70 are again constants with dimension energy per unit volume , @xmath86 is boltzmann s constant , and the last term in eq .
( [ eq : fdensitydilute ] ) is the dilute limit of the entropy of mixing .
the calculation of the grand potential densities is straightforward and yields _ = f_^a - ( ) .
the compositions as a function of the chemical potential are given by c _
[ eq : cofmudilute ] it is obvious that these compositions satisfy , for any value of the chemical potential , the partition relation c_s = k c_l with the partition coefficient @xmath87 given by k= ( ) .
[ eq : kdef ]    the equilibrium chemical potential for a given temperature is again obtained from the condition @xmath88 which yields f_s^a(t)-f_l^a(t)=. [ eq : mueqdilute ] the left hand side can be expanded for temperatures close to the melting temperature @xmath36 ; the right hand side can be rewritten in terms of @xmath89 and the partition coefficient .
the result is ( t - t_m ) = c_l^eq(k-1 ) .
if , on the right hand side of this equation , @xmath8 is approximated by @xmath36 , which is justified in the limit @xmath90 , the standard dilute alloy phase diagram is obtained , c_l^eq = , where @xmath91 is the liquidus slope .    when these expressions are now used in the complete grand - potential functional , the composition as a function of @xmath4 and @xmath3 becomes c ( , ) = g_s ( ) ( ) + ( 1-g_s ( ) ) ( ) .
[ eq : cofphiandmudilute ] a specific feature of the dilute alloy model is that this expression can be factorized into two functions that depend only on @xmath4 and @xmath3 , respectively .
moreover , the latter can again be rewritten in terms of the liquid composition , which yields c(,)=c_l ( ) .
[ eq : csimplified ] as a result , the expression for the susceptibility is also quite simple and reads ( , ) = ( ) = .
[ eq : chidilute ]    inserting these expressions in eqs .
( [ eq : phievolution ] ) and ( [ eq : muevolution ] ) leads to model equations identical to those of ref .
the difference of the grand potential densities is @xmath92.\end{aligned}\ ] ] the free energy difference can be expressed in terms of the equilibrium chemical potential using eq .
( [ eq : mueqdilute ] ) , and after some algebra one obtains _ s()-_l ( ) = c_l^eq(1-k ) .
as in ref .
@xcite , two dimensionless variables are now introduced .
the first , u = [ eq : udef ] is the dimensionless deviation of the chemical potential from its equilibrium value . this variable can also be expressed in terms of the composition and the equilibrium composition at two - phase coexistence using the definition of eq .
( [ eq : cprofile ] ) as u=. the second dimensionless variable , u = [ eq : udef ] is a dimensionless supersaturation .
this can be seen by inserting the identity @xmath93 obtained from the preceding equation , which yields u = . [ eq : uofceq ] when the driving force ( the grand potential difference ) is expressed in either of these variables , the same evolution equation for the phase field as in ref .
@xcite is obtained .
matters are slightly more complicated for the second evolution equation .
@xcite uses an evolution equation for the composition ( or , equivalently , for the dimensionless supersaturation @xmath94 ) rather than for the chemical potential . for the dilute alloy model
, such an equation can be obtained starting from the general evolution equation of the chemical potential , eq .
( [ eq : muevolution ] ) , or ( more simply ) from the original formulation of the mass conservation law , eq .  ( [ eq : massconservation ] ) . for this purpose , the chemical potential has to be eliminated in favor of @xmath42 or @xmath94 .
this is possible because eqs .
( [ eq : udef ] ) and eq .
( [ eq : udef ] ) can be inverted and combined with eq .
( [ eq : csimplified ] ) to yield = _ eq + and c = c_l^eq .
a straightforward calculation then yields the variational form ( without the antitrapping current ) of the evolution equation for the composition of ref .
these steps will be discussed in more details later on ; here , it is important to stress that the possibility to switch from an evolution equation for @xmath3 to one for @xmath42 by an exact transformation is specific to the dilute alloy model : this procedure only works because the function @xmath95 is easily inverted , which is not the case in more general models , as will be seen below .      in an ideal solution model ,
the free energy is a weighted average of the pure substance free energies of a and b plus an entropy of mixing term , f_(t , c)= ( 1-c)f_^a(t)+cf_^b(t)+ .
[ eq : fideal ] contact with the notations of the previous examples can be made by setting @xmath96 ; the free energy becomes f_(t , c)= f_^a(t)+c_(t)+ .
the chemical potential is = = _ + .
this can be inverted to yield the conentration in each phase as a function of @xmath3 , c _ ( ) = .
the grand potential densities are _ s , l = f_^a + ( 1-c ) = f_^a - .
[ eq : omegadensitiesideal ] as before , these expressions can now be used to define the interpolated composition and the susceptibility , c(,)=g_s ( ) + ( 1-g_s ( ) ) , [ eq : cofphiandmuideal ] ( , ) = , where the latter has been expressed in terms of the functions @xmath97 because this leads to a simpler expression .
the equations of motion for the ideal solution model are obtained by inserting these expressions in the general evolution equations , eqs .
( [ eq : phievolution ] ) and ( [ eq : muevolution ] ) .
the equilibrium chemical potential and the phase diagram can be calculated analytically , but the resulting expressions are quite complicated and not of interest here .
the important point here is that for this model it is not possible to transform the evolution equation for @xmath3 into one for the composition @xmath42 : whereas the functions @xmath98 for the composition in each phase as a function of @xmath3 can be easily inverted , the same is not true for the interpolated composition given by eq .
( [ eq : cofphiandmuideal ] ) . as a consequence ,
it is easy to obtain @xmath42 from @xmath3 for given @xmath4 and @xmath8 , but hard to obtain @xmath3 from @xmath42 .
in the two - phase model @xcite , the interface region is seen as a phenomenological superposition of the two bulk phases , with a weighting function @xmath99 that interpolates between liquid ( @xmath100 ) and solid ( @xmath101 ) .
the main difference to the coarse - graining approach is that the two - phase model starts with two separate composition fields for the solid and the liquid , @xmath102 and @xmath103 . the free energy density and the `` true '' composition ( in the coarse - graining sense )
are then written as f(,c ) = h_s()f_s(c_s ) + ( 1-h_s())f_l(c_l ) , c = h_s ( ) c_s + ( 1-h_s ( ) ) c_l .
[ eq : cdefmixture ] since there are two equations but three variables ( @xmath4 , @xmath102 , and @xmath103 ) , an additional condition is needed to close the system : the chemical potentials of the two coexisting phases are required to be the same , = .
[ eq : muequal ] taking this implicit relationship between @xmath102 and @xmath103 into account , the number of independent fields is reduced to two , and two evolution equations for , say , @xmath4 and @xmath42 can be written down .
this approach is completely equivalent to the grand - potential formalism outlined above , with the difference that the dynamical variable is @xmath42 instead of @xmath3 . to see this ,
set @xmath104 .
equation ( [ eq : cdefmixture ] ) becomes identical to eq .
( [ eq : cofmuandphi ] ) . furthermore , since the compositions @xmath102 and @xmath103 in eq .
( [ eq : cofmuandphi ] ) are defined as functions of the variable @xmath3 , eq .
( [ eq : muequal ] ) is automatically satisfied . finally , since all the equations of ref .
@xcite are developed by analogy with the pure substance model , it is not surprising that the evolution equations , eqs .
( 31 ) and ( 32 ) of ref .
@xcite are identical to the evolution equations ( [ eq : phievolution ] ) and ( [ eq : muevolution ] ) of the present paper once all the notations have been properly translated : the driving force for the phase transformation is the difference in grand potential density , and the quantity @xmath105 that appears in the evolution equation for the concentration in ref .
@xcite is identical to @xmath106 here .    in summary
, the two - phase model can be obtained in a fully variational manner from a grand - potential functional .
note that , in this point of view , the introduction of two separate composition fields is not necessary any more : the fundamental dynamical field is the chemical potential , and the two fields @xmath102 and @xmath103 are simply obtained as the derivatives of the bulk grand potential densities with respect to @xmath3 , whereas the `` real '' composition at any space point is given by the functional derivative of the grand - potential functional .      at this point , it is useful to discuss the respective merits of the grand - potential and the two - phase approaches . at first glance ,
the former seems to be more advantageous : the number of fundamental fields is equal to two ( as compared to three for the two - phase model ) , and whereas @xmath3 has to be obtained from @xmath102 and @xmath103 in the two - phase model by solving eq .
( [ eq : muequal ] ) , @xmath102 and @xmath103 are obtained from @xmath3 by simple derivatives in the grand - potential formalism . however , an analysis in terms of computation time reveals that matters are not so simple .
for the sake of concreteness , consider the simplest case of constant but distinct solute diffusivities in the solid and the liquid . in this case , the evolution equation for the composition reduces , in the bulk phases , to the simple linear diffusion equation .
in contrast , the evolution equation for @xmath3 has several nonlinearities ( even in the bulk ) due to the presence of the factors @xmath64 , which are in general nonlinear functions of @xmath3 .
this means that the numerical effort to integrate the equation for @xmath3 in the bulk is higher that the one for integrating an equation for @xmath42 . in the interfaces
, the grand potential formulation does not require much additional effort , whereas the nontrivial eq .
( [ eq : muequal ] ) has to be solved in the two - phase model .
however , since the interface regions usually represent only a small fraction of all the grid points in a numerical simulation , the equation of motion for @xmath3 may not always be advantageous from a computational point of view .
the computational disadvantage of the grand - potential formalism in the bulk can be alleviated by an additional step , which also brings to light the direct relation of this approach to the phenomenological two - phase model developed by the access group @xcite .
the idea is to make a change of variables and to replace the chemical potential field by another continous field that plays the same role . in order to obtain the standard diffusion equation for this field in the liquid phase ,
the appropriate field is the density ( or the composition ) in the liquid , @xmath107 or @xmath103 . indeed , under the hypothesis that @xmath108 is an invertible function of @xmath43 , the function @xmath109 is just its inverse function , according to the properties of the legendre transform . furthermore , @xmath110 is also a function of @xmath3 and can therefore expressed as a function of @xmath107 , @xmath111 eliminating @xmath3 in favor of @xmath107 in eq .
( [ eq : muevolution ] ) yields @xmath112 +        \frac{g'(\phi)}{2}\left[\rho_s(\rho_l)-\rho_l\right]\partial_t\phi\right\},\ ] ] where @xmath113 is the susceptibility of the liquid phase .
unsing the fact that @xmath114 by definition , this equation can be rewritten as @xmath115 } \times \nonumber \\   & &   \biggl\{\vec\nabla\cdot\left[d(\phi,\rho_l)\chi_l(\rho_l)[1-(1-g_s(\phi)\chi_s/\chi_l)]\vec\nabla\rho_l\right ] + \nonumber \\   & & \quad        \frac{g'(\phi)}{2}\left[\rho_s(\rho_l)-\rho_l\right]\partial_t\phi\biggr\}.\end{aligned}\ ] ] for a dilute alloy , @xmath116 and @xmath117 according to eqs .
( [ eq : kdef ] ) and ( [ eq : chidilute ] ) , and the above model becomes identical to the one of ref .
the grand - potential formalism thus allows for a generalization of this model to arbitrary phase diagrams .
further progress can be made by a simple approximation .
the crucial point is the relation between composition and chemical potential : its nonlinearity penalizes the grand - potential formalism in the bulk and makes the resolution of eq .
( [ eq : muequal ] ) in the two - phase model non - trivial .
the idea is thus to replace the exact relation between chemical potential and composition _ in the interfaces _ by an approximate one that will make it possible to write a simple equation for the composition
. this approximation will be called _ local supersaturation approximation _ : it exploits the fact that , for slow solidification , the chemical potential in the interfaces is close to the value for two - phase equilibrium .
this suggests to use a taylor expansion of the composition around the equilibrium composition profile in the interface , c - c_eq ( ) = .|__eq(-_eq ) = ( , _ eq)(-_eq ) [ eq : lsa ] which can be easily inverted to yield = _ eq + .
furthermore , an expansion of the driving force around the equilibrium chemical potential yields _ s ( ) - _ l ( ) = ( -_eq ) . inserting these expression in the evolution equation for the phase field and the mass conservation law yields a simple set of equations for @xmath4 and @xmath42 , _ t= ^2-hf_dw -c [ eq : philsa ] _ t c = . [ eq : clsa ] note that the second equation can also be rewritten after applying the chain rule as _
t c = d ( ) c + , where @xmath118 .
this latter form displays explicitly the two driving forces for solute diffusion that establish the equilibrium solute profile and that lead to solute redistribution out of equilibrium : composition gradients and differences between the thermodynamic potentials in the two phases .    before proceeding further , it is useful to relate the quantities that appear in the above equations to the phase diagram of the binary alloy , characterized by the curves @xmath119 and @xmath120 , or equivalently by the coexistence line @xmath48 .
the quantities @xmath121 are related to the liquidus and solidus slopes , @xmath122 , = = .|__eq = _ ^eq . moreover
, the quantity @xmath123 can be evaluated using a clausius - clapeyron relation for the @xmath3-@xmath8 coexistence line , = - = - . combining these results yields _ s , l^eq = - .
thus , the susceptibilities are inversely proportional to the liquidus and solidus slopes , and therefore @xmath124 . defining an effective partition coefficient by the ratio of the liquidus solpes @xmath125 ,
the evolution equations of the phase - field model can be further simplified .
indeed , the susceptibility along the equilibrium profile is ( , _ eq ) = _ s^eqg_s ( ) + _ l^eq(1-g_s ( ) ) = _ l^eq[1-(1-k_m)g_s ( ) ] , and the evolution equations for @xmath4 and @xmath42 become _
^2-hf_dw - [ eq : philsakm ] _ t c = .
[ eq : clsakm ] these equations are very similar to the ones of the dilute alloy model , except that the partition coefficient @xmath87 has been replaced by the effective partition coefficient @xmath126 which depends on the temperature . in that sense , this approach bears some similarity with the method used in ref .
@xcite to construct a quantitative phase - field model for arbitrary phase diagrams : the free energy curves are first approximated by a dilute alloy phase diagram with `` effective '' ( temperature - dependent ) partition coefficient , melting temperature , and liquidus slope ; the equations of motion for the dilute alloy model are then applied with these effective parameters . here
, the approximation is directly in the evolution equations , and can be applied in a straightforward manner for arbitrary free energy functions .
also note that the two appromixations are not completely equivalent .
for instance , the effective partition coefficient in ref .
@xcite is defined by the ratio of the compositions , @xmath127 , which is equal to the ratio @xmath128 only for a dilute alloy .
it should also be noted that this approximation is _ not _ equivalent to the approximation of constant concentration gap @xmath81 ( equivalent to parallel liquidus and solidus slopes ) used in refs .
this can be easily seen from eq .
( [ eq : lsa ] ) by considering a constant chemical potential deviation @xmath129 ( generated , for example , by a local curvature of the interface ) : the shifts in concentration on the two sides of the interface are proportional to @xmath130 , respectively , and hence inversely proportional to the liquidus slopes , as they should be .
the above approximation has been called `` local '' for two reasons .
first , this emphasizes the fact that the approximation of the relationship between composition and chemical potential is needed only in the interfaces , while it leaves the bulk evolution equations unchanged .
second , it is anticipated that this method should be applicable to situations in which the temperature field varies slowly with time and over large length scales , such as in directional solidification or in thermosolutal models with realistic values of the lewis number .
for this purpose , it should be sufficient to apply the above equations with the _ local _ value of the temperature for each point of the interface , which implies that @xmath81 , @xmath130 and @xmath126 are not constants but vary between different interface points .
the next step is to incorporate into the model two features that have been widely used to increase the precision and performance of phase - field models .
the first is motivated by the fact that a non - variational model can be more efficient for computational purposes than a strictly variational formulation .
this was first highlighted by karma and rappel @xcite , and their method has since been used in many other models . in the terms of the present formulation ,
it amounts to keeping the interpolation function @xmath15 in the evolution equation of the phase field , but using a different interpolation function for the number density and the susceptibility .
let @xmath131 be a function that has the property @xmath132 , and let h_s ( ) = .
then , the concentration is defined as ( , ) = = _ s()h_s ( ) + _ l()(1-h_s ( ) ) [ eq : credef ] instead of eq .
( [ eq : rhoofmuandphi ] ) ; as a consequence , the equilibrium composition profile given by eq .
( [ eq : cprofile ] ) is also modified and becomes c_eq ( ) = c_s^eqh_s ( ) + c_l^eq(1-h_s ( ) ) .
the susceptibility is still defined as the derivative of the number density with respect to the chemical potential and becomes ( , t,)== h_s ( ) _ s(t , ) + ( 1-h_s ( ) ) _
[ eq : chiredef ]    the second feature is the so - called antitrapping current , which was developed in order to counterbalance spurious solute trapping @xcite .
indeed , if the solute diffusivity in the solid is substantially lower than in the liquid , as is usually the case in alloy solidification , the upscaling of the interface thickness magnifies the solute trapping effect , whose magnitude is proportional to the interface thickness @xcite . to restore local equilibrium at the interface , as appropriate for low - speed solidification , an additional solute current is introduced which `` pushes '' the solute out of the freezing material , and which is given by j_at = aw[_l()-_s()]n _ t , where @xmath133 is the unit normal vector pointing from the solid to the liquid , @xmath0 is the interface thickness , and @xmath134 is a constant to be determined by a matched asymptotic analysis @xcite . the current thus defined is proportional to the interface velocity ( _ via _ the factor @xmath135 ) and to the composition difference between solid and liquid , and is directed from the solid to the liquid for a solidifying interface , for which @xmath136 .
the mass conservation law , eq .
( [ eq : massconservation ] ) , reads now _
t = - ( j_+ j_at ) = ( m(,)- aw[_l()-_s()]n _ t ) .    taking these modifications into account , the evolution equation for the chemical potential , eq .
( [ eq : muevolution ] ) , is replaced by @xmath137\hat n \partial_t\phi\right ] \nonumber \\     & & \qquad\qquad\quad \mbox { } -        \frac{h'(\phi)}{2}\left[\rho_s(\mu)-\rho_l(\mu)\right]\partial_t\phi\biggr\};\end{aligned}\ ] ] the evolution equation for @xmath4 remains unchanged .    in the local supersaturation approximation ,
the composition difference in the expression for the antitrapping current is approximated by its equilibrium value , @xmath138 .
the evolution equation for the concentration , eq .
( [ eq : clsakm ] ) , is then replaced by _
[ eq : clsakmredef ]      as usual , the parameters of the phase - field model have to be related to the quantities that appear in the sharp - interface theories by matched asymptotic analysis . the complete asymptotic analysis for the general eqs . ( [ eq : phievolution ] ) and ( [ eq : muevolution ] )
will be presented elsewhere . here
, only the behavior of the model in the local supersaturation approximation will be discussed , because for its analysis the analogy to the dilute alloy model @xcite can be exploited .    in order to apply directly the results of ref .
@xcite , it is useful to cast the evolution equations in dimensionless form . from eqs .
( [ eq : philsa ] ) and ( [ eq : clsa ] ) , it is clear that the dimensionless variable that generalizes the quantity @xmath94 of the dilute alloy model defined by eq .
( [ eq : udef ] ) is u = = .
indeed , this expression can be rewritten using the fact that @xmath139 $ ] , where @xmath140 is the standard partition coefficient , u = , which reduces to eq .
( [ eq : uofceq ] ) for a dilute alloy , since @xmath141 in this case .    in terms of this variable , eq .
( [ eq : clsa ] ) becomes @xmath142\partial_t u & = & \vec\nabla\bigl\ {    d(\phi)[1-(1-k_m)h_s(\phi ) ] \vec\nabla u   \nonumber \\    & &   \quad \mbox{}+ aw\hat n[1+(1-k_m)u]\partial_t\phi\bigr\ }   \nonumber \\   & & \mbox{}+ [ 1+(1-k_m)u]\partial_t h_s(\phi).\end{aligned}\ ] ] a form formally identical to eq .
( 69 ) in ref .
@xcite is obtained by choosing a particular interpolation for the diffusion coefficient @xmath143 , namely by setting d()[1-(1-k_m)h_s ( ) ] d_l q ( ) , where @xmath144 is the solute diffusivity in the liquid , supposed to be constant .
note that , since the left hand side is actually the product of the diffusivity and the susceptibility , strictly speaking the function @xmath145 is an interpolation of the _ mobility _ rather than of the diffusion coefficient .
the final result for the evolution equation is @xmath142\partial_t u & = & \vec\nabla\left (    d_l q(\phi ) \vec\nabla u + aw\hat n[1+(1-k_m)u]\partial_t\phi\right )   \nonumber \\   & & \mbox{}+ [ 1+(1-k_m)u]\partial_t h_s(\phi ) .
\label{eq : ulikedilute}\end{aligned}\ ] ] this equation is indeed identical to the one used in the asymptotics of the dilute alloy model , except that the dilute alloy partition coefficient @xmath87 is replaced by the ratio of the solidus and liquidus slopes @xmath126 .
this is very natural , since this quantity controls how the composition difference between solid and liquid depends on the chemical potential at the interface .
the replacement of @xmath42 by @xmath94 in the evolution equation for the phase field leads to _
^2-hf_dw - u. this equation is now divided by the constant @xmath22 , which amounts to non - dimensionalizing the free energy and grand potential densities ( since @xmath22 has dimension of energy per unit volume ) .
furthermore , the function @xmath146 is now chosen to be the standard fifth - order polynomial @xmath147 , the function @xmath148 , and the double - well function to be @xmath149 .
the resulting equation reads _
t= w^2 ^ 2 + -^3 -(1-^2)^2u , [ eq : phinodim ] where @xmath150 is the relaxation time for the phase field , @xmath151 is the interface thickness defined by eq .
( [ eq : wdef ] ) , and the constant @xmath152 is given by = .
equation ( [ eq : phinodim ] ) is identical to the standard evolution equation for the phase field @xcite .    as announced previously , the results of the asymptotic analysis of ref .
@xcite can now be exploited since eqs .
( [ eq : ulikedilute ] ) and ( [ eq : phinodim ] ) are identically to the model analyzed in this reference .
therefore , the variable @xmath94 obeys , in the liquid , the free boundary problem _
t u = d_l^2 u , u_int = - d_0k - v_n , [ eq : ugitho ] v_n = - d_l_n u|_int , [ eq : ustefan ] where @xmath153 and @xmath154 are the local curvature and interface velocity , respectively , @xmath155 is the capillary length , and @xmath156 the kinetic coefficient .
equation ( [ eq : ugitho ] ) is the generalized gibbs - thomson equation , and eq .
( [ eq : ustefan ] ) is the stefan boundary condition that describes mass conservation at the phase boudary .    in terms of the phase - field parameters ,
the capillary length and the kinetic coefficient are given by d_0 = a_1 [ eq : d0defpf ] = a_1(1-a_2 ) with @xmath157 and @xmath158 ; these values are identical to those obtained by karma and rappel @xcite .    in terms of physical quantites ,
this expression for the capillary length is in fact identical to the standard thermodynamic definition @xcite . indeed , the number @xmath157 quoted above is equal to @xmath159 , where @xmath30 , the numerical constant defined in eq .
( [ eq : gammarelation ] ) , is equal to @xmath160 for the standard fourth - order double well potential used here . with the help of these relations , eq .
( [ eq : d0defpf ] ) can be rewritten as d_0 = .
then , the use of eqs .
( [ eq : gammarelation ] ) and ( [ eq : darken ] ) yields d_0 = = .
[ eq : d0def ]
the relations found in the preceding section are now used to perform some illustrative simulations on a concrete model system .
the ideal solution model is chosen , with the same parameters as those used in ref .
@xcite to model the nickel - copper alloy .
this alloy exhibits a typical lens - shape phase diagram with a rather narrow coexistence zone .
concretely , the free energy densities given by eq .
( [ eq : fideal ] ) are used ; the free energy differences ( between solid and liquid ) of the pure substances are given by f_s^ni(t)-f_l^ni(t)=(t - t_m^ni ) , f_s^cu(t)-f_l^cu(t)=(t - t_m^ni ) , with the melting temperatures @xmath161 k and @xmath162 k and the latent heats @xmath163 j/@xmath164 and @xmath165 j/@xmath164 .
the molar volume is taken to be @xmath166 @xmath164 , and the surface tension @xmath167 j/@xmath168 .
for a temperature of @xmath169 k , the equilibrium concentrations are @xmath170 and @xmath171 , the partition coefficient is @xmath172 , the ratio of the liquidus slopes is @xmath173 , and the capillary length calculated by eq .
( [ eq : d0def ] ) is @xmath174 cm .
isothermal dendritic solidification is simulated in two dimensions .
the anisotropy needed to obtain stable dendritic growth is introduced in the standard way @xcite by making the surface tension dependent on the angle @xmath175 between the interface normal and a crystallographic axis , here chosen to coincide with the @xmath28 direction .
a standard fourfold anisotropy , @xmath176 is used , with @xmath177 .
the initial composition of the liquid is chosen as @xmath178 , which corresponds to a supersaturation of @xmath179 .
four simulations are carried out with the equations of motion in the local supersaturation approximation , with @xmath180 , and @xmath181 , which corresponds to interface widths of @xmath182 and @xmath183 nm .
for each simulation , the relaxation time of the phase - field equation is chosen such as to eliminate interface kinetics ( @xmath184 for all orientations ) .
the steady - state growth velocity of the dendrites is measured as described in ref .
@xcite , and the result is displayed in fig .
[ figvel ] .
it exhibits the behavior that is typical for quantitative phase - field models : the simulation results converge to a constant value with decreasing interface thickness @xmath0 , and the convergence is roughly quadratic in @xmath0 , which can be expected since all terms linear in @xmath0 have been eliminated by the model formulation .
it is not surprising to find such behavior , since the model used here is essentially identical to the dilute alloy model for which rapid convergence with @xmath0 has been demonstrated @xcite .
moreover , the parameters chosen here are in a region of the phase diagram in which the dilute approximation should still work quite well
. however , this is not a limitation of the approach : simulations at @xmath185 k , where the ratio of the liquidus slopes @xmath186 is very different from the partition coefficient @xmath187 , yield a similar convergence plot .
this shows that the model can be applied to alloys with arbitrary phase diagram .
k , for different choices of the interface width @xmath0 . ]
the most important conclusions of the present work can be summarized as follows .    1 .
a phase - field model for alloy solidification has been obtained in a completely variational framework , starting from a phenomenological grand - potential functional that is a simple sum of bulk and interface contributions . in this model ,
the two dynamic variables are the phase field and the chemical potential field .
a complete analogy can be established with the standard phase - field model for the solidification of a pure substance , in which the variables are the phase field and the temperature field .
the main difference between the two sets of equations is that the relation between the composition and the chemical potential ( the extensive and the intensive variable ) is nonlinear , whereas the relation between temperature and internal energy is usually assumed to be linear .
the resulting model is shown to be completely equivalent to the model of kim , kim and suzuki @xcite , with the chemical potential replacing the composition as the dynamic field . as a result , in the present model no `` partitioning '' of the solute into coexisting phases is necessary ; the ( auxiliary ) compositions in each of the phases can be simply obtained from the chemical potential . with an additional change of variables ,
the phenomenological access model @xcite can also be recovered and extended to general alloy phase diagrams .
these developments show that these two - phase models , despite a seemingly quite different starting point , can in fact also be obtained by a coarse - graining procedure if the appropriate thermodynamic potential is used .
3 .   the equations of the new model can also be written in terms of a phase field and the composition field .
they thus have essentially the same computational complexity as the original phase - field models for alloy solidification @xcite derived in the coarse - graining framework .
however , in contrast to the latter models , they have a decisive property which is required for quantitative simulations : bulk and interface thermodynamic properties can be adjusted independently .
this difference in behavior is due to the different interpolations of the relevant thermodynamic potentials ( free energies in refs .
@xcite , grand potentials here ) .
4 .   with an additional approximation  a linearization of the relation between chemical potential and composition inside the interfaces
the model becomes equivalent to the quantitative dilute alloy model studied in refs .
this feature makes it possible to include the additional antitrapping current as in that model , and to apply the detailed asymptotic analysis of ref .  @xcite . as demonstrated for one particular case here ,
efficient and accurate simulations are thus possible for arbitrary alloy phase diagrams .
numerous interesting perpectives for future work arise from the present results .
first , the model has been worked out here for isothermal solidification only , but it can be easily extended to non - isothermal situations : coupled equations for the phase field , the temperature field and the chemical potential field can be developed by following the same steps as done here for each transport field separately , taking also into account off - diagonal elements in the onsager matrix of transport coefficients as well as cross - derivatives of the thermodynamic potentials .
this is anticipated to yield a generalization of the thermosolutal model of ref .
.    moreover , the generalization of the formalism to multi - component systems should be straightforward .
this is particularly interesting because general models for multi - component multi - phase solidification have been developed in the two - phase framework @xcite . in these models ,
the determination of the compositions in the individual phases for given global composition requires to solve a generalization of eq .
( [ eq : muequal ] ) , which represents a set of coupled nonlinear equations ( one for each component ) .
a formulation in terms of the chemical potential would completely avoid this problem and thus potentially offer important gains in computational performance .
it should also be mentioned that the two - phase approach has been used in other contexts .
one example is the treatment of fluid flow in solidification @xcite and two - phase flows @xcite , where two separate velocity fields , one for each phase , are introduced , in contrast to `` coarse - graining '' models in which a single velocity field is used @xcite
. it would be interesting to reassess the relations between these different models in the light of the present findings .