This CAE demonstration shows a single blade model where you can directly compare a built-in strain-hardening creep material and a custom CREEP subroutine in the same simulation workflow, focusing on blade creep behavior. The study follows a two-step workflow (thermal → creep) and delivers full thermo-mechanical outputs so engineers can evaluate differences in distribution, deformation, and life-prediction metrics.

Workflow

1. Apply the thermal load and run a thermal analysis to compute the temperature field (transient or steady).
2. Import the computed temperature distribution into a separate structural/creep analysis.
3. In the structural model, assign two material definitions in the same mesh:
   • Material A: built-in strain-hardening creep law (temperature-dependent data table).
   • Material B: user-defined CREEP subroutine (custom Fortran law with thermally-activated and stress-sensitive terms).
4. Run creep simulation and post-process the outputs.

What you get (results & outputs)

• Temperature distribution: mapped from the thermal run and shown across the blade (hot spots clearly visible).
• Thermal stress maps: stress from thermal expansion and constraint, used as input loading for creep.
• Creep strain fields (CEEQ / accumulated creep): equivalent creep deformation maps for both materials so you can compare where and how much permanent strain accumulates.
• CEEQ deformations comparison: side-by-side images/plots showing built-in vs custom creep response at identical locations and times.

About the Author
Saman Hosseini – is a structural engineer who’s helped many researchers and engineers in academic and industrial projects to solve complex simulations. You can visit his Engineering Downloads profile here.