The material properties come from other sources, but I think the behavior is independent of the values being used for material properties.
I am trying to understand why the following two cases cause different outcomes when running the simulation:
CASE 1: A range of temperature-dependent material properties are defined up to 1600°C. The simulation exceeds 1600°C. Based on a previous reply, the material property value corresponding to 1600°C continues to be used for all higher temperatures.
CASE 2: The same range of temperature-dependent material properties are defined, except an additional data point is included at 5000°C (the value of the material property at 5000°C is the same or nearly the same as the value used at 1600°C). The simulation has odd behavior when the temperature exceeds 1600°C, including convergence issues and different temperature results.
Why is the simulation different between these two cases?
I am using command objects to define material properties because it is easier to make changes to material properties (I can just copy and paste a single block of text generated by another code). The GUI can be combersome to change material property data in some cases.