Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-k7p5g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-11T03:31:48.181Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Improvement of Accuracy in Representation of Conventional Pole Figures

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 March 2019

K. Aoki ,
S. Hayami  and
M. Matsuo
K. Aoki
Affiliation:
Tokyo Research Institute Yawata Iron & Steel Company, Ltd. Kawasaki, Japan
S. Hayami
Affiliation:
Tokyo Research Institute Yawata Iron & Steel Company, Ltd. Kawasaki, Japan
M. Matsuo
Affiliation:
Tokyo Research Institute Yawata Iron & Steel Company, Ltd. Kawasaki, Japan
Get access

Abstract

In the conventional pole figure, an accurate representation can be attained by correcting the observed X-ray diffraction intensity for any change in diffraction geometry and by comparing this with the correctly established standard intensity. For the intensity corrections, ASTM has prescribed the method of Decker et al. In practice, however, the validity of the correction formula is uncertain, since the prerequisite is difficult to attain for parallelism of an incident beam of sufficient intensity. For the standard intensity, it is desirable to take the intensity obtained with the randomly oriented material of the same composition. However, in most cases an arbitrary unit has been taken because of the difficulty in getting a truly random and uniform sample. Under these circumstances, it is first necessary for an accurate representation of pole figures to make a random sample of uniform thickness for the standard. The authors have obtained satisfactory standard samples by sintering the randomly oriented iron powder made from iron chloride and made use of them to check the method of intensity correction. Satisfactory results are obtained in the randomness tests, such as the comparison of the relative intensity diffracted from the crystal planes parallel to the sample surface and the fluctuation of diffraction intensity during α rotation.

In the reflection case by the Schulz method, the (110) reflection intensity of a random sample, by Co Kα radiation, is independent of the tilting angle up to 50°. The other reflections do not give a constant intensity for the wide range of the tilting angles because of dispersion of the diffracted beam due to the wider separation of Kα doublet in the higher reflection angle and the wider irradiated area at the lower angles. In the transmission case Schulz's correction formula is in good agreement with the observed values for the various diffraction lines and the samples of various µt, while the Decker-Harker formula does not give the absorption change with α-rotation even by an incident beam of ⅙° divergence. In both cases, an accurate determination of pole densities is made by comparing the diffraction intensity of the standard sample substituted in place of the test specimen and by correcting the absorption change due to the difference of µt between the standard and test sample, which affords good coincidence in the overlapped region. The pole figure obtained by the above method furnishes an accurate prediction of plastic and elastic anisotropy in sheet metals.

Type
Research Article
Information
Advances in X-Ray Analysis , Volume 10: Fifteenth Annual Conference on Applications of X-ray Analysis, August 10-12, 1966 , 1966 , pp. 342 - 353
Copyright
Copyright © International Centre for Diffraction Data 1966

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.ASTM Committee E-4 on Metallography, “Tentative Method for Preparing Quantitative Pole Figures of Metals,” ASTM Standards ES1-49T: 1094-1104, 1949.Google Scholar
2. Decker, B. F., Asp, E. T., and Harker, D., “Preferred Orientation Determination Using a Geiger Counter X-Ray Diffraction Goniometer,” J. Appl. Phys. 19: 388–392, 1948.Google Scholar
3. De Earr, A. E., “Determination of the Texture of Poly crystalline Materials,” International Tables far X-Ray Crystallography, Vol. III, The Kynoch Press, 1962, pp. 302–315.Google Scholar
4. Schwartz, M., “Method for Obtaining Complete Quantitative Pole Figures for Flat Sheets Using One Sample and One Sample Holder,” J. Appl. Phys. 26: 1507–1513, 1955.Google Scholar
5. Newkivk, J. B. and Bruce, L., “Rapid X-Ray Determination of a Complete Pole Figure,” J. Appl. Phys. 29: 151–157, 1958.Google Scholar
6. Grewen, J., Segmiiller, A., and Wassermann, G., “Zahlrohr-Verfahren mit einem neuentwickelten Probenhalter zur Darstdlung von Texturen in quantitativen Polfiguren,” Archiv fur das Eisenhiittenwesen 29: 115–118, 1958.Google Scholar
7. Schute, L. G., “A Direct Method of Determining Preferred Orientation of a Flat Reflection Sample Using a Geiger-Counter Spectrometer,” J. Appl. Phys. 20: 1030–1033, 1949.Google Scholar
8. Chernock, W. P. and Beck, P. A., “Analysis of Certain Errors in the X-Ray Reflection Method for the Quantitative Determination of Preferred Orientations,” J. Appl. Phys. 23: 341–345, 1952.Google Scholar
9. Schulz, L. G., “Determination of Preferred Orientation in Flat Transmission Samples Using a Geiger-Counter X-Ray Spectrometer,” J. Appl. Phys. 20: 1033–1036, 1949.Google Scholar
10. Elias, J. A., Heyer, R. H., and Smith, J. H., “Plastic Anisotropy of Cold-Rolled Annealed Low-Carbon Steel Related to Crystallographic Orientation,” Trans. Met. Soc. AIME 224: 667–686, 1962.Google Scholar
11. Nagashima, S., Takechi, H., and Kato, H., “Plastic Strain Ratios of Textured Sheets of Low-Carbon Steel,” J. Japan Jnst. Metals 29: 393–398, 1965.Google Scholar
12. Aoki, K., Hayami, S., and Matsuo, M., “Application of Conventional Pole Figure to Prediction of Plastic and Elastic Anisotropy in Low-Carbon Steel Sheets,” to be published in Trans. Japan Jnst. Metals. Google Scholar