Eur. Phys. J. AP
Volume 15, Number 2, August 2001
|Page(s)||85 - 96|
|Section||Surfaces, Interfaces and Films|
|Published online||15 August 2001|
Comparison of several methods for the reproduction of the orientation distribution function from pole figures in medium to strong textured materials
Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Nucleares, Departamento de Física. AP 18-1027, Col. Escandón,
México 11801, DF, México
2 Laboratoire de Physico-Chimie de l'État Solide (UMR CNRS 8648), Bâtiment 410, Université de Paris-Sud, 91405 Orsay Cedex, France
3 Laboratoire Léon Brillouin (CEA-CNRS), CEN Saclay, 91191 Gif-sur-Yvette Cedex, France
Corresponding author: email@example.com
Revised: 2 February 2001
Accepted: 2 February 2001
Published online: 15 August 2001
A quantitative comparison of the errors introduced by several methods for the reproduction of the crystallographic orientation distribution function from poles figures is presented. The harmonic, ADC, WIMV and component methods have been employed in the characterization of the deformation and recrystallization textures of a Fe-50% Ni alloy in order to investigate the accuracy associated with each one of these methods. To carry out this study, experimental and synthetic pole figures have been used as input data. The strong and weak points of each method are examined showing that the iterative discrete methods (ADC and WIMV) are better suited for the reproduction of the texture function in the present case. In comparing these two discrete methods, it is evidenced that the ADC method reproduces more accurately both the experimental and synthetic texture functions over the entire range of texture sharpness considered.
PACS: 81.40.Ef – Cold working, work hardening; annealing, post-deformation annealing, quenching, tempering recovery, and crystallization
© EDP Sciences, 2001
Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.
Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.
Initial download of the metrics may take a while.