Diffracting-grain identification from electron backscatter diffraction maps during residual stress measurements: a comparison between the sin2ψ and cosα methods

被引:11
作者
Delbergue, Dorian [1 ,2 ]
Texier, Damien [3 ]
Levesque, Martin [2 ]
Bocher, Philippe [1 ]
机构
[1] Ecole Technol Super, Dept Mech Engn, 1100 Rue Notre Dame Ouest, Montreal, PQ H3C 1K3, Canada
[2] Ecole Polytech Montreal, Dept Mech Engn, Montreal, PQ H3T 1J4, Canada
[3] Univ Toulouse, CNRS, IMT Mines Albi, ICA,INSA,ISAE SUPAERO,UPS, Campus Jarlard, F-81013 Albi, France
来源
JOURNAL OF APPLIED CRYSTALLOGRAPHY | 2019年 / 52卷 / 04期
基金
加拿大自然科学与工程研究理事会;
关键词
X-ray diffraction; residual stress; XRD method comparison; diffracting-grain identification; Debye rings; Inconel; 718; CRYSTALLOGRAPHIC TEXTURE; ELASTIC-CONSTANTS; SHOT; PREDICTION;
D O I
10.1107/S1600576719008744
中图分类号
O6 [化学];
学科分类号
0703 ;
摘要
X-ray diffraction (XRD) is a widely used technique to evaluate residual stresses in crystalline materials. Several XRD measurement methods are available. (i) The sin(2)psi method, a multiple-exposure technique, uses linear detectors to capture intercepts of the Debye-Scherrer rings, losing the major portion of the diffracting signal. (ii) The cos alpha method, thanks to the development of compact 2D detectors allowing the entire Debye-Scherrer ring to be captured in a single exposure, is an alternative method for residual stress measurement. The present article compares the two calculation methods in a new manner, by looking at the possible measurement errors related to each method. To this end, sets of grains in diffraction condition were first identified from electron backscatter diffraction (EBSD) mapping of Inconel 718 samples for each XRD calculation method and its associated detector, as each method provides different sets owing to the detector geometry or to the method specificities (such as tilt-angle number or Debye-Scherrer ring division). The X-ray elastic constant (XEC) 1/2S(2), calculated from EBSD maps for the {311} lattice planes, was determined and compared for the different sets of diffracting grains. It was observed that the 2D detector captures 1.5 times more grains in a single exposure (one tilt angle) than the linear detectors for nine tilt angles. Different XEC mean values were found for the sets of grains from the two XRD techniques/detectors. Grain-size effects were simulated, as well as detector oscillations to overcome them. A bimodal grain-size distribution effect and `artificial' textures introduced by XRD measurement techniques are also discussed.
引用
收藏
页码:828 / 843
页数:16
相关论文
共 51 条
[21]   Experimental and numerical investigation of material heterogeneity in shot peened aluminium alloy AA2024-T351 [J].
Gariepy, A. ;
Bridier, F. ;
Hoseini, M. ;
Bocher, P. ;
Perron, C. ;
Levesque, M. .
SURFACE & COATINGS TECHNOLOGY, 2013, 219 :15-30
[22]   Calculation of single-crystal elastic constants for cubic crystal symmetry from powder diffraction data [J].
Gnäupel-Herold, T ;
Brand, PC ;
Prask, HJ .
JOURNAL OF APPLIED CRYSTALLOGRAPHY, 1998, 31 (pt 6) :929-935
[23]   Relating Almen intensity to residual stresses induced by shot peening: a numerical approach [J].
Guagliano, M .
JOURNAL OF MATERIALS PROCESSING TECHNOLOGY, 2001, 110 (03) :277-286
[24]  
Hauk V, 1997, STRUCTURAL AND RESIDUAL STRESS ANALYSIS BY NONDESTRUCTIVE METHODS, P3, DOI 10.1016/B978-044482476-9/50003-7
[25]  
He B. B., 2009, 2 DIMENSIONAL XRAY D
[26]   Kernel density estimation on the rotation group and its application to crystallographic texture analysis [J].
Hielscher, Ralf .
JOURNAL OF MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS, 2013, 119 :119-143
[27]   THE ELASTIC BEHAVIOUR OF A CRYSTALLINE AGGREGATE [J].
HILL, R .
PROCEEDINGS OF THE PHYSICAL SOCIETY OF LONDON SECTION A, 1952, 65 (389) :349-355
[28]  
Hines WW, 2003, Probability and statistics in engineering
[29]  
Horz F., 1973, Moon, V6, P45, DOI 10.1007/BF02630652