In some works such as the following paper, the texture reported for a vertical cross section differs from that of the horizontal cross section. In other words, the texture reported depends on the surface being bellow the scanner of SEM. Considering the 3D intrinsic of the texture, is not these reports correct?
“Effect of hatch length on the development of microstructure, texture and residual stresses in selective laser melted superalloy Inconel 718”
In this work, for the vertical cross section BD-SD, the texture is ||BD, Fig 1, and for the horizontal cross section, the reported texture is Goss (110) (Fig 2).
Let me state another example (Fig 3, the schematic image): if we have a columnar structure along BD direction, as in the above paper, the texture evaluation for the vertical cross section shows ||BD texture. According the 3D imagination, considering Goss texture for the horizontal cross section is impossible. Am I right?
In fact, due to the 3D nature of the texture, if we say that a structure has ||BD it is a clear description about the 3D position of grains and it is independent to the direction of cross sectioning of grains.
Dear Morteza Azarbarmas ,
Strictly speaking, when looking at different surfaces, it is possible to obtain different crystallographic textures. The reason is that you are not looking at the exact same regions of your sample (e.g. the exact same crystals). These regions do not have the exact same thermomechanical history, which may lead to different textures.
This being said, if the initial microstructure and the thermomechanical history is reasonably homogeneous within your sample, you should have very similar results from different texture analyses on different sections.
Now, If you look at the PFs (instead of the IPF maps) in Figure 6 of the above paper, you should see that the are parallel to SD, not BD. In other words, when looking at Figure 4, you should be careful because the sample direction used for plotting the IPF map is likely SD (not BD). Such results are consistent with a Goss texture in the sense that //SD.
Regards.
Charles
The reason behind that is the grains of a material was deformed or grown in one direction, so if you are looking from the top view section then you will see the grains (moving from left to right for example) more likely line shapes. But if you are looking from side view section you will see the section of the grains only more likely round shapes.
Depending on the deformation geometry and the mechanisms of deformation that lead to texture development… one could imagine that you may be more likely to see certain microstructures in one cut/section than in another.
For example… tilt wall blourdaries might be better observed in a vorticity-normal section in which the view of the non-coaxial component of a deformation is maximized. Conversely, a cut that is perpendicular to the corricity normal olane may intersect fewer tilt walls.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Social Psychology
- Attitude