Reconstruction of Stress and Composition Profiles from X-Ray Diffraction Experiments — How to Avoid Ghost Stresses?

Thomas L. Christiansen; Marcel A.J. Somers

doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/MSF.443-444.91

Paper Titles

The Microstructure of Nanocrystalline Powders from Line Profile Analysis
p.71

Elastic Behaviour of Thin Stabilized-Zirconia Coatings
p.77

Characterization of Crystalline Silicon via XRPD
p.83

Simulation of X-Ray Powder Diffraction Patterns for One-Dimensionally Disordered Crystals
p.87

Reconstruction of Stress and Composition Profiles from X-Ray Diffraction Experiments — How to Avoid Ghost Stresses?
p.91

Contrast Factors and Character of Dislocations in Cubic and Hexagonal Crystals
p.95

Computer Simulation for X-Ray Analysis of Nanostructured Cu Processed by Severe Plastic Deformation
p.99

The Microstructure of Mechanically Alloyed Nanocrystalline Aluminium-Magnesium
p.103

Approximate Estimation of Contributions to Pure X-Ray Diffraction Line Profiles from Crystallite Shapes, Sizes and Strains by Analysing Peak Widths
p.107

HomeMaterials Science ForumMaterials Science Forum Vols. 443-444Reconstruction of Stress and Composition Profiles...

Reconstruction of Stress and Composition Profiles from X-Ray Diffraction Experiments — How to Avoid Ghost Stresses?

Abstract:

On evaluating lattice strain-depth or stress-depth profiles with X-ray diffraction, the variation of the information depth while combining various tilt angles, in combination with lattice spacing gradients leads to artefacts, so-called ghost or fictitious stresses. X-ray diffraction lattice-strain analysis was simulated for a model stress-depth profile combined with a composition-depth profile. Two principally different methods were investigated for the reconstruction of the actual stress and composition profiles from the simulated data: - considering the stress/strain determined at a specific depth as a weighted average over the actual stress/strain depth profile - considering the lattice spacing determined at a specific depth, for a specific value for as a weighted average over the actual lattice spacing profile for this direction. On the basis of the results it is possible to propose a preferred method for the evaluation of stress/strain and composition profiles, while minimising the risk for ghost stresses.

You might also be interested in these eBooks

$European Powder Diffraction EPDIC 8$ View Preview

Info:

Periodical:

Materials Science Forum (Volumes 443-444)

Pages:

91-94

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/MSF.443-444.91

Citation:

Cite this paper

Online since:

January 2004

Authors:

Thomas L. Christiansen, Marcel A.J. Somers

Keywords:

Depth Profiling, Residual Stress, Successive Layer Removal, X-Ray Diffraction (XRD)

Export:

RIS, BibTeX

Price:

Permissions:

Request Permissions

References

[1] B. Eigenmann, B. Scholtes and E. Macherauch, in: H. Fujiwara, T. Abe, K. Tanaka (Hrsg. ): Residual Stresses –III, Science and Technology (Elsevier Applied Science London, New York 1992), p.601.

Google Scholar

[2] M.A.J. Somers and E.J. Mittemeijer: Metallurgical Transactions A Vol. 21A (1990) p.189.

Google Scholar

[3] W.G. Sloof, M.A.J. Somers, R. Delhez, Th. H. de Keijser and E.J. Mittemeijer: Residual Stresses in Science and Technology (1987), p.493.

Google Scholar

[4] G.A.F. Seber and C.J. Wild: Nonlinear Regression (John Wiley & Sons 1989).

Google Scholar