Reconstruction of Stress and Composition Profiles from X-Ray Diffraction Experiments — How to Avoid Ghost Stresses? |
|
| Journal | Materials Science Forum (Volumes 443 - 444) |
|---|---|
| Volume | European Powder Diffraction EPDIC 8 |
| Edited by | Yvonne Andersson, Eric J. Mittemeijer and Udo Welzel |
| Pages | 91-94 |
| DOI | 10.4028/www.scientific.net/MSF.443-444.91 |
| Citation | Thomas L. Christiansen et al., 2004, Materials Science Forum, 443-444, 91 |
| Online since | January, 2004 |
| Authors | Thomas L. Christiansen, Marcel A.J. Somers |
| Keywords | Depth Profiling, Residual Stress, Successive Layer Removal, X-Ray Diffraction (XRD) |
| 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. |
| Full Paper |
Get the full paper by clicking here
|
