Synchrotron X-ray Diffraction Results - Measuring Bulk Crystallographic Texture from Differently-Orientated Ti-6Al-4V Samples

A dataset of crystallographic texture results for both α (hexagonal close packed, hcp) and β (body-centred cubic, bcc) phases, measured from six differently orientated Ti-6Al-4V (Ti-64) samples, using two different analysis techniques of synchrotron X-ray diffraction (SXRD) data. The texture results are produced from two refinement methods for fitting intensities from SXRD pattern images; an established Rietveld refinement method using the software package MAUD (Materials Analysis Using Diffraction) and a new Fourier-based peak fitting method from the Continuous-Peak-Fit Python package. The texture results were also compared with electron backscatter diffraction (EBSD) measurements from a single sample orientation. The SXRD and EBSD textures were analysed using MTEX to enable a direct comparison of the pole figures, orientation distribution functions (ODFs) and numerical values for the texture indices. The SXRD texture is calculated from each of the six different sample orientations, a combination of the six sample orientations, and in a batch processing method for calculating spatially-resolved texture variation from 387 individual X-Y stage-scan SXRD measurements across one of the samples. The texture variation measured using stage-scan SXRD is directly compared with EBSD, by splitting up the EBSD map into an equivalent grid matrix using an automated script in MTEX. <strong>Material </strong> The Ti-64 material used in this study was pre-rolled to 87.5% reduction at 915ºC and then air-cooled to develop a characteristic texture. The run numbers from the experiment reference six different sample orientations, according to their alignment with the original rolling directions (RD – rolling direction, TD – transverse direction, ND – normal direction), and alignment with the horizontal (X) and vertical (Y) axes of the synchrotron detector. <strong>MAUD / MTEX Analysis</strong> The α and β phase texture for each of the six different sample orientations was calculated using MAUD, included in this analysis dataset, which produced ODFs in the form of text files. The texture files were analysed in MTEX using scripts from the MAUD-batch-analysis package, for plotting of the pole figures and ODF slices, along with calculation of pole figure maxima, ODF maxima and texture indices. The same procedure was used to analyse texture from all six orientations together; using MTEX to fit a single ODF text file. And a series of ODF text files were analysed to calculate texture variation from an X-Y stage scan of Sample 1 (103845). Two different ODF resolutions of 5º and 15º were initially used to fit the texture in MAUD, with the same ODF resolution applied to analyse the data in MTEX. However, an ODF resolution of 15° was found to reproduce the most reasonable texture strength intensity values, with the closest match to the EBSD results. <strong>Continuous-Peak-Fit / MTEX Analysis </strong> The lattice plane intensities for 21 α and 4 β phase peaks were extracted from the Continuous-Peak-Fit analysis, included in this analysis dataset, and saved as text files in the form of pole figures. The lattice intensity text files were analysed in MTEX using scripts from the continuous-peak-fit-analysis package, to plot pole figures and ODF slices, and to calculate pole figure maxima, ODF maxima and texture indices. The same procedure was used to analyse texture from all six orientations together, along with combinations of different sample orientations, by fitting combined lattice intensity text files in MTEX. And a series of lattice intensity text files were analysed to calculate texture variation from the X-Y stage scan of Sample 1 (103845). Lattice plane intensity distributions which had been normalised to a Ti-64 powder sample measurement were also analysed, to see if this had any effect on the texture intensities. Nevertheless, the powder-corrected texture was found to exactly match the raw intensity measurements. Three different ODF resolutions of 5º, 10º and 15º were initially used to fit the texture in MTEX. However, a kernel half-width of 10° was found to produce optimal data fitting, for highly accurate texture strength intensity values. <strong>EBSD / MTEX Analysis </strong> The indexed α-phase EBSD measurements were recorded over an area of around 100 mm², with an equivalent sized map of β-phase orientations reconstructed from the data. Both the α and the β phase maps were analysed using the MTEX-texture-block-analysis package, which was used to split up the map into 387 individual square sections, with equivalent dimensions to the SXRD stage-scan measurement grid. For each of the 387 sections, MTEX was used to plot pole figures and ODF slices, and to calculate pole figure maxima, ODF maxima and texture indices. <strong>Texture Variation Comparison</strong> The texture values calculated from the SXRD stage scan measurements, with the two analysis methods, were used for a direct comparison with the texture variation recorded using EBSD. This analysis was recorded in the texture-strength-comparison package. The results show differences in texture variation across the piece depending on the method used to analyse the SXRD data. The Continuous-Peak-Fit analysis method shows the closest match with EBSD, producing clear texture intensity spikes for the different α and β lattice plane pole figure intensities, ODF maxima and texture indices, at the centre of the piece. The results were also used to develop SXRD maps showing the distribution of texture intensities across the sample. <strong>Metadata </strong> An accompanying YAML text file contains associated processing metadata for the SXRD and EBSD analyses, recording information about the different packages used to process the data, along with details about the different files contained within this results dataset.本数据集包含针对α（密排六方，hexagonal close packed, hcp）相和β（体心立方，body-centred cubic, bcc）相的晶体学纹理结果，采集自6个不同取向的Ti-6Al-4V（Ti-64）样品，采用两种不同的同步辐射X射线衍射（synchrotron X-ray diffraction, SXRD）数据分析技术。纹理结果通过两种精修方法拟合SXRD衍射图案图像的强度得到：一种是使用MAUD（Materials Analysis Using Diffraction，材料衍射分析软件）的成熟Rietveld精修方法，另一种是来自Continuous-Peak-Fit Python包的新型基于傅里叶的峰拟合方法。本数据集还将纹理结果与单一样品取向的电子背散射衍射（electron backscatter diffraction, EBSD）测量结果进行了对比。SXRD与EBSD纹理均通过MTEX进行分析，以实现极图、取向分布函数（orientation distribution functions, ODFs）以及纹理指数数值的直接对比。SXRD纹理的计算覆盖6种不同的样品取向、6种样品取向的组合，以及通过批量处理方法从其中一个样品的387次独立X-Y台扫同步辐射X射线衍射测量中计算得到的空间分辨纹理变化。通过将EBSD图谱通过MTEX中的自动化脚本划分为等效网格矩阵，将台扫同步辐射X射线衍射测得的纹理变化与EBSD结果进行直接对比。 <strong>材料</strong> 本研究使用的Ti-64材料经915℃下预轧制，压下率达87.5%，随后空冷以形成特征纹理。实验编号对应6种不同的样品取向，分别依据其与原始轧制方向（RD – rolling direction，轧制方向；TD – transverse direction，横向；ND – normal direction，法向）的对齐方式，以及与同步辐射探测器水平（X）轴和垂直（Y）轴的对齐方式确定。 <strong>MAUD / MTEX分析</strong> 针对6种不同样品取向的α相和β相纹理，均通过MAUD计算得到（已纳入本分析数据集），生成文本格式的ODFs。使用MAUD-batch-analysis包的脚本在MTEX中分析纹理文件，用于绘制极图和ODF切片，同时计算极图极大值、ODF极大值与纹理指数。对6种取向的整体纹理也采用相同流程分析：使用MTEX拟合单个ODF文本文件。此外还分析了一系列ODF文本文件，以计算样品1（103845）的X-Y台扫纹理变化。最初在MAUD中采用5°和15°两种不同的ODF分辨率进行纹理拟合，并在MTEX中采用相同的ODF分辨率分析数据。但最终发现15°的ODF分辨率可复现最合理的纹理强度数值，与EBSD结果匹配度最高。 <strong>Continuous-Peak-Fit / MTEX分析</strong> 从Continuous-Peak-Fit分析中提取了21个α相和4个β相的晶面强度数据（已纳入本分析数据集），并保存为极图格式的文本文件。使用continuous-peak-fit-analysis包的脚本在MTEX中分析晶面强度文本文件，用于绘制极图和ODF切片，同时计算极图极大值、ODF极大值与纹理指数。对6种取向的整体纹理以及不同样品取向的组合也采用相同流程分析：在MTEX中拟合组合后的晶面强度文本文件。此外还分析了一系列晶面强度文本文件，以计算样品1（103845）的X-Y台扫纹理变化。同时还分析了以Ti-64粉末样品测量值为基准归一化的晶面强度分布，以探究其对纹理强度的影响。但最终发现经粉末校正的纹理与原始强度测量结果完全一致。最初在MTEX中采用5°、10°和15°三种不同的ODF分辨率进行纹理拟合，但最终发现10°的核半峰宽可实现最优的数据拟合，得到高精度的纹理强度数值。 <strong>EBSD / MTEX分析</strong> 已标定的α相EBSD测量区域面积约为100 mm²，并从数据中重构了同等尺寸的β相取向分布图。使用MTEX-texture-block-analysis包分析α相和β相的分布图，将其划分为387个正方形区域，尺寸与SXRD台扫测量网格一致。针对387个区域中的每一个，使用MTEX绘制极图和ODF切片，并计算极图极大值、ODF极大值与纹理指数。 <strong>纹理变化对比</strong> 将两种分析方法得到的SXRD台扫测量纹理值与EBSD记录的纹理变化进行直接对比，该分析通过texture-strength-comparison包完成。结果显示，根据分析SXRD数据所用方法的不同，样品整体的纹理变化存在差异。Continuous-Peak-Fit分析方法与EBSD匹配度最高，在样品中心处可清晰得到不同α和β晶面极图强度、ODF极大值以及纹理指数的纹理强度峰值。该结果还被用于绘制展示样品整体纹理强度分布的SXRD图谱。 <strong>元数据</strong> 附带的YAML文本文件包含SXRD和EBSD分析的相关处理元数据，记录了用于处理数据的不同软件包信息，以及本结果数据集包含的各类文件详情。