Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Statistical Reliability of Phase Fraction Determination Based on Electron Backscatter Diffraction (EBSD) Investigations on the Example of an Al-TRIP Steel

  • Published:
Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The aim of this article is to discuss the representativeness of electron backscatter diffraction (EBSD) mapping data for phase fraction determination in multiphase materials. Particular attention is paid to the effect of step size and scanned area. The experimental investigations were carried out on a low-alloyed steel with transformation induced plasticity (TRIP) that shows a relatively heterogeneous distribution of residual austenite in a ferrite matrix. EBSD scans of various area sizes and step sizes were carried out and analyzed with respect to the determined austenite phase fraction. The step size has only an indirect influence on the results, as it determines the size of the investigated area if the number of measurement points is kept constant. Based on the experimental results, the optimum sampling conditions in terms of analyzed area size and the number of measurement points were determined. These values were compared with values obtained from Cochran’s formula, which allows calculation of sampling sizes for predefined levels of precision and confidence. A significant deviation of experimental from theoretical optimum sample sizes was found. This deviation is, for the most part, a result of the heterogeneous distribution of the austenite phase. Depending on grain size and volume fraction of the second phase, the false assignment of phases at grain boundaries also may introduce a significant error. A general formula is introduced that allows estimation of the error caused by these parameters. Finally, a new measurement scheme is proposed that allows improvement of reliability and representativeness of EBSD-based phase determination without large sacrifices in measurement time or data set sizes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. S.I. Wright, M.M. Matthew, M. Nowell, and J.F. Bingert: Metall. Mater. Trans. A, 2007, vol. 38A, pp. 1845–55.

    Article  CAS  ADS  Google Scholar 

  2. T. Baudin and R. Penelle: Metall. Trans. A, 1993, vol. 24A, pp. 2299–311.

    CAS  ADS  Google Scholar 

  3. P.J. Jacques, S. Allain, O. Bouaziz, A. De, A.-F. Gourges, B.M. Hance, Y. Houbaert, J. Huang, A. Iza-Mendia, S.E. Kruger, M. Radu, L. Samek, J. Speer, L. Zhao, and S. van der Zwaag: Mater. Sci. Technol., 2009, vol. 25, pp. 567–74.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. S. Graham and N. Yang: Scripta Mater., 2003, vol. 48, pp. 269–74.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. C. Grufman and F. Ellyin: Compos. Sci. Technol., 2007, vol. 67, pp. 766–75.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. S. Zaefferer, P. Romano, and F. Friedel: J. Microsc., 2008, vol. 230, pp. 499–508.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. G.D. Israel: Sampling the Evidence of Extension Program Impact, Program Evaluation and Organizational Development, PEOD-6, IFAS, University of Florida, 1992.

  8. W.G. Cochran: Sampling Techniques, 2nd ed., Wiley, New York, NY, 1963.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Wikipedia: Normal distribution, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_distribution, 2010.

  10. L. Sachs: Angewandte Statistik, vol. 11, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany, 2004.

  11. J.E. Barlett, J.W. Kotrlik, and C.C. Higgins: Inf. Technol., Learn. Perform. J., 2001, vol. 19, pp. 43–50.

    Google Scholar 

  12. S. Zaefferer: Ultramicroscopy, 2007, vol. 107, pp, 254–66.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. B. Fultz and H.N. Frase: Hyperfine Interact, vol.130, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell, MA, 2000, pp. 81–108.

    Google Scholar 

  14. S. Zaefferer, J. Ohlert, and W. Bleck: Acta Mater., 2004, vol. 52, pp. 2765–78.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. R. Petrov, L. Kestens, A. Wasilkowska, and Y. Houbaert: Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 2007, pp. 285–97.

  16. A.W. Wilson, J.D. Madison, and G. Spanos: Scripta Mater., 2001, vol. 45, pp. 1335–40.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The financial support of K. Davut by the Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft is gratefully acknowledged.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Max Planck Institute for Iron Research, Max Planck Street 1, Düsseldorf, D-40237, Germany

    Kemal Davut (Scientist) & Stefan Zaefferer (Group Leader)

Authors
  1. Kemal Davut
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stefan Zaefferer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stefan Zaefferer.

Additional information

Manuscript submitted February 3, 2010.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Davut, K., Zaefferer, S. Statistical Reliability of Phase Fraction Determination Based on Electron Backscatter Diffraction (EBSD) Investigations on the Example of an Al-TRIP Steel. Metall Mater Trans A 41, 2187–2196 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11661-010-0315-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11661-010-0315-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation