Full text loading...
[(a) and (b)] Crystal structure in the parent phase (cubic, type) and the martensite (monoclinic, type), respectively. [(c)–(e)] Change in the magnetic flux maps with the martensitic transformation in a alloy. The result of (e) shows a flux map in a large martensite variant (crystallographic domain) produced in the field of view.
Reproducibility of the crystallographic domain structure in the martensite. (a), (b), and (c) show the observations during the first cooling test, second cooling test, and third cooling test, respectively. The left side presents bright-field images (TEM observations), while the right side depicts electron diffraction patterns obtained from each martensite variant.
(a) Magnetic flux map for the closed area in Fig. 2(a). [(b)–(d)] Change in the magnetic flux maps during the second cooling. The field of view corresponds to the closed area in Fig. 2(b). [(e)–(h)] Change in the magnetic flux maps during the third cooling. The field of view corresponds to the closed area in Fig. 2(c).
[(a)–(c)] Change in the electron diffraction patterns with cooling. [(d)–(f)] Intensity profiles observed in the closed area in (a), (b), and (c), respectively. In (d) and (e), the intensity profiles were measured along three lines , , and , which cross the fundamental reflection. The lines and trace the diffuse scattering; i.e., the solid lines in (d) and (e) provide the diffuse scattering that superposes on the tail of the fundamental reflection. The arrows indicate the position of the intensity maximum. The observation along provides the background intensity of the fundamental reflection; i.e., the dashed lines in (d) and (e) represent the intensity profile of the fundamental reflection by itself.
Article metrics loading...