We have used the cross-correlation based high resolution electron backscattering diffraction (HR-EBSD) technique to evaluate at high spatial resolution the spatial patterning of the type III intragranular residual stresses and geometrically necessary dislocation (GND) density within polycrystalline Cu after cyclic deformation. Oxygen free high conductivity (OFHC) polycrystalline copper samples were cyclically deformed under stress-control at a load ratio of 0.1 and EBSD measurements were made at points throughout the early stages of fatigue when strain amplitudes and cyclic creep rates are changing most significantly, namely at 0 cycles, 2 cycles, 200 cycles and 2000 cycles. Statistical analysis is presented showing that moderate correlations exist between stored GND density, residual intragranular stress and distance from the nearest grain boundaries or/and triple junctions.
Ref: Ms.No.A-15-232Manuscript: "Evolution of intragranular stresses and dislocation densities during cyclic deformation of polycrystalline copper"
Dear Prof MahajanWe are very pleased to submit our revised manuscript to Acta Materialia for considering publication. Each of referee's comment and suggestion has been carefully addressed. Detailed explanations are included in the 'Response to Reviewer' file. All changes and corrections to our original manuscript have been highlighted in the revised manuscript.We would be very grateful for Editor's effort and time to process our manuscript and very look forward to hearing from you soon. Authors are very grateful to Reviewer's time, effort and constructive comments. In order to comprehensively revise our manuscript and give most appropriate response, we address Reviewer's comments one by one in detail in the following section. (Reviewer's comments are marked using red colour, correction to the manuscript are marked as yellow and Authors responses are marked as blue.Editor's/Reviewer's comments: This paper gives some interesting insights into dislocation and stress development during cyclic testing. Overall the analysis is appropriate, although I was surprised about two things: the correlations reported in the paper are pretty low; I was surprised that the authors did not pursue this a little further to factor out some of the issues (such as substructure development) that appear to play an important role in causing this. Relating to the previous point, the authors mention dislocation substructure development in an extremely cursory and handwaving fashion. They mention correlations with orientation and different types of structure, but in an almost off-handed way that does not even connect with the wealth of literature on the subject. Issue 2. should certainly be fixed, and it would be nice to improve issue 1. a little if possible. I have made comments on the manuscript that I hope will be helpful (including pointing out a few typos).1. These coefficients are low. The correlation coefficients are generally not very high (~-0.2) (That's a bit of a stretch) This is a sensible suggestion and ...