2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.ultramic.2020.113130
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

TrueEBSD: Correcting spatial distortions in electron backscatter diffraction maps

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The black rectangles mark the approximate position of lift-out regions A and D with the numbers indicating the expected position of the respective tip, e.g., A1 or D2, after preparation by FIB milling. The approximate lift-out regions are determined by the correlation of SEM images of the slightly etched surface and the EBSD scans due to the typical spatial distortion of EBSD maps [ 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 ]. The local tetragonality maps for lift-out regions B and C are shown in Appendix A in Figure A1 .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The black rectangles mark the approximate position of lift-out regions A and D with the numbers indicating the expected position of the respective tip, e.g., A1 or D2, after preparation by FIB milling. The approximate lift-out regions are determined by the correlation of SEM images of the slightly etched surface and the EBSD scans due to the typical spatial distortion of EBSD maps [ 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 ]. The local tetragonality maps for lift-out regions B and C are shown in Appendix A in Figure A1 .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The tempered martensite units appear darker in LOM than fresh martensite units and have a slight topographic contrast in FSD images as shown in Figures 5(a) and (b). The FSD images show typical spatial distortion [38][39][40][41] compared to LOM, but the tempered martensite units can be matched almost perfectly between the two methods. The small differences between both images can mainly be contributed to a different depth position due to the polishing step between FSD and LOM as well as the different contrast methods.…”
Section: Formation With Respect To Pagmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The presented multimodal data fusion workflow accomplishes two tasks: first, it corrects distortions in the EBSD map [13], and secondly, it fuses data from the particle map of higher fidelity with the corrected EBSD map. There are numerous available solutions to the first task [15,33,34], with various degrees of complexity. To accomplish the first task, the present workflow requires a minimum of two images showing shared features, but which can have totally different contrast and intensity, manual selection of a sufficient number of CPs uniformly distributed in the images, and a single transformation function without tuning parameters to correct distortions in the EBSD map based on the CPs.…”
Section: Evaluation Of the Multimodal Data Fusion Workflowmentioning
confidence: 99%