PolyProc: A Modular Processing Pipeline for X-ray Diffraction Tomography
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract Direct imaging of three-dimensional microstructure via X-ray diffraction-based techniques gives valuable insight into the crystallographic features that influence materials properties and performance. For instance, X-ray diffraction tomography provides information on grain orientation, position, size, and shape in a bulk specimen. As such techniques become more accessible to researchers, demands are placed on processing the datasets that are inherently “noisy,” multi-dimensional, and multimodal. To fulfill this need, we have developed a one-of-a-kind function package, PolyProc, that is compatible with a range of data shapes, from planar sections to time-evolving and three-dimensional orientation data. Our package comprises functions to import, filter, analyze, and visualize the reconstructed grain maps. To accelerate the computations in our pipeline, we harness computationally efficient approaches: for instance, data alignment is done via genetic optimization; grain tracking through the Hungarian method; and feature-to-feature correlation through k-nearest neighbors algorithm. As a proof-of-concept, we test our approach in characterizing the grain texture, topology, and evolution in a polycrystalline Al–Cu alloy undergoing coarsening.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Machine Learning in Materials Science · Electron and X-Ray Spectroscopy Techniques · Advanced Electron Microscopy Techniques and Applications
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (35)
Show source-provided references
1. Rowenhorst DJ, Gupta A, Feng CR, Spanos G (2006) 3D Crystallographic and morphological analysis of coarse martensite: combining EBSD and serial sectioning. Scr Mater 55:11–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scriptamat.2005.12.06110.1016/j.scriptamat.2005.12.061 ↗
2. Uchic MD, Holzer L, Inkson BJ, Principe EL, Munroe P (2007) Three-dimensional microstructural characterization using focused ion beam tomography. Mater Res Soc Bull 32:408–416. https://doi.org/10.1557/mrs2007.6410.1557/mrs2007.64 ↗
3. Rowenhorst DJ, Lewis AC, Spanos G (2010) Three-dimensional analysis of grain topology and interface curvature in a β-titanium alloy. Acta Mater 58:5511–5519. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2010.06.03010.1016/j.actamat.2010.06.030 ↗
4. Groeber MA, Haley BK, Uchic MD, Dimiduk DM, Ghosh S (2006) 3D reconstruction and characterization of polycrystalline microstructures using a FIB-SEM system. Mater Charact 57:259–273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matchar.2006.01.01910.1016/j.matchar.2006.01.019 ↗
5. Hounsfield GN (1973) Computerized transverse axial scanning (tomography): part 1. Description of system. Br J Radiol 46:1016–1022. https://doi.org/10.1259/0007-1285-46-552-101610.1259/0007-1285-46-552-1016 ↗
6. Lauridsen EM, Schmidt S, Suter RM, Poulsen HF (2001) Applied crystallography tracking: a method for structural characterization of grains in powders or polycrystals. J Appl Cryst 34:744–750. https://doi.org/10.1107/s002188980101417010.1107/s0021889801014170 ↗
7. Poulsen HF (2012) An introduction to three-dimensional X-ray diffraction microscopy. J Appl Cryst 45:1084–1097. https://doi.org/10.1107/s002188981203914310.1107/s0021889812039143 ↗
8. Ludwig W et al (2009) New opportunities for 3D materials science of polycrystalline materials at the micrometre lengthscale by combined use of X-ray diffraction and X-ray imaging. Mater Sci Eng A 524:69–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2009.04.00910.1016/j.msea.2009.04.009 ↗
9. Suter RM, Hennessy D, Xiao C, Lienert U (2006) Forward modeling method for microstructure reconstruction using x-ray diffraction microscopy: single-crystal verification. Rev Sci Instrum 77:123905. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.240001710.1063/1.2400017 ↗
10. Johnson G, King A, Honnicke MG, Marrow G, Ludwig W (2008) X-ray diffraction contrast tomography: a novel technique for three-dimensional grain mapping of polycrystals. II. The combined case. J Appl Cryst 41:310–318. https://doi.org/10.1107/s002188980800172610.1107/s0021889808001726 ↗
11. Hayashi Y, Hirose Y, Seno Y (2015) Polycrystal orientation mapping using scanning three-dimensional X-ray diffraction microscopy. J Appl Cryst 48:1094–1101. https://doi.org/10.1107/s160057671500989910.1107/s1600576715009899 ↗
12. King A, Reischig P, Adrien J, Peetermans S, Ludwig W (2014) Polychromatic diffraction contrast tomography. Mater Charact 97:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matchar.2014.07.02610.1016/j.matchar.2014.07.026 ↗
13. Renversade L et al (2016) Comparison between diffraction contrast tomography and high-energy diffraction microscopy on a slightly deformed aluminium alloy. IUCrJ 3:32–42. https://doi.org/10.1107/s205225251501999510.1107/s2052252515019995 ↗
14. McDonald SA et al (2015) Non-destructive mapping of grain orientations in 3D by laboratory X-ray microscopy. Sci Rep 5:14665. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep1466510.1038/srep14665 ↗
15. Holzner C et al (2016) Diffraction contrast tomography in the laboratory-applications and future directions. Microsc Today 24:34–43. https://doi.org/10.1017/s155192951600058410.1017/s1551929516000584 ↗
16. Keinan R, Bale H, Gueninchault N, Lauridsen EM, Shahani AJ (2018) Integrated imaging in three dimensions: providing a new lens on grain boundaries, particles, and their correlations in polycrystalline silicon. Acta Mater 148:225–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2018.01.04510.1016/j.actamat.2018.01.045 ↗
17. Sun J et al (2019) Grain boundary wetting correlated to the grain boundary properties: a laboratory-based multimodal X-ray tomography investigation. Scr Mater 163:77–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scriptamat.2019.01.00710.1016/j.scriptamat.2019.01.007 ↗
18. Mcdonald SA et al (2017) Microstructural evolution during sintering of copper particles studied by laboratory diffraction contrast tomography (LabDCT). Sci Rep 7:5251. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-04742-110.1038/s41598-017-04742-1 ↗
19. Sun J et al (2017) 4D study of grain growth in armco iron using laboratory x-ray diffraction contrast tomography. IOP Conf Ser Mater Sci Eng. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899x/219/1/01203910.1088/1757-899x/219/1/012039 ↗
20. Gürsoy D, Carlo DF, Xiao S, Jacobsen C (2014) TomoPy: a framework for the analysis of synchrotron tomographic data. J Synchrotron Rad 21:1188–1193. https://doi.org/10.1107/s160057751401393910.1107/s1600577514013939 ↗
21. Bachmann F, Hielscher R, Schaeben H (2010) Texture analysis with MTEX-free and open source software toolbox. Solid State Phenom 160:63–68. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/SSP.160.6310.4028/www.scientific.net/SSP.160.63 ↗
22. Groeber MA, Jackson MA (2014) DREAM.3D: a digital representation environment for the analysis of microstructure in 3D. Integr Mater Manuf Innov 3:5. https://doi.org/10.1186/2193-9772-3-510.1186/2193-9772-3-5 ↗
23. Goldberg DE, Holland JH (1988) Genetic algorithms and machine learning. Mach Learn 3:95–99. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:102260201918310.1023/a:1022602019183 ↗
24. Chow CK, Tsui HT, Lee T (2004) Surface registration using a dynamic genetic algorithm. Pattern Recognit 37:105–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0031-3203(03)00222-x10.1016/s0031-3203(03)00222-x ↗
25. Lomonosov E, Chetverikov D, Ekárt A (2005) Pre-registration of arbitrarily oriented 3D surfaces using a genetic algorithm. Pattern Recogn Lett 27:1201–1208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patrec.2005.07.01810.1016/j.patrec.2005.07.018 ↗
26. Brunnstrom K, Stoddart AJ (1996) Genetic algorithms for free-form surface matching. Proc Int Conf Pattern Recogn. https://doi.org/10.1109/icpr.1996.54765310.1109/icpr.1996.547653 ↗
27. Goldberg DE (1989) Genetic algorithms in search, optimization & machine learning. Addison-Wesley, Boston
28. Underwood EE (1973) Quantitative stereology for microstructural analysis. In: McCall JL, Mueller WM (eds) Microstructural analysis. Springer, Boston, pp 35–6610.1007/978-1-4615-8693-7_3 ↗
29. DeHoff RT, Aigeltinger EH, Craig KR (1972) Experimental determination of the topological properties of three-dimensional microstructures. J Microsc 95:69–91. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2818.1972.tb03712.x10.1111/j.1365-2818.1972.tb03712.x ↗
30. Shahani AJ, Xiao X, Skinner K, Peters M, Voorhees PW (2016) Ostwald ripening of faceted Si particles in an Al–Si–Cu melt. Mater Sci Eng A 673:307–320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2016.06.07710.1016/j.msea.2016.06.077 ↗
31. Roberts CG, Semiatin SL, Rollett AD (2007) Particle-associated misorientation distribution in a nickel-base superalloy. Scripta Mater 56:899–902. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scriptamat.2007.01.03410.1016/j.scriptamat.2007.01.034 ↗
32. Bhattacharya A, Shen YF, Hefferan CM, Li SF, Lind J, Suter RM, and Rohrer GS (2019) Three-dimensional observations of grain volume changes during annealing of polycrystalline Ni. Acta Mater 167:40–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2019.01.02210.1016/j.actamat.2019.01.022 ↗
33. Kuhn HW (1955) The Hungarian method for the assignment problem. Nav. Res. Logist. Q. 2:83–97. https://doi.org/10.1002/nav.380002010910.1002/nav.3800020109 ↗
34. Bourgeois F, Lassalle JC (2002) An extension of the Munkres algorithm for the assignment problem to rectangular matrices. Commun ACM 14:802–804. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.imavis.2008.04.00410.1016/j.imavis.2008.04.004 ↗
35. Lind J et al (2014) Tensile twin nucleation events coupled to neighboring slip observed in three dimensions. Acta Mater 76:213–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2014.04.05010.1016/j.actamat.2014.04.050 ↗