On the origin of recrystallization textures

Abstract

The development of recrystallization textures has been debated for the past 50 years. Essentially the rival theories of evolution of recrystallization textures i.e. oriented nucleation (ON) and oriented growth (OG) has been under dispute. In the ON model, it has been argued that a higher frequency of the special orientation (grains) than random occur, thus accounting for the texture. In the OG model, it has been argued that the specially oriented grains have a high mobility boundary and thus can migrate faster and grow to a larger size as compared to random orientations thus contributing to the final recrystallization texture.

In FCC metals and alloys like aluminium, cube orientation [(001) 〈100〉] is the recrystallization texture component. In the classic OG model, cube orientation is supposed to be misoriented fromS-orientation [(123)$\left\langle {62\bar 4} \right\rangle$] which is a deformation texture component by a 40° about 〈111〉 relationship which is supposed to be a high mobility boundary leading to faster growth of cube grains. Stereographic calculations and analytical calculations are presented in this paper to the effect that theS-orientation (123)$\left\langle {63\bar 4} \right\rangle$is not misoriented from cube (100) 〈001〉 by 40° 〈111〉 whereas another deformation texture component (123)$\left\langle {41\bar 2} \right\rangle$which is termed theR-component is misoriented from cube component by 40° 〈111〉,R-component is also seen in deformation textures of aluminium and hence the classic OG model remains valid with respect to theR-component.