In the conventional pole figure, an accurate representation can be attained by correcting the observed X-ray diffraction intensity for any change in diffraction geometry and by comparing this with the correctly established standard intensity. For the intensity corrections, ASTM has prescribed the method of Decker et al. In practice, however, the validity of the correction formula is uncertain, since the prerequisite is difficult to attain for parallelism of an incident beam of sufficient intensity. For the standard intensity, it is desirable to take the intensity obtained with the randomly oriented material of the same composition. However, in most cases an arbitrary unit has been taken because of the difficulty in getting a truly random and uniform sample. Under these circumstances, it is first necessary for an accurate representation of pole figures to make a random sample of uniform thickness for the standard. The authors have obtained satisfactory standard samples by sintering the randomly oriented iron powder made from iron chloride and made use of them to check the method of intensity correction. Satisfactory results are obtained in the randomness tests, such as the comparison of the relative intensity diffracted from the crystal planes parallel to the sample surface and the fluctuation of diffraction intensity during α rotation.
In the reflection case by the Schulz method, the (110) reflection intensity of a random sample, by Co K
radiation, is independent of the tilting angle up to 50°. The other reflections do not give a constant intensity for the wide range of the tilting angles because of dispersion of the diffracted beam due to the wider separation of K
doublet in the higher reflection angle and the wider irradiated area at the lower angles. In the transmission case Schulz's correction formula is in good agreement with the observed values for the various diffraction lines and the samples of various µt, while the Decker-Harker formula does not give the absorption change with α-rotation even by an incident beam of ⅙° divergence. In both cases, an accurate determination of pole densities is made by comparing the diffraction intensity of the standard sample substituted in place of the test specimen and by correcting the absorption change due to the difference of µt between the standard and test sample, which affords good coincidence in the overlapped region. The pole figure obtained by the above method furnishes an accurate prediction of plastic and elastic anisotropy in sheet metals.