Region of Interest:
center
Region of Interest:
near edge
Simulated partition coefficient:
0.25
k_v
Simulated partition coefficient:
0.3
k_v
Simulated partition coefficient:
0.35
k_v
Simulated partition coefficient:
0.45
k_v
Simulated partition coefficient:
0.55
k_v
Simulated partition coefficient:
0.6
k_v
Simulated partition coefficient:
0.7
k_v
Simulated partition coefficient:
0.8
k_v
Simulated partition coefficient:
0.9
k_v
Simulated partition coefficient:
1
k_v
Simulated partition coefficient:
0.65
k_v
Mean simulated Al contentl:
1.77
wt%
Mean simulated Al contentl:
2.08
wt%
Mean simulated Al contentl:
2.34
wt%
Mean simulated Al contentl:
3.58
wt%
Mean simulated Al contentl:
4.48
wt%
Mean simulated Al contentl:
4.94
wt%
Mean simulated Al contentl:
5.1
wt%
Mean simulated Al contentl:
5.31
wt%
Mean simulated Al contentl:
5.45
wt%
Mean simulated Al contentl:
5.65
wt%
Mean simulated Al contentl:
5.67
wt%
Mean simulated Al contentl:
4.57
wt%
Mean simulated Al contentl:
4.91
wt%
Mean simulated Al contentl:
5.22
wt%
Mean simulated Al contentl:
5.16
wt%
Mean simulated Al contentl:
5
wt%
Least Squares difference simulation versus experiment:
0.25
Least Squares difference simulation versus experiment:
0.05
Least Squares difference simulation versus experiment:
0.03
Least Squares difference simulation versus experiment:
14.96
Least Squares difference simulation versus experiment:
8.45
Least Squares difference simulation versus experiment:
6.93
Least Squares difference simulation versus experiment:
6.58
Least Squares difference simulation versus experiment:
5.77
Least Squares difference simulation versus experiment:
5.45
Least Squares difference simulation versus experiment:
5.23
Least Squares difference simulation versus experiment:
5.5
Least Squares difference simulation versus experiment:
6.56
Least Squares difference simulation versus experiment:
2.85
Least Squares difference simulation versus experiment:
2.06
Least Squares difference simulation versus experiment:
1.8
Least Squares difference simulation versus experiment:
2.15
Least Squares difference simulation versus experiment:
2.13
beta + Al-Mn phase fraction:
4.407
%
beta + Al-Mn phase fraction:
3.01
%
beta + Al-Mn phase fraction:
2.353
%
Mean experimental Al content:
2.24
wt%
Mean experimental Al content:
7.28
wt%
Mean experimental Al content:
6.01
wt%
Standard deviation:
0.376
%
Standard deviation:
0.372
%
Standard deviation:
0.418
%
Composition Al Content:
4.8
wt %
Composition Mn Content:
0.09
wt %
Composition Mg Content:
95.11
wt %