GLYPH<s48> GLYPH<s49> GLYPH<s48> GLYPH<s50> GLYPH<s48> GLYPH<s51> GLYPH<s48> GLYPH<s52> GLYPH<s48> GLYPH<s53> GLYPH<s48> GLYPH<s54> GLYPH<s48> GLYPH<s55> GLYPH<s48> GLYPH<s56> GLYPH<s48> GLYPH<s57> GLYPH<s48> GLYPH<s48> GLYPH<s46>GLYPH<s52> GLYPH<s48> GLYPH<s46>GLYPH<s53> GLYPH<s48> GLYPH<s46>GLYPH<s54> GLYPH<s48> GLYPH<s46>GLYPH<s55> GLYPH<s48> GLYPH<s46>GLYPH<s56> GLYPH<s48> GLYPH<s46>GLYPH<s57> GLYPH<s49> GLYPH<s46>GLYPH<s48> GLYPH<s32>GLYPH<s32>GLYPH<s32>GLYPH<s66> GLYPH<s99> GLYPH<s50> GLYPH<s32> GLYPH<s32>GLYPH<s61>GLYPH<s32>GLYPH<s53> GLYPH<s32> GLYPH<s32>GLYPH<s61>GLYPH<s32>GLYPH<s52> GLYPH<s32> GLYPH<s32>GLYPH<s61>GLYPH<s32>GLYPH<s51> GLYPH<s32>GLYPH<s32>GLYPH<s32>GLYPH<s32>GLYPH<s66> GLYPH<s61> GLYPH<s48> GLYPH<s32> GLYPH<s32>GLYPH<s61>GLYPH<s32>GLYPH<s53> GLYPH<s32> GLYPH<s32>GLYPH<s61>GLYPH<s32>GLYPH<s52> GLYPH<s32> GLYPH<s32>GLYPH<s61>GLYPH<s32>GLYPH<s51> GLYPH<s98> GLYPH<s99>GLYPH<s50> GLYPH<s44> GLYPH<s32> GLYPH<s98> GLYPH<s61>GLYPH<s48> GLYPH<s116> GLYPH<s32> GLYPH<s40>GLYPH<s176> GLYPH<s41> GLYPH<s112> GLYPH<s99> GLYPH<s61> GLYPH<s48>GLYPH<s46> GLYPH<s50>GLYPH<s53> FIG. 3: Angular dependence of the upper critical field and the zero resistivity field. θ$_{t}$ denotes the angle between the tape normal and the applied magnetic field. B$_{c2}$ and B$_{ρ}$$_{=0}$ were normalized by their values at 90 $^{◦}$. The B$_{ρ}$$_{=0}$ -anisotropy was fixed to 2.4 which corresponds to α$_{t}$ = 34 . 5, 30, and 20.8 ◦ for γ = 5, 4, and 3, respectively. Neither B$_{c2}$ nor B$_{ρ}$$_{=0}$ obey the angular dependence predicted by anisotropic Ginzburg Landau theory (solid line). macroscopic anisotropy. The same γ$_{ρ}$$_{=0}$ (2.4) can be obtained with γ = 5 and α$_{t}$ = 34 . 5 ◦ or with γ = 3 and α$_{t}$ = 20 . 8 $^{◦}$. The corresponding angular dependencies of B$_{ρ}$$_{=0}$ are presented in Fig. 3 (open symbols). They are similar to each other and cannot be described by the angular dependence predicted by anisotropic Ginzburg Landau theory (Equ. 2, line graph) by assuming γ$_{ρ}$$_{=0}$ instead of γ . The deviation from this theory is even more pronounced for the onset of the transition ( B$_{c2}$ , solid symbols) and the anisotropy of the upper critical field is quite different at the same B$_{ρ}$$_{=0}$ -anisotropy. It seems therefore possible to estimate the three unknown parameters ( γ , α$_{t}$ , and p$_{c}$ ) from the angular dependence of B$_{ρ}$$_{=0}$ and B$_{c2}$ and from the ratio of these quantities (not visible in Fig. 3, because the data were normalized by the values in parallel orientation). The increase of B$_{ρ}$$_{=0}$ in parallel orientation as well as the decrease in perpendicular ori- entation (compared to untextured materials) lead to a weaker and stronger field dependence of the critical currents, respectively (Fig. 4). While J$_{c}$ converges to the limiting behaviour of perfect texture ( α$_{t}$ = 0 $^{◦}$) rather quickly in the perpendicular orientation, it remains signifi- cantly below its limit in the parallel orientation, even for a high degree of texture ( α$_{t}$ = 5 $^{◦}$). However, for a typical texture of α$_{t}$ = 20–30 ◦ $^{5,23}$, a quite significant enhancement beyond 7