Computer Simulation of Pitting Corrosion in Galvanostatic Conditions
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Pitting corrosion of stainless steels has been the subject of substantial research over many years. The overall mechanism can be separated into nucleation and propagation stages, and the development of a reliable predictive model requires a robust treatment for both these processes. Over the years, several purely stochastic models have been developed, including those by Shibata and Takeyama [1], Williams et al. [2], Baroux [3] and Wu et al. [4]. Alternatively, Macdonald and co-workers [e.g., 5] have focused on a deterministic approach, based on the point defect model of passivity breakdown. Newman, Laycock and co-workers developed a deterministic model for the propagation of individual corrosion pits [6-8], which was then combined with a stochastic model of pit nucleation to enable simulation of pitting potential measurements [9]. Li, Scully and Frankel later published a series of papers based on a similar approach [e.g., 10-11]. The majority of the prior modelling work has focused on potential-controlled conditions, where the pitting outcomes are determined mainly by the pit propagation element; for example, a limiting lower bound distribution of the pitting potential can be calculated without any consideration of pit nucleation processes [9]. However, real corrosion does not occur under potential control; rather, there is a limited supply of cathodic current that must be shared between all simultaneously propagating pits [12,13]. This situation is closer to that of experiments under galvanostatic control [14]. Krouse et al [15] described simulations that included possible interactions between multiple simultaneously propagating pits under galvanostatic conditions, supporting earlier suggestions that pits compete for the available current, and that ‘champion pits’ will ultimately use all available resources (see, e.g., Figure 1). In more recent work [16], we have further developed the earlier propagation model [6-9] to include the interactions and possible mergers between two simultaneously propagating pits. Here we expand on the work of Krouse et al [15] to carry out simulations of galvanostatic experiments that now incorporate the possibility of mergers between propagating pits. References Shibata, T. Takeyama, Corrosion 33 (1997) 243. E. Williams, C. Westcott, M. Fleischmann, J. Electrochem. Soc. 132 (1985) 1796. Baroux, Corros. Sci. 28 (1988) 969. Wu, J.R. Scully, J.L. Hudson, A.S. Mikhailov, J. Electrochem. Soc. 144 (1997) 1614. Engelhardt, D.D. Macdonald, Corrosion 54 (1998) 469. Ernst, N.J. Laycock, M.H. Moayed, R.C. Newman, Corros. Sci. 39 (1997) 1133. J. Laycock, S.P. White, J.S. Noh, P.T. Wilson, R.C. Newman, J. Electrochem. Soc. 145 (1998) 1101. J. Laycock, S.P. White, J. Electrochem. Soc. 148 (2001) B264. J. Laycock, J.S. Noh, S.P. White and D.P. Krouse, Corros. Sci, 47, 3140 (2005). S. Frankel, T. Li, and J. R. Scully, Journal of the Electrochemical Society, 164, C180 (2017). Li, J. R. Scully, and G. S. Frankel, Journal of The Electrochemical Society, 165, C484 (2018). Y. Chen, F. Cui and R.G. Kelly, J. Electrochem. Soc., 155, C360-C368 (2008). Y. Chen and R.G. Kelly, J. Electrochem. Soc., 157, C69 (2010). I. Suleiman and R. C. Newman, Corros. Sci., 36, 1657 (1994). Krouse, P. McGavin and N. Laycock, in Proceedings of Corrosion & Prevention 2008, Paper # 97, ACA, Wellington, 16-19 November (2008). A Nguyen, R.C. Newman and N.J. Laycock, J. Electrochem. Soc., 169, 081503 (2022) Figure 1
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».