Effects of coolant chemistry on corrosion of 3003 aluminum alloy in automotive cooling system
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this work, effects of coolant chemistry, including concentrations of chloride ions and ethylene glycol and addition of various ions, on corrosion of 3003 Al alloy were investigated by electrochemical impedance spectroscopy measurements and scanning electron microscopy characterization. In chloride‐free, ethylene glycol–water solution, a layer of Al‐alcohol film is proposed to form on the electrode surface. With the increase of ethylene glycol concentration, more Al‐alcohol film is formed, resulting in the increase in film resistance and charge‐transfer resistance. In the presence of Cl − ions, they would be involved in the film formation, decreasing the stability of the film. In 50% ethylene glycol–water solution, the threshold value of Cl − concentration for pitting initiation is within the range of 100 ppm to 0.01 M. When the ethylene glycol concentration increases to 70%, the threshold Cl − concentration for pitting is from 0.01 to 0.1 M. In 100% ethylene glycol, there is no pitting of 3003 Al alloy even at 0.1 M of Cl − . Even a trace amount of impurity cation could affect significantly the corrosion behavior of 3003 Al alloy in ethylene glycol–water solution. Addition of Zn 2+ is capable of increasing the corrosion resistance of Al alloy electrode, while Cu 2+ ions containing in the solution would enhance corrosion, especially pitting corrosion, of Al alloy. The effect of Mg 2+ on Al alloy corrosion is only slight.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".