The Influence of Galvanic Coupling on Corrosion of Carbon Steel Coupled with Stainless Steels for Use in Concrete Structures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The judicious use of stainless steel and carbon steel in concrete structures-using stainless steel only in areas with a high risk of corrosion and carbon steel in low-risk areas-could be a viable option for reducing lifetime cost, and extending service life. However, the concern about the risk of galvanic corrosion between the two different steels has prevented this application in the field. This paper investigates the galvanic coupling behaviours of carbon steel and three different stainless steels (304LN, 316LN and 2205). The results indicate that the oxygen reduction reaction is a rate-determining step and is much lower on stainless steel than on passive carbon steel. Therefore, the galvanic coupling current between stainless steel and corroding carbon steel is lower than the coupling current between passive and corroding carbon steels. Consequently, the combination of stainless steel with carbon steel will not increase the risk of corrosion of carbon steel.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".