Inhibition and compressive-strength performance of Na<sub>2</sub>Cr<sub>2</sub>O<sub>7</sub> and C<sub>10</sub>H<sub>14</sub>N<sub>2</sub>Na<sub>2</sub>O<sub>8</sub>·2H<sub>2</sub>O in steel-reinforced concrete in corrosive environments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper studied corrosion-inhibition and compressive-strength performances of Na2Cr2O7 (sodium dichromate) and C10H14N2Na2O8·2H2O (ethylenediaminetetraacetic disodium salt: EDTA-Na2) admixtures in steel-reinforced concrete immersed in NaCl and in H2SO4 corrosive environments. Electrochemical methods were used for studying corrosion responses of different concentrations of the individual admixtures and their synergies, in the model that partially replace the toxic Na2Cr2O7 by the environmentally-friendly C10H14N2Na2O8·2H2O, in steel-reinforced concretes. After the electrochemical experiment, the steel-reinforced concrete samples were subjected to the compressive-strength testing and analyses of ASTM C39/C39M-03 and ASTM C267-01(2012). Results showed that the use of environmentally-friendly EDTA-Na2 for partially replacing toxic Na2Cr2O7 chemical exhibited better corrosion-inhibition and compressive-strength improvement in the NaCl-immersed concretes, than in the H2SO4-immersed concretes. The 2 g Na2Cr2O7 + 6 g EDTA-Na2 admixture (representing partial replacement model of 6 g Na2Cr2O7 by 6 g EDTA-Na2) exhibited optimal corrosion inhibition efficiency (η = 99.0%) and very good compressive-strength improvement advantage in the NaCl-immersed concretes. In contrast, comparatively low compressive-strength reduction trade-off with the good inhibition effectiveness of η = 79.9% support use of 6 g EDTA-Na2 admixture only (i.e., without Na2Cr2O7 addition) for inhibiting reinforcing-steel corrosion in the H2SO4-immersed concretes.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".