MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2157350607 · doi:10.1039/c4fd00237g

The corrosion protection of AA2024-T3 aluminium alloy by leaching of lithium-containing salts from organic coatings

2015· article· en· W2157350607 on OpenAlexaff
Peter Visser, Y. Liu, Xiaorong Zhou, Teruo Hashimoto, G.E. Thompson, S.B. Lyon, Leendert G.J. van der Ven, J.M.C. Mol, Herman Terryn

Bibliographic record

VenueFaraday Discussions · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCorrosion Behavior and Inhibition
Canadian institutionsAkzoNobel (Canada)
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilAkzoNobelUniversity of Manchester
KeywordsMaterials scienceCorrosionLithium carbonateScanning electron microscopeLayer (electronics)AlloyLithium (medication)CoatingChemical engineeringSalt (chemistry)AluminiumTransmission electron microscopyLeaching (pedology)MetallurgyComposite materialChemistryNanotechnologyIonOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lithium carbonate and lithium oxalate were incorporated as leachable corrosion inhibitors in model organic coatings for the protection of AA2024-T3. The coated samples were artificially damaged with a scribe. It was found that the lithium-salts are able to leach from the organic coating and form a protective layer in the scribe on AA2024-T3 under neutral salt spray conditions. The present paper shows the first observation and analysis of these corrosion protective layers, generated from lithium-salt loaded organic coatings. The scribed areas were examined by scanning and transmission electron microscopy before and after neutral salt spray exposure (ASTM-B117). The protective layers typically consist of three different layered regions, including a relatively dense layer near the alloy substrate, a porous middle layer and a flake-shaped outer layer, with lithium uniformly distributed throughout all three layers. Scanning electron microscopy and white light interferometry surface roughness measurements demonstrate that the formation of the layer occurs rapidly and, therefore provides an effective inhibition mechanism. Based on the observation of this work, a mechanism is proposed for the formation of these protective layers.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.231 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations96
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFaraday DiscussionsSame topicCorrosion Behavior and InhibitionFrench-language works237,207