MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2165698630 · doi:10.5539/mas.v4n5p87

Breakdown and Pitting Formation of Anodic Film Aluminum Alloy (3003)

2010· article· en· W2165698630 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Applied Science · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicAnodic Oxide Films and Nanostructures
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnodizingMaterials scienceElectrolyteAlloyAluminiumCurrent densityMetallurgyCorrosionPolarization (electrochemistry)Surface roughnessMicrostructureAnodeScanning electron microscopeComposite materialChemistryElectrode

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aluminum alloy (3003) has been anodized using sulfuric acid solution. To study the characteristic of the anodic film of aluminum alloy (3003); four variables are examined in term of anodic film thickness, these are current density ranging between 1.5- 3.5 A/dm2, electrolyte concentration ranging between 10- 20 Vol.%, electrolyte temperature between 10- 30oC and anodizing time between 10- 50 min.The study shows that the time of anodizing and current density has positive dependence of great significance on the anodic film thickness of aluminum alloy (3003) while the other two studied variables (i.e. concentration and temperature of electrolyte) show little dependence on the film thickness. When conditional Hookes and Jeeves optimization method is used, optimum conditions of aluminum alloy (3003) in terms of maximum thickness are found equal to: Current density (A /dm2) 3.5 Acid concentration (Vol. %) 10 Electrolyte temperature (oC) 19 Time of anodizing (min.) 50 Aluminum alloy (3003) specimens at optimum conditions are anodized and comparison studies between anodized and un-anodized specimens are carried out in terms of: 1) the roughness and hardness of anodic film. 2) the corrosion rates in 3.5% NaCl solution by: a) immersion test. b) polarization curves. 3) examining microstructure before and after anodizing of both types and their corrosion specimens by optical microscope and X-ray diffraction.In general, it is found that the surface roughness and hardness values for the anodized specimens are greater than that of un-anodized specimens because of the very much thicker oxide coating compare with the natural oxide (atmospheric oxide) whose improved physical and chemical properties. Also, the corrosion rates for anodized specimens are lower than that for un-anodized ones. The polarization behavior for anodizing alloy shows that the breakdown potentials are shifted to more noble direction than bare metals due to anodizing.The study also shows that the Breakdown of passive film and pitting formation occurred at (-661mV) for un-anodized alloy, while (-410 V) for anodized alloy. The observed pits are clearly not deep and small in size in large numbers compared with the unanodized specimens.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.418

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.208 · 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