Corrosion Mechanisms in Dissimilar AZ31/AZ80 Friction Stir Welds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Corrosion of dissimilar friction stir welds (FSW) made in AZ31/AZ80 magnesium alloys was investigated using the scanning reference electrode technique (SRET), and microcapillary polarization technique, complemented by optical and SEM/EDX microscopy. The corrosion rate of the base metals along with the welded specimen was estimated by mass loss testing. The stir zone material in both alloys showed a higher corrosion potential than the base metal due to the partial dissolution of β-Mg 17 Al 12 and Al-Mn particles. The basic corrosion mechanism in dissimilar welds was determined to be different from that of a similar joint. The corrosion behavior of the dissimilar FSW joint was governed by the galvanic coupling of the two alloys, and not by the microstructural evolution occurring during the welding process. The corrosion behavior of the joint was governed by the galvanic coupling between the α-Mg matrix in AZ31 and the Al-rich intermetallics in AZ80. The welded specimens exhibited the highest corrosion rate, while AZ80 was the most corrosion resistant material.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".