Comparative Corrosion Evaluation of Ferritic Stainless Steels Utilized in Automotive Exhaust Applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this work was to initiate a comparative evaluation of the aqueous corrosion resistance of ferritic stainless steels currently used to fabricate automotive exhaust systems. Both acid condensate and double loop electrochemical potentiokinetic reactivation (DL-EPR) testing using both as-received and heat treated test coupons prepared from Types 409, 409Al, 436 and 439 stainless steel was conducted for this purpose. A truncated version of an in-house acid condensate testing protocol revealed that Type 409Al stainless steel was the most resistant to corrosion of the four ferritic stainless steels examined, whereas Type 409 stainless steel was the least resistance to corrosion. Interestingly, an increase in the Cr content from ~11 wt.% (Type 409 stainless steel) to ~17 wt.% (Types 436 and 439 stainless steel) was not sufficient to improve the stability of the passive film against localized breakdown to a level equivalent to the corrosion resistance exhibited by Type 409Al stainless steel. The DL-EPR testing revealed that Type 409 stainless steel exhibited the highest degree of sensitization after being subjected to a 750°C-1 h heat treatment, whereas Type 439 stainless steel exhibited the lowest. A detailed examination of the grain boundary regions is required to better understand the beneficial role of alloyed Cr in lowering the degree of sensitization observed. Regardless, the preliminary corrosion testing conducted thus far point to elevated Cr contents as being beneficial in improving corrosion resistance of exhaust components.
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".