MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200336818 · doi:10.1088/2051-672x/ac443c

The effect of chemical treatment on the adhesion strength and structural integrity of the epoxy coatings

2021· article· en· W4200336818 on OpenAlexaff
Ameeq Farooq, Abdul Hannan, Rafiq Ahmad, Kashif Mairaj Deen

Bibliographic record

VenueSurface Topography Metrology and Properties · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCorrosion Behavior and Inhibition
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoatingEpoxyMaterials scienceCorrosionDielectric spectroscopyDelamination (geology)Composite materialElectrochemistryChemical engineeringNuclear chemistryChemistryElectrode

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This research aims to investigate the effect of chemical treatment on the integrity of the epoxy coating applied on mild steel substrates. Grit blasted steel samples were chemically treated in 10 vol.% NaOCl solution, 10 vol.% CrCl 3 and 30 vol.% H 3 PO 4 –5 vol.% HNO 3 solutions prior to coating application. Post-cleaning surface morphology and chemical composition revealed the formation of oxidation products on steel surface. Under optimized conditions, a dry film thickness of 135 ± 3 μ m of epoxy coating was achieved. The CT2 sample (pre-treated with CrCl 3 ) presented higher coating adhesion strength (∼4.12 MPa) and the lowest rust area of ∼0.03% compared to other chemically treated samples during 720 h of immersion in 5 wt.% NaCl solution. The coating degradation mechanism was evaluated by electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) after 24, 48, 72 and 120 h of immersion in 3.5 wt. % NaCl solution. EIS analysis of the coated samples pretreated with NaOCl and CrCl 3 solutions exhibited low water uptake and limited corrosion due to hindrance in the diffusion of ionic species through the coating. However, coated steel samples pretreated in acidic solutions displayed appreciable corrosion damage as confirmed from salt spray and immersion tests. For instance, the delamination of the CT3 and CT4 (acid pre-treated) coatings was confirmed from the EIS analysis., which represented the formation of a double layer and occurrence of faradaic (corrosion) reactions as the coating-substrate interface, resulting in ∼15%–30% delamination in 120 h of exposure.

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 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)0.000
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 score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.250

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSurface Topography Metrology and PropertiesSame topicCorrosion Behavior and InhibitionFrench-language works237,207