Abstract
In this investigation, the corrosion behavior of AA2198–T851 was compared to AA2024–T3 by electrochemical impedance spectroscopy and the surface of both alloys was analyzed by Field Emission Gun (FEG) scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and X‐ray energy dispersive analysis (EDX). Electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) results for the uncoated surface of both alloys showed higher pitting susceptibility associated to the AA2198–T851 alloy comparatively to the AA2024–T3. In order to improve the corrosion resistance of both alloys, tartaric sulphuric acid anodising (TSA) was carried out with both alloys followed by primer application. The corrosion resistance of the anodized and primer coated samples was also evaluated by CASS salt spray test followed by EIS tests at increasing periods of exposure to the CASS test. The results showed larger amounts of corrosion products associated to the primer coated AA2198–T851 alloy comparatively to the AA2024–T3 alloy. Diffusion was only indicated in the EIS results of the AA2198–T851 samples likely because of large amounts of porous corrosion products on the exposed surface of this alloy to the corrosive environment. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
