4.7 Article

Unraveling EDTA corrosion inhibition when interleaved into Layered Double Hydroxide epoxy filler system coated onto aluminum AA 2024

期刊

APPLIED CLAY SCIENCE
卷 83-84, 期 -, 页码 32-41

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.clay.2013.08.005

关键词

Layered Double Hydroxide; EDTA; DC-Polarization; Electrochemical Impedance Spectroscopy; Polymer coating

资金

  1. BASF Coatings GmbH Company

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To entrap a corrosion inhibitor agent into a host matrix and avoid its possible weakening/plasticizing toward an organic coating as well as in enabling its progressive release under stimuli, Layered Double Hydroxide (LDH) framework is here selected as its role as a coating filler to provide a barrier effect due to its associated aspect ratio. To protect aluminum alloy AA 2024 ethylenediaminetetraacetic add (EDTA) was chosen because of its interaction with copper rich intermetallic phases. Characterization of the inorganic-organic (I/O) hybrid phase confirms the formation of LDH-type sheets with an unusual high charge density. LDH/EDTA is evaluated as corrosion inhibitor agent in the presence of aggressive chloride anions and compared to chromate, carbonate and chloride interleaved LDH anions. The mechanism of inhibitor release from the inorganic LDH container is studied by X-ray diffraction and its efficiency when embarked into an epoxy-based coating is characterized by Electrochemical Impedance Spectroscopy (EIS) and DC-Polarization experiments using Tafel plot refinements. The possible corrosion mechanisms are discussed as a function of the EDTA/LDH action under such particular conditions and the associated protection is scrutinized evolving diadochy, buffering and possible complexing reaction against electrolyte salt concentration versus exposure time. Counter intuitively the deleterious role of released EDTA in inhibiting the corrosion process is here demonstrated, however underlining the benefit of the LDH platelets. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据