347 resultados para Grafting influence
Resumo:
Micro-arc oxidation (MAO) coatings were prepared on AZ31B magnesium alloy using alkaline silicate electrolyte at different current densities (0.026, 0.046 and 0.067 A/cm(2)). Field Emission Scanning Electron Microscopy (FESEM) analysis of the coating revealed an irregular porous structure with cracked morphology. Compositional analysis carried out for MAO coating showed the presence of almost an equal amount of Mg and 0 (34 wt.%) apart from other elements such as F, Si and AI. The cross-sectional FESEM images clearly portrayed that the MAO coating was dense along with the presence of very few fine pores. The surface roughness (R-a) of the coatings increased with an increase in the current density. Potentiodynamic polarization and electrochemical impedance spectroscopic (EIS) studies were carried out for both the bare and MAO coated AZ31B Mg alloy in 3.5% NaCl solution. The corrosion potential (E-corr) and corrosion current density (i(corr)) values obtained for the bare substrate were -1.49 V and 46 mu A/cm(2), respectively. The coating prepared at 0.046 A/cm(2) exhibited the lowest i(corr) value of 7.79 x 10(-10) A/cm(2) and highest polarization resistance (41.6 M Omega cm(2)) attesting to the better corrosion resistance of the coating compared to other samples. EIS results also indicated almost similar corrosion behavior for the MAO coatings. Mott-Schottky analysis showed n-type and p-type semiconductor behavior for the oxide layer present on the bare magnesium alloy and MAO coatings respectively. (C) 2016 Published by Elsevier B.V.
Resumo:
In this letter, we submit our comment on the following recently published papers by Kalidas Das: (1) ``Influence of chemical reaction and viscous dissipation on MHD mixed convection flow,'' Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology 28 (5) (2014) 1881-1885; and (2) ``Cu-water nanofluid flow and heat transfer over a shrinking sheet,'' Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology 28 (12) (2014) 5089-5094. The authors attempt to present the similarity solutions in both papers. We comment that the similarity transformations considered in Refs. 1, 2] are incorrect. Thus, the results presented by Kalidas Das lead to invalid conclusions.