Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://localhost:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/1143
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorSusai Rajendran, B.V. Apparao-
dc.contributor.authorV. Periasamy, G. Karthikeyan and-
dc.contributor.authorN. Palaniswamy-
dc.date.accessioned2024-10-25T10:36:59Z-
dc.date.available2024-10-25T10:36:59Z-
dc.date.issued1998-
dc.identifier.citation10.1108/00035599810198750en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://localhost:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/1143-
dc.description.abstractThe formulation consisting of 50ppm ATM and 300ppm MoO4 2– had only 32 per cent efficiency in inhibiting the corrosion of mild steel immersed in a neutral aqueous environment containing 60ppm C1–, whereas the ATMP (50ppm) – MoO4 2– (300ppm) – Zn2+ (50ppm) system had 96 per cent inhibition efficiency. The lower inhibition efficiency in the former case was due to the dissolution of the protective film formed on the metal surface, and getting precipitated in the bulk of the solution; this system controlled the anodic reaction only. The latter system controlled both the anodic and cathodic reactions; the dissolution of the protective film formed on the metal surface was reduced to a greater extent.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipNITWen_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherMCBUniversity Pressen_US
dc.subjectComparisonen_US
dc.subjectefficienciesen_US
dc.titleComparison of the corrosion inhibition efficiencies of the ATMP-molybdate system and the ATMPmolybdate-Zn2+systemen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
Appears in Collections:Chemistry

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
10-1108_00035599810198750.pdf57.45 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.