Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-pftt2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-03T17:28:19.392Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Stability of the Mg65Y10Cu15Ag10 metallic glass in neutral and weakly acidic media

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2011

R. V. Subba Rao ,
U. Wolff ,
S. Baunack ,
J. Eckert  and
A. Gebert
R. V. Subba Rao
Affiliation:
Leibniz Institute for Solid State and Materials Research (IFW) Dresden, P.O. Box 270016, D-01171 Dresden, Germany
U. Wolff
Affiliation:
Leibniz Institute for Solid State and Materials Research (IFW) Dresden, P.O. Box 270016, D-01171 Dresden, Germany
S. Baunack
Affiliation:
Leibniz Institute for Solid State and Materials Research (IFW) Dresden, P.O. Box 270016, D-01171 Dresden, Germany
J. Eckert
Affiliation:
Leibniz Institute for Solid State and Materials Research (IFW) Dresden, P.O. Box 270016, D-01171 Dresden, Germany
A. Gebert*
Affiliation:
Leibniz Institute for Solid State and Materials Research (IFW) Dresden, P.O. Box 270016, D-01171 Dresden, Germany
*
c) Address all correspondence to this author. e-mail: a.gebert@ifw-dresden.de
Get access

Abstract

The corrosion behavior of the bulk glass-forming Mg65Y10Cu15Ag10 alloy was studied in neutral and weakly acidic media. Potentiodynamic polarization studies in cyclic and linear modes were carried out in electrolytes with a pH = 7, containing different anions. The alloy corroded freely in electrolytes with sulfate and pthalate ions, whereas passivity was observed in the electrolyte with borate ions. Further tests were performed in boric-acid-added borate buffer solution with pH = 7, 6, and 5. From Tafel characteristics, corrosion potentials and corrosion current densities were estimated. The data were compared with those of the ternary Mg65Y10Cu15 metallic glass. Potentiostatic anodic polarization tests were conducted on the Mg65Y10Cu15Ag10 alloy in boric-acid-added borate buffer solution with pH = 7 at two different potentials, 800 and 300 mV, saturated calomel electrode, which revealed different current transient characteristics. Auger electron spectroscopy was employed to characterize the anodically generated passive layers. The depth distributions of the elements as well as their chemical states were detected to be different for layers formed in electrolytes (i) with different pH values (8.4 and 7) of the same anion, (ii) with the same pH value but containing different anions (borate, sulfate, and pthalate), and (iii) with the same pH value and anion (borate) but at two different anodic potentials.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Materials Research , Volume 18 , Issue 1 , January 2003 , pp. 97 - 105
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2003

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1.Mordike, B.L. and Ebert, T., Mater. Sci. Eng. A 302, 37 (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Decker, R.F., Adv. Mater. Proc. 9, 31 (1998).Google Scholar
3.Song, G.L. and Atrens, A., Adv. Eng. Mater. 1, 11 (1999).3.0.CO;2-N>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Inoue, A., Zhang, T., and Matsumoto, T., Mater. Trans., JIM 31, 177 (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Peker, A. and Johnson, W.L., Appl. Phys. Lett. 63, 2342 (1993).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Inoue, A. and Matsumoto, T., Mater. Sci. Eng. A 173, 1 (1993).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Kang, H.G., Park, E.S., Kim, W.T., and Cho, H.K., Mater. Trans., JIM 41, 846 (2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Gebert, A., Buchholz, K., Leonhard, A., Mummert, K., Eckert, J., and Schultz, L., Mater. Sci. Eng. A 267, 294 (1999).Google Scholar
9.Schroeder, V., Gilbert, C.J., and Ritchie, R.O., Scripta Mater. 38, 1481 (1998).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10.Hiromoto, S., Tsai, A-P., Sumita, M., and Hanawa, T., Corros. Sci. 42, 2193 (2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Gebert, A., Wolff, U., John, A., and Eckert, J., Scripta Mater. 43, 279 (2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12.Gebert, A., Wolff, U., John, A., Eckert, J., and Schultz, L., Mater. Sci. Eng. A 299, 125 (2001).Google Scholar
13.Rao, R.V. Subba, Wolff, U., Baunack, S., Eckert, J., and Gebert, A., Corros. Sci. 45, 817 (2002).Google Scholar
14.Uhlig, H.H. and Gilman, J.R., Z. Phys. Chem. 226, 127 (1964).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.Zuo, Y., Wang, H., Zhao, J., and Xiong, J., Corros. Sci. 44, 13 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16.Florianovich, G.M., Ko¨lotyrkin, Y.M., Kononova, D., in Proceedings of the 4th ICMC-Amsterdam, edited by Hamner, N.E. (NACE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1972), p. 189.Google Scholar
17.Virtanen, S., Schmuki, P., Bu¨chler, M., Isaacs, H., J. Electrochem. Soc. 146, 4087 (1999).Google Scholar
18.Martini, E.M.A. and Muller, I.L., J. Braz. Chem. Soc. 10, 505 (1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19.Pourbaix, M., Atlas of Electrochemical Equilibria in Aqueous Solutions (Pergamon Press, Oxford, London, U.K. 1966), p. 396.Google Scholar
20.Gaarenstroom, S.W., J. Vac. Sci. Technol. 16, 600 (1979).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21.Hofmann, S. and Steffen, J., Surf. Interface Anal. 14, 59 (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22.Solomon, J.S., Thin Solid Films 154, 11 (1987).CrossRefGoogle Scholar