The Passivity of Metals

Schwabe, K.

doi:10.1002/anie.196601851

Cited by 13 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 129 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This suggests a surface segregation of the thin layer of alumina which protects the underlying alloy against further oxidation or chemical attack due to its self‐inhibiting behaviour . Starting from depths defined by at least 500 s sputter time, a positive deviation of approximately 15 at.% of the Cu concentration can be observed before reaching 2000 s while a negative deviation of approximately −10 at.% was found after 5000 s. Overall, both Al and Cu depth profiles show only slight variations around the composition of Al‐66 at.% Cu measured by EDX.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 86%

Vapour phase co‐deposition of Al—Cu thin film alloys

Hafner

Mardare

Hassel

2013

Physica Status Solidi (a)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The fabrication and characterisation of Al-Cu thin film alloys obtained using co-deposition geometry from individual Al and Cu sources were addressed. A compositional gradient ranging from 36 to 93 at.% Cu was obtained. The surface microstructure evolved with a strong influence on the Cu content. This was connected to the presence of the Cu(111) in the alloys. The electrical resistivity showed a decrease by almost one order of magnitude in the Cu rich region of the Al-Cu combinatorial library. Al-Cu thin films evaporated from a single source produced a surface compositional gradient of 7 at.%. X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) depth profiling revealed an in-depth compositional gradient as well. This behaviour was attributed to the gas phase dynamics of Al and Cu during the thin film formation.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 86%

Vapour phase co‐deposition of Al—Cu thin film alloys

Hafner

Mardare

Hassel

2013

Physica Status Solidi (a)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A passivating film that coats a metal surface will prevent the metal from contacting the solution. [36][37][38][39][40][41] When ions are not released, then corrosion does not occur.…”

Section: Review Of Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Corrosion between orthodontic archwires and bracket couples

O'Leary¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nickel-containing orthodontic wires have been reported to cause allergic reactions in sensitive individuals. However, stainless steel brackets also contain nickel and could potentially elicit a reaction. The ability of these metals to cause an allergic reaction is related to corrosion of the alloys and subsequent leaching of nickel ions into the oral cavity. The purpose of this study was to determine if there is a significant difference in the corrosive potential of stainless steel, NiTi and TMA wires either alone or when coupled with a stainless steel bracket. At least two wires and bracket/wire combinations of each type were tested using potentiostatic anodic polarization. The samples were tested in 0.9% NaCl solution at room temperature with neutral pH. Using a Wenking MP 95 potentiostat, the breakdown potential for each sample was determined from constructed polarization curves. The potentiostat was connected to an electrochemical corrosion cell and data was collected using a computer and data acquisition program. The samples were visually analyzed for surface changes and photographs were taken. The breakdown potentials of stainless steel ("A" Co.), NiTi (Ormco), TMA (Ormco), and the stainless steel bracket (Ormco) were 600 mv, 1600 mv, >2000 mv, and 200 mv respectively. When coupled with a stainless steel bracket, the breakdown potential for all three of the wire types was 200 mv. The breakdown potential of the stainless steel bracket overrode the potential for the wires themselves and the samples all broke down at the point where the bracket would have corroded by itself. The stainless steel brackets proved to be the weak ling in the galvanic couple with the three wire types and the brackets have a significantly higher corrosive potential than any of the wires themselves. If a patient has a nickel allergy, the orthodontist would be wise to avoid the use of stainless steel brackets in addition to nickel containing archwires. TMA wires do not contain nickel and they have a very high resistance to corrosion. TMA wires would be an acceptable substitute for NiTi while ceramic brackets should be considered instead of stainless steel. iii To my parents, John and Mary Ellen, whose love, support and example have allowed me to pursue all of my goals in life. iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS My sincere appreciation to the following individuals: Dr. Michael Bagby for serving as my chairman and helping me complete this project. Dr. Marcia Gladwin for her encouragement and serving on my committee. Dr. Peter Ngan for his commitment to excellence and his dedication to education for his residents. Dr. Hera Kim for her help and support throughout the course of this study.

show abstract

Electrochemical machining

Bannard

1977

J Appl Electrochem

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Passivity of Metals

Cited by 13 publications

References 129 publications

Vapour phase co‐deposition of Al—Cu thin film alloys

Vapour phase co‐deposition of Al—Cu thin film alloys

Corrosion between orthodontic archwires and bracket couples

Electrochemical machining

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About