Journal of Alloys and Compounds 470 (2009) 397–403

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Alloys and Compounds

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jallcom

Corrosion of aluminium and aluminium alloy in ethylene

glycol–water mixtures
J. Zaharieva a , M. Milanova a , M. Mitov b , L. Lutov a , S. Manev b , D. Todorovsky a,∗
aFaculty of Chemistry, University of Sofia, 1, J. Bourchier Boulevard, Sofia 1164, Bulgaria
bFaculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, South-West University,
66, Ivan Mihailov Street, Blagoevgrad 2700, Bulgaria

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Samples of pure aluminium and aluminium alloy were heated at 150 kPa and 130 ◦ C in ethylene glycol
Received 11 December 2007 (EG)–water mixture (volume ratio 1:1) for 172 h (8–12 h heating, 12–16 h pause). The corrosion of the
Received in revised form 18 February 2008 metals was characterised by the transfer of Al into solution, changes in the surface morphology of the
Accepted 22 February 2008
samples and their electrochemical behaviour. Formation of a white crystalline aluminium-organic pre-
Available online 8 April 2008
cipitate was found during the heating of metals and some of its characteristics were determined. The
effect of the addition of glycolic, citric and sebacic acid to the EG–water mixture on the metal corrosion
Keywords:
behaviour was investigated. A significant corrosive action of glycolic acid and a protective effect of sebacic
Corrosion
Metals and alloys
acid were found.
Scanning electron microscopy (SEM)
© 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
X-ray diffraction

1. Introduction confirmed. The role of the complexation chemistry of ethylenedi-

Recently, the interest in corrosion and corrosion inhibition of
Al-alloys has been revived due to the aging of these types of alloys
extensively used in the air-space and automotive industry [1]. The
corrosion of Al-pigments in aqueous alkaline media [2], in a mix-
ture of desalinated water and in butyl glycol [4], as well as the
corrosion of Al in water-alcohol media (such as automotive engine
coolants) [3] have been studied. The inhibition effect of the alcohol
has been shown [3]. The influence of thermal treatment, chemical
processing, various trace impurities and alloying elements on the
electrochemical activation of aluminium has been reported [5]. The
main attention has been focussed on the inhibition of the corrosion
by a number of potential inhibitors such as nitrates, phosphates,
citrates, tartrates, benzoates, acetates [6], hydroxycarboxylic and
amino acids [7], citric and agaric acids [2], reducing sacharides
(fructose and mannose) and ascorbic acid [8], glucose [9], dyes
(methylene blue and others [10]), acetic and benzoic acids and cup-
ferron [11]. The role of chelating [2,12] and reducing [8] actions
as crucial factors for the inhibition effect particularly on hydrogen
corrosion of Al-pigments has been discussed.
The inhibition of metal corrosion by organic substances contain-
ing polar groups (with N, S, O) [13–17] as well as by heterocyclic
compounds containing conjugated double bonds [16–19] has been
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +359 2 8161322; fax: +359 2 9625438.
E-mail address: nhdt@wmail.chem.uni-sofia.bg (D. Todorovsky).
aminetetracetic and ethylenediaminetetraphosphonic acids on the
formation of a protective layer on the oxidized aluminium surface
has also been reported [20,21]. The protection by dyes was related
to the increase of the corrosion activation energy due to the dye
adsorption [10].
The interaction of ethylene glycol (EG) with Al and the chemistry
of the inhibition process have been studied by means of inelastic
electron tunnelling spectroscopy. In the respective spectra the OH
or OD vibrations of the EG have not been observed implying that OH
groups loose their protons being attached to the oxidized Al surface
through their oxygen atoms [22].
The aims of the present work are to study: (i) the corrosion
behaviour of aluminium and aluminium alloy in EG–water solution
under conditions simulating the operating conditions of automo-
tive engine coolant (without forced circulation), and (ii) the action
of glycolic, citric and sebacic acids applied as additives to the model
coolant.
The corrosive agent composition, the temperature and pressure
as well as the cyclic regime of the heat treatment of the tested sam-
ples were as much as possible consistent with the real operating
conditions of the coolant.
A number of criteria were used for the evaluation of the
specimens’ corrosion: (i) the transfer of Al and of the Al-alloy
components to the aggressive liquid, (ii) characterization of the
corrosion products, (iii) SEM study of the changes caused by corro-
sion on the metal surfaces, and (iv) post-treatment electrochemical
behaviour of the specimens.

0925-8388/$ – see front matter © 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.jallcom.2008.02.079
398 J. Zaharieva et al. / Journal of Alloys and Compounds 470 (2009) 397–403

Glycolic acid was selected as an additive to be investigated

because it could be formed as a result of EG oxidation during the
use of the coolant and thereby enhance the corrosiveness of the
liquid. Citric acid was selected because it has a protective effect on
aluminium in some systems, while sebacic acid has been used as an
anticorrosive coolant additive. The acids selected are significantly
different in their molecular structure, particularly in the number
of hydroxyl and carboxyl groups and, mainly, in the hydrocarbon
chain length.

2. Experimental

2.1. Materials

Pure Al (99.99%, Aldrich) and an Al-alloy (D16AT type) containing (%): Mn 0.50,
Si 0.56, Fe 0.66, Mg 1.30, Cu 4.02, and Al 92.96, were used for the corrosion tests.
The samples were pretreated by rinsing with trichloroethylene and then acetone at
ambient temperature and finally with 20% NaOH solution at 50 ◦ C for 1 min. After
washing with plenty of water, the plates were treated in 50% HNO3 at 30 ◦ C for 1 min.
Fig. 1. IR spectra of the precipitates isolated from EG–water solution after heating
Chemical polishing of the Al samples was performed in a mixture of 12 cm3 H2 O
of aluminium (1) and Al-alloy (2).
and concentrated H3 PO4 (50 cm3 ), H2 SO4 (25 cm3 ), HNO3 (7 cm3 ), and CH3 COOH
(6 cm3 ) at 70 ◦ C for 2 min. The same procedure was followed for the Al-alloy in
a mixture of concentrated H3 PO4 (70 cm3 ), H2 SO4 (25 cm3 ), and HNO3 (50 cm3 )
at 85 ◦ C for 2 min. Finally, the polished samples were washed with distilled 2.2. Corrosion test
water.
EG and citric (CA), glycolic (GA) and sebacic (SA) acids shown in the figure below Samples of 2 cm × 1 cm (0.1 and 0.05 cm thick for the Al and the alloy, respec-
(all of them p.a. grade) were used as additives in the corrosion tests. tively) were put in glass tubes filled with a mixture of EG and water (volume ratio
1:1). In some of the tubes CA, GA, SA or a mixture of GA and SA acids (in a mass ratio
CH2 –COOH 1:1) were added in amount of 10% with respect to the water-EG mixture. In some
–HO–(CH2 )2 –OH HO–C–COOH HO–(CH2 )2 –COOH HOOC–(CH2 )8 –COOH experiments, 10% each of GA and SA were added simultaneously.
EG CH2 –COOH GA SA The tubes with the samples were immersed in a water–EG bath (volume ratio
CA
1:1) in an autoclave and heated at 130 ◦ C and 150 kPa (at cycles of 8–12 h heating
followed by 12–16 h at ambient temperature) for a total time of 172 h.

Fig. 2. 1H NMR spectrum of the precipitate formed as a result of heating of aluminium sample in EG–water solution.
 J. Zaharieva et al. / Journal of Alloys and Compounds 470 (2009) 397–403
Fig. 3. X-ray diffractogram of the precipitate formed at heating of aluminium in
EG–water solution; in brackets – relative intensity of the reflexes.
After the heating of samples in pure EG–water solution white precipitates were
found, these precipitates were separated from the liquid using 0.22 ␮m membrane
filters.
2.3. Analysis
The content of Al in the above mentioned precipitates was determined by means
of atomic absorption analysis (PerkinElmer–Zeeman 3030 spectrometer) after dis-
solving them in 0.5 M HCl. The contents of Mg, Cu and Mn were also determined by
the same method.
The X-ray diffractograms of the precipitates and those of the tested metal plates
were recorded using a Siemens D500 powder diffractometer at 40 kV, 30 mA with
2 step of 0.02◦ /2 s.
The IR spectra (4000–400 cm−1 ) were taken using a Bohmem-Michelson 100
FTIR spectrometer in KBr pellets, while 1 H NMR spectra were recorded using a Bruker
250 MHz spectrometer with DMSO as a solvent.
SEM observations of the tested plates surfaces and isolated precipitate were
performed using a JSM 5510 scanning electron microscope.
Electrochemical investigation of the initial and the treated samples was per-
formed by means of linear voltammetry using a PJT 35-2 Potentiostat-galvanostat
(Radiometer-Tacussel) with IMT 101 electrochemical interface and Volta Master 2
software. The studied samples were connected as working electrodes in a conven-
tional three-electrode cell with 1 M KNO3 as a model neutral electrolyte. A saturated
calomel electrode (SCE) as the reference and a platinum third electrode were used.
After the establishment of a steady-state open-circuit potential (OCP), low sweep-
rate anode polarization was applied. The procedure was repeated until reproducible
polarization curves were recorded.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Content of metals in the EG–water solution
The contents of Al, Mg, Cu and Mn in the EG–water solu-
tions after 172 h of heating of the metal samples are shown in
Table 1.
399
Fig. 4. SEM image of the precipitate, formed in EG–water solution as a result of
aluminium heat treatment.
It can be seen that GA has a strong corrosive effect on both Al and
the alloy. The influence of CA is three times weaker, thereby con-
firming that the corrosive effect of the acid added decreases with
an increase of its hydrocarbon chain length. Accordingly, SA, the
acid with the longest chain, has no corrosive effect on the pure Al
and only slightly increases the alloy corrosion. For Al, it decreases
the corrosiveness of a mixture containing GA. The latter was con-
firmed by experiments conducted with a solution containing 10%
each of both acids. In general, the alloy is slightly more sensitive
to corrosion. This could be explained by the well known formation
of local microgalvanic cells as a result of deposition of elements
with higher electrochemical potential (Cu, Mn, etc., present in the
solution) on the alloy surface. As a result, further dissolution of
the metal surface is being enhanced. The fixation of these ions as
low soluble compounds (like sebacic salts) will impede such cell
formation. However, under the conditions of our experiments, the
protective effect of SA (in a mixture with 5% GA) against corrosion of
the alloy is not clear. No decrease of the alloy corrosion is observed
for the solution containing 10% each of GA and SA, compared to the
solution containing 10% GA only.
3.2. Characterization of the precipitate formed during
experiments using EG–water solution
In some of the experiments the heating of Al and Al-alloy in
EG–water solutions led to formation of white finely dispersed
crystalline precipitates containing 11 ppm and 41 ppm Al, respec-
tively.
The IR spectra of the two samples are practically identical (Fig. 1).
The presence of EG and H2 O in the precipitates is confirmed by the
doublet around 1100 cm−1 and 1040 cm−1 (belonging to the sym-
metrical and antisymmetrical C–O stretching frequencies) and at
1639 cm−1 , respectively. The OH groups of both compounds con-
tribute to the band at ∼3360 cm−1 / (OH)/. The IR spectrum of EG
has no band at 1199 cm−1 ascribed to (C–O) [25]. This band, seen
in Fig. 1, along with the shoulder at 1705 cm−1 caused by as (C O)
reveal the presence of traces of carboxylic groups in the precipitate
suggesting some oxidation of EG to GA.
The precipitates were rather poorly soluble in commonly used
solvents and only a 1 H NMR spectrum was successfully recorded
(Fig. 2). It confirms the rather complicated nature of the obtained
product. Based on literature data on NMR spectra of metal com-
plexes formed in CA-EG medium [23] or in pure EG [24] it appears
400 J. Zaharieva et al. / Journal of Alloys and Compounds 470 (2009) 397–403

Table 1
Content of Al, Mg, Cu and Mn in EG–water solutions (EGW) after heating of the metal samples

Solution symbol Additive (content in the solution, %) Studied metal Content (ppm) of

Al Mg Cu Mn

EGW – Al 4.1
EGW-GA GA (10) Al 25.2
EGW-CA CA (10) Al 8.5
EGW-SA SA (10) Al 4.2
EGW-GA-SA GA (5) + SA (5) Al 6.8
EGW – Al-alloy 4.2 0.2 0.2 0.2
EGW-GA GA (10) Al-alloy 28.2 0.8 0.9 0.2
EGW-CA CA (10) Al-alloy 10.5 0.6 1.2 0.15
EGW-SA SA (10) Al-alloy 6.5 0.6 0.1 <0.05
EGW-GA-SA GA (5) + SA (5) Al-alloy 14.2 0.3 0.6 0.15

Fig. 5. SEM images of the surfaces of initial aluminium and Al-alloy and after treating in EG–water solutions; for the solution symbols see Table 1.

that the formed precipitate contains EG bonded both as adduct
(confirmed by the most intensive shift at 3.4–3.5 ppm) and as a gly-
colic acid ester (the shift at 4.37 ppm can be ascribed to –CH2 –O–
from esterified EG).
The X-ray diffractogram of the precipitate formed when heating
aluminum in EG–water solution is shown in Fig. 3. The diffrac-
togram presented does not match with any of the reference material
diffractograms, summarized in JCPDS, which proves that the prod-
uct obtained is not aluminium oxide or hydroxide. The presence
of large interplanar distances strongly suggests the presence of
organic components in the crystal structure.
The SEM image (Fig. 4) shows that the precipitate consists of par-
allelepiped morphological grains of about 1 ␮m in size with strong
agglomerization.
3.3. Changes of the metal surfaces due to corrosion by the
EG–water solution
The changes of the studied metals surfaces due to corrosion
by pure EG–water solution as well as in presence of some addi-
tives were studied by SEM (Fig. 5). A uniform, relatively dense film
consisting of two types of crystals (prismatic and strongly agglom-
erated plate-like ones) was observed on the Al-surface after heating
in EG–water solution. Only plate-like crystals were formed on the
surface of the alloy heated under the same conditions. The X-ray
diffractograms of the initial Al plates and those heat-treated in
EG–water solution are shown in Fig. 6. The X-ray pattern of the new
crystalline phase is identical with that of the precipitate separated
from the EG-water solution (Fig. 3), this phase is thus consisting
of the same Al-EG complex which plays a protective anticorrosive
role. Such a layer is not observed by either X-ray or SEM studies
on the surface of Al or Al-alloy heated in the presence of GA or CA.
This suggests that the complex formed is not stable in an acidic
medium and corrosion pits are clearly visible on the respective
metal surfaces.
The stronger corrosive action of GA in comparison with CA (seen
from the data in Table 1) is confirmed by the SEM images (Fig. 5).
Formation of Al(III)–CA chelate as a result of interaction between
Al-pigments and CA has been reported [2]. The product (whose
chemical composition has not been precisely established) forms
 J. Zaharieva et al. / Journal of Alloys and Compounds 470 (2009) 397–403 401

Fig. 7. Tafel plots of aluminium samples, heated in EGW (11), EGW-GA (3), EGW-CA
(5), EGW-SA (1), and EGW-GA-SA (9), first polarization scan; for the solution symbols
see Table 1.

3.4.1. Aluminium
The polarization curves (plotted in Tafel’s coordinates, Fig. 7)
show that only the sample heated in the presence of SA has a posi-
tive corrosion potential. The presence of GA and CA does not seem to
have an effect compared with the sample heated in pure EG–water
solution. Repeating the scans, the potentials became more positive
because of anodic polarization (Fig. 8). The values reached are sim-
ilar for the different samples suggesting that the surfaces of the
samples, heated with different additives, are more or less similar.
The only exception is the sample heated with SA where the corro-
sion potential became rather positive after seven scans. Apparently,
Fig. 6. X-ray diffractograms of non-treated aluminium plate (1) and after its heating the film formed during the heating in the presence of that acid
in EG–water solution (2). (Fig. 5) enhances the growth of a protective film that prevents cor-
rosion during anodic polarization. The estimated corrosion current
density, which is a measure for the corrosion rate, is lowest for the
a protective anticorrosive layer. The latter is not stable in aque-
same sample (Fig. 9a).
ous medium and is dissolved in the course of time. In water-butyl
glycol solution (volume ratio 1:1) its inhibition effect is preserved
3.4.2. Aluminium alloy
up to 142 days [2]. Such a protective effect was not found for
The Tafel plots of the samples heated in solutions with differ-
the system studied in the present work. The possible reason is
ent compositions (Fig. 10) show that the electrochemical behaviour
the much higher concentration of CA used here (∼27 mmol/100 g
of the alloy depends on the nature of the solution it was treated
EG–water solution) compared to the one used in the above cited
with. All the treated samples show a higher corrosion resistance
paper (0.35–6 mmol/100 ml solution). Indeed, an approximately
than the non-treated specimen. The studied additives lead to an
4.5-fold increase of the conversion of Al to Al(III) is observed in
increased resistance in comparison with the sample heated in
water-butyl glycol (9:1) solution at pH 10 when the CA concentra-
pure EG–water solution, i.e. a positive shift of corrosion poten-
tion increases in the interval mentioned [2].
The presence of SA in the EG–water solution leads to formation
of a dense layer of crystals with an irregular form (Fig. 5). Reflexes
at 2.43 (45), 2.52 (37), 3.34 (36), 3.87 (65), 4.12 (77) and 4.35 (100) Å´
interplanar spacing are seen on the aluminium X-ray diffractogram
(in brackets the intensities of the peaks in percent of the most
intensive ones are given). Some of the interlayer distances found
are close, but not identical, to those of the sebacic acid (JCPDS 34-
1776). The layer formed, probably of Al(III)–sebacic acid complexes,
has a protective role against Al corrosion (Fig. 5). When both GA and
SA are present a similar but thinner and not very uniform layer is
observed, especially on the alloy surface. This appears to lead to
less corrosion compared with the case when only GA was present
as additive.

3.4. Electrochemical behaviour of the studied samples

The sensitivity of the aluminium samples heated with differ-

ent additives towards corrosion was estimated from the obtained Fig. 8. Tafel plots of aluminium (heated in EG–water solution containing GA)
polarization curves. obtained at the first and seventh polarization scans.
402 J. Zaharieva et al. / Journal of Alloys and Compounds 470 (2009) 397–403

Fig. 9. Corrosion current density calculated from the Tafel plots (first scan) for: (a) aluminium heated in EGW (11), EGW-GA (3), EGW-CA (5), EGW-SA (1), and EGW-GA-SA
(7); (b) aluminium alloy: initial (0) and heated in EGW (12), EGW-GA (4), EGW-CA (6), EGW-SA (2), EGW-GA-SA (10); for the solution symbols see Table 1.

tials as well as a lower rate of corrosion (Fig. 9b). SA has the
highest inhibitive effect which is similar to its effect on the cor-
rosion of pure Al. The samples heated in the presence of acids
show an inclination to anodic passivity above a certain critical cur-
rent density. A sharp decrease in the current density followed by
a region of constant, relatively low densities and, respectively, low
rate anodic process is observed in Fig. 10. Above 350–400 mV (but
600 mV for the sample treated in SA-containing solution) a sec-
ondary anodic process starts that is accompanied by O2 release. The
nearly equal values of the potential where the passivity occurred
suggest the formation of similar protective layers on the speci-
mens heated in pure EG–water solution or in solutions with GA
or CA, probably preventing the oxidation of an alloy component.
The behaviour of alloy samples when repeating the linear polar-
ization procedure (Fig. 11) is different from that of aluminium.
While the shift of corrosion potential of all of the Al-samples
is in the positive direction, the potential of the alloy samples,
treated in pure EG–water solution as well as in the presence of SA,
stays more negative compared with the non-treated alloy. Obvi-
ously, the protective properties of the layers formed depend both
on the nature of the substrate and the composition of the solu-
tion.
Summarizing, it is concluded that the action of EG–water
solution on pure Al and on the alloy leads to formation of an
aluminium-organic complex containing H2 O, EG and derivates of
EG. Most probably, EG has bonded through the deprotonation of
its OH group as observed in [22]. The X-ray pattern of the complex
is not described in the JCPDS. A layer with the same X-ray diffrac-
togram is formed on the metal surfaces and (according to the SEM
image) inhibits the corrosion.
The presence of GA and CA in the EG-water mixture enhances
corrosion. Formation of the above mentioned protective layer is
not observed, suggesting that the Al-organic complexes are not
stable in an acidic medium. As a result, much more Al dissolves
(Table 1), clear corrosion pits are formed (Fig. 5), and the metal cor-
rosion potential is not changed (Al-alloy) compared to the corrosion
potential of the samples heated in pure EG-H2 O solution.
Despite its larger dissociation constant as well as its number of
COOH groups, CA is about three times less corrosive for both types
of studied metals (Table 1) compared with GA. The resistance to


Fig. 10. Tafel s plots for the alloy samples heated in EGW (12), EGW-GA (4), EGW-CA Fig. 11. Tafel, s plots for the alloy samples heated in EGW (12), EGW-GA (4), EGW-CA
(6), EGW-SA (2), EGW-GA-SA (10) (first scan); for the solution symbols see Table 1. (6), EGW-SA (2), EGW-GA-SA (10) obtained at the seventh scans.
 J. Zaharieva et al. / Journal of Alloys and Compounds 470 (2009) 397–403
corrosion of the alloy heated in the presence of CA (Fig. 10) and its
anodic passivation (Fig. 11) are improved in comparison with the
samples heated with GA. Most probably, the weaker corrosivity of
CA is related to the higher stability of its chelate complexes formed,
which play a protective role [2,12]. Such complexes, formed with
non-aluminium components of the Al alloy, may impede the for-
mation of microgalvanic cells and thus inhibit the corrosion of the
alloy.
SA forms a layer on the metal surfaces (Fig. 5) that has a different
crystal structure and morphology compared to the layer formed in
pure EG-H2 O solution, but it has a similar protective effect (Table 1).
The positive effect of the SA addition is clearly demonstrated when
components with a strong corrosive effect (for example, GA) are
present in the coolant as well. This effect of SA is more apparent at
moderate GA concentrations and especially for pure Al. The pres-
ence of SA in the EG–H2 O solution results in the highest corrosion
potential (Figs. 7 and 10), and lowest corrosion rate (Fig. 9) for both
tested metals as well as a larger degree of aluminium anodic passi-
vation. The latter fact shows that the film formed in presence of SA
enhances the growth of a new protective layer during the following
treatment of the metals.
The experimental data reported (Table 1, Figs. 5, 7, 9 and 10)
show a greater susceptibility to corrosion of the alloy than the
pure metal. At the same time, the inhibitive effect of SA on
the corrosion of the alloy is weaker, as shown by the lower
decrease of the Al content in the GA + SA – containing solutions
in comparison with the GA only containing solution (Table 1). The
tendency can be seen as well by the corrosion current density
(Fig. 9).
The effect of the studied additives is similar for the two types of
specimens tested: (i) the corrosivity of the acids decreases in the
order GA > CA > SA (Table 1), (ii) the presence of the acids decreases
the corrosion current density in comparison with the pure EG–H2 O
solution; SA, having the lowest value, shows the strongest inhibitive
effect.
However, some differences are observed concerning the influ-
ence of the additives on the corrosion potential of the pure metal
and its alloy: (i) the presence of all additives increases the alloy
potential and (except SA) leads to a decrease of the potential of
the aluminium, (ii) the alloy samples show an inclination to anodic
passivity after certain current density processing in two steps and
(iii) repeating the polarization procedures increases the potential
of pure metal for all additives but their effect on the alloy depends
on the acid nature.
Considering these differences, one has to account that the elec-
trochemical behaviour of the tested samples is studied in the
standard electrolyte and the results obtained are significantly influ-
enced by the state of the specimens’ surface after the heat treatment
in EG–H2 O solution.
The differences between the pure metal and the alloy have to
be related to the non-aluminium components of the latter. From
one side the presence of components with higher electrochemical
potential (and, probably, active centres formed in the course of the
alloy production) are responsible for the observed higher corrosion
activity of the alloy. On the other hand, it could be supposed that
the alloy components take place in the complexation process form-
ing a surface layer with different composition compared to the film
formed on the pure metal surface. Indeed, the morphology of the
films formed on pure metal and on its heating in EG–water solu-
tion is different (Fig. 5). These films may significantly influence the
specimens’ behaviour during the post-heating test.
403
4. Conclusion
A crystalline aluminium-organic compound is formed under the
action of EG–water solution on aluminium and its alloy. The 1 H
NMR spectral data suggest a complicated chemical nature of the
compound, containing H2 O, EG and, probably, some derivates of the
latter. The complex covers the metals surfaces with a layer which
is not formed in the presence of GA and CA. The latter suggests
instability of the complex in acidic medium.
The GA, a potential oxidation product of the EG, has a strong cor-
rosive effect on the studied metals and its formation in the course
of a prolonged exploitation of the coolant may be one of the reasons
for its corrosive action.
The corrosive effect of the added acids decreases with the
increase of the length of their hydrocarbon chain. The crystalline
layer formed with the participation of sebacic acid has a protective
effect against corrosion and enhances the anodic passivation of the
aluminium.
The tested aluminium alloy shows a little higher corrosion abil-
ity and inclination to anodic passivity after certain current density.
The peculiarities of the alloy corrosion behaviour can be related
with the presence of non-aluminium components which can influ-
ence the corrosion process through formation of microgalvanic
cells, specificity of the complexation with the additives and the
nature of the layers formed with their participation.
Acknowledgments
The work is performed with the financial support of the Sofia
University Scientific Fund. The authors are indebted to Assoc. Prof.
I. Karadjova for the help in atomic absorption analysis.
References
[1] Z. Szklarska–Smialowska, Corros. Sci. 41 (1999) 1743–1767.
[2] B. Müller, Corr. Sci. 46 (2004) 159–167.
[3] B.A. Abd-El-Nabey, N. Khalil, E. Khamis, Corros. Sci. 25 (1985) 225–232.
[4] B. Müller, Tenside Surf. Det. 37 (2000) 241–244.
[5] J.T.B. Gundersen, A. Aytac, S. Ono, J.H. Nordlien, K. Nisancioglu, Corr. Sci. 46
(2004) 265–283, 697-714.
[6] W.J. Rudd, J.C. Scully, Corr. Sci. 20 (1980) 611–631.
[7] G. Bereket, A. Yurt, Corr. Sci. 43 (2001) 1179–1195.
[8] B. Müller, Corr. Sci. 44 (2002) 1583–1591.
[9] I.N. Putilova, S.A. Balezin, V.P. Barranik, Metallic Corrosion Inhibitors, Pergamon
Press, London, 1960, p. 125.
[10] E.E. Oguzie, Mater. Chem. Phys. 87 (2004) 394–401.
[11] Q.Q. Shu, P.J. Love, A. Bayman, P.K. Hansma, Appl. Surf. Sci. 13 (1982) 374–388.
[12] B. Müller, Corros. Sci. 43 (2001) 1155–1164.
[13] T. Hovarth, E. Kalman, Progress in the Understanding and Prevention of Corro-
sion, vol. 2, Institute of Materials, 1993, p. 923.
[14] E.E. Ebenso, Mater. Chem. Phys. 79 (2003) 58–70.
[15] H. Ashassi–Sorkhabi, S.A. Nabavi-Amri, Acta Chim. Slov. 47 (2000) 507–517.
[16] E.E. Ebenso, U.J. Ekpe, B.I. Ita, E.O. Offiong, U.J. Ibok, Mater. Chem. Phys. 60 (1999)
79–90.
[17] O. Ikeda, F. Goto, H. Tamura, Bull. Chem. Soc. Jpn. 54 (1981) 3146–3152.
[18] E.S. Ferreira, C. Giacomelli, F.C. Giacomelli, A. Spinelli, Mater. Chem. Phys. 83
(2004) 129–134.
[19] S.M. Beloglazow, Progress in the Understanding and Prevention of Corrosion,
vol. 2, Institute of Materials, 1993, p. 908.
[20] L.R.B. Holze, D.S. Azambuja, C.M.S. Piatnicki, G.A. Englert, Mater. Chem. Phys.
91 (2005) 375–380.
[21] L.R.B. Holze, D.S. Azambuja, C.M.S. Piatnicki, G.A. Englert, Mater. Chem. Phys.
103 (2007) 59–64.
[22] A. Bayman, P.K. Hansma, Nature 285 (1980) 97–99.
[23] M. Milanova, M. Arnaudov, M. Getsova, D. Todorovsky, J. Alloys Compd. 264
(1997) 95–103.
[24] N. Petrova, D. Todorovsky, S. Angelova, D. Mechandjiev, J. Alloys Compd. 454
(2008) 491–500.
[25] M. Arnaudov, M. Getsova, D. Todorovsky, M. Milanova, Anal. Lab. 7 (1998) 70–74.