Investigation of ratio as a corrosion inhibitor for metal alloys

N. Mohamad and N. K. OthmanA. Jalar

Citation: AIP Conference Proceedings 1571, 136 (2013); doi: 10.1063/1.4858643

View online: http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4858643
View Table of Contents: http://aip.scitation.org/toc/apc/1571/1
Published by the American Institute of Physics
Investigation of SiO2:Na2O ratio as a Corrosion Inhibitor for
Metal Alloys
N. Mohamada, N. K. Othmana, and A. Jalarb
a
School of Applied Physics, Faculty of Science and Technology Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia,
43600 UKM Bangi, Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia
b
Institute of Micro Engineering and Nanoelectronics (IMEN), Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia,
43600 UKM Bangi, Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia

Abstract. The silicate is one of the potential compounds used as a corrosion inhibitor for metal alloys. The mixture
between silica and sodium hydroxide (NaOH) succeeded to produce the silicate product. The formulation of a silicate
product normally variable depended by the different ratio of SiO 2:Na2O. This research utilized the agriculture waste
product of paddy using its rice husk. In this study, the amorphous silica content in rice husk ash was used after rice husk
burnt in a muffle furnace at a certain temperature. The X-ray diffraction (XRD) analysis was done to determine the
existence of amorphous phase of silica in the rice husk ash. There are several studies that recognized rice husk as an
alternative source that obtained high silica content. The X-ray fluorescence (XRF) analysis was carried out to clarify the
percentage amount of Si and O elements, which referred the silica compound in rice husk ash. The preparation of sodium
silicate formulation were differ based on the SiO2:Na2O ratio (SiO2:Na2O ratio = 1.00, 2.00 and 3.00). These silicate
based corrosion inhibitors were tested on several testing samples, which were copper (99.9%), aluminum alloy (AA
6061) and carbon steel (SAE 1045). The purpose of this study is to determine the appropriate SiO2:Na2O ratio and
understand how this SiO2:Na2O ratio can affect the corrosion rate of each metal alloys immersed in acidic medium. In
order to investigate this study, weight loss test was conducted in 0.5 M hydrochloric acid (HCl) for 24 hours at room
temperature.
Keywords: Corrosion inhibitor, Metal alloys, Silicate, SiO2:Na2O.
PACS: 81. 05.Bx; 81.65.Kn; 82.45.Bb

INTRODUCTION
Normally, silicate solution is represented by general formula of xSiO 2:M2O where M is an alkali metal and x is
the silicon cation ratio. Sodium silicate is a water-soluble, non-toxic and low priced [1]. Due to that reason, silicate
have been used for several decades to prevent corrosion of metallic materials [2]. It's also important to differentiate
based on proportion of SiO2:Na2O ratio [3], [4]. The SiO2:Na2O ratio is one of the factors that affect the distribution
of silicate [5]. Therefore, it influenced the compositions of sodium silicate formulation and will further act on
corrosion inhibition. The investigation of SiO2:Na2O ratio (1.00, 2.00 and 3.00) effect will determine the suitable
SiO2:Na2O ratio for some of metal alloys. The tested samples were copper (99.9%), aluminum alloy (AA 6061) and
carbon steel (SAE 1045).
These samples have their own properties, which could possibly impinge on the inhibition efficiency of the
inhibitor. In order to formulate sodium silicate corrosion inhibitor, there are several factors that should be
considered. One of the important factor is environmental friendly. Thus, this research also intends to investigate the
potential of sodium silicate corrosion inhibitor that produced from rice husk. Rice husk is the waste agricultural
product from paddy field which is one of the largest readily available but under-utilized biomass resources.
Nowadays, rice husk is the preferable material used in many applications such as a filler in composite product [6],
fuel for electricity generation [7], source of silica [8] and many others.
Through utilization of rice husk as fuel resources of energy generation, it also generates ash after burning process
[13]. This phenomenon leads to severe disposal problems. Generally, this ash comprised of high content of silica.
Silica existed in amorphous and crystalline form. Moreover, according to the International Agency for Research on
Cancer, it has been reported that crystalline silica has been sorted as a hazardous compound [8]. Hence, in this
research, the used of amorphous silica is preferable. Therefore, the optimization of burning temperature is crucial
towards the economy and sustainability of the environment. Several research studies claimed that amorphous silica
attained in the temperature range of less than 700 ºC [10-11]. Previous research by Foletto and his co-researchers,

The 2013 UKM FST Postgraduate Colloquium

AIP Conf. Proc. 1571, 136-140 (2014); doi: 10.1063/1.4858643
© 2014 AIP Publishing LLC 978-0-7354-1199-9/$30.00

136
sodium silicate has been possibly attained from rice husk after treating the silica with sodium hydroxide (NaOH).
[12]. Therefore, by using silica extracted from rice husk, a green silicate based corrosion inhibitor able to produce.
Thus, the investigation of SiO2:Na2O ratio (1.00, 2.00 and 3.00) effect will be carried out to verify the suitability
ratio for different metal alloys using the formulation of green silicate based corrosion inhibitor from rice husk.

METHODS

Silica Extract from Rice Husk Ash

The rice husk ash was produced from the burning process of rice husk in a muffle furnace at 600 ºC for 6 hours.
10 g of rice husk was mixed with 80 ml 2.5 M NaOH in a closed beaker at 40-50º C for 3-4 hours while constantly
stirred condition. The produced solution was filtrated using warm distilled water. Then, a clear solution was
constructed in the beaker. This clear solution was heated at 90-100 ºC before titrated it with 2.5 M sulphuric acid
(H2SO4) until reaching pH 2. Through this titration process, a gel-like solution was obtained in the beaker. This gel-
like solution was filtrated again by the warm distilled water. The filtrate was constructed on filter paper and dried in
the oven at 70 ºC for 15 hours. The dried white powder, which generated was known as silica powder.

Formulation of Sodium Silicate acts as Corrosion Inhibitor

The sodium silicate formulations used in this study are consisting of three types. There are distinguished
according to the different ratio of SiO2:Na2O (SiO2:Na2O ratio = 1.00, 2.00 and 3.00). SiO2:Na2O ratio of 1.00, 2.00
and 3.00 were prepared by adding 2 g, 4 g and 6 g respectively with 0.2 M NaOH and distilled water in 250 ml
volumetric flask. This mixture will stir until it becomes homogenous. Then, these solutions were allowed to stand
for two days to stabilize.

Preparation of Metal Alloys

In this study, the test samples were copper (99.9%), aluminum alloy (AA 6061) and carbon steel (SAE 1045).
Before these samples were exposed for corrosion test, they were holed and grounded until 600 grit of SiC paper.
These samples were cleaned with distilled water and ethanol before prior used.

Weight Loss Test

The well-prepared test samples copper (99.9%), aluminum alloy (AA 6061) and carbon steel (SAE 1045) were
hung using nylon string and immersed in untreated and treated solution with different SiO 2:Na2O ratio = 1.00, 2.00
and 3.00 of sodium silicate corrosion inhibitor. This test was performed for 24 hours in a beaker filled with 100 ml
of immersion solutions. In this test, the 500 ppm silicate inhibitor was used as a constant parameter. Based on this
test, the weight loss, corrosion rate and inhibition efficiency can be obtained using given equations.

Weight loss (mg) = (Wi –Wf) / Wi (1)

where Wi is weight before immersed and Wf is the weight after immersed in the medium.

Corrosion rate (mpy) = (534 × ΔW) / (ρ × A × T) (2)

where K is factor (534), ∆W: weight loss (mg), ρ is density (g/cm3), A is area (inch2) and T is time exposed (hour).

Inhibition Efficiency (%) = [(CRi – CR) / CR ] × 100 (3)

where CRi and CR are corrosion rate in the absence and presence of inhibitors, respectively.

137
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Analysis of Rice Husk Ash

The XRD analysis of rice husk ash was done after rice husk burnt in a muffle furnace at 600 ºC for 6 hours. The
received results confirmed the occurrence of amorphous phase of silica. In this study, amorphous silica is preferred
because of its desirable properties. Amorphous silica is non-toxic compound [8]. So, it is safely used by the
consumers. Moreover, it has several favorable properties such as large pore volume, high specific surface area and
high reactivity [13]. These properties are important in chemical synthesis for enhancing the formulation process of
silica based corrosion inhibitor.

SiO2

FIGURE 1. XRD result of amorphous silica in rice husk ash.

TABLE (1). XRF analysis of rice husk ash.

Formula O Si K P

Concentration 51.63% 42.44% 2.75% 1.03%

The obtained result based on XRF analysis of rice husk ash. There are several elements occurred from this result.
There are some other elements that not stated in the TABLE (1) such as Mg, Ca, Fe, S, Na, Mn, Al, Zn, Cl, Cu, Rb,
Ni and Sr, which occurred less than 1 % in rice husk ash. From this result, it shows that Si and O obtained 42.44 %
and 51.63 % respectively. Thus, it approved the declaration that rice husk ash has high silica content.

Weight Loss Measurement

According to the weight loss test, the 500 ppm of silicate inhibitor was used as a constant parameter. The result
obtained from this test was interpreted by the graph in FIGURE 2. It shows that as the 500 ppm of silicate inhibitor
was added into all the immersion solution, the inhibition efficiency was increased for these three samples. The
graphical trend of copper sample shows that as the SiO2:Na2O ratio increased the inhibition efficiency also
decreased. The highest inhibition efficiency is at SiO2:Na2O ratio of 3.00 which is 27 %. For the SiO2:Na2O ratio
result for 1.00 and 2.00, each of them achieved 13 % and 18 % respectively. Thus, it displays that the optimum
SiO2:Na2O ratio of copper is 3.00. Meanwhile, the inhibition efficiency result for the aluminum AA 6061 shows that
SiO2:Na2O ratio 2.00 reached until 99 %. As seen in Figure 2, the inhibition efficiency of carbon steel at SiO 2:Na2O
ratio of 2.00 is 100 %. By referring towards inhibition efficiency result obtained from the AA 6061 and carbon steel,

138
it explained that at this ratio, silicate inhibitor gives maximum protection for them from corrosion attack by the
acidic medium. The high inhibition efficiency causes the less corrosion attack by the corrosive medium [14]. These
results demonstrate that the optimum SiO2:Na2O ratio of copper is 3.00 while SiO2:Na2O ratio of AA 6061 and
carbon steel is 2.00.
The inhibition efficiency result of copper continuously increased as the SiO 2:Na2O ratio increased from 1.00 -
3.00. It is found from the previous study, the higher SiO2:Na2O ratio gives greater protection towards metal alloys.
This is because as the SiO2:Na2O ratio increased, it also increases the blocking of the charge transfer and electrolyte
diffusion [15]. Thus, it also increases the corrosion resistance of copper. Meanwhile, as mentioned before, the
inhibition efficiency of silicate inhibitor for AA 6061 and carbon steel are SiO 2:Na2O ratio of 2.00. From this result,
it also proved that as the increase of SiO2:Na2O ratio, the corrosion resistance will be increased too. It also believed
that the SiO2:Na2O ratio is related to the existence of monomeric and polymeric silicate. It is said that the higher
SiO2:Na2O ratio contributes to the occurrence of polymeric silicate in the solution. Conversely, at the lower
SiO2:Na2O ratio, there is a more monomeric silicate formed in the solution [16]. The increased of the large two and
three dimensional silicate anions in the solution gives the more compact silicate inhibitor laid on copper, AA 6061
and carbon steel surface [1]. Consequently, the inhibition efficiency increased accordingly with the increment of
SiO2:Na2O ratio. However, at SiO2:Na2O ratio of 3.00 for AA 6061 and carbon steel, the inhibition efficiency tends
to be decreased. This result can be explained in compared with Yuan and his group researchers' results from their
previous research. They proposed this phenomenon is related to the different changes in the electrode/electrolyte
interface happened while immersion process [16]. Therefore, further investigation of adsorption study should be
carried out to clarify the explanation regarding the attained result.

FIGURE 2. The inhibition efficiency of different SiO2:Na2O ratios: 1.00, 2.00 and 3.00 of sodium silicate corrosion inhibitor on
metal alloys in 0.5 M HCl for 24 hours.

139
 CONCLUSION
The silicate based inhibitor formulated from rice husk has been proved its potential in inhibiting the corrosion of
copper, AA 6061 and carbon steel in 0.5 M HCl for this study. It is also verified that each metal alloy (copper, AA
6061 and carbon steel) influenced the determination of optimal SiO 2:Na2O ratio in sodium silicate formulation. The
optimum SiO2:Na2O ratio of copper is 3:1 while SiO2:Na2O ratio of AA 6061 and for carbon steel is 2:1.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The acknowledgement is sincerely express to the Ministry of Science, Technology & Innovative Malaysia
(MOSTI) for the financial support given through the Science Fund Grants Scheme (03-01-02-SF0734),
ERGS/1/2012/STG05/UKM/02/2, DIP -2012-2014, DDP-2013-035 and Ministry of Higher Education, Malaysia
(MOHE) with their support through MyBrain15 scholarship.

REFERENCES
1. M. Yuan, J. Lu, G. Kong and C. Che, Surf. Coat. Tech. 205, 4466-4470 (2011).
2. J. Min, J. H. Park, H. Sohn, J. M. Park, J. Ind. Eng. Chem. 18, 655–660 (2012).
3. B. Veeraraghavan, D. Slavkov, S. Prabhu, M. Nicholson, B. Haran, B. Popov and B. Heimann, Surface and Coatings
Technology, 167, 41–51 (2003).
4. J. J. Hahn, N. G. McGowan, R. L. Heimann and T. L. Barr, Surf. Coat. Tech. 108–109, 403–407 (1998).
5. H. Gao, Q. Li, F.N. Chen, Y. Dai, F. Luo and L.Q. Li, Corr. Sci. 53, 1401-1407 (2011).
6. B.Park, S. G. Wi, K. H. Lee, A. P. Sigh, T. Yoon and Y. S. Kim, Biomass. Bioenerg. 25, 319-327 (2003).
7. K.A. Matori, M.M. Haslinawati, Z.A. Wahab, H.A.A. Sidek, T.K. Ban and W.A.W.A.K. Ghani, MASAUM Journal of Basic
and Applied Sciences, 1, 512-515, (2009).
8. M. Bhagialaksmi, L. J.Yun, R. Anuradha and H. T. Jang, J. hazard. Mater. 175, 928-938 (2010).
9. J. Umeda and K. Kondoh, Ind. Crop. Prod. 32, 539-544 (2010).
10. K. Amutha, R. Ravibaskar and G. Sivakumar, International Journal of Nanotechnology and Applications 4, 61-66 (2010).
11. M. Rozainee, S.P Ngo, A.A. Salema, K.G. Tan, M. Ariffin and Z.N. Zainura, Biosource Technolgy 99, 703-713 (2008).
12. E. L. Foletto, E. Gratieri, L. H. de Oliveira and S. L. Jahn, Materials Research 9, 335-338 (2006).
13. L. Xiong, E. H. Sekiya, P. Sujaridworakun, S. Wada and K.Saito, Journals of Metals, Materials, Materials and Minerals 19,
95-99 (2009).
14. D. B. Hmamou, R. Saghi, A.Zarrouk, M. Messali, H. Zarrouk, M. Errami, B. Hammouti, Lh. Bazzi, and A. Chakir, Der
Pharma Chemica 4(4), 1496-1505 (2012).
15. M.Yuan and J. Lu, G. Kong, Surf. Coat. Tech. 204, 1229-1235 (2010).
16. R. Gaggiano, P. Moriamé, M. Biesemans, De Graeve and H. Terryn, Surf. Coat. Tech. 206, 1269-1276 (2011).

140