ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Reconstruction of the Passive Layer of AISI 304 and 316 Steel After Scratching.
Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Thin Copper Foils: From Electrodeposition Conditions to Adhesion Performances.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Corrosion Behavior and Mechanical Properties of Metallic Materials.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Austenitic stainless steels are used widely in many fields due to their good mechanical properties and high resistance to corrosion. This work focuses on the reconstruction of the passive film after scratching. The purpose of the study was to compare changes in the rate of passive layer reconstruction and to discuss the effect of both the type of material and its electrochemical treatment on the reconstruction of the passive layer for two types of stainless steel: 304 and 316. The XPS tests performed indicate a significantly higher Cr/Fe ratio for the samples after the electropolishing process of 1.41-1.88 compared to the as-received samples of 0.82-0.86. After 2-3 min of sputtering the surface with Ar+ ions, a decrease in chromium content can be observed, with a simultaneous increase in nickel content, visible especially for the electropolished samples. A new approach in the conducted research was to scratch the test samples under controlled conditions, then evaluate the dynamics of the passive layer reconstruction using the AFM method, and then confront the obtained results with XPS measurements for the corresponding samples. For the as-received samples (2B finish) and those after surface treatment, regardless of the level of contamination of the electropolishing process bath, the reconstruction time was similar, which was approximately 2 h, although certain differences in the process dynamics were noticeable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.