Jump to content

Talk:Galvanization: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Fixed problem, please feel free to fix it yourself
+{{talkheader}}
Line 1: Line 1:
{{talkheader}}
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1=
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1=
{{WikiProject Metalworking|class=C|importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject Metalworking|class=C|importance=Mid}}

Revision as of 17:09, 22 November 2013

Untitled

This page is rather confusing. It doesn't explicitly define galvanization.

I agree, no clear or definitive explanation. Does this article need a clean up tag?? -Hamdev Guru 20:42, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
is it necessary to link to the Chemical Brothers when, there is no article explicitly about the song Galvanize, surely if people work looking for the Chemical Brothers they wouldn't type that particular song. Would a disambig page be useful?? Hamdev Guru 20:45, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This is not very definitive... -

This page definitely needs a cleanup and a disambig Maelnuneb 18:33, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

-I would like to suggest a spelling change of the main title, to the English: 'galvaniSation'. Tommason 11:50, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

everywhere I see it's actually spelled 'galvanizing'. Also, there is no mention of "cold galvanizing" here. Sumter sells something called Galvalox which is described as 'cold galvanizing'. I'm trying to determine exactly what it is and how it works. Would this be a good add to the page?-micah

Strength not reduced

To my knowledge it is not correct that the process reduces the strength in any measurable way. Is there anyone who can actually document this claim in the article, or is it just someone who tried rationalizing while writing on this article???

Googling a little gives a number of sources supporting my view.

Thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Larkuur (talkcontribs) 10:12, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

- So, no response. I have removed the contested line. And rewritten it, as can be seen in the article. Larkuur (talk) 06:33, 21 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is well known and will be in any decent text on structural design. It's not an issue for mild steel, but it is for highly-stressed components in high tensile alloy steels. The problem isn't that the steel strength is "reduced" as such (as simple bulk strength), but that the risk of cracking is increased so that the design limits have to be reduced. In practice, what actually happens is that highly-stressed components avoid galvanisation. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:01, 21 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Great... That is also more or less exactly what I wrote in my edit of the actual article... Feel free to look it over. Larkuur (talk) 04:59, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not certain, but I think there are cracking mechanisms involved, such as Stress corrosion cracking, that are more than hydrogen embrittlement at the time of galvanising. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:58, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Modern meaning: dipping in molten zinc

This section has some errors or misstatements. Zinc is not more corrosion-resistant than steel! Iron-base alloys are higher in the galvanic series (more noble or cathodic) than zinc (more active or anodic). [1] Zinc corrodes more easily than almost all other metals except magnesium, in most environments. The zinc layer does act as a protective barrier, but the sacrificial anode effect is what protects the edges, nicks and scratches on galvanized (the American spelling) steel. Properly done hot-dip galvanization forms three intermetallic Zn-Fe layers between the zinc shell and the steel substrate. Excess ZnO and Zn(OH)2 are problematic on the outer 100% Zn layer and can be avoided by a chromate conversion coating immediately following the hot dip. [2] Some footnotes or Suggested Reading, such as the two books I have cited, would improve the article.His Manliness (talk) 19:13, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ M.G. Fontana & N.D. Greene, Corrosion Engineering, 2nd Ed., McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1978, p 29-34, ISBN 0-07-021461-1.
  2. ^ T.J. Langill, "Batch Process Hot Dip Galvanizing," ASM Handbook, Vol. 13A: Corrosion: Fundamentals, Testing, and Protection, ASM International, p 794-802, ISBN 0-87170-705-5.

History

The fourth point is unecessary, and in fact out of place. It does not reveal another step in the history of galvanization, but rather further expounds the third point. GBMorris 12:36, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Electrodeposition

The link to Electrodeposition leads to a disambiguation page... does anyone know to which article it should point, or is it both? --Explodicle 20:11, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Probably both. There doesn't appear to be much difference between the proccesses each article describes. --BigChicken 10:54, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The American Galvanizers Association's website www.galvanizeit.org has over 500 pages of technical information on hot-dip galvanizing. This page is fairly brief and others have mentioned it is not descriptive enough. I would suggest linking to our site for more information. As a non-profit trade association, our goal is to educate first, so the material is straight forward and informative, rather than fluff. 71.218.208.72 21:15, 19 July 2007 (UTC) Melissa Lindsley, Marketing Manager, American Galvanizers Association[reply]

Z/S

As is normal in US English, the title of this article is "Galvanization". However, much of the text uses the Commonwealth English for "galvanisation". Surely there should be some consistency here? As a Commonwealth English user, I would personally prefer that to be used for both the text and the title, but if the title is in US English, so should be the text. Grutness...wha? 10:55, 22 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for catching and pointing this out; I have fixed the lead paragraph of the article, which was inconsistent with the rest of the article and its title. In the future, please feel free to fix it yourself, in due accordance with WP:ENGVAR. Cheers! Reify-tech (talk) 17:08, 22 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]