Talk:Galvanization: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 16:33, 15 March 2018

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Galvanization article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Metalworking C‑class Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Metalworking, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Metalworking on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MetalworkingWikipedia:WikiProject MetalworkingTemplate:WikiProject MetalworkingMetalworking articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

History of Science C‑class Mid‑importance

	History of science portal This article is part of the History of Science WikiProject, an attempt to improve and organize the history of science content on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. You can also help with the History of Science Collaboration of the Month.History of ScienceWikipedia:WikiProject History of ScienceTemplate:WikiProject History of Sciencehistory of science articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Chemistry Start‑class Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemistry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of chemistry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChemistryWikipedia:WikiProject ChemistryTemplate:WikiProject ChemistryChemistry articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Technology C‑class

	Technology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

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 (talk • contribs) 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]

^ M.G. Fontana & N.D. Greene, Corrosion Engineering, 2nd Ed., McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1978, p 29-34, ISBN 0-07-021461-1.
^ 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]

Add a link to our website

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]

The reason I didn't fix it myself is I felt it needed further discussion, given that the problem exists in a range of articles on the subject of galvanis/zation, some of them using the Commonwealth spelling in the title (e.g., Corrugated galvanised iron). Some consistency is likely needed across all these articles, and ENGVAR makes it clear that it is only for inconsistency within articles (WP:ENGVAR's stress). Under those circumstances I brought it here for discussion before anyone decided to take it into their own hands by assuming WP:ENGVAR covered the problem. Grutness...wha? 23:04, 22 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the situation you describe appears to be long-standing. Until somebody takes on the project of getting a consensus on all the related articles, at least we should try to keep each article self-consistent. You're welcome to propose a more comprehensive solution, starting with compiling a list of all the affected articles. Cheers! Reify-tech (talk) 11:21, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A few years ago I would have done just that, but I've semi-retired from most Wikipedia work, and have found through long experience that there is an inability to gain consensus 99% of the time a specific "project for gaining consensus" enters the picture. It's usually far quicker to try to start a discussion on a talk page - which is what I've tried to do here. Pat solutions aren't always the best way around this sort of situation. Grutness...wha? 23:24, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We should follow WP:ENGVAR (and by implication fix consistency within articles, but leave inconsistency between articles). ENGVAR exists, not to fix linguistic issues, but to avoid perennial edit wars. There has recently been a tendency that "loudest edit warrior wins" on US/UK spelling issues, and that's a bad one. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:37, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Problems in galvanising big diameter poles

We have a galvanising plant of size 12m x 1m x1.25m deep kettle. We have to gal a tapered pole having a 1sqm by 50mm thick base plate welded to this 860 dia pole of length 10 meters.We are getting a smooth finish but in the top inner one third portion it remains in black condition even though the entire pole sinks into the zinc. The width is about 250mm with about 2.5m length. We have tried dipping in various angles but it is not satisfactory. Some say it is an air lock. With this kettle dimension can any suggestion be made for which we will be grateful. Regards Krishan Chopra Director Kavcon engineers p ltd. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.97.48.248 (talk) 12:32, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Galvanization. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140222165139/http://www.galvanizing.org.uk/about_galvanizing/corrosion_performance/atmospheric_resistance to http://www.galvanizing.org.uk/about_galvanizing/corrosion_performance/atmospheric_resistance

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:40, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 15 March 2018

It has been proposed in this section that Galvanization be renamed and moved to Galvanizing.

A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil.

Please use {{subst:requested move}}. Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly.

Links: current log • target log • direct move

Galvanization → Galvanizing – The lead says "galvanizing" is the more commonly-used term. The article uses it more often than the rather obscure "galvanization". Please don't let this be a grammatically correct but factually wrong thing? Lithopsian (talk) 16:33, 15 March 2018 (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.

[1]

[2]

@@ Line 82: / Line 82: @@
 Cheers.—[[User:InternetArchiveBot|'''<span style="color:darkgrey;font-family:monospace">InternetArchiveBot</span>''']] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">([[User talk:InternetArchiveBot|Report bug]])</span> 13:40, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
+== Requested move 15 March 2018 ==
+{{requested move/dated|Galvanizing}}
+[[:Galvanization]] → {{no redirect|Galvanizing}} – The lead says "galvanizing" is the more commonly-used term.  The article uses it more often than the rather obscure "galvanization".  Please don't let this be a grammatically correct but factually wrong thing?  <!-- [[User:DoNotArchiveUntil]] 16:33, 29 March 2018 (UTC) -->{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|1522341201}} [[User:Lithopsian|Lithopsian]] ([[User talk:Lithopsian|talk]]) 16:33, 15 March 2018 (UTC)