Materials and Corrosion 2011, 62, No.

9999

DOI: 10.1002/maco.201106072

Corrosion behavior of CuCrFeNiMn high entropy alloy system

in 1 M sulfuric acid solution
B. Ren, Z. X. Liu*, D. M. Li, L. Shi, B. Cai and M. X. Wang
Immersion tests and potentiodynamic polarization measurements were
conducted in 1 M sulfuric acid solution (H2SO4) at ambient temperature (25 8C)
to investigate the corrosion behavior of CuCrFeNiMn alloy system. The results
show that the alloys display a good general corrosion resistance that is mainly
influenced by the Cu content and elemental segregation degree. The corrosion
resistance degrades when increasing Cu content and elemental segregation
degree. Among the tested alloys, the CuCr2Fe2Ni2Mn2 alloy with low Cu content
and elemental segregation degree displays a better general corrosion resistance.
On the contrary, the Cu2CrFe2NiMn2 alloy with high Cu content and elemental
segregation degree exhibits the worst general corrosion resistance.

1 Introduction
In recent years, high-entropy alloys (HEAs) with multi-principal
elements have been widely developed by researches [17]. The
high mixing entropy, lattice distortion, sluggish diffusion, and
cocktail effect, as a result of their multi-principal-element
mixtures, are the core factors influencing the microstructure
and properties of alloys [1]. The microstructure of HEAs is
principally composed of simple solid solution phases [4, 822] or
even amorphous [17, 19, 23, 24] and nano-precipitates [9, 12, 17, 18],
instead of the binary or ternary intermetallic compounds predicted
by traditional alloy theories. The promising properties of these
alloys, such as high strength and hardness [1219, 2328], thermal
stability [23, 2932], wear and corrosion resistance [21, 22, 3337],
contribute to their great potential in many applications, including
the manufacturing of tools, molds, dies, mechanical parts,
furnace parts, etc. [15].
As mentioned above, many works have focused on the
microstructure and mechanical properties of HEAs, but the
researches on HEAs corrosion resistance are comparatively rare.
Among the investigated alloys, the FeCoNiCrCux and AlxCrFe1.5MnNi0.5 alloys exhibit a better corrosion resistance in
3.5 wt% sodium chloride solution and 1 M sulfuric acid solution
as x 0 (x is molar ratio), respectively [35, 36]. As Cu or Al
contents increased, the corrosion resistance of the alloys
degrades. According to the research of Yuan and Shen, a low
content of Cu can enhance the corrosion resistance of alloys by
increasing the passivation ability [38]. Additionally, Cr and Ni
elements can also enhance the corrosion resistance of alloys such
as stainless steel and Ni-alloy. Based on the AlxCrFe1.5MnNi0.5
B. Ren, Z. X. Liu, D. M. Li, L. Shi, B. Cai, M. X. Wang
School of Physics and Engineering, Key Laboratory of Materials Physics,
Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450052 (P. R. China)
E-mail: liuzhongxia@zzu.edu.cn

www.matcorr.com

wileyonlinelibrary.com

alloy, Al is abandoned and Cu is added into the purposed alloy.

Therefore, a novel alloy system composed of Cu, Cr, Fe, Ni, and
Mn, is prepared and expected for possessing a simple structure
and good properties. It has been found that the alloys with higher
Nieq (Nieq Ni% 0.5 Mn% 0.25 Cu%, atomic percentage)
mainly consist of a single FCC (FCC means face-centered-cubic)
phase, and those with higher Creq (Creq Cr% Fe%, atomic
percentage) are mainly composed of FCC BCC (BCC means
body-cencetered-cubic) mixed structures [39]. However, the
corrosion behavior of the CuCrFeNiMn alloy system is relatively
unknown. Therefore, the immersion tests and electrochemical
polarization measurements were conducted in 1 M sulfuric acid
solution for investigating the corrosion behavior of the
CuCrFeNiMn alloy system.

2 Experimental methods
Table 1 presents the chemical composition of the test materials
used in this work. The alloys were prepared through arc melting
and casting under vacuum (0.01 atm). Each alloy was molten four
times to improve homogeneity. The microstructure of the
CuCrFeNiMn alloy system is characterized by a JSM-6700F type
scanning electron microscope (SEM) and XPert PROX type X-ray
diffraction (XRD).
The corrosion resistance of the alloys was evaluated by
immersion tests and potentiodynamic polarization measurements. The specimens were machined to a size of 10 mm 
10 mm  3 mm and then mechanically polished for the immersion tests and potentiodynamic polarization measurements.
Before the immersion tests, all specimens were cleaned in
acetone and dried in a drying cabinet. The weight of specimens
before and after immersion tests were weighed using an electric
balance. Subsequently, the specimens were immersed in 1 M
sulfuric acid solution at room temperature for 100 h. Afterwards,

2011 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

Ren, Liu, Li, Shi, Cai, and Wang

Materials and Corrosion 2011, 62, No. 9999

Table 1. Chemical composition (at%) of the CuCrFeNiMn alloy system and stainless steel 304

Alloy
CuCrFeNiMn (S1)
CuCrFeNi2Mn2 (S2)
CuCr2Fe2NiMn (S3)
CuCr2Fe2Ni2Mn2 (S4)
Cu2CrFe2NiMn2 (S5)
Cu2CrFe2Ni2Mn (S6)
Cu2Cr2FeNiMn2 (S7)
Cu2Cr2FeNi2Mn (S8)
Stainless steel 304

Cu

Cr

Fe

Ni

Mn

Si

Co

20
14.29
14.29
11.11
25
25
25
25
0.01

20
14.29
28.57
22.22
12.5
12.5
25
25
0.35

20
14.29
28.57
22.22
25
25
12.5
12.5
1.27

20
28.57
14.29
22.22
12.5
25
12.5
25
0.14

20
28.57
14.29
22.22
25
12.5
25
12.5
0.03

0.04

0.002

0.01

the corroded specimens were cleaned through ultrasonic washing

to remove loosely adherent corrosion products. The surface
morphologies of the corroded alloys were observed using an SEM
in order to identify the types of corrosion. The semi-quantitative
analyses of the chemical composition of the alloys were carried
out in an SEM equipped with energy dispersive spectrometry
(EDS).
Potentiodynamic polarization measurements were carried
out in a typical three-electrode cell set-up, with the specimen as a
working electrode, a Hg/Hg2SO4 electrode (saturated K2SO4)
with E 0.640 VSHE as the reference electrode, and a platinum
counter electrode. The potentiodynamic tests were performed in
1 M sulfuric acid solution at 25 8C. The potential and current were
measured using an M273A type potentiostat/galvanostat with a
computer-controlled electrochemical interface, which allowed
continuous monitoring of the potential and total current.
Potentiodynamic tests were performed at a scan rate of 1 mV/s.
Electrochemical characteristic parameters, such as electrochemical corrosion potential (Ecorr), corrosion current density (icorr),
primary passive potential (Epp), and critical passive current
density (icrit), can be obtained by evaluating polarization curves.
Before testing, specimens were cathodically polarized to a
potential of 0.2 VSHE for 10 min to reduce any existing surface
oxides. Afterward, scans were initiated and polarizations were
automatically terminated when the anodic current (Ia) reached
100 mA or when E reached 1.0 V higher than the corrosion
potential (Ecorr), whichever occurred first. Following the
polarization experiment, the specimens were cleaned by
ultrasonic washing and then dried in a drying cabinet.
Subsequently, the morphology of the corroded surface of each
specimen was examined by SEM.

3 Results and discussion

3.1 Microstructural characterization
The typical SEM micrographs and XRD patterns of the
CuCrFeNiMn alloy system are shown in Figs. 1 and 2,
respectively. All alloys consist of dendrite (DR) and interdendrite
(ID) structures, which were identified by XRD and EDS as simple
FCC or FCC BCC solid solution phases. The crystal structures
of S2, S4, and S6 have a single FCC phase, whereas those of the
other alloys have FCC BCC mixed structures.

2011 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

Figure 1. Typical SEM micrographs of the CuCrFeNiMn alloy system:

(a) CuCr2Fe2Ni2Mn2 (S4), (b) Cu2CrFe2NiMn2 (S5)

3.2 Corrosion behavior of the CuCrFeNiMn alloy system

3.2.1 Immersion tests
The corrosion rate of the CuCrFeNiMn alloy system and stainless
steel 304 in 1 M sulfuric acid solution for the 100-h immersion

www.matcorr.com

Materials and Corrosion 2011, 62, No. 9999

Corrosion behavior of CuCrFeNiMn high entropy alloy system

Figure 2. XRD patterns of the CuCrFeNiMn alloy system [38]

tests at 25 -C can be calculated by Equation (1) [40]:

Corrosion ratemm=y

8:76  104  W
tAD

(1)

where W is the total weight loss (in g) after the exposure time t
(in h), D the density of the alloy (in g/cm3), and A (in cm2) is the

surface area of the specimen. The measured densities for S1

through S8 and stainless steel 304 are 8.01 g/cm3, 8.00 g/cm3,
7.83 g/cm3, 7.78 g/cm3, 7.91 g/cm3, 7.64 g/cm3, 7.41 g/cm3,
7.75 g/cm3, and 7.90 g/cm3, respectively.
Table 2 shows the corrosion rate of the CuCrFeNiMn alloy
system and stainless steel 304 in 1 M sulfuric acid solution for the
100-h immersion tests at 25 -C. It can be seen that the
CuCrFeNiMn alloy system displays a better general corrosion
resistance as compared to stainless steel 304. Among the alloys,
S4 and S5 present the best and worst general corrosion resistance,
respectively.
The typical surface appearances of the CuCrFeNiMn alloy
system and stainless steel 304 after immersion tests in 1 M
sulfuric acid solution are shown in Fig. 3. The corroded surfaces
of the CuCrFeNiMn alloy system display numerous DR and ID
structures. However, the surface of stainless steel presents a steplike corroded pattern. Therefore, the major corrosion types of the
CuCrFeNiMn alloy system are general corrosion and intergranular corrosion, while the major corrosion type of the stainless
steel 304 is general corrosion.
The corrosion resistance of the alloys is mainly affected by
the components and elemental segregation degree. The effect of
components on the corrosion resistance is shown in Fig. 4. In
general, the corrosion resistance degrades with the increasing of
Cu content. The corrosion rate is low and little affected by the
components when the content of Cu is low. However, when the

Table 2. Corrosion rate (calculated from immersion tests) of the CuCrFeNiMn alloy system and stainless steel 304 in 1 M sulfuric acid solution for
100-h immersion tests at 25 8C

Corrosion rate (mm/yr)

S1

S2

S3

S4

S5

S6

S7

S8

304

0.128

0.107

0.150

0.074

0.473

0.261

0.308

0.239

1.710

Figure 3. Typical surface appearances of alloys after immersion tests in 1 M sulfuric acid solution for 100-h: (a) CuCrFeNiMn (S1), (b) CuCr2Fe2Ni2Mn2
(S4), (c) Cu2CrFe2NiMn2 (S5), (d) stainless steel 304

www.matcorr.com

2011 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

Ren, Liu, Li, Shi, Cai, and Wang

Materials and Corrosion 2011, 62, No. 9999

Figure 4. Relationship between corrosion rate (calculated from immersion tests) and bulk elemental composition of CuCrFeNiMn alloy system: (a)
CrCu, (b) NiCu, (c) MnCu, (d) FeCu

content of Cu is high (>20 at%), Cr and Fe can significantly

enhance the corrosion resistance. As the Cu content further
increased, Fe and Mn have a negative effect on the corrosion
resistance. The negative effect of Cu content on the corrosion
resistance is shown more clearly in Fig. 5. The corrosion rate of
the alloys increases with increase in Cu content, which is
consistent with Ref. [35]. The contents of Cu and Cr have dual
influence on the corrosion resistance. On the one hand, Cu is in

Figure 5. Effect of Cu content on the corrosion rate (calculated from

immersion tests) of CuCrFeNiMn alloy system

2011 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

favor of the formation of single FCC structure which can reduce

the action of galvanic corrosion, and Cr is easy to form a passive
film to improve corrosion resistance. On the other hand, the
elemental segregation and mixed structures of FCC BCC
enhance the action of galvanic corrosion. Therefore, the
competition results of the negative and positive factors will
determine the corrosion resistance.

Figure 6. Influence of elemental segregation degree on the corrosion

rate (calculated from immersion tests) of CuCrFeNiMn alloy system. (The
order of alloys on the X-axis is arranged according to the Cu content.)

www.matcorr.com

Materials and Corrosion 2011, 62, No. 9999

Corrosion behavior of CuCrFeNiMn high entropy alloy system

The influence of elemental segregation degree on the

corrosion rate is shown in Fig. 6. The elemental segregation
degree is defined as follows:
SR

CDR
1
CID

(2)

where CDR and CID stand for the concentration of element in DR

and ID regions, respectively. The larger the value of elemental
segregation degree, the higher the elemental concentration in DR
regions. On the contrary, the smaller the value of elemental
segregation degree, the higher the elemental concentration in ID
regions. The segregation degree of Cr (in ID regions) and Cu (in
DR regions) is relatively higher as compared to that of other
elements. This means that the formation of Cu-rich and Crdepleted zones is accompanied by the formation of Cr-rich and
Cu-depleted zones, which results in the galvanic corrosion
between the ID and DR. And the electrochemical action causes
attack along the ID in the alloys with higher elemental
segregation. From Fig. 6, the S5 alloy, with the most serious
segregation of Cu and Mn in DR regions and Fe and Cr in ID
regions, displays the worst general corrosion resistance. In
contrast, the S2 and S4 alloys, with little elemental segregation
and low Cu content, show a better general corrosion resistance. In
addition, the uniform structure (single FCC phase) contributes to
the corrosion resistance. However, the S7 alloy, with little
elemental segregation and low Cu content but mixed structure
(FCC BCC phases) exhibits a worse corrosion resistance.
Therefore, the structure of alloys is a major contributor, too.
Non-uniform structure and high elemental segregation will result
in more serious galvanic corrosion. From Table 3, the EDS results
suggest that Cu has been dissolved as a result of galvanic
corrosion. Especially, the formation of sulfocompound in the S5
alloy indicates that the action of galvanic corrosion that stems
from the elemental segregation is more serious.
3.2.2 Potentiodynamic polarization measurements
As mentioned above, the general corrosion resistance of the alloys
is mainly related to the content of Cu and elemental segregation
degree. Two typical alloys are adopted to investigate its
electrochemical behaviors. One is S4 that has a uniform FCC
structure, lowest Cu content and higher Cr and Ni contents.
Another is S5 that has a mixed structure of FCC BCC, the
highest Cu content and the lowest Cr and Ni contents. For

Figure 7. Polarization curves of CuCr2Fe2Ni2Mn2 (S4), Cu2CrFe2NiMn2

(S5), and stainless steel 304 in 1 M sulfuric acid solution

comparison, the polarization measurement of stainless steel 304

is also conducted in the same conditions. The polarization curves
and electrochemical characteristic parameters for S4, S5 and
stainless steel 304 in 1 M sulfuric acid solution are shown in Fig. 7
and Table 4, respectively. Corrosion rate obtained from electrochemical polarization measurements can be calculated by
Equation (3) [40]:
Corrosion ratemm=y

3:27  10-3  icorr  EW

D

(3)

where icorr (in mA/cm2) is the corrosion current density, EW the

equivalent weight of the alloy, and D (in g/cm3) is the density of
the alloy. EW is defined as follows [34, 41],
EW

1
 
P f i ni
ai

(4)

where fi, ni, and ai are mass fraction, electrons exchanged, and
atomic weight, respectively, of the ith alloying element. The EW
for S4, S5 and stainless steel 304 are 20.82, 21.51, and 24.28,
respectively. The corrosion rate presented in Table 4 delineates
that the results obtained from immersion tests and polarization
measurements are in correspondence with each other. It can be

Table 3. EDS results (at%) of the CuCrFeNiMn (S1), CuCr2Fe2Ni2Mn2 (S4), and Cu2CrFe2NiMn2 (S5) alloys after immersion in 1 M sulfuric acid
solution for 100-h

CuCrFeNiMn (S1)

Cr
Mn
Fe
Ni
Cu
O
S

CuCr2Fe2Ni2Mn2 (S4)

Cu2CrFe2NiMn2 (S5)

Spectrum 1

Spectrum 2

Spectrum 1

Spectrum 2

Spectrum 1

Spectrum 2

32.4
12.0
32.4
18.2
5.0

23.4
10.0
21.4
16.7
2.8
25.8

30.0
9.1
30.7
25.6
4.7

39.7
24.9
21.5
13.9

3.0
30.4
7.4
13.8
45.4

5.3
8.8
10.8
7.7
11.2
52.2
4.0

www.matcorr.com

2011 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

Ren, Liu, Li, Shi, Cai, and Wang

Materials and Corrosion 2011, 62, No. 9999

Table 4. Electrochemical parameters and corrosion rate of the CuCr2Fe2Ni2Mn2 (S4), Cu2CrFe2NiMn2 (S5), and stainless steel 304 in 1 M sulfuric
acid at 25 8C, E (V) versus VSHE

CuCr2Fe2Ni2Mn2 (S4)
Cu2CrFe2NiMn2 (S5)
Stainless steel 304

Ecorr (V)

icorr (A/cm2)

Epp (V)

icrit (A/cm2)

Corrosion rate (mm/y)

0.73
0.90
0.86

2.09  106
4.02  105
5.10  105

0.64
0.86
0.15

2.33  105
3.24  104
1.87  105

0.02
0.36
0.51

seen that the corrosion current density for S4 and S5 is less than
that of stainless steel 304. It is apparent that the S4 and S5 alloys
are more resistant to general corrosion in 1 M sulfuric acid
solution than stainless steel 304. The Ecorr for S4 is 0.17 and
0.13 VSHE higher than that for S5 and stainless steel 304,
respectively. The corrosion current density for S4 is lower than
that of S5 and stainless steel 304 about 20 and 25 times
respectively, as shown in Table 4. The corrosion rate of S4 is
far below that of S5 and stainless steel 304. Therefore, the S4
alloy displays the best corrosion resistance as compared to other
alloys.

The corroded surfaces shown in Fig. 8 present DR, ID

structures, and numerous corrosion shallow pitting. The
corrosion extent of S4 is slight, while that in S5 is greater.
Higher galvanic corrosion results from a multiphase structure
and component segregation may be the main reason. Firstly, the
uniform structure of S4 reduces the effect of galvanic corrosion.
Secondly, higher contents of Ni and Cr make it easy to form
protective film [e.g., NiO, Ni(OH)2, NiSO4, and Cr2O3] which
prevent the alloying element from coming into contact with
sulfuric acid solution [4244]. This suppresses the continued
corrosion attack during anodic polarization. Moreover, the lower
Cu content and elemental uniform distribution can also enhance
the corrosion resistance by increasing the passivation ability [38,
45, 46]. However, for S5, poor corrosion resistance may be
attributed to galvanic corrosion that results from their nonuniform structure. First, the low anode/cathode surface area ratio
results in the galvanic corrosion between DR and ID. Electrochemical corrosion is initiated at the ID zone and propagates
along the boundaries of the DR before finally forming DR and ID
structures, and even numerous corrosion pits (as shown in
Fig. 8). Second, the high Cu content and non-uniform
microstructure also enhance the galvanic corrosion. It is possible
that many of Cu atoms combine with the dissolved oxygen, and
then form a metastable oxide films. It is easy to further
decompose due to a lack of sufficiently stable films (e.g., NiO
and Cr2O3). Therefore, anodic dissolution is also accelerated.

4 Conclusions
Immersion tests and potentiodynamic polarization measurements show that the CuCrFeNiMn alloy system displays a good
general corrosion resistance which is mainly influenced by the Cu
content, elemental segregation degree and structure of the alloys.
The major corrosion types of the alloys are general corrosion and
intergranular corrosion.
Low Cu content and elemental segregation degree result in
good corrosion resistance. The uniform structure contributes to
the corrosion resistance, too. However, high elemental segregation degree of Cu, Cr, and Fe causes galvanic corrosion in the ID
zones, thus degrading the corrosion resistance.
The CuCr2Fe2Ni2Mn2 (S4) alloy with a low Cu content and
elemental segregation degree displays an excellent general
corrosion resistance, while the Cu2CrFe2NiMn2 (S5) alloy with
a high Cu content and elemental segregation degree displays the
worst general corrosion resistance.
Figure 8. Corroded surfaces of the typical alloys after potentiodynamic
polarization measurements in 1 M sulfuric acid solution:
(a) CuCr2Fe2Ni2Mn2 (S4), (b) Cu2CrFe2NiMn2 (S5)

2011 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

Acknowledgements: The authors would like to acknowledge the

financial support by the Scientific Research Foundation of
Excellent Doctoral Dissertation of Zhengzhou University.

www.matcorr.com

Materials and Corrosion 2011, 62, No. 9999

5 References
[1] J. W. Yeh, Ann. Chim. Sci. Mater. 2006, 31, 633.
[2] W. H. Wu, C. C. Yang, J. W. Yeh, Ann. Chim. Sci. Mater. 2006,
31, 737.
[3] K. H. Cheng, C. H. Lai, J. W. Yeh, Ann. Chim. Sci. Mater.
2006, 31, 723.
[4] B. Cantor, I. T. H. Chang, P. Knight, A. J. B. Vincent, Mater.
Sci. Eng., A 2004, 375377, 213.
[5] B. Cantor, Ann. Chim. Sci. Mater. 2007, 32, 245.
[6] B. Cantor, K. B. Kim, P. J. Warren, Mater. Sci. Forum. 2002,
386388, 27.
[7] B. Cantor, F. Audebert, M. Galano, K. B. Kim, I. C. Stone,
P. J. Warren, J. Metastable Nanocryst. Mater. 2005, 2425, 1.
[8] Y. Zhang, Y. J. Zhou, J. P. Lin, G. L. Chen, P. K. Liaw, Adv.
Eng. Mater. 2008, 10, 534.
[9] C. J. Tong, Y. L. Chen, S. K. Chen, J. W. Yeh, T. T. Shun, C. H.
Tsau, S. J. Lin, S. Y. Chang, Metall. Mater. Trans. A 2005, 36,
881.
[10] F. J. Wang, Y. Zhang, Mater. Sci. Eng., A 2008, 496, 214.
[11] C. Li, J. C. Li, M. Zhao, Q. Jiang, J. Alloys Compd. 2009, 475,
752.
[12] K. B. Zhang, Z. Y. Fu, J. Y. Zhang, W. M. Wang, H. Wang,
Y. C. Wang, Q. J. Zhang, J. Shi, Mater. Sci. Eng., A 2009, 508,
214.
[13] J. M. Zhu, H. F. Zhang, H. M. Fu, A. M. Wang, H. Li, Z. Q.
Hu, J. Alloys Compd. 2010, 497, 52.
[14] X. F. Wang, Y. Zhang, Y. Qiao, G. L. Chen, Intermetallics
2007, 15, 357.
[15] T. T. Shun, C. H. Hung, C. F. Lee, J. Alloy. Compd. 2010, 495,
55.
[16] Y. J. Zhou, Y. Zhang, T. N. Kim, G. L. Chen, Mater. Lett. 2008,
62, 2673.
[17] T. K. Chen, M. S. Wong, T. T. Shun, J. W. Yeh, Surf. Coat.
Technol. 2005, 200, 1361.
[18] H. W. Chang, P. K. Huang, A. Davison, J. W. Yeh, C. H. Tsau,
C. C. Yang, Thin Solid Films 2008, 516, 6402.
[19] C. H. Lai, S. J. Lin, J. W. Yeh, S. Yi Chang, Surf. Coat. Technol.
2006, 201, 3275.
[20] U. S. Hsu, U. D. Hung, J. W. Yeh, S. K. Chen, Y. S. Huang,
C. C. Yang, Mater. Sci. Eng., A 2007, 460461, 403.
[21] M. R. Chen, S. J. Lin, J. W. Yeh, S. K. Chen, Y. S. Huang,
M. H. Chuang, Metall. Mater. Trans. A 2006, 37, 1363.

Corrosion behavior of CuCrFeNiMn high entropy alloy system

[22] J. M. Wu, S. J. Lin, J. W. Yeh, S. K. Chen, Y. S. Huang, H. C.

Chen, Wear 2006, 261, 513.
[23] Y. S. Huang, L. Chen, H. W. Lui, M. H. Cai, J. W. Yeh, Mater.
Sci. Eng., A 2007, 457, 77.
[24] T. K. Chen, T. T. Shun, J. W. Yeh, M. S. Wong, Surf. Coat.
Technol. 2004, 188189, 193.
[25] C. J. Tong, M. R. Chen, S. K. Chen, J. W. Yeh, T. T. Shun, S. J.
Lin, S. Y. Chang, Metall. Mater. Trans. A 2005, 36, 1263.
[26] Y. J. Zhou, Y. Zhang, Y. L. Wang, G. L. Chen, Mater. Sci.
Eng., A 2007, 454455, 260.
[27] Y. J. Zhou, Y. Zhang, F. J. Wang, Y. L. Wang, G. L. Chen,
J. Alloys Compd. 2008, 46, 201.
[28] B. S. Li, Y. P. Wang, M. X. Ren, C. Yang, H. Z. Fu, Mater. Sci.
Eng., A 2008, 498, 482.
[29] S. Y. Chang, M. K. Chen, Thin Solid Films 2009, 517, 4961.
[30] M. H. Tsai, C. W. Wang, C. H. Lai, J. W. Yeh, J. Y. Gan, Appl.
Phys. Lett. 2008, 92, 1.
[31] T. T. Shun, Y. C. Du, J. Alloys Compd. 2009, 478, 269.
[32] L. H. Wen, H. C. Kou, J. S. Li, H. Chang, X. Y. Xue, L. Zhou,
Intermetallics 2009, 17, 266.
[33] Y. Y. Chen, U. T. Hong, H. C. Shih, J. W. Yeh, T. Duval,
Corros. Sci. 2005, 47, 2679.
[34] Y. Y. Chen, T. Duval, U. D. Hung, J. W. Yeh, H. C. Shih,
Corros. Sci. 2005, 47, 2257.
[35] Y. J. Hsu, W. C. Chiang, J. K. Wu, Mater. Chem. Phys. 2005,
92, 112.
[36] C. P. Lee, C. C. Chang, Y. Y. Chen, J. W. Yeh, H. C. Shih,
Corros. Sci. 2008, 50, 2053.
[37] C. P. Lee, Y. Y. Chen, C. Y. Hsu, J. W. Yeh, H. C. Shih, Thin
Solid Films 2008, 51, 1301.
[38] J. N. Yuan, L. C. W. H. Shen, Corros. Sci. 1992, 33, 851.
[39] B. Ren, Z. X. Liu, D. M. Li, L. Shi, B. Cai, M. X. Wang,
J. Alloys Compd. 2010, 493, 148.
[40] ASTM Standard G31-72, ASTM, PA, 2004.
[41] S. W. Dean, Mater. Perform. 1987, 26, 51.
[42] K. M. Ismail, A. M. Fathi, W. A. Badawy, Corrosion 2004, 60,
795.
[43] C. F. Zinola, A. M. Castro Luna, Corros. Sci. 1995, 37, 1919.
[44] M. R. F. Hurtado, P. T. A. Sumodjo, A. V. Benedetti,
Electrochim. Acta 2003, 48, 2791.
[45] A. A. Hermas, K. Ogura, T. Adachi, Electrochim. Acta 1995,
40, 837.
[46] D. Itzhak, P. Peled, Corros. Sci. 1986, 26, 49.
(Received: January 12, 2011)
(Accepted: March 14, 2011)

www.matcorr.com

W6072

2011 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim