| Literature DB >> 31844736 |
O Olawale1, J O Bello1, B T Ogunsemi2, U C Uchella1, A P Oluyori3, N K Oladejo4.
Abstract
The inhibiting effects of Chicken Nails Extract (CNE) on Mild Steel corrosion in 2M H2SO4 were investigated in this study. The effect of the concentration of inhibitor (0.5-1.5 g/l), time (5-8 h) and temperature (40-70oc) on Inhibition efficiency were investigated using Response Surface Methodology. The Physiochemical analysis and proximate analysis of the CNE were investigated; the result showed that organic constituents were present which made the Chicken nails extract a good inhibitor. The rate of corrosion increases as time and temperature increase while the Inhibition efficiency was discovered to increase as the inhibitor concentration increases. The optimum conditions obtained were temperature 63.63 °C, time 5 h and inhibitor concentration of 0.1 g/l. The optimum Inhibition Efficiency at these optimum conditions was predicted to be 74.04%. The micrographs result of Scanning Electron Micrographs analysis showed that in the presence of the inhibitor, there was a passive layer of a film formed on the surface. This study revealed that Chicken Nails Extract is a potentially good green inhibitor for Mild steel corrosion in 2M H2SO4.Entities:
Keywords: Agriculture; Chemistry; Corrosion; Environmental science; Inhibition; Materials science; Optimization; Weight loss
Year: 2019 PMID: 31844736 PMCID: PMC6895698 DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e02821
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Heliyon ISSN: 2405-8440
Experimental range of independent variables with different levels for the CN. Inhibition of Chicken nails Extract on mIld Steel in H2SO4 solution.
| Independent Variables | Factor Levels | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Time(hrs) | 5 | 6.5 | 8 |
| Temperature(°c) | 40 | 55 | 70 |
| Inhibition Concentration (g/l) | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.5 |
Central Composite Design factors and levels#.
| Run | Factor 1 | Factor 2 | Factor 3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 5 | 40 | 1.5 |
| 2 | 8 | 40 | 0.5 |
| 3 | 5 | 40 | 0.5 |
| 4 | 5 | 70 | 0.5 |
| 5 | 8 | 70 | 0.5 |
| 6 | 5 | 70 | 1.5 |
| 7 | 8 | 70 | 1.5 |
| 8 | 5 | 55 | 1 |
| 9 | 8 | 55 | 1 |
| 10 | 6.5 | 55 | 0.5 |
| 11 | 6.5 | 55 | 1.5 |
| 12 | 6.5 | 55 | 1 |
| 13 | 6.5 | 55 | 1 |
| 14 | 6.5 | 55 | 1.5 |
| 15 | 8 | 40 | 0.5 |
| 16 | 8 | 70 | 0.5 |
| 17 | 6.5 | 55 | 1 |
| 18 | 8 | 55 | 1 |
| 19 | 6.5 | 55 | 1 |
| 20 | 6.5 | 55 | 0.5 |
Proximate analysis.
| Proximate | Result |
|---|---|
| Protein | Present |
| Moisture | Present |
| Ash | Present |
| Glyceride | Present |
| Lysine | Present |
| Nitrogen | Present |
| Amino acids | Present |
| Fat | Present |
Qualitative Determination of Physiochemicals present in the methanol and ethanol extract of chicken nails.
| Reagent | Color change | Result |
|---|---|---|
| Wagner | Brown ppt. | + |
| 10% KOH | Dirty white ppt. | - |
| 10% NaOH | Yellow ppt. | ++ |
| Distilled water | A persistent foam | + |
NB: +++ = highly ++ = moderately present; + = low present; - = Not present.
RSM result of the corrosion inhibition of Mild Steel in H2SO4 by Chicken Nails Extract (CNE).
| Run | Factor 1 | Factor 2 | Factor 3 | Weight Loss(g) | Response 1 | Response 2 Inhibition efficiency (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 5 | 40 | 1.5 | 0.144 | 0.072 | 2.30 |
| 2 | 8 | 40 | 0.5 | 0.758 | 0.236 | 13.03 |
| 3 | 5 | 40 | 0.5 | 0.222 | 0.111 | 3.50 |
| 4 | 5 | 70 | 0.5 | 4.774 | 3.467 | 68.08 |
| 5 | 8 | 70 | 0.5 | 4.232 | 1.322 | 60.4 |
| 6 | 5 | 70 | 1.5 | 4.560 | 2.28 | 69.61 |
| 7 | 8 | 70 | 1.5 | 4.422 | 1.38 | 67.8 |
| 8 | 5 | 55 | 1 | 2.166 | 1.083 | 31.24 |
| 9 | 8 | 55 | 1 | 4.890 | 1.528 | 74.06 |
| 10 | 6.5 | 55 | 0.5 | 4.512 | 1.735 | 70.67 |
| 11 | 6.5 | 55 | 1.5 | 2.622 | 1.008 | 39.28 |
| 12 | 6.5 | 55 | 1 | 3.426 | 1.317 | 54.74 |
| 13 | 6.5 | 55 | 1 | 3.574 | 1.374 | 53.93 |
| 14 | 6.5 | 55 | 1.5 | 2.622 | 1.008 | 39.28 |
| 15 | 8 | 40 | 0.5 | 0.758 | 0.236 | 13.03 |
| 16 | 8 | 70 | 0.5 | 4.232 | 1.322 | 60.4 |
| 17 | 6.5 | 55 | 1 | 3.426 | 1.317 | 54.74 |
| 18 | 8 | 55 | 1 | 4.890 | 1.528 | 74.06 |
| 19 | 6.5 | 55 | 1 | 3.426 | 1.317 | 54.74 |
| 20 | 6.5 | 55 | 0.5 | 4.512 | 1.735 | 70.67 |
ANOVA for the corrosion inhibition of Mild Steel in H2SO4 by Chicken Nails Extract.
| ANOVA for Response Surface Quadratic model; corrosion rate Analysis of variance table [Partial sum of squares] | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Source | Sum of squares | Degree of freedom (DF) | Mean of squares | F- values | P-value Prob > F | |
| Model | 10.78 | 9 | 1.20 | 15.66 | <0.0001 | Significant |
| A(time) | 0.12 | 1 | 0.12 | 1.56 | 0.2398 | |
| B(temperature) | 4.34 | 1 | 4.34 | 56.73 | <0.0001 | |
| C(inhibitor concentration) | 0.10 | 1 | 0.10 | 1.35 | 0.2725 | |
| A2 | 9.357 | 1 | 9.357 | 0.12 | 0.7338 | |
| B2 | 0.038 | 1 | 0.038 | 0.50 | 0.4965 | |
| C2 | 1.352 | 1 | 1.352 | 0.018 | 0.8969 | |
| AB | 1.93 | 1 | 1.93 | 25.30 | 0.0005 | |
| AC | 0.60 | 1 | 0.60 | 7.79 | 0.0191 | |
| BC | 0.37 | 1 | 0.37 | 4.83 | 0.0526 | |
| Residual | 0.76 | 10 | 0.076 | |||
| Lack of fit | 0.76 | 2 | 0.38 | |||
| Pure error | 3.249 | 8 | 4.061 | |||
| Cor. Total | 11.55 | 19 | ||||
| Std. Dev. | 0.28 | R- squared | 0.9338 | |||
| Mean | 1.27 | Adj R- squared | 0.8741 | |||
| C.V% | 21.75 | Pred. R-squared | 0.6686 | |||
| Press | Adeq. Precision | 18.679 | ||||
Fig. 1Effects of time and temperature on corrosion rate of CNE on Mild Steel at constant inhibitor concentration.
Fig. 2Effects of time and inhibitor concentration on corrosion rate of CNE on Mild Steel at constant temperature.
Fig. 3Effects of temperature and inhibitor concentration on corrosion rate of CNE on Mild Steel at constant time.
Fig. 4Plot of residuals values versus the predicted experimental values for corrosion rate of CNE on Mild Steel.
Fig. 5Coupon without inhibitor (blank metal).
Fig. 6Coupon with inhibitor that gave highest inhibition efficiency.
Fig. 7Coupon with inhibitor via the optimal process variables.
Fig. 8(a–c) SEM macrographs of the surface morphologies of: (a) bank mild steel; (b) mild steel obtained via the highest inhibition efficiency and (c) mild steel obtained at the optimal predicted level which was validated.