3 ms·
It should be (relatively) easy to find out which process has occurred here, as it is possible to eliminate electrolysis by grounding all the systems which make
by nickff 13y ago
It should be (relatively) easy to find out which process has occurred here, as it is possible to eliminate electrolysis by grounding all the systems which make contact with the sea.
It is also worth noting that a large percentage of electronic device failures (after they get wet,) are caused by electrolysis. You can see this for yourself if you look at a circuit board after the device got wet and failed; the large green (copper oxide) and white (lead oxide) splotches on the board are symptoms of electrolysis.
- pdonis 13y agoIt should be (relatively) easy to find out which process has occurred here The fact that the article mentions that cathodic protection was not installed on the ship strongly indicates, to me (based on prior US Navy experience), that it was galvanic corrosion. It looks to me like someone signed off on eliminating cathodic protection to save money and didn't realize the technical implications. Not that that exonerates the manufacturer: cathodic protection is not just a special thing for military ships, even small boats need it if they have metal props (because the props are generally a dissimilar metal from the prop shafts, so without cathodic protection the props just dissolve away over time). So the manufacturer should have waved a red flag about removing it.