Comment on “Sodium Hydroxide Anodization of Ti-6AI-4V Adherends”, {J. Adhesion 20,283 (1987)}

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
The recent article “Sodium Hydroxide Anodization of Ti-6A1-4V Adherends” by Filbey, Wightman and Progar' is commendable in that a wide variety of analytical techniques has been used to study the surface preparation first reported by Kennedy, Kohler and Poole. We too have conducted in-depth studies of surface preparations for Ti-6A1-4V adherends with recent emphasis on chromic acid and sodium hydroxide anodization (CAA and SHA, respectively). Our initial results were in agreement with those presented by Filbey et al. (hereafter “the authors”) regarding surface composition and oxide sputter-etching efficiency. However, the results of more detailed work have shown that these observations (and the subsequent conclusions) may be influenced by instrumentation effects. We wish to highlight these briefly.

This publication has 6 references indexed in Scilit: