3.1. Electrochemical Studies
3.1.1. Open Circuit Potential
It is significant to provide the steady-state potential of the metal surface before the electrochemical tests as it helps to understand the behavior of metals in electrochemical reactions in a given medium. The variation of open circuit potential (OCP) with time is represented in Fig.1 and it is observed that MS acquired steady-state OCP in 1800 sec. The OCP value at different concentrations of PMSE is found to increase from -0.54 V and reach a steady state in the range of -0.51 V in 0.5 M HCl. The increase in OCP value attributes to the rupture of the pre-immersion air-formed oxide layer while constant potential value contributes to the further thickening of the oxide layer [21,22]. The small positive variation in potential overtime for the inhibited solution compared to the blank attributed to the formation of corrosion products and/or adsorption of inhibitor molecules on the metal surface that offered partial protection of the material [23, 24].
3.1.2. Tafel polarization (TP) Studies
The influence of different concentrations of PMSE on MS corrosion was monitored by the TP method and the resulting TP plots for the metal dissolution in various concentrations of HCl solution are depicted in Fig.2 (a). The icorr and Ecorr are obtained by the linear extrapolation of cathodic and anodic curves and the point of intersection corresponding to the x-axis and y-axis respectively. It is observed from the Tafel plots that the addition of PMSE to the acid environment leads to the shift in cathodic and anodic current curves toward the lower current densities thereby causing a substantial reduction in the CR [26].
The CR, the degree of surface coverage (ϴ), and the % IE were obtained from Eqs. (1), (2) and (3) respectively [27].
Where 3270 is constant that describes the unit for the corrosion rate, icorr= corrosion current density in μA/cm2, d= density of corroding material in g/cm3, EW = equivalent weight of corroding metal (atomic weight/ number of electrons transferred per atom.
where, θ is the surface coverage, icorr and icorr(inhi) are the corrosion current densities with and without PMSE respectively [28]. The results of the PDP technique are recorded in Table 1.
It is evident from the literature if the difference in Ecorr is greater or lesser than ±85 mV compared to the Ecorr of the uninhibited solution then the inhibitor can be regarded as an anodic or cathodic type [29]. Since in the present study, the maximum shift in corrosion potential is less than 85 mV suggesting mixed behavior of PMSE. The increase in the % IE with an increase in PMSE concentration is attributed to the increase in the surface coverage of MS surface by the adsorbed PMSE molecules in all the concentrations of HCl. Further, the percentage inhibition efficiency decreased with an increase in acid concentration. This may be due to the increase in the aggressiveness of the corrosive medium causing more dissolution of metal [30].
3.1.3. Effect of Temperature
Temperature is another factor having a greater influence on the conductivity of the corrosive medium. The increase in the conductivity of solution leads to the desorption of adsorbed PMSE molecules from the metal surface which will be the cause of decreasing trend in the % IE with rising in temperature as depicted in Fig. 2(b) [31]. This also signifies the physisorption of PMSE onto the metal surface.
The corrosion rate values obtained for the MS sample immersed in different concentrations of HCl containing various concentrations of PMSE at various temperatures facilitate the measurements of activation and thermodynamic parameters. The energy of activation (Ea) is calculated using Arrhenius Eq. (4) [32].
where B is the Arrhenius constant, and R is the universal gas constant. The plot of ln (CR) versus 1/T (Fig. 3(a) gives a straight line with slope = - Ea/R, from which, the activation energy values for the corrosion process were calculated. The change in enthalpy (∆H#) and change in entropy (∆S#) of activation for the metal dissolution process in the absence and presence of PMSE is determined using the transition state Eq. (5) [33] and the resultant activation parameters are given in Table 2.
where h is Plank’s constant and N is Avogadro’s number. A plot of ln (CR/T) versus 1/T gave a straight line (Fig.3 (b)) withslope =∆H#/R and intercept = ln (R/Nh) + (∆S#/R).
From Table 2 it is observed that Ea values rise after successive addition of the PMSE which attributes to physisorption. Further, the Ea value in the absence and presence of the PMSE is more than 20 kJmol-1 which ascribes that the entire process is regulated by the surface reaction. Ea values are more pronounced with inhibitor concentration which describes the reduction in the dissolution of metal in the acid medium after the addition of PMSE. This indicates the increase in the energy barrier of the corrosion process due to the adsorption of active organic molecules at the MS surface [34]. The large negative values of entropy of activation (∆S#) in inhibited and uninhibited solution infer that the activated complex in the rate-determining step represents an association rather than dissociation, leading to a decrease in the randomness ongoing from the reactants to the activated complex [35].
3.1.4. Adsorption isotherm
Adsorption isotherms refer to the relationship between the PMSE concentrations in the liquid phase and the adsorption amount of PMSE on the solid phase at a certain temperature range. The adsorption behaviour of PMSE at mild steel/solution interface can be interpreted by choosing a suitable isotherm, which ascribes the deviation of the amount of adsorbed material per unit area at the mild-steel surface with its bulk concentration [36]. The degree of surface coverage (θ) values acquired from TP studies are used fitted to various adsorption isotherms such as Temkin, Freundlich, Frumkin, Langmuir. The best correlation was acquired for Freundlich adsorption isotherm and it is given by the Eq. (6).
logq = logK+ 1/nlog C (6)
C is the concentration of inhibitor and Kads is the equilibrium constant of adsorption reaction [37].
The graph of log θ versus log C (Fig. 4) shows a straight line and values of Kads are calculated from the intercept. The Kads values are then used to calculate the standard free energy of adsorption (Δ𝐺°ads) by the relation (7) [37].
Kads = (1/55.5) exp (-∆𝐺o𝑎𝑑s / RT) (7)
Where R is the universal gas constant, T is the absolute temperature, and 55.5 is the concentration of water in solution in mol dm−3. The enthalpy and entropy of adsorption values are calculated from thermodynamic Eq. (8). The thermodynamic parameters provide valuable evidence about the corrosion inhibition process and are tabulated in Table.3.
∆𝐺o𝑎𝑑s = ∆𝐻o𝑎𝑑𝑠 −𝑇∆𝑆o𝑎𝑑𝑠 (8)
From Table 3 it is observed that with an increase in temperature Kads values decrease. The adsorption coefficient attributes to the rate of adsorption of inhibitor onto the metal surface. In the present study, it was found that greater values of Kads at low temperatures, ascribes to stronger adsorption of inhibitor molecules onto the surface of metal [38]. With an increase in temperature, there may be a decrease in the adsorption of inhibitor molecules suggesting the physical adsorption of PMSE molecules on the metal surface.
Since the obtained ΔG°ads values are less negative than -20 kJ/mol signify that the adsorption of PMSE on the metal surface is based on physical adsorption [39, 40]. If the values of ΔH°ads are more positive (endothermic process) attributes to chemical adsorption whereas ΔH°ads is more negative (exothermic process) attributes to chemisorption or physisorption or a mixture of both [41, 42]. In the present study, the negative values of ΔH°ads specify the physical adsorption of the molecule. The ΔS°ads value is negative indicates, random displacement of the PMSE molecules in the bulk of the solution before the adsorption on the surface of the metal but as the adsorption proceeds the inhibitor molecules were evenly adsorbed on the surface of the metal, escorted to reduction in entropy [43].
3.2. Mechanism of corrosion
The factors that influence the adsorption of inhibitor molecule on the metal surface depends on the chemical structure, charge on the inhibitor, and behavior of the acidic media. Generally, the adsorbed inhibitor molecules block the active sites on the metal leading to the formation of a barrier layer at the metal solution interface. PMSE contains a large number of heterocyclic rings, electron-donating groups, flavonoids, tannins, etc., which get adsorb on the surface of the metal, forming a protective film and hence protecting the metal from dissolution. Generally, inhibitor molecules may adsorb on the surface of the metal, either by physisorption or by chemisorption, or by mixed adsorption. Physical adsorption takes place by the electrostatic interaction between the protonated inhibitor and chloride ions that are previously adsorbed on the surface of the metal. Chemisorption focuses on donor-acceptor interaction between the π-electrons of aromatic ring & metal surface containing empty d-orbitals or by the interaction between hetero atom having unshared electron pair and & metal surface containing vacant d orbitals. Thermodynamic parameters revealed the adsorption of PMSE on MS via physical mode. Schematic representation for a physical mode of adsorption is depicted in Fig.5.
MS specimen immersed in the acidic environment gets positively charged due to its initial dissolution which favors the adsorption of negatively charged chloride ions towards the vicinity of the metal surface. This results in the formation of Helmholtz electrical double layer at the metal solution interface which then promotes the adsorption of protonated PMSE molecules onto the metal surface by electrostatic interaction [44].
3.3. FTIR Characterization of PMSE
The FTIR spectrum of stem extract of PM and the corroded product after its inhibition is shown in Fig.6. The peak corresponding carbonyl group at 1600 cm-1 is slightly shifted to 1650 cm-1, and the peak with respect to –OCH3 is shifted from 1200 to 1300 cm-1 indicating the adsorption active constituents of extract molecules onto the metal surface. The reduction in the intensity of the peak at around 2900 cm-1 indicates the decrease in the aromaticity of the molecules due to the adsorption of π electrons of the benzene ring present in the extracted molecule. The broad peak at 3300 cm-1 is due to the presence of –OH group. The lone pair of electrons of the oxygen atom donated to the metal making the bond order of C-O increase slightly which is reflected in the peak around 3200cm-1suggesting the bond formation between the adsorbed molecule and metal surface.
3.4. Surface morphological study
Surface characterization is done using a Scanning electron microscope (SEM) and atomic force microscope (AFM) to investigate the changes that occurred on the surface of MS specimen in the absence and presence of PMSE. The SEM image of (a) corroded MS (b) MS dipped in 0.1 M HCl containing PMSE is shown in Fig.7. Fig. 7 (a) exhibits a rough surface with more number pits and is severely corroded by the attack of acid. However, in presence of PMSE (Fig. 7b) smooth surface was obtained without any pits which confirm the adsorption of PMSE onto the surface of the metal.
The three-dimensional AFM images of the MS treated with acid and acid-containing PMSE are depicted in Fig. 8 (a) and (b) respectively. Table 4, comprises the average surface roughness (Ra) and root mean square (RMS) roughness (Rq). From Table 4 it is observed that average surface roughness is greater for uninhibited specimens when compared to the inhibited specimen. The lesser values of Rq and Ra for the inhibited sample are attributed to the formation of the protective layer of PMSE onto the metal surface and prevent further corrosion [45].
4. Response Surface Methodology
The inhibition efficiency of PMSE adsorbed on the surface of MS towards corrosion caused by HCl was analysed by the Taguchi method. Three input parameters were taken into consideration, namely A- HCl concentration (HCl conc), B- Inhibitor concentration (Inh conc), and C- Temperature (Temp). Table 5 shows the considered parameters and the three selected levels for each of them.
The analysis revealed a significant model with an F-value of 18.01 with only 0.29 % of such a large F-value occurring due to noise. B was found to be the only significant parameter with a p-value of 0.0029. Further fit statistics obtained for the model are: R2, adjusted R2, and predicted R2 of 0.8572, 0.8096, and 0.6787 respectively. The adequate precision that measures the signal to noise ratio was to have a value of 8.465. Since this ratio is greater than 4, the model indicates adequate signal and can be used to navigate the design space [46]. Since the predicted R² is in reasonable agreement with the adjusted R² having a difference less than 0.2, it can be said that the model can explain 80.96 % and 67.87 % of the values obtained for the experimental and predicted values for oil removal respectively.
The final equation in terms of the coded factors can be shown in Eq. (9). This equation can be used to make predictions about the response for given levels of the factor B. In general, the coded equation is useful for identifying the relative impact of the factors by comparing the factor coefficient.
We see from Fig. 9 that the predicted vs actual values of IE are in an agreeable form. The same can be observed from the plot of Cook’s distance showing no outliers in the model obtained from the experimental values.
3.4.1. Interactive Effect
Response surface plots for IE were used to interpret the interaction effect of the variables and are shown in Fig. 10. The plots were utilized to explain the combined effects of the process parameters on the inhibition efficiency. The surface plots were generated from the model by varying any two variables within the range of the experimental data while keeping the other independent factors at their midpoint.
The nature of the plot can indicate the amount of effect the parameters have on the oil removal. The slightly straight, unchanged bard in Fig. 10 (b) indicate the very little effect of temperature and HCl concentration on the inhibition efficiency. Whereas Fig. 10 (a) and (c) shows a significant combined effect of the axes parameters on IE. Fig. 10 (a) is the surface plot observing the interaction effect between inhibitor concentration and HCl concentration at a temperature of 313 K. The increase in the inhibitor concentration and fall in HCl concentration results in the increase in inhibition efficiency. A maximum IE of 82.6 % was observed at inhibitor concentration of 0.24 M and HCl concentration of 0.1 M. Fig. 10 (b) observes the interaction effect between temperature and HCl concentration at a constant inhibitor concentration of 0.12 M. The inhibition efficiency is observed to increase with a decrease in the temperature and HCl concentration. A maximum IE of 68.7 % was predicted at temperature 303 K and HCl concentration of 0.1 M.
Fig. 10 (c) observes the interaction effect between inhibitor concentration and temperature at a constant HCl concentration of 0.25 M. The rise in inhibitor concentration coupled with a reduced temperature results in an increase in the inhibition efficiency. A maximum oil removal of 85.33 % was predicted at temperature 313 K and inhibitor concentration of 0.24 M.
The above effects can also be observed in the graphs shown in Fig. 11. The plots also further show that the inhibitor concentration has a significant effect over the inhibition efficiency, and that HCl concentration and inhibitor concentration do not effect it as much. HCl provides the acidic medium for corrosion to take place. At lower HCl concentrations, the acidic content of the medium is not enough to break through the inhibitor barrier adsorbed over the mild steel. Hence the inhibition efficiency is higher. With the increase in HCl concentration, the acidic medium gets stronger and breaks through the barrier lowering the inhibition efficiency [47].
With increasing concentrations of the inhibitor, PMSE got better adsorbed onto the surface of mild steel, decreasing the interaction with HCl and forming a barrier to prevent further corrosion [48]. With larger concentrations, the inhibitor layers over the surface of mild steel significantly affect corrosion [49, 50].
When the temperature of the medium increases, surface coverage reduction causes the desorption of PMSE inhibitor from the mild steel surface and the mild steel surface is exposed to the acidic medium. This can be attributed to the decrease in the strength of the adsorption process at higher temperatures as a result of the physical adsorption of the inhibitor on the mild steel, thus resulting in decreased inhibition efficiency with increasing temperature [51-53].
3.4.2. Optimization of IE
The optimized parameters to get the maximum IE based on RSM were obtained from the model generated by the Design Expert software by keeping HCl concentration and temperature fixed at 0.1 M and 303 K respectively. The maximum IE was predicted to be 76.0267 % at an inhibitor concentration of 0.24 M with a desirability of 0.76. This, when compared to the observed inhibition efficiency of 88.9 % gave an error of 14.48 %.