Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Global Cost of Corrosion

impact.nace.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 251 posts

Re: The Global Cost of Corrosion

#231

Post by Aeroi »

algo_trader wrote: post #159
lbrindze wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

most objects like this I have passed in the water seem to be made of some sort of painted steel. I think this is a good combination of durability vs economical. I suspect your electronics will go long before anything corrodes away to nothing, since in my experience its always the electronics that fail first (even when properly sealed for marine use). Note that the main issue with any barrier coating (assuming there a…

> autonomous vessel of some sort. Actually just a large floating shed to support all those panels. But yeah, there are multiple moving pieces (floating?!) involved. Would love to chat in the future and brain storm, if u want to leave your details in my profile puppet mail.

are you constructing a floating tower to mount microwave panels for HFT?

Re: The Global Cost of Corrosion

#232

Post by xyzzy123 »

dexwiz wrote: post #109
countvonbalzac wrote: post #3

Why aren't bridges and ships made out of stainless steel? Is it too expensive, or not as strong as regular steel?

In addition to other comments, it's also difficult to weld. Stainless steel retains heat, so prolong welding can warp it. Also unless careful, welding can destroy the Chromium coating, so the area are the weld will rust quicker than the bulk material. When choosing a metal material, it's important to consider not just its innate properties, but it properties during join. Welding can melt the metal surrounding the wel…

Stainless can also be a pig to machine due to work hardening.

Re: The Global Cost of Corrosion

#233

Post by eternityforest »

function_seven wrote: post #223
eternityforest wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For some applications, plastic fills that role very well. A lot of stuff would probably be made with plastic, and be just as durable, if we didn't have this "Stuff should feel substantial" design mindset. It's amazing how there's such a strong preference for things with size and weight, and how plastic is seen as cheap trash rather than an engineering marvel.

I have a hand cart / furniture dolly that's almost entirely plastic. The only metal bits on it are the axle and the handle. It's perfectly durable and I've used it to cart around items that weigh 600 lbs. (300kg). It's also a good little example of where plastic is good and where it's not. The axle and the handle get the largest amount of stress, so they remain steel, while the body of the cart can be a trussed plast…

All-carbon cars seem pretty doable.

Tools and bridges are harder, but there's always dry nitrogen. Not sure why we don't have toolboxes with integrated solid state dehumidifiers yet, or bridge cables in rubber tubes of pressurized dry air.

Re: The Global Cost of Corrosion

#234

Post by bamboozled »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #220
fomine3 wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not uncommon to buy used car like newer than 10yo in Japan now. I can see many such cars at the road side used car shop. Because Japanese people especially in rural area (who need car) getting poor relatively, newer cars getting expensive thanks to safety and comfortable equipment, and reliability is improved, used cars getting more reasonable. After 13yo, vehicle tax increases so it's not popular but still sold…

Is this new in Japan or has it always been the way?

Getting poor ?

Re: The Global Cost of Corrosion

#235

Post by weq »

jandrese wrote: post #181
s1artibartfast wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>have been galvanizing all their bodies domestic and import. This is because there's basically no market for used cars older than 5 years in Japan https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.picknbuy24.com/amp/column_1...

I feel like that is a self-perpetuating cycle. Japanese carmakers build cars to rust out in half a decade and thus nobody wants to buy old rustbuckets thus the carmakers don't bother to build them to last.

This was true in the 60s and 70s for Jap cars, they didnt make them to rust, they just didnt rust prevent like they do now. Go watch youtube and watch some rust belt mechanics like south main auto and u will see what what cars rust and what cars last now (hint, US made cars dont even last 10yrs with salt)

I personally drive a jap car from the 90s and 400+k on the clock. I can fix everything myself including rebuilding anything i need. My wipers arnt controlled by a CANN BUS, they use a simple mechanical switch. There is a new killer on the block that makes corrision look like childs play - its called computers. Cars these days are literly THROW away with the amount of electronics on them. Replacing the guage cluster on a new econo-car like a hyuandi can cost upwards of 8k. Instance write-off, doesnt matter that the engines wont lost 150k, because the electronics that manage it are discontinued way before that. Got a broken wire in your loom? thats 5k to replace.

Re: The Global Cost of Corrosion

#236

Post by nick__m »

rasz wrote: post #224
hadlock wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Porsche started galvanizing their bodies in the 1970s, VW started in the 1980s, Japan only started galvanizing their bodies in export markets, in response to the germans, and only recently (last 15 years) have been galvanizing all their bodies domestic and import.

Some Japanese brands are "galvanizing" instead of proper electro-galvanizing. Here is investigation into Mazda, legendary for rotting into nothing. https://www.reddit.com/r/mazda3/comments/adioma/polish_autom...

the mazda3 used to be terrible for rusting but they changed something in 2007, a collegue mazda3 was from 2006 and it rusted so much thast it had almost no resale value, my gf mazda3 from 2008 sill looks new...

p.s. I live in a place were salt used to be applied aggressively in the winter. Nowadays they use more sand and only use salt when the road conditions really requires it. but it's a recent development (3 years at best)

Re: The Global Cost of Corrosion

#237

Post by kqr »

_yb2s wrote: post #156
kqr wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I got the impression Volvo was able to do this for fairly small production runs, whereas the Japanese figured out how to consistently do it in large volumes.

I'd say the Japanese figured out how to make this happen on a cheap car. Almost all high end european cars (including Volvos) had great rustproofing for a long time but cost far more than Japanese cars. The Japanese made the first reliable and long lasting low priced cars.

I think that was what I wanted to say. Thank you for putting it more clearly.

(In my mind, European craft production results in pricey cars, whereas large volumes only make sense for cheaper stuff.)

Re: The Global Cost of Corrosion

#238

Post by ajkjk »

mattnewton wrote: post #100
ajkjk wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well perhaps "retain" should be added. Making something last longer isn't quite "reduce" or "reuse".

Isn’t it reuse? Reduce - don’t buy another car, reuse - keep using your car, or buy a used car, recycle - sell your old car for scrap.

Well I think of reuse as.. use it again after you've used it once. As opposed to, keep using it the first time and make its initial use last longer.

Re: The Global Cost of Corrosion

#239

Post by jacquesm »

thereisnospork wrote: post #192
algo_trader wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, the payload has a 20 year life time. Solar panels, navigational lights, etc. Hopefully very little physical contact with other man made objects. A decade of sea life before some sort of land refurbishment would be a nice value for the excel.

I'd look at the nickel alloys, Inconel 625 and Hastelloy C22 would be a good start. They should be orders of magnitude more corrosion resistant than stainless steel and still have respectable strength. Of course they are more expensive and harder to fabricate.

The tooling alone will cost a small fortune though.

Re: The Global Cost of Corrosion

#240

Post by jacquesm »

nomel wrote: post #211
jacquesm wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plastic is indispensable completely unlike electricity is indispensable. Plastic is a huge pollutant, with breakdown stats that make you cry once you start thinking in terms of tons of absolutely indestructible stuff that makes it into our environment every day. Only a very small fraction of that stuff really needed to be made from plastic. Mostly it is just done because it is cheap and mechanically well understood.…

What do you see as the material that could have been used, or could be used, to replace plastic?

In many applications glass or treated paper was used prior to plastic and it usually worked well enough to give a reasonable service life. Lots - and I mean really lots - of applications where plastic is used today it could still be replaced by either paper, glass or sometimes wood. Using plastic for the remaining use cases would be fine by me. But plastics for 'economics' reasons is just a temporal form of externalization.
Post reply on HN