Issue

Vol. 38 No. 8 (2026): Vol 38, Issue 8 (2026)

Copyright (c) 2026 Dipak Kumar Gupta, Anju Kumari Das, Gayatri Maiya Koju, Sanjay Singh, Amar Prasad Yadav

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Galvanostatic Deposition of Polyaniline on Mild Steel in Benzoic Acid – Alcohol Water System and Its Corrosion Performance in Na2SO3 Medium

https://doi.org/10.14233/ajchem.2026.36220
Dipak Kumar Gupta
Central Department of Chemistry, Tribhuvan University, Kirtipur, Kathmandu, Nepal
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6010-9495
Anju Kumari Das
Department of Chemistry, Tribhuvan University, Amrit Science Campus, Kathmandu, Nepal
https://orcid.org/0009-0006-0935-5838
Gayatri Maiya Koju
Department of Chemistry, Tribhuvan University, Bhaktapur Multiple Campus, Bhaktapur, Nepal
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7491-0731
Sanjay Singh
Central Department of Chemistry, Tribhuvan University, Kirtipur, Kathmandu, Nepal; Department of Chemistry, Tribhuvan University, Amrit Science Campus, Kathmandu, Nepal
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9405-6889
Amar Prasad Yadav
Central Department of Chemistry, Tribhuvan University, Kirtipur, Kathmandu, Nepal
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8592-4856

Corresponding Author(s) : Anju Kumari Das

anjudas004@gmail.com

Asian Journal of Chemistry, Vol. 38 No. 8 (2026): Vol 38, Issue 8 (2026)

Abstract

The polyaniline (PANI) coating on a mild steel (MS) surface, prepared from 0.3 M aniline in 0.04 M benzoic acid in a 3:1 alcohol-water (BAW) solvent, was investigated by the galvanostatic method. The influence of current density on the development of a homogeneous and adherent PANI coating on MS was explored at current densities of 100, 200 and 300 µA cm–2. The results showed a sequential process of MS dissolution, benzoate salt formation, oxidation of the aniline monomer and PANI coating nucleation and growth. The corrosion behaviour of the PANI coating was examined using potentiodynamic polarisation (PDP) and electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) in a 0.4 M Na2SO3 solution to simulate an industrial environment. The inhibition efficiency of the PANI coating was affected by the applied current density. The best inhibition efficiency of the PANI coating by PDP, obtained at 100 µA cm–2, was approximately 96%, followed by 85% at 200 µA cm–2 and 75% at 300 µA cm–2. The EIS showed 99.75% inhibition efficiency, resulting in excellent barrier protection. The PANI film showed stability in 0.4 M Na2SO3 solution at a higher anodic potential. The optical and scanning electron microscopic techniques were utilised to investigate the microstructural features and surface morphology of the coatings before and after polarisation exposure.

Keywords

Electropolymerisation Mild steel Benzoic acid in alcohol-water Polyaniline
(1)
Gupta, D. K.; Das, A. K.; Koju, G. M.; Singh, S.; Yadav, A. P. Galvanostatic Deposition of Polyaniline on Mild Steel in Benzoic Acid – Alcohol Water System and Its Corrosion Performance in Na2SO3 Medium. ajc 2026, 38, 2037-2044.
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX
References
  1. S. Shi, Y. Zhao, Z. Zhang and L. Yu, Prog. Org. Coat., 132, 227 (2019); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.porgcoat.2019.03.040
  2. A.H. El-Shazly and H.A. Al-Turaif, Int. J. Electrochem. Sci., 7, 11 (2012).
  3. A. Cook, A. Gabriel and N. Laycock, J. Electrochem. Soc., 151, B529 (2004); https://doi.org/10.1149/1.1782077
  4. J. Xu, Y. Zhang, D. Zhang, Y. Tang and H. Cang, Prog. Org. Coat., 88, 84 (2015); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.porgcoat.2015.06.024
  5. A. Akdag, G. Ozyilmaz and A.T. Ozyilmaz, Anti-Corros. Methods Mater., 65, 580 (2018); https://doi.org/10.1108/ACMM-04-2018-1922
  6. N. Huang, C. Liang and B. Yi, Mater. Corros., 59, 21 (2008); https://doi.org/10.1002/maco.200704062
  7. P. Li, T.C. Tan and J.Y. Lee, Synth. Met., 88, 237 (1997); https://doi.org/10.1016/S0379-6779(97)03860-5
  8. M.F.D. Aguiar, R.A. Borges, M.F.B. Rocha, N. Bouchonneau, C.P.D. Melo, H.P.D. Oliveira and K.G.B. Alves, Mater. Res., 26(suppl 1), e20220549 (2023); https://doi.org/10.1590/1980-5373-mr-2022-0549
  9. E. Kim, N. Kang, J.J. Moon and M. Choi, Bull. Korean Chem. Soc., 37, 1445 (2016); https://doi.org/10.1002/bkcs.10887
  10. Y. Wang, S. Zhang, P. Wang, Z. Lu, S. Chen and L. Wang, Prog. Org. Coat., 137, 105327 (2019); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.porgcoat.2019.105327
  11. M. Ates, J. Adhes. Sci. Technol., 30, 1510 (2016); https://doi.org/10.1080/01694243.2016.1150662
  12. A.M. Abdel-Gaber, B.A. Abd-El-Nabey, E. Khamis, R.M. Salman, H.T. Rahal and Z. El Morr, Chem. Eng. Commun., 1, (2020); https://doi.org/10.1080/00986445.2019.1710493
  13. F. Masdarolomoor, S. Hajizadeh, M. Arab Chamjangali and P.C. Innis, Synth. Met., 250, 121 (2019); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.synthmet.2019.03.011
  14. M.M. Popović and B.N. Grgur, Synth. Met., 143, 191 (2004); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.synthmet.2003.12.022
  15. A.T. Ozyilmaz and A. Akdag, IMF, 89, 215 (2011); https://doi.org/10.1179/174591911X13077162170188
  16. B. Wessling, Adv. Mater., 6, 226 (1994); https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.19940060309
  17. M. Sabouri, T. Shahrabi, H.R. Faridi and M.G. Hosseini, Prog. Org. Coat., 64, 429 (2009); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.porgcoat.2008.08.003
  18. A. Truncali, T. Laxminarayan, N. Rajagopalan, C.E. Weinell, S. Kiil and M. Johansson, J. Coat. Technol. Res., 21, 1875 (2024); https://doi.org/10.1007/s11998-023-00899-9
  19. A.M. Fenelon and C.B. Breslin, Surf. Coat. Tech., 190, 264 (2005); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2004.04.083
  20. N.M. Martyak, P. McAndrew, J.E. McCaskie and J. Dijon, Prog. Org. Coat., 45, 23 (2002); https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-9440(02)00070-X
  21. J.L. Camalet, J.C. Lacroix, S. Aeiyach, K. Chane-Ching and P.C. Lacaze, Synth. Met., 93, 133 (1998); https://doi.org/10.1016/S0379-6779(97)04099-X
  22. A.T. Özyılmaz, T. Tüken, B. Yazıcı and M. Erbil, Prog. Org. Coat., 52, 92 (2005); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.porgcoat.2004.09.003
  23. A.T. Ozyilmaz, A. Akdag, I.H. Karahan and G. Ozyilmaz, Prog. Org. Coat., 77, 872 (2014); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.porgcoat.2014.01.020
  24. N.B. Devkota, S. Singh, S. Neupane, D.K. Gupta and A.P. Yadav, J. Nep. Chem. Soc., 35, 94 (2016).
  25. P. Pawar, A.B. Gaikawad and P.P. Patil, Sci. Technol. Adv. Mater., 7, 732 (2006); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stam.2006.09.014
  26. M. Shabani-Nooshabadi and F. Karimian-Taheri, RSC Adv., 5, 96601 (2015); https://doi.org/10.1039/C5RA14333K
  27. D.K. Gupta, S. Neupane, S. Singh, N. Karki and A.P. Yadav, Prog. Org. Coat., 152, 106127 (2021); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.porgcoat.2020.106127
  28. D.K. Gupta, S. Neupane, S. Singh, N. Karki and A.P. Yadav, Data Brief, 35, 106875 (2021); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2021.106875
  29. D.K. Gupta, S. Neupane, S. Singh and A.P. Yadav, Indian J. Chem. Technol., 29, 82 (2022); https://doi.org/10.56042/ijct.v29i1.54305
  30. S. Neupane, M.Sc. Dissertation, Development of a Windows-Based Program to Control the Analogue Potentiostat in Combination with an ADA Converter, Tri-Chandra Multiple Campus, Tribhuvan University, Nepal (2013).
  31. J.L. Camalet, J.C. Lacroix, S. Aeiyach, K. Chane-Ching and P.C. Lacaze, J. Electroanal. Chem., 416, 179 (1996); https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-0728(96)01012-1
  32. H.J.N.P. Mello and M. Mulato, Thin Solid Films, 656, 14 (2018); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsf.2018.04.022
  33. J.C. Lacroix, J.L. Camalet, S. Aeiyach, K.I. Chane-Ching, J. Petitjean, E. Chauveau and P.C. Lacaze, J. Electroanal. Chem., 481, 76 (2000); https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-0728(99)00490-8
  34. A. Eftekhari, Synth. Met., 125, 295 (2002); https://doi.org/10.1016/S0379-6779(01)00393-9
  35. O. Kazum and M.B. Kannan, Surf. Eng., 32, 607 (2016); https://doi.org/10.1080/02670844.2015.1108071
  36. M. Shabani-Nooshabadi, E. Allahyary and Y. Jafari, Prot. Met. Phys. Chem. Surf., 54, 104 (2018); https://doi.org/10.1134/S2070205118010276
  37. S.K. Dhawan and D.C. Trivedi, Polym. Int., 25, 55 (1991); https://doi.org/10.1002/pi.4990250110
  38. A.F. Diaz and J.A. Logan, J. Electroanal. Chem. Interface Electrochem., 111, 111 (1980); https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-0728(80)80081-7
  39. E.M. Genies and C. Tsintavis, J. Electroanal. Chem. Interfacial Electrochem., 195, 109 (1985); https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0728(85)80009-7
  40. N. Mahato and M.H. Cho, Constr. Build. Mater., 115, 618 (2016); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.04.073
  41. M.M. Popović, B.N. Grgur and V.B. Mišković-Stanković, Prog. Org. Coat., 52, 359 (2005); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.porgcoat.2004.05.009
  42. Y. Chen, X.H. Wang, J. Li, J.L. Lu and F.S. Wang, Corros. Sci., 49, 3052 (2007); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.corsci.2006.11.007
  43. A. Yağan, N.Ö. Pekmez and A. Yıldız, Prog. Org. Coat., 59, 297 (2007); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.porgcoat.2007.04.006
Read More
Author biographies is not available.
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 17 Download : 8
PlumX