title: Comparison of 316LVM and MP35N alloys as charge injection electrodes.
abstract: An In vitro comparison of the corrosion response of 316LVM stainless steel and MP35N (a CoNiCrMo alloy) electrodes under conditions appropriate to applications in functional electrical stimulation (FES) was made. Electrodes of both alloys were subjected to a cathodic 40 microC/cm2 charge injection protocol and the potential transient response was recorded over a 96 h period. The transient responses were compared with potentiodynamic polarization data used to establish the quasiequilibrium response of the alloys in the carbonate and phosphate-buffered saline electrolyte used in the study. The MP35N electrodes exhibited extensive pitting corrosion during charge injection, whereas little corrosion was observed on 316LVM electrodes. An explanation for the susceptibility of MP35N to corrosion during charge injection is found in the potentiodynamic polarization data, which reveal a breakdown potential (critical pitting potential) of 0.45 V (SCE) for MP35N compared with 1.05 V (SCE) for 316LVM. Factors that may influence corrosion response during charge injection from alloys exhibiting active-passive behavior are discussed.
authors.affiliation: EIC Laboratories, Norwood, Massachusetts 02062.
authors.forename: S F
authors.initials: SF
authors.lastname: Cogan
authors.forename: G S
authors.initials: GS
authors.lastname: Jones
authors.forename: D V
authors.initials: DV
authors.lastname: Hills
authors.forename: J S
authors.initials: JS
authors.lastname: Walter
authors.forename: L W
authors.initials: LW
authors.lastname: Riedy
mesh_terms: D002858:Chromium Alloys; D003343:Corrosion; D004558:Electric Stimulation; D004567:Electrodes, Implanted / Q000592:standards*; D008422:Materials Testing; D008855:Microscopy, Electron, Scanning; D013193:Stainless Steel
chemical_list: D002858:Chromium Alloys; D013193:Stainless Steel