Talk:Bronze disease

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Bronze disease article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

Chemistry Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemistry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of chemistry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChemistryWikipedia:WikiProject ChemistryTemplate:WikiProject ChemistryChemistry articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Materials Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Materials, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Materials on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MaterialsWikipedia:WikiProject MaterialsTemplate:WikiProject MaterialsMaterials articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Daily pageviews of this article

A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

On copper pipes[edit]

Could this 'bronze disease' be the cause of deep pitting on domestic copper piping ? Rod57 (talk) 16:30, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's unlikely, because it relies on the presence of chlorides and they're not common in the habitable domestic environment. Maybe if you're near the coast, or there's winter road salt washoff?

One of the most common causes of pitting in this situation, especially on new work, is soldering flux residues not being cleaned off. Plumbing fluxes (unlike electronic fluxes) are powerfully acidic and do need a deliberate cleaning step. Andy Dingley (talk) 17:09, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

use of tap water[edit]

There's a number of problems with this paragraph:

"Use of tap water for initial carbonate rinses is fine as any chloride content in the water is low compared to the content found when the chlorides from the contaminated artefact have dissolved into the water. Later rinses should be with distilled water though it is to be noted that the chlorine of a chlorinated town water supply is likely to have evaporated from tap water inside 24 hours and therefore will not further contaminate the object."

First, this needs a citation, as it just sounds like the writer's opinion. Second, the last bit about chlorine also needs a citation, and lacks important information. Many municipal water supplies no longer use simple chlorine but a compound called chloramine which takes much, much longer to evaporate and likely has different chemical properties relative to bronze disease:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chloramine#Other_methods — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.190.9.125 (talk) 20:39, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Does the Reaction Paragraph Lack Steps or Information?[edit]

I don't get it. The steps 4) and 5) show the same reaction, just with different text, so the repetition could as well go from 3) to 1). But it looks like a copy/paste error or missing reaction steps. 3) shows how Cl is consumed into two compounds, the text for 5) shows a third. So if this happens in confined space, would the reaction stop after all Cl has been used up? Or should 4) show how Cl is set free again? Do the resulting compounds crumble away for the reaction to get access to more copper? By what aspects is this similar to or different from iron rusting? The name "Disease" confuses me because it seems to mean corrosion by an unlimited external supply of chemicals. Just asking for explanations. --84.62.152.112 (talk) 23:43, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]