Chapter 10: Modern Theory: Applications

Welcome to Last Minute Lecture.

This free chapter overview is designed to help students review and understand key concepts.

These summaries supplement not replaced the original textbook and may not be redistributed or resold.

For complete coverage, always consult the official text.

Welcome back to the Deep Dive.

Today, we are doing something a little different.

A little more focused.

Yeah, exactly.

Usually we take a wide -angle lens to a topic, history, tech trends, psychology, but today we are zooming way, way in.

Under the microscope.

We are putting a single chapter of a single textbook under the microscope and it is a chapter that sounds,

on the surface, maybe a little dry.

Modern theory applications.

Yeah, it sounds like the title of a generic elective you take in grad school just to fill a credit requirement.

It really does.

But here is the hook and this is what got me.

This chapter determines whether a chemical plant explodes or stays safe.

It determines whether a bridge collapses or stands for a hundred years.

Right.

We are looking at chapter 10 of Corrosion Engineering, the third edition by Mars G.

Fontana.

And honestly, after reading through this, I feel like this is where the rubber meets the road.

Or maybe where the acid meets the steel.

Huh, that's good.

That is a great way to put it.

Because if you look at the structure of the book, those first nine chapters are all about the abstract physics.

Totally.

It's mixed potential theory, thermodynamics,

electrokinetics, just a lot of squiggly lines on graphs that exist in a vacuum.

But chapter 10.

Chapter 10 is the so -what chapter.

It is the bridge between here is a graph of potential versus current and here is why that pipe leaked the second we turned the pump off.

The mission for this deep dive is to cross that bridge.

Yeah.

We want to take these electrochemical concepts, which, let's be honest, can be pretty intimidating and turn them into actual engineering intuition.

Yes.

We want to understand the personality of metals when they are under stress, because they really do have personalities, don't they?

They absolutely do.

And they are often contradictory, very paradoxical.

That is what makes this specific chapter so fascinating.

Paradoxes are the theme of the day.

For sure.

We have quite a roadmap ahead of us.

We are going to talk about how pouring a corrosive acid on a metal can sometimes,

somehow, stop it from corroding.

The big one.

We are going to look at how speeding up a fluid flow, which you'd think would wear a pipe down faster, can actually save it.

And we are definitely going to spend some time busting the myth of the EMF series, which I know drives a lot of engineers crazy.

Oh, that's one of those things taught in high school that's just dangerously incomplete, right?

You got it.

And then finally, we will look at how we actually measure this stuff without waiting 10 years for a hole to appear in the tank.

Okay.

Let's start with the big one then.

The concept that anchors this entire chapter.

The oxidizer paradox.

If you get this, you get the rest of the chapter.

So lay the scene for me.

When I hear the word oxidizer, like oxygen or nitric acid or ferric salts,

my brain goes to rust.

Sure.

Oxidizers make things corrode.

That is just basic chemistry, isn't it?

For a normal metal, absolutely.

If you have a piece of zinc or just standard carbon steel and drop it into a vat of acid, it bubbles, it dissolves.

If you add an oxidizer to that mix, it is like pouring gasoline on a fire.

You are feeding the cathodic reaction.

The corrosion rate goes up linearly.

It is a straight lineup.

Okay.

So more oxidizer equals more corrosion.

That fits my mental model perfectly.

For normal metals.

But we aren't here to talk about normal metals.

We are talking about active passive metals.

Like stainless steel.

Stainless steels, titanium, aluminum, even iron under specific conditions.

These materials have a split personality.

This is where we need to visualize the graph.

Yeah.

I am looking at figure 10 to 1 in the text.

I want to walk you, the listener, through this curve because it looks like a roller coaster.

It really is a roller coaster.

So picture a graph in your mind.

On the bottom, the x -axis, you have the concentration of your oxidizer.

Okay.

Let's say we are adding nitric acid to a solution.

Moving to the right means the solution is getting more aggressive.

Got it.

x -axis is the strength of the attack.

Right.

Now on the vertical axis, the y -axis is the log of the corrosion rate.

So how fast is the metal being eaten away?

Okay.

I am at zero.

I start adding acid.

What happens?

At first, it behaves just like a normal metal.

The rate goes up.

You add acid.

It eats the metal faster.

This is called the active state.

I am climbing a steep hill.

You are climbing a steep hill.

The metal is actively dissolving into the solution.

So far, my intuition is holding up.

Acid is bad.

But keep adding it.

You are climbing this hill, experiencing higher and higher corrosion rates.

And then suddenly, you hit the peak.

In the book, this is labeled point D.

This is the critical anodic current density.

It is the absolute worst case scenario.

The metal is dissolving as fast as it possibly can.

And then you add one tiny drop more of oxidizer.

And the corrosion rate doesn't just level off.

It crashes.

It falls off a cliff.

Wow.

It drops by orders of magnitude factors of 10, 100, 1000, almost zero.

So I have made the solution more aggressive, chemically speaking.

But the metal essentially stops corroding.

Completely stops.

You have entered the passive state.

The potential of the metal has jumped up and the surface has formed a protective film, usually a very thin invisible oxide layer that seals the metal off from the environment.

Like the metal gets so overwhelmed by the attack that it just throws up a shield.

That is a great way to think about it.

The oxidizer forces the formation of that shield.

The attack itself triggers the defense.

Does it stay safe forever?

If I just keep dumping acid in?

No.

And that is the trap.

If you keep going to the far right of the graph, eventually that protective film breaks down.

You enter what's called the trans -passive region.

The rate shoots up again.

But there is this wide,

safe plateau in the middle, the passive zone, where you want to live.

This brings us to a concept that I found really tricky, but I think is crucial for safety.

Hysteresis.

Path dependence, yeah.

The text says it matters which direction you are coming from.

This is figure 10 -2, and it is vital for designing safety systems.

Think about it this way.

To get you have to climb that huge hill we just talked about.

You have to endure high corrosion to get to the peak and fall into the safe valley.

Okay, so I have to pay the toll to get in.

You do.

Let's say you need a concentration of, I don't know, four to get over the hill.

But once you are in the valley, once the film is formed, you don't need a concentration of four to keep it there.

You can back off.

You can back off.

You can drop the concentration down to say two, and the film stays intact.

Because it is easier to maintain the shield than to build it from scratch.

Exactly.

The text uses an analogy that I love.

It's about pushing a car over a hill.

I like that one too.

Let's break that down for everyone.

Okay, so imagine you are in a car at the bottom of a steep hill.

That is the active state.

To get to the other side, you have to floor it.

Right.

You need maximum gas, maximum oxidizer to fight gravity and reach the crest.

And the crest is that critical point, that point D.

Right.

But once your front wheels tip over the crest, what happens?

You start coasting.

You start coasting.

You can take your foot off the gas.

You need very little energy to keep moving forward into the passive valley.

That sounds efficient.

Why wouldn't we just do that?

Use a lot of oxidizer to start, then back off to save money.

You can.

But it is dangerous.

How so?

Imagine you are coasting down the other side of the hill, but you aren't at the bottom yet.

You are halfway down.

You are in this borderline zone.

You are technically passive, but just barely.

Okay, so you're moving slowly.

What happens if you hit a bump?

Or in corrosion terms, what happens if you scratch the surface of the metal?

I assume the scratch breaks the film.

It breaks the film.

And since you don't have your foot on the gas, since the oxidizer concentration is low, you don't have enough energy to push that specific spot back over the hill.

You roll backwards.

You revert to the active state.

Instantly.

And now you have a disaster.

The tank looks passive, but that one scratch is at the peak of the hill rate.

You get catastrophic pitting.

The metal eats through itself in hours.

So the safety rule Fontana gives us is basically don't coast.

Pretty much.

He says you should keep the oxidizer concentration at or above the amount needed to produce spontaneous passivation.

Even if the film breaks, you want enough chemical in the tank to heal it instantly.

You want to be pressing the gas pedal just in case.

Always.

You never want to rely on the film remembering its state.

You want the environment to force the state.

That idea of healing the film relies on the environment supplying the oxidizer.

But sometimes the environment is moving.

This leads us to the next big topic.

Velocity.

Yeah.

Because in my head, faster fluid means more erosion, more damage.

But you are telling me that is not always true.

It is almost never that simple.

Velocity acts as a magnifier.

But what it magnifies depends entirely on what is limiting your corrosion process.

We need to define two terms here, and I want to make sure I've got them right.

Diffusion control versus activation control.

Right.

The text gets pretty dense here, so let's try to simplify this.

Let's use an analogy.

Imagine a busy restaurant kitchen.

You are the chef.

The chef represents the metal surface reacting.

Okay.

I am the chef.

I am cooking corrosion.

You are cooking orders.

The orders are the oxidizers, the oxygen or acid coming from the dining room.

Got it.

Now, in scenario one, you are a slow chef.

It doesn't matter how fast the waiters run.

It doesn't matter if they stack orders to the ceiling.

You can only chop one onion a minute.

So the bottleneck is me.

The reaction speed of the metal surface.

Correct.

This is activation control.

The process is controlled by the activation energy of the reaction itself.

In this scenario, velocity, the speed of the waiters, is irrelevant.

You can pump the fluid at 100 miles per hour.

The corrosion rate won't change because the surface reaction is already maxed out.

Got it.

So if I see a system under activation control,

I don't need to worry about flow rate.

Generally, yes.

Look at figure 10 -3 in the book.

It's a flat line.

Velocity changes.

Rate stays the same.

But now, scenario two.

You are a super fast chef.

You are Gordon Ramsay on speed.

But the waiters are incredibly slow.

You spend most of your time standing around waiting for the next order ticket to arrive.

So I am starved for ingredients.

You are starved.

This is diffusion control.

The corrosion is limited by how fast the oxidizer can diffuse through the fluid to reach the metal surface.

So in this case, if the waiters start running, if we increase the fluid velocity, I get more orders.

I cook faster.

Corrosion goes up.

Exactly.

For normal metals like iron or copper in seawater, this is usually what happens.

They are under diffusion control.

You increase the flow.

You bring more oxygen to the surface.

The corrosion rate goes up.

And the text has a curve for this.

Figure 10 -4.

It goes up and flattens out.

Why does it flatten?

It flattens because eventually the waiters are bringing food so fast that you become the bottleneck again.

You switch back to activation control.

There's a speed limit to chemistry.

There is.

Okay.

So for normal metals, faster flow equals more corrosion until it maxes out.

But we are still talking about those weird active passive metals, right?

The stainless steels.

This is where the twist comes in.

Remember the hill.

The car on the hill.

To make stainless steel passive, to save it, we need a high supply of oxidizer.

We need to get over the hump.

Right.

We need to flood it with orders so it gets overwhelmed and puts up the closed sign.

Precisely.

If the fluid is stagnant, no velocity, the supply of oxidizer might be too low.

The waiters are walking.

You might be stuck on the uphill side of the curve, corroding away in the active state.

But if I turn on the pump?

The waiters start running.

The supply of oxidizer hits the surface in a massive wave.

And if that wave is big enough, if it hits that critical anodic current density, the metal spontaneously jumps to the passive state.

So the corrosion rate drops to zero.

Practically zero.

Look at figure 10 -6.

The rate goes up initially as you speed up and then boom, it drops to the bottom axis.

That is wild.

So literally the act of moving the fluid faster saves the pipe.

And the reverse is the killer.

We see this in industry all the time.

Really?

You have a stainless steel piping system that works perfectly for years.

Then, one weekend, they shut the plant down for maintenance.

The pumps turn off.

The fluid stops moving.

The waiters stop running.

The oxidizer supply drops.

The metal rolls back down the hill into the active state.

By Monday morning, the pipes have holes in them.

Just because they turn the switch off?

Just because they stop the flow.

Context is everything.

You cannot just look at a data sheet that says 304 stainless is resistant to sulfuric acid.

You have to ask more questions.

You have to ask, is it moving?

How fast?

What is the temperature?

That leads us perfectly into another area where context is usually ignored and where people rely on oversimplified rules.

Galvanic coupling.

Oh boy.

The EMF series.

I remember this from high school chemistry.

There is a list.

Gold is at the top.

It's noble.

Zinc is at the bottom.

It's active.

If you touch them together, the zinc rots.

And that is the dangerously incomplete version of the truth.

Okay.

The EMF series is thermodynamic.

It tells you the potential difference, the energy stored in the system.

It tells you what could happen.

It does not tell you how fast it will happen.

It tells you the destination but not the speed limit.

Exactly.

To understand the speed, the actual corrosion rate, you need to understand the kinetics.

You need mixed potential theory.

Let's look at the classic example from the text.

Platinum connected to zinc.

This is figure 10 -7.

Okay.

Zinc is the anode.

It wants to corrode.

Platinum is the cathode.

It is noble.

It won't corrode.

When you connect them, the zinc corrodes much faster than it would alone.

Why?

The standard answer is platinum pulls the electrons harder.

That is the layman's view.

But it misses the mechanism.

It is actually about surface area for hydrogen evolution.

Break that down for me.

Hydrogen evolution.

When zinc corrodes in an acid, it releases electrons.

Those electrons have to go somewhere.

They travel to the surface and try to combine with hydrogen ions in the acid to make hydrogen gas.

That is the reduction reaction.

Okay.

So zinc gives up an electron.

Hydrogen grabs it.

Bubbles away.

But here's the thing.

Zinc is a terrible surface for this.

It is chemically slippery for the hydrogen reaction.

It is hard for the hydrogen ions to grab electrons off a zinc surface.

It creates a bottleneck.

So the zinc corrosion is limited because the electrons are stuck in traffic.

Yes.

But platinum.

Platinum is the ultimate catalyst.

It is a superhighway for hydrogen evolution.

It has a massive exchange current density.

So when I wire the platinum to the zinc, the electrons have a new path.

A better path.

They rush over to the platinum.

The platinum acts as a massive drain, sucking electrons out of the zinc and handing them off to the hydrogen ions incredibly fast.

This uncaps the bottleneck on the zinc.

The zinc dissolves rapidly to feed that hunger.

This explains the area effect too, right?

The text uses a funnel analogy.

It is the best way to visualize it.

Think of the cathode, the platinum, as a funnel collecting oxidizers or enabling that hydrogen reaction.

Think of the anode, the zinc, as the thing being eaten.

So if I have a giant sheet of platinum connected to a tiny zinc rivet.

You have a massive funnel feeding a tiny drain.

The current density on that poor zinc rivet is enormous.

It will vanish in hours.

But if I have a giant sheet of zinc and a tiny platinum rivet.

Then the effect is negligible.

The funnel is too small to pull much current.

The zinc barely notices the extra drain.

So the rule of thumb for engineers.

Large anode, small cathode is safe.

Large cathode, small anode is a disaster.

Always.

If you must mix metals, keep the noble ones small.

But wait.

There is an exception.

A weird one that totally flips the script.

Titanium.

Yes.

This is where the EMF series completely fails you.

A mixed potential theory shines.

This is figure 1011.

It's a great one.

Normally,

connecting a meter to platinum makes it corrode faster.

But the tech says if I connect titanium to platinum, the titanium corrosion rate drops.

It stops corroding.

Stops cold.

How is that even possible?

Platinum is still the superhighway, right?

It should be sucking electrons out of the titanium.

It is.

And that is the key.

By connecting titanium to platinum, you do increase the initial current.

You create a massive surge of anodic current from the titanium.

That sounds bad.

But remember our car on the hill analogy.

I do.

Titanium is an active passive metal.

That surge of current acts just like the surge of oxidizer.

It pushes the titanium's potential up.

It pushes it right over the hill.

Exactly.

The galvanic couple provides enough current density to push the titanium past its critical point and into the passive region.

Once it is there, it forms that protective film.

So we are using the enemy, the galvanic couple, to force the metal into a safe state.

It is electrochemical judo.

You use the opponent's strength, the pull of the platinum, to throw the titanium into passivity.

That is incredibly cool.

And it actually sets up the next section perfectly.

If we can manipulate the potential to save the metal, can we also change the metal itself to make it easier to save?

This is alloy evaluation.

This is how we actually design stainless steels.

We don't just guess.

We engineer the curve.

We are looking at figures 1013 through 1016.

We see curves for iron, then type 430 stainless, then 304, then 316.

Imagine that active hill or the nose of the curve again.

For pure iron and acid, that nose is huge.

It sticks way out to the right.

Okay.

That means the critical anodic current density is very high.

Meaning I need a massive amount of oxidizer or current to get it over the hill.

Right.

It is hard to passivate.

Iron and sulfuric acid basically never passivates on its own.

The hill is too steep.

Then we add chromium to make type 430 stainless.

And the nose shrinks.

It pulls back to the left.

It is easier to passivate.

Then we add nickel to get to type 304.

Shrinks even more.

Then molybdenum, which gets us to type 316.

Now the nose is tiny.

The critical current density is very low.

So practically speaking, what does this mean for an engineer selecting a material?

Why do I pay extra for the 316 with molybdenum?

It means that for type 316 stainless, even a weak oxidizer, like the oxygen naturally dissolved in tap water, is enough to push the car over the hill.

The metal passivates itself spontaneously in air -saturated solutions.

Whereas iron would just sit there and rust because the air isn't strong enough to push it over that giant hill.

Exactly.

We are manipulating the chemistry of the alloy so that the environment wins the tug of war in favor of passivity.

And the beautiful thing is, these electrochemical tests generating these curves take a few hours.

Versus the old way.

Put a coupon in a bucket and come back in six months.

Right.

It allows for rapid prototyping of new alloys.

You can see the effect of adding 1 % molybdenum in an afternoon.

It's a game changer.

So we have talked about changing the velocity, changing the area, and changing the alloy.

Now let's talk about just brute forcing it.

Advanced prevention strategies.

There are two big ones here.

A note of protection and noble metal alloying.

Let's start with a notic protection.

This sounds like cathodic protection, which we see on pipelines and boats all the time.

But it's different.

It is the complete opposite.

In cathodic protection, you pump electrons into the metal.

You force the potential down into the immune region.

Okay.

You are basically suppressing the oxidation reaction by sheer force.

Got it.

And a notic protection.

You use a device called a potentiostat.

You pull electrons out of the metal.

You force the potential up.

Wait, pushing the potential up usually makes things corrode faster.

That is the active region.

Unless you push it far enough to get over the hill.

Bingo.

A notic protection is finding that sweet spot midway between the active peak and the trans -passive breakdown and clamping the voltage right there electronically.

So you are holding the metal in the passive state with a battery, essentially.

Yes.

And the beauty of it is efficiency.

Remember, once you are passive, the current needed to stay passive is tiny.

Maintenance current.

Coasting speed.

Right.

So unlike cathodic protection, which can create a massive current draw to protect a bare structure, a notic protection uses a very small current to maintain that film.

It is extremely cheap to run once it is established.

Why don't we use it for everything then?

Why isn't my car anodically protected?

Because it is risky.

High risk, high reward.

If the power fails or if you lose control and the potential drifts, you might fall back into the active region.

And since you are hooked up to a power source?

You would be actively pumping current into a corroding system.

You would dissolve your tank in record time.

It requires sophisticated control.

It is mostly used in very aggressive chemical plants.

Sulfuric acid storage, where the cost savings are worth the complexity.

Okay, now strategy number two.

Noble metal alloying.

This loops back to our titanium -platinum story.

It does.

We saw that coupling titanium to a big piece of platinum protected it.

But mechanically, bolting sheets of platinum inside a reactor is a nightmare.

It is expensive.

It breaks.

It is hard to build.

So what is the fix?

What if you melted a tiny amount of platinum like say 0 .1 % or even less into the titanium itself when you cast it?

Like a homeopathic dose of platinum.

A little more scientific than homeopathy.

But yes, the distribution is key.

When this alloy starts to corrode, the titanium atoms dissolve.

But the platinum atoms don't.

They stay behind on the surface.

So as the surface wears down slightly, you get an enrichment of platinum.

Exactly.

You effectively build your own galvanic couple at the microscopic level.

I see.

Those little platinum sites act as the superhighway for hydrogen evolution we talked about.

They drive the local potential up.

And since they drive the potential up?

They push the surrounding titanium into the passive state.

It is automatic, built -in anodic protection without any external power source.

Does it actually work?

Or is this just theory?

The data in Table 10 -1 is shocking.

Pure titanium in boiling sulfuric acid corrodes at 460 mils per year.

Mils per year?

Thousands of an inch.

So that is nearly half an inch of metal gone in a year.

That is a massive failure.

That is a hole in the tank in a month.

Add 0 .5 % platinum.

The rate drops to 2 mils per year.

From 460 to 2.

That is the power of mixed potential theory.

You turn a material that fails in weeks into one that lasts decades, just by adding a trace element that theoretically, according to the EMF series, should have caused galvanic corrosion.

It really flips the script.

It shows that if you understand the mechanism, you can break the rules of thumb.

You can break the rules of thumb because you are following the actual laws of nature.

Alright, we have one final segment, and it is about how we actually see any of this.

Because corrosion is usually slow.

If I am managing a nuclear plant, I cannot wait a year to see if the pipe is getting thinner.

No.

We need real -time data.

This brings us to corrosion rate techniques.

How do we measure the invisible?

The text describes two main methods.

Tafel extrapolation and linear polarization.

Let's start with Tafel.

This is the old -school method.

It is.

Figures 1020 and 1021 show this.

The idea is to take your metal sample and force it to corrode by applying voltage.

You push it away from its natural state, maybe 300 millivolts up and 300 millivolts down.

That is a pretty big swing electrically.

It is.

You plot the current versus the potential on a semi -log graph.

Because of the nature of the reaction equations, you get these V -shaped curves.

The arms of the V should be straight lines.

And you are looking for the intersection.

The Tafel regions.

If you take a ruler and draw a line along the straight part of the anodic curve and cathodic curve back towards the middle,

the point where they cross is X marks the spot.

That is your natural corrosion rate, what we call I -core.

But you said this is old -school.

What is the problem with it?

Well, to get those straight lines, you have to push the metal quite far.

You might damage the surface.

You are effectively dissolving it to measure it.

So it's destructive.

It can be.

Plus, real -world data is messy.

Finding that perfect straight line can be subjective.

So enter the modern champion,

linear polarization.

This is the genius move.

Instead of pushing the metal 300 millivolts, what if we just tickle it?

Just push it.

10 millivolts.

A tiny nudge.

A tiny nudge.

If you look at the curve right near the origin, right near the natural potential, it isn't a log curve.

It is a straight line.

Linear.

Hence the name.

And the slope of that line contains the answer.

Right.

Equation 10 .4.

The slope is inversely proportional to the corrosion rate.

Think about it like electrical resistance.

If the slope is steep, it means I have to apply a lot of voltage to get even a tiny bit of current to flow.

High resistance.

The system is fighting back.

High resistance means the reaction is sluggish.

The corrosion rate is low.

Conversely, if the slope is flat.

A tiny voltage change causes a huge surge of current.

Low resistance.

The system is reactive.

High corrosion rate.

And the math is surprisingly simple.

You just take a constant, 0 .026 usually works, divided by the slope, and you have your corrosion rate.

Within a factor of three or so, yes.

It is an estimation, but it is instant.

And because the voltage swing is so small?

It is non -destructive.

You can install a linear polarization probe inside a working chemical reactor.

It can take a reading every five minutes without affecting the pipe it's measuring.

So if the process engineer accidentally dumps too much acid in, the corrosion engineer sees the spike on their monitor immediately.

Real -time corrosion monitoring.

It changed the industry.

It turned corrosion from a forensic science.

Why did it break?

Into a control science.

How do we stop it breaking right now?

We have covered a massive amount of ground today.

From the oxidizer paradox and the car on the hill, to the nuances of velocity, the myth of the EMF series, alloying, and finally measurement.

It is a dense chapter.

But if you are going to be a corrosion engineer,

this is your toolkit.

This is the difference between guessing and engineering.

If we synthesize this, what is the big picture for the listener?

The big picture is that corrosion is not random bad luck.

It is a deterministic system governed by current and potential.

It is a tug of war between the anodic reaction, dissolving, and the cotic reaction, reduction.

And the engineer's job is to rig the game.

Exactly.

We rig it by adding chrome to the metal.

We rig it by pumping the fluid faster.

We rig it by using a potentiostat or adding platinum.

If you can control the current, you control the corrosion.

I want to leave the listeners with a thought about passivity.

We have talked about it as the safe state.

But looking at the curve, that cliff, it feels precarious.

It is.

Our entire industrial civilization, stainless steel bridges, chemical plants, nuclear reactors,

relies on a film of oxide that is nanometers thick.

We are balancing on a tightrope.

And paradoxically, we stay on that tightrope by adding stress.

We add oxidizers.

We add noble metals.

We push the system harder to force it into resilience.

That is a profound observation.

In corrosion, the most stable state isn't always the one at rest.

Sometimes you have to push a system to its limit to trigger its defense mechanism.

A little bit of stress creates passivity.

Maybe there's a life lesson in there, too.

Maybe there is.

Just don't let anyone scratch your surface while you're coasting.

Exactly.

Stay passive.

Stay safe.

Thanks for diving deep with us.

A pleasure.

See you on the next one.