Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T23:37:23.285Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Surface Charge Density Determination of Micaceous Minerals by 235U Fission Particle Track Method

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2024

S. Y. Lee*
Affiliation:
Department of Soil Science, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706, U.S.A.
M. L. Jackson
Affiliation:
Department of Soil Science, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706, U.S.A.
*
*Present address: Department of Soil & Crop Sciences, Texas A & M University, College Station, TX 77843, U.S.A.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The surface charge density of mica (001) cleavages was determined by counting the number of fission particle tracks in a given area of a 6-mm muscovite disc replica with optical and scanning electron microscopy after saturation of the layer charge by washing with 0.5 M UO2(NO3)2 solution, dilution of the excess salt by washing with 0.01 M UO2(NO3)2 in 0.005 M HNO3 (pH 2.4), blotting off the excess liquid, thermal neutron activation in contact with the muscovite disc, etching the muscovite, and counting the 235U fission tracks/cm2. In initial studies, the uranyl cations were found to hydrolyze from the cleavage surface continuously during the washings with water, ethanol or acetone to remove excess salts, but the uranyl cations in the interlayers near broken edges and crystallographical steps were strongly retained even against washings with 0.5 M CaCl2 solution. The hydrolysis of UO22 + from the smooth portions of the flake surfaces was avoided by the use of three 1-hr final washings with the 0.01 M UO2(NO3)2 in 0.005 M HNO3 solution. Each flake was pressed between filter papers three times to remove the excess solution. A negligible amount of excess salt remained on the cover glass controls. The UO22 + cations retained (mean, 3.6 ± 0.2 × 10−7 mequiv./cm2) on the cleavage surfaces of various micas were nearly equivalent to the theoretical surface charge (cation exchange capacity, 3.5 × 10−7 mequiv./cm2), showing that hydrolysis was prevented. The uranium on the unblemished mica planar surfaces increased with increasing uranyl concentrations in the final washing solution, indicating that the excess salt remaining on the surfaces had become significant. With a given UO22 + salt concentration, the uranium on the surface increased on increasing the solution pH from 2.5 to 3.5, attributable to the formation of polymeric ions such as U2O52 + and U3O82 + with higher uranium retention per unit positive charge equivalent to the fixed negative charge of the mineral surface. Uranyl cations replaced much of the interlayer cations from vermiculites even after K, Rb and Cs presaturation and drying from 110°C were employed. Strong adsorption of uranyl cations (in a form not replaced by washings with a neutral salt solution), which occurred in the defects of micaceous minerals, is important in the interpretation of actinide element retention in soils and sediments wherein these minerals are abundant.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Clay Minerals Society 1977

References

Cordfunke, E. H. P. (1969) Chemistry of Uranium, pp. 99107. Elsevier, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Cowan, G. A. (1976) A natural fission reactor: Sci. Am. 235(1), 3647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, M. L. (1963) Interlayering of expansible layer silicates in soils by chemical weathering: Clays and Clay Minerals 11, 2946.Google Scholar
Jackson, M. L. (1974) Soil Chemical Analysis—Advanced Course, 2nd edition. Published by the author, 895 pp.Google Scholar
Jackson, M. L., Lee, S. Y., Ugolini, F. C. and Helmke, P. A. (1977) Age and uranium content of soil micas from Antarctica by the fission particle track replica method: Soil Sci. 123, 241248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, S. Y., Jackson, M. L. and Sachs, I. B. (1974) Fission particle tracks in micas and micaceous vermiculites as related to chemical weathering and cation exchange properties: Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 38, 423428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, S. Y., Jackson, M. L. and Brown, J. L. (1975) Micaceous vermiculite, glauconite, and mixed-layer kaolinite–montmorillonite examination by ultramicrotomy and high resolution electron microscopy: Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 39, 793800.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mokma, D. L., Syers, J. K. and Jackson, M. L. (1970) Cation exchange capacity and weathering of muscovite macroflakes: Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 34, 146151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rabinowitch, E. I. and Belford, R. L. (1964) Spectroscopy and Photochemistry of Uranyl Compounds, pp. 91110. Macmillan, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seitz, M. G. and Taylor, R. E. (1974) Uranium variation in a dated fossil bone series from Olduvai Gorge, Tanzania: Archaeometry 16(2), 129135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sutton, J. (1949) The hydrolysis of the uranyl ion. Part 1: J. Chem. Soc. S275.Google Scholar
Tsvatan, O. and Radka, Z. (1973) Sorption of uranium (VI) on clays from uranyl sulfate solutions: Rudodobiv 28, 1820.Google Scholar
van Olphen, H. (1963) An Introduction to Clay Colloid Chemistry: Interscience, New York.Google Scholar
Yastrebov, M. T. (1973) Natural radioactivity of some soils in landscapes of the Tamov forest steppe: Vestn. Mosk. Univ., Biol., Pochvoved. 28, 9196.Google Scholar