Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T00:53:03.794Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Solids Characterization from Hydrothermal Tests with Spent Fuel

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2011

N.H. Uziemblo
Affiliation:
Westinghouse Hanford Co., P. 0. Box 1970, Richland, WA 99352
L.E. Thomas
Affiliation:
Westinghouse Hanford Co., P. 0. Box 1970, Richland, WA 99352
L.H. Schoenlein
Affiliation:
Westinghouse Hanford Co., P. 0. Box 1970, Richland, WA 99352
B. Mastel
Affiliation:
Westinghouse Hanford Co., P. 0. Box 1970, Richland, WA 99352
E.D. Jenson
Affiliation:
Westinghouse Hanford Co., P. 0. Box 1970, Richland, WA 99352
Get access

Abstract

Reacted solids from 200°C, 25 MPa tests with spent light water reactor fuel and other component materials of a high-level nuclear waste repository in basalt were analyzed by scanning electron microscopy, X-ray powder diffractometry, transmission electron diffraction, Auger electron spectrome- try, and microautoradiography. The work complements solutions analysis from the same tests conducted in Dickson-type rocking autoclaves for the Basalt Waste Isolation Project. Spent fuel reacted very slowly in fuel/water tests, exhibiting noticeable grain boundary etching and uranium silicate formation only after six months. Particle abrasion in the rocking autoclave produced fuel fines that remained apparently unaltered. In spent fuel tests with basalt or basalt and steel, iron smectite clay formed at the expense of mesostasis phases in the basalt. Low concentrations of β-emitters, probably Cs and Tc released from grain boundaries in the fuel, were incorporated in the clay. Steel corroded very slowly under the low-oxygen conditions of the tests, forming minor amounts of magnetite, hematite and wustite. The sluggishness of spent fuel/water and steel/water reactions is attributed to limited availability of oxygen under the test conditions.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1987

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Mahoney, J.J. and Coles, D.G., this proceedings.Google Scholar
2. Seyfried, W.E. Jr., Gordon, P.C., Dickson, F.W., Am. Mineralogist. 64, 646 (1979).Google Scholar
3. Barner, J.O., PNL Report No. 5109, 1984.Google Scholar
4. Allen, C.C., Johnston, R.G., Strope, M.B., RHO Report No. SD-BWI-DP-053, 1985.Google Scholar
5. Dill, J.A., Jones, T.E., Marcy, A.D., RHO Report No. SD-BWI-TD-013, 1985.Google Scholar
6. McKinley, J.P., Rawson, S.A., Horton, D.G., in Microbeam Analysis-1986, edited by Romig, A.D. Jr. and Chambers, W.F. (San Francisco Press, Inc., San Francisco, 1986), pp. 127130.Google Scholar
7. Brown, G. and Brindley, G.W., in Crystal Structures of Clay Minerals and Their X-Rax Identification, edited by Brindley, G.W. and Brown, G. Mineralogical Society, London, 1980), p. 305.Google Scholar
8. Sunder, S. D. et al. , in Proceedings of International Conference on Radioactive Waste Management, edited by Fernaday, M.A. (Canadian Nuclear Society, Toronto, Canada, 1985), pp. 398405.Google Scholar
9. Johnson, L. H. et al. , Nucl. Tech. 56, 238 (1982).Google Scholar
10. Forsythe, R. S. and Werme, L.O., in Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management IX, edited by Werme, L.O. (Materials Research Society, Pennsylvania, 1986) pp. 327336.Google Scholar
11. Grandstaff, D.E. et al. , in Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management VII, edited by McVay, G.L. (North Holland, New York, 1984), pp. 137145.Google Scholar
12. Woodley, R.E. et al. , RHO Report No. RHO-BWI-C-114, 1981.Google Scholar
13. Thomas, L. E. and Gilbert, E. R., in Proceedings of Third International Spent Fuel Storage Technology Symposium/Workshop, April 8-10, 1986, CONF-860417, vol.2, pp. W40-W51.Google Scholar