Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-cfpbc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T02:12:04.062Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Accelerated Testing of Waste forms using a Novel Pressurized Unsaturated flow (PUF) Method

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 September 2012

B. P. McGrail ,
P. F. Martin  and
C. W. Lindenmeier
B. P. McGrail
Affiliation:
Applied Geology and Geochemistry Department, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, Washington 99352, bp_mcgrail@pnl.gov
P. F. Martin
Affiliation:
Applied Geology and Geochemistry Department, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, Washington 99352, bp_mcgrail@pnl.gov
C. W. Lindenmeier
Affiliation:
Applied Geology and Geochemistry Department, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, Washington 99352, bp_mcgrail@pnl.gov
Get access

Abstract

A new experimental technique has been developed to test waste forms and other proposed engineered-barrier materials under unsaturated conditions. Laboratory experiments using the pressurized unsaturated flow (PUF) apparatus have been performed with a Na-Ca-Al borosilicate glass being studied for immobilization of low-activity tank wastes and a reference borosilicate glass for immobilization of high-level wastes (SRL-202). A complex coupling between glass corrosion, secondary phase precipitation, and unsaturated flow behavior was observed. Precipitation of a family of Na-Ca-Al zeolites was also found to cause an acceleration in the reaction rate of the low-activity waste glass. This same effect was observed after approximately 1 year in high solid-to-liquid ratio batch tests but after only 12 days using the PUF method at the same temperature. The onset of secondary phase precipitation was tracked by monitoring changes in volumetric water content and by inline chemical analysis. Finally, elemental release of the major glass components and solution pH were found to differ under unsaturated flow-through conditions as compared with saturated, batch tests. These findings, while preliminary, have important implications for understanding and modeling glass corrosion behavior under unsaturated conditions.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 465: Symposium II – Scienfific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management XX , 1996 , 253
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1997

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

REFERENCES

1. Eiholzer, C. R. 1995. Disposal Facility Data for the Interim Performance Assessment. WHC-SD-RPT-159, Rev. 0, Westinghouse Hanford Company, Richland, Washington.10.2172/81104Google Scholar
2. Mann, F. M., Eiholzer, C. R., Lu, A. H., Rittmann, P. D., Kline, N. W., Chen, Y., McGrail, B. P., Williamson, G. F., and Brown, N. R.. 1996. Hanford Low-Level Tank Waste Interim Performance Assessment. WHC-EP-0884, Westinghouse Hanford Company, Richland, Washington.10.2172/326848Google Scholar
3. McGrail, B. P., and Mahoney, L. A.. 1995. Selection of a Computer Code for Hanford Low-Level Waste Engineered-System Performance Assessment. PNL-10830, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, Washington.10.2172/118381Google Scholar
4. Bates J. K., Jardine, L. J., and Steindler, M. J.. 1982. “Hydration Aging of Nuclear Waste Glass”. Science 218: 51–54.Google Scholar
5. Bates, J. K., and Gerding, T. J.. 1985. NNWSI Phase II Materials Interaction Test Procedure and Preliminary Results. ANL-84–81, Argonne National Laboratory, Argorme, Illinois.10.2172/59354Google Scholar
6. Chen, Y., McGrail, B. P., and Engel, D. W.. 1996. “Source-Term Analysis for Hanford Low-Activity Tank Waste Using the Reaction-Transport Code AREST-CT”. In this volume of the Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management XX.10.1557/PROC-465-1051Google Scholar
7. McGrail, B. P., Lindenmeier, C. W., Martin, P. F., and Gee, G. W.. 1996. “The Pressurized Unsaturated Flow (PUF) Test: A New Method for Engineered-Barrier Materials Evaluation”. In Proceedings of'the American Ceramic Society, Indianapolis, Indiana, April 14–18, 1996.Google Scholar
8. Wierenga, P. J., Young, M. H., Gee, G. W., Hills, R. G., Kincaid, C. T., Nicholson, T. J., and Cady, R. E.. 1993. Soil Characterization Methods for Unsaturated Low-Level Waste Sites. PNL-8480, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, Washington.10.2172/6677674Google Scholar
9. Ebert, W. L., and Bates, J. K.. 1993. “A Comparison of Glass Reaction at High and Low Glass Surface/Solution Volume”. Nuc. Tech. 104: 372–384.10.13182/NT93-A34898Google Scholar
10. ASTM. 1994. Standard Test Methods for Determining the Chemical Durability of Nuclear Waste Glasses: The Product Consistency Test (PCT). ASTM C1285–94, Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
11. Bakel? Baker?, A.J., Ebert, W. L., and Luo, J. S.. 1995. Long-Term Performance of Glasses for Hanford Low-Level Waste. ANL-84526, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, Illinois.Google Scholar
12. White, M.D. and Oostrom, M.. 1995. STOMP Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases. Theory Guide. PNL-11217, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, Washington.Google Scholar
13. van, Genuchten. 1980. “A Closed-Form Equation for Predicting the Hydraulic Conductivity of Unsaturated Soils”. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 44: 892–898.Google Scholar
14. Ebert, W. L., Bates, J. K., Buck, E. C., and Bradley, C. R.. “Accelerated Glass Reaction Under PCT Conditions”. In Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management XVI, eds. Interrante, C. G. and Pabalan, R. T., Materials Research Society, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvannia.Google Scholar