Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-7drxs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-23T06:59:00.886Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Influence of Defect Interactions on Diffusion Processes in UO2+x: a Key Issue for Understanding the Behaviour of Spent Nuclear Fuel.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 March 2011

Georgette Petot-Ervas
Affiliation:
Laboratoire Structures Propriètès et Modèlisation des Solides, CNRS-Ecole Centrale Paris, 92295 Châtenay-Malabry, FR, gpetot@spms.ecp.fr, baldinozzi@spms.ecp.fr
Gianguido Baldinozzi
Affiliation:
Laboratoire Structures Propriètès et Modèlisation des Solides, CNRS-Ecole Centrale Paris, 92295 Châtenay-Malabry, FR, gpetot@spms.ecp.fr, baldinozzi@spms.ecp.fr
Pascal Ruello
Affiliation:
Laboratoire Structures Propriètès et Modèlisation des Solides, CNRS-Ecole Centrale Paris, 92295 Châtenay-Malabry, FR, gpetot@spms.ecp.fr, baldinozzi@spms.ecp.fr CEA Cadarache, DEC/S3C/LECMI Bât. 316, 13108 St. Paul-lez-Durance, FR.
Lionel Desgranges
Affiliation:
CEA Cadarache, DEC/S3C/LECMI Bât. 316, 13108 St. Paul-lez-Durance, FR.
Georgeta Chirlesan
Affiliation:
Laboratoire Structures Propriètès et Modèlisation des Solides, CNRS-Ecole Centrale Paris, 92295 Châtenay-Malabry, FR, gpetot@spms.ecp.fr, baldinozzi@spms.ecp.fr
Claude Petot
Affiliation:
Laboratoire Structures Propriètès et Modèlisation des Solides, CNRS-Ecole Centrale Paris, 92295 Châtenay-Malabry, FR, gpetot@spms.ecp.fr, baldinozzi@spms.ecp.fr
Get access

Abstract

The transformation of UO2 into U3O8 is of technological and academical interest because of the severe consequences on the spent nuclear fuel management. The structural mechanism responsible for the isothermal transformation of UO2 into U3O8 seems still unclear. Several phases (UO2+x, U4O9, β-U3O7, α-U3O7, U3O8 were reported but their true structures, phase boundaries between their existence domains and matter transport processes are still a matter of debate. Gathering accurate information on the behaviour of uranium oxide is a key issue for understanding the behaviour of spent nuclear fuel. The chemical diffusion coefficient ( ~ D) of UO2+x was determined by electrical conductivity experiments. Measurements were performed in transient state for departure from stoichiometry in the range 0<x<0.17 (10-11<P(O2)<10-8 atm.)and for 973<T<1673 K. We have found that ~ D is a decreasing function of the departure from stoichiometry x. This behaviour was attributed to the presence of singly charged (2:2:2) Willis defects as suggested by equilibrium conductivity measurements. The decrease of Dchim can be explained by transport processes occurring via a dynamic exchange between isolated mobile defects and complex defects frozen in clusters or domains. At higher P(O2), near U4O9, the time to reach an equilibrium electrical conductivity value becomes increasingly long. This suggests the presence either of large defect aggregates or of complex defects arranged into domains. Furthermore, the analysis of the transport processes in non equilibrium conditions has allowed us to show that the results of ~ D are consistent with those of the oxygen diffusion coefficient within the P(O2) and temperature range of stability of the [2:2:2] clusters.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2004

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. Haase, V., Manes, L., Schultz, B., Schumacher, G., Vollath, D., Uranium, Gmelin Handbook of Inorganic Chemistry, supp. volume C4, Ed. Keim, R., Keller, C., Springer-Verlag, Berlin (1986)Google Scholar
2. Petot-Ervas, G., Petot, C., Monceau, D., Sproule, G., Graham, M., J.Am.Cer.Soc., 78, 23142320 (1995)Google Scholar
3. Korfiatis, D., Potamianou, S., Tsagarakis, E., Thoma, K., Solid State Ionics, 136–137, 13671371 (2000)Google Scholar
4. Murch, G.E., Catlow, C.R.A, J.Chem. Soc. Faraday Trans., 2, 11571169 (1987)Google Scholar
5. Willis, B., Acta Crystallogr., 18, 7576 (1965)Google Scholar
6. Ruello, P., Petot-Ervas, G., Petot, C., Desgranges, L., J.Am.Cer.Soc. (in press)Google Scholar
7. Dudney, N.J., Coble, R.L., Tuller, H.L., J.Am.Cer.Soc., 64, 11, 627631 (1981)Google Scholar
8. Bayoglu, A.S., Lorenzelli, R., Solid State Ionics, 12, 53-66 (1984)Google Scholar
9. Bittel, J.T., J.Am.Cer.Soc. 52, 815 (1968)Google Scholar
10. Lay, K.W., J.Am.Cer.Soc. 30, 1625 (1969)Google Scholar
11. Marin, J.F., report CEA-Nu883 (1968)Google Scholar
12. Lierde, W. Van, unpublished results; Cited by Murch, G.E., Phil.Mag., 32, 6, 11201140 (1975)Google Scholar
13. Murphy, J., Norwood, K.S.. A revised recommendation for oxygen self-diffusion in stoichiometric and hyperstoichiometric uranium dioxide, report UKAEA Harwell Laboratory (1989)Google Scholar
14. Taskinen, A., Kullberg, H., J.Nucl.Mater., 83, N°2, 333334 (1929)Google Scholar
15. Contamin, P., Bacmann, J.J., Marin, J.F., J.Nucl.Mater., 42, 5464 (1972)Google Scholar
16. Hagemark, K., Brogli, M., J. Inorg. Nucl. Chem., 28, 28372850 (1966)Google Scholar
17. Catlow, C.R.A., Proc. R. Soc. Lond.,A 353, 533561 (1077)Google Scholar