Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-n9wrp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-20T03:23:39.635Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Development of Secondary Phases on Synroc Leached at 150˚C

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 February 2011

Gregory R. Lumpkin
Affiliation:
Advanced Materials Program, Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation, Private Mail Bag 1, Menai 2234, NSW, Australia.
Katherine L. Smith
Affiliation:
Advanced Materials Program, Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation, Private Mail Bag 1, Menai 2234, NSW, Australia.
Mark G. Blackford
Affiliation:
Advanced Materials Program, Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation, Private Mail Bag 1, Menai 2234, NSW, Australia.
Get access

Abstract

Electron microscopy techniques were used to identify secondary phases on the surface of Synroc after exposure to doubly deionized water (DDW) at 150 ˚C for time periods up to 532 days. After one day, Ti02 develops on perovskite in the form of polycrystalline crusts of anatase or epitaxial crystals of brookite (± anatase), and as scattered single crystals on hollandite and rutile-Magnéli phases. With increasing exposure time the anatase crusts exhibit slow grain growth and development of preferred orientation; whereas, the epitaxial brookite crystals appear to grow more rapidly. Dissolution of perovskite and P-bearing intermetallic particles results indirectly in the precipitation of monazite after 84 days. Additional alteration products observed over a range of time include crystalline Al-O-H phases and amorphous to poorly crystalline Fe-O-H phases which form as a result of the dissolution of Al-rich oxides and Fe-bearing intermetallic grains, respectively. A poorly crystalline Ru-O-H phase was found as an alteration product of Ru-bearing intermetallic particles after exposure to DDW for 336 days.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1995

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 Pham, D.K., Neall, F.B., Myhra, S., Smart, R.St.C. and Turner, P.S.: Materials Research Society Symposium Proceedings, Vol. 127, 231240 (1989).Google Scholar
2 Smith, K.L., Hart, K.P., Lumpkin, G.R., McGlinn, P., Lam, P. and Blackford, M.G.: Materials Research Society Symposium Proceedings, Vol. 212, 167174 (1991).Google Scholar
3 Lumpkin, G.R., Smith, K.L. and Blackford, M.G.: Journal of Materials Research, 6, 22182233 (1991).Google Scholar
4 Smith, K.L., Lumpkin, G.R., Blackford, M.G., Day, R.A. and Hart, K.P.: Journal of Nuclear Materials, 190, 287294 (1992).Google Scholar
5 Kastrissios, T., Stephenson, M., Turner, P.S. and White, T.J.: Journal of the American Ceramic Society, 70, C-144C-146 (1987).Google Scholar
6 Myhra, S., Delogu, P., Giorgi, R. and Riviere, J.C.: Journal of Materials Science, 23, 15141520 (1988).Google Scholar
7 Murakami, T.: Journal of Nuclear Materials, 135, 288291 (1985).Google Scholar
8 Pepin, J.G., Vance, E.R. and McCarthy, G.J.: Materials Research Bulletin, 16, 627633 (1981).Google Scholar
9 Boatner, L.A. and Sales, B.C.: Radioactive Waste Forms for the Future (Lutze, W. and Ewing, R.C., eds.), North-Holland, Amsterdam, p. 495564 (1988).Google Scholar
10 Clarke, D.R., Jantzen, CM. and Harker, A.B.: Nuclear and Chemical Waste Management, 3, 5966 (1982).Google Scholar