Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-rkxrd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T13:21:14.751Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Diffusion of Uranium in Compacted Bentonites in the Reducing Condition with Corrosion Products of Iron

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 February 2011

Kazuya Idemitsu ,
Y. Tachi ,
H. Furuya ,
Y. Inagaki  and
T. Arima
Kazuya Idemitsu
Affiliation:
Department of Nuclear Engineering, Kyushu University, Fukuoka 812–81, JAPAN.
Y. Tachi
Affiliation:
Department of Nuclear Engineering, Kyushu University, Fukuoka 812–81, JAPAN.
H. Furuya
Affiliation:
Department of Nuclear Engineering, Kyushu University, Fukuoka 812–81, JAPAN.
Y. Inagaki
Affiliation:
Department of Nuclear Engineering, Kyushu University, Fukuoka 812–81, JAPAN.
T. Arima
Affiliation:
Department of Nuclear Engineering, Kyushu University, Fukuoka 812–81, JAPAN.
Get access

Abstract

In high-level waste repository, a carbon steel overpack will be corroded after closure. This will create a reducing environment in the vicinity of the repository. Reducing conditions are expected to retard the migration of redox-sensitive radionuclides such as uranium.

The apparent diffusion coefficients of uranium were measured in compacted bentonites (Kunigel VI® and Kunipia F®, JAPAN) in contact with carbon steel and its corrosion products under reducing conditions or without carbon steel under oxidizing conditions for comparison. The apparent diffusion coefficients measured were 10-12 to 10-14 m2/s under oxidizing conditions and 10-13 to 10-14 m2/s under reducing conditions. There were significant effects of redox conditions, dry density (0.8 to 2.0 g/cm3) and montmorillonite contents (60% for Kunigel VI or 100% for Kunipia F) on the apparent diffusion coefficients. The sorption of uranium on corrosion products of iron was smaller than that on montmorillonite. Montmorillonite density could be a good index to explain density dependence of the diffusion coefficients under the reducing conditions. Uranium would diffuse in free pore water with diffusion coefficients greater than 10-13 m2/s in low density bentonites under both redox conditions because the diffusion coefficients depended on sorption coefficients. Since diffusion coefficients were independent of sorption coefficients in high density bentonites where free pore water is scarce, surface diffusion might occur with coefficients were of about 10-13 m2/s.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 412: Symposium V – Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management XIX , 1995 , 683
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1996

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. Trestenfelt, B., Kipatsi, H., Anderson, K., Allard, B. and Olofsson, U. in Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management V, edited by Lutze, W. (Mater. Res. Soc. Proc. 11, New York, NY, 1982), pp.659–668.Google Scholar
2. Muurinen, A., Penttila-Hiltunen, P. and Uusheimo, K. in Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management XII, edited by Lutze, W. and Ewing, R.C. (Mater. Res. Soc. Proc. 127, Pittsburgh, PA, 1989), pp.74 3 -7 4 8.Google Scholar
3. Sato, H., Ashida, T., Kohara, Y. and Yui, M. in Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management XVI, edited by Interrante, C.G. and Pabalan, R.T. (Mater. Res. Soc. Proc. 294, Pittsburgh, PA, 1993), pp.403–408.Google Scholar
4. Crank, J., The Mathematics of Diffusion, 2nd ed. (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1975), pp. 11–21.Google Scholar
5. Idemitsu, K., Furuya, H. and Inagaki, Y. in Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management XVI, edited by Interrante, C.G. and Pabalan, R.T. (Mater. Res. Soc. Proc. 294, Pittsburgh, PA, 1993), pp. 467–4 74.Google Scholar
6. Idemitsu, K., Furuya, H. Tachi, Y. and Inagaki, Y. in Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management XVI1, edited by Barkatt, A. and Konynenburg, R.A. Van (Mater. Res. Soc. Proc. 333, Pittsburgh, PA, 1994), pp.939–946.Google Scholar
7. Grenthe, I., Fuger, J., Koning, R.J.M., Lemire, R.J., Muller, A.B., Nguyen-Trung, C. and Wanner, H., Chemical Thermodynamics of Uranium, edited by Wanner, H. and Forest, I. (North Holland, Amsterdam, 1992).Google Scholar
8. Miyahara, K., J.Nuclear Science and Technology 30 (4),314 (1993).Google Scholar
9. Sneliman, M., Uotila, H. and Rantanen, J. in Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management X, edited by Bates, J.K. and Seefeldt, W.B. (Mater. Res. Soc. Proc. 84, Pittsburgh, PA, 1987), pp. 781–790.Google Scholar
10. Grambow, B., Hermansson, H.P., Bjoner, I.K. and Werme, L. in Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management IX, edited by Werme, L.O. (Mater. Res. Soc. Proc. 50, Pittsburgh, PA, 1985), pp. 187–202.Google Scholar
11. Wanner, H. in Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management IX, edited by Werme, L.O. (Mater. Res. Soc. Proc. 50, Pittsburgh, PA, 1985), pp.509–516.Google Scholar
12. Rasmusson, A. and Neretnieks, I., KBS Technical Report 83–37, (1983).Google Scholar
13. Cheung, S.C.H. and Gray, M.N. in Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management XII, edited by Lutze, W. and Ewing, R.C. (Mater. Res. Soc. Proc. 127, Pittsburgh, PA, 1989), pp.677–681.Google Scholar