Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-22dnz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T14:10:18.257Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Radiation stability of natural britholites

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 March 2011

Tatiana S. Yudintseva
Tatiana S. Yudintseva*
Affiliation:
Institute of Geology of Ore Deposits RAS, Staromonetny 35, Moscow, 119017, Russia
Get access

Abstract

Britholite, Ca-REE silicate with apatite structure, is an actinide host phase occurred in vitreous borosilicate waste forms. Such glass-ceramics are considered as potential host phases for immobilization of actinide-containing high-level waste. Crystalline phases have to be radiation resistant for this application. Radiation stability of the britholites was mainly studied by either heavy ions irradiation or incorporation of Cm-244 or Pu-238 and 240. A wide range of critical doses (0.15 - 0.6 dpa at 25°C) and temperatures have been obtained depending on the compositions of the samples. Natural analogue study of the waste forms allows to predict the behavior of actinide host phases for long periods after disposal. Britholites with age from 320 to 2600 millions years, ThO2+UO2 content from 1.0 to 12 wt.%, and cumulative doses from 0.6×1019 to 7.7×1019 α-decays/g have been studied. The britholite becomes amorphous at a dose of 1 dpa (0.9×1019 α-decays/g) and higher. Critical doses for natural minerals are higher than those for synthetic samples, most likely due to re-crystallization during annealing.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 932: Symposium – Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management XXIX , 2006 , 3.1
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2006

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. Rose, P.B., Ojovan, M.I., Hyatt, N.C., Lee, W.E., (Mater. Res. Soc. Proc. 824, Warrendale, PA, 2004), Paper 5.6.Google Scholar
2. Zhao, D., Li, L., Davis, L.L., Weber, W.J., Ewing, R.C., (Mat. Res. Soc. Proc. 663, Warrendale, PA, 2001), pp. 199–206.Google Scholar
3. Ewing, R.C., Weber, W.J., Clinard, F.W., Progress in Nuclear Energy, 29, 63 (1995).Google Scholar
4. Weber, W.J., Matzke, Hj., Material Letters, 5, 9 (1986).Google Scholar
5. Wald, J.W., Weber, W.J., Advances in Ceramics, 8, 71 (1984).Google Scholar
6. Utsunomiya, S., Yudintsev, S., Wang, L.M., Ewing, R.C., J. Nucl. Mater., 322, 180 (2003).Google Scholar
7. Gong, W.L., Wang, L.M., Ewing, R.C., Chen, L.F., Lutze, W., (Mat. Res. Soc. Proc. 465, Pittsburgh, PA, 1997), pp. 649–656.Google Scholar
8. Kupriyanova, I.I., Sidorenko, G.A., Kudrina, M.A., Geology of deposits of rare elements. Rare-earth silicates (Russ.), 26, 23 (1966).Google Scholar
9. Povarennykh, A.S., “Crystal-chemical classification of mineral species” (Russ.), (Kiev, Naukova Dumka, 1966), pp. 310–311.Google Scholar
10. Lumpkin, G.R., Chakoumakos, B.C., Ewing, R.C., Amer. Mineralogist, 71, 569 (1986).Google Scholar