Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-swr86 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-22T22:48:25.675Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Waste Glass/Repository Interactions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 February 2011

D.E. Clark
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Engineering, College of Engineering University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32611, USA.
C.A. Maurer
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Engineering, College of Engineering University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32611, USA.
Get access

Abstract

The effects of repository material and a tailored backfill or overpack on the leaching behavior of glass have been studied. Two types of glasses were used in this investigation: 1) Model glasses comprised of 33 mol% alkali oxide-67 mol% SiO2 , and 2) alkali borosilicate glasses with and without simulated wastes. Several types of repository material were placed in the same containers as the glasses to determine if their presence would alter the extent of leaching. A backfill material consisting of phosphate slime/sand mixtures was evaluated with the same procedure. The results indicate that the leaching behavior of the glass may be influenced by the presence of some materials. Preliminary results of a 16½ month burial experiment in Florida are also discussed.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1982

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. Dilmore, M.F., Clark, D.E. and Hench, L.L., (1979), Am. Ceram. Soc. Bull. 58(11), 11111124.Google Scholar
2. Iler, R.K., (1973), I. Colloid Interface Sci., 43(2), 399408.10.1016/0021-9797(73)90386-XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Materials Characterization Center (MCC), Results of Round Robin Leach Test, Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratory Richland, Washington 1980.Google Scholar
4. Tait, J.C. and Jensen, C.D., 1981, in Proceedings of 6th University Conference on Glass Science, Penn. State University.Google Scholar
5. Werme, L. et al. , This Proceedings, p. 135.Google Scholar
6. Wicks, G. et al. , This Proceedings, p. 15.Google Scholar
7. Materials Characterization Center, DOE/TIC-11400, Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington, 1982.Google Scholar
8. Hench, L.L. and Clark, D.E., October 1981, Annual Report to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Contract No. NRC-04–78–252.Google Scholar
9. Clark, D.E., Urwongse, L. and Maurer, C., (1982), Nuclear Technology, 56, 212225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Moudgil, B.M., Private Communication.Google Scholar
11. Whitney, E.D., Moudgil, B.M. and Onoda, Jr., G.Y., , 1977, Report to the Center for Research in Mining and Mineral Resources, College of Engineering, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida.Google Scholar
12. Clark, D.E. Pantano, Jr. C.G., and Hench, L.L., 1979, Corrosion of Glass, Magazines for Industry, Inc., New York.Google Scholar
13. Maurer, C., Purdy, B. and Clark, D.E., in preparation.Google Scholar
14. Hench, L.L., Private communication.Google Scholar