Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T18:33:35.665Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Surface analytical study of uranium exposed to low pressures of hydrogen at ∼ 80°C

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 July 2012

Robert M. Harker
Affiliation:
AWE Aldermaston, Aldermaston, Reading, RG7 4PR, UK
Afiya H. Chohollo
Affiliation:
AWE Aldermaston, Aldermaston, Reading, RG7 4PR, UK
Get access

Abstract

Identical samples of uranium coupons were prepared and each exposed to hydrogen for different times (where this time is significantly less than a classically understood ‘induction time’). Samples were prepared from rolled depleted uranium stock: as-received oxide was removed on all surfaces and two faces (~12x12 mm) were polished to a sub-micron standard. Samples were individually taken through a Vacuum Thermal Pre-Treatment cycle from room temperature to 200°C to the reaction temperature (80°C) over 40 hours and subsequently exposed to 10 mbar O2 for 24 hours. After O2 was removed, the samples were exposed to hydrogen for pre-determined times of up to 48 minutes. Examination of the samples by Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) has, as expected, identified small features protruding from the surface believed to have been caused by sub-surface precipitation of UH3. In general these features are circular and isolated from each other, have a diameter of less than 3μm and appear as either ‘flat-topped’ or ‘domed’ morphology. In addition, longer time exposure samples show a predominance of ‘area attack’ where coalesced sub-surface precipitation appears to be confined to particular metal grains. X-Ray Diffraction (XRD) data show an increase in the quantity of UH3 with time.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2012

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. Ben-Eliyahu, Y., Brill, M., Mintz, M. H., J. Chem. Phys., 111, 6053 (1999).Google Scholar
2. Arkush, R., Venkert, A., Aizenshtein, M., Zalkind, S., Moreno, D., Brill, M., Mintz, M. H. and Shamir, N., J. Alloys Compd. 244, 197 (1996).Google Scholar
3. Owen, L.W. and Scudamore, R.A., Corros. Sci., 6, 461 (1966).Google Scholar
4. Moreno, D., Arkush, R., Zalkind, S. and Shamir, N., J. Nucl. Mater. 230, 181 (1996).Google Scholar
5. Bloch, J., Simca, F., Kroup, M., Stern, A., Shmariahu, D., Mintz, M. H., J. Less-Common Met., 103, 163 (1984).Google Scholar
6. Brill, M., Halevy, I., Kimmel, G., Mintz, M., Bloch, J., J. Alloys Compd., 330-332, 93 (2002).Google Scholar
7. Benamar, G., Schweke, D., Bloch, J., Livneh, L., Mintz, M., J. Alloys Compd., 477, 188 (2009).Google Scholar
8. For example, see Bloch, J., Mintz, M. H.., J. Nucl. Mater. 110, 251255 (1982).Google Scholar
9. Harker, R., Chohollo, A. H., Brierley, M., Parsley, M., in preparation.Google Scholar
10. Harker, R., Chohollo, A. H., Gover, R., in preparation.Google Scholar