2008
DOI: 10.1016/j.jnucmat.2007.12.007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Corrosion of UO2 and ThO2: A quantum-mechanical investigation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

9
42
3

Year Published

2009
2009
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 61 publications
(54 citation statements)
references
References 64 publications
9
42
3
Order By: Relevance
“…The surface was prepared using deoxygenated aqueous solutions, and no effort was made to remove bound hydroxyl or water [29], which would require heating in UHV. Previous theoretical studies predict surface U-OH and U-OH 2 bond lengths of 2.2 and 2.6 Å, respectively [22,28], consistent with the CTR results. Given that the binding energy difference between Slab 2 and Slab 3 interstitials for a hydroxylated surface is very small (Fig.…”
Section: +supporting
confidence: 84%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…The surface was prepared using deoxygenated aqueous solutions, and no effort was made to remove bound hydroxyl or water [29], which would require heating in UHV. Previous theoretical studies predict surface U-OH and U-OH 2 bond lengths of 2.2 and 2.6 Å, respectively [22,28], consistent with the CTR results. Given that the binding energy difference between Slab 2 and Slab 3 interstitials for a hydroxylated surface is very small (Fig.…”
Section: +supporting
confidence: 84%
“…These findings differ from those of ultrahigh vacuum (UHV) experiments, which indicate incomplete U coordination and outward relaxation of U atoms [15]. DFT calculations indicate that an O-terminated surface should have a U-O adatom bond length of ~1.8 Å regardless of whether subsurface interstitials are present, and the surface U should be fully oxidized to U(VI), producing a surface species that resembles half of the uranyl cation [22,23]. Our calculations indicate this "hemi-uranyl" termination energetically favors incorporation of the first oxygen interstitial layer into Slab 3, as observed with CTR, whereas hydroxyl termination slightly favors Slab 2 (Fig.…”
Section: +contrasting
confidence: 67%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…(B.1) (e.g., Wu and Nancollas, 1998). The surface energy value of 0.73 J/m 2 for UO 2 was estimated starting from a value computed by Skomurski et al (2006) (1.194 J/m 2 for the (100) face, consistent with cubic UO 2 ) then lowered to consider hydration based on the same average ratio of anhydrous to hydrous surface energies reported by Mazeina and Navrotsky (2007) for Fe (hydr)oxides (on the basis of similar enthalpies of water adsorption; Skomurski et al, 2008). This value is in the range of mean surface energies at 25°C ($0.85 ± 0.6 J/m 2 ) obtained from correlations presented by Hall and Mortimer (1987), and yields a solubility consistent with that given by Guillaumont et al (2003) for UO 2(am) at a particle size of about 3 nm when surface stress is neglected (and thus assumed to be compensated by hydration) (Fig.…”
Section: Appendix Bmentioning
confidence: 99%