Kinetics of the Graphite‐Uranium Dioxide Reaction from 1400° to 1756°C

Lindemer, T.B.; Allen, M. D.; Leitnaker, J.M.

doi:10.1111/j.1151-2916.1969.tb09173.x

Cited by 33 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is a key point in the preparation of the samples, since the reaction between the U x O y and carbon is controlled by the diffusion of carbon and oxygen [28], so that a good contact between the reactants is necessary for the reaction to proceed satisfactorily.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Developing uranium dicarbide–graphite porous materials for the SPES project

Biasetto¹,

Zanonato²,

Carturan³

et al. 2010

Journal of Nuclear Materials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Developing uranium dicarbide–graphite porous materials for the SPES project

Biasetto¹,

Zanonato²,

Carturan³

et al. 2010

Journal of Nuclear Materials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Several have reported difficulty in achieving low oxygen with this technique (Stoops andHamme 1962 andFrost 1963), but more recent work on UC by Matthews and Herbst (1983) showed that with proper care and equipment, the oxygen could be reduced to 360 ±95 ppm. Lindemer et al (1969) reported that removal of oxygen from a spherical UO 2 particle is controlled by diffusion of oxygen through the UC 2 layer of the microsphere to the surface. Suzuki et al (1982) added that the kinetics of the carbothermic synthesis of uranium carbides may be influenced by the characteristics of the UO 2 feed powder and shape of the compacts.…”

Section: Techniques For Fabricating Ug>mentioning

confidence: 99%

Experimental investigation of uranium dicarbide densification and the influence of free carbon diffusion

Chidester¹

1991

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

for providing funding for this research. Thanks for the opportunity to use an outstanding fuels development facility and equipment during the course of this investigation.Gratitude is extended to Dr. R. Bruce Matthews for interactive discussions, support, and patience during the performance of this work.The author would like to thank Professor Mohamed El-Genk for his encouragement and helpful discussion, which added greatly to the accomplishment of this work.Thanks to Ed Storms for many valuable insights, tutoring, and discussions.A special thanks goes to Gene Moore for his tireless effort in helping prepare, run, and measure samples throughout this investigation. Without his help, little would have been accomplished. Thanks to all the technicians in the Nuclear Fuels group who contributed much to this work.The author is grateful to Nora Rink for her efforts in helping to prepare this manuscript. List of Figures (continued) 5.3.2 UC2 densification on tungsten, niobium, and tantalum with time at 2373 K 5.3.3 UC 2 densification on tungsten, niobium, and tantalum at 2273 K 33 5.3.4 UC 2 densification on tungsten with time at 2273 K 33 5.3.5 UCj densification on niobium with time at 2273 K 5.3.6 UC 2 densification on tantalum with time at 2273 K , 5.3.7 UC^ densification on tungsten with time at 2373 K 5.3.8 UCj densification on niobium with time at 2373 K 5.3.9 UC 2 densification on tantalum with time at 2373 K 5.3.10 UC 2 densification on tungsten with square root of time, 5.3.11 UC2 densification on niobium with square root of time 5.3.12 UC 2 densification on tantalum with square root of time 5.4.1 Height of densified region vs temperature. Second order polynomial fit to each data set is shown 5.4.2 Effect of temperature on densification rate 42 5.5.1 Example schematic of a sliced UC 2 pellet showing slice thickness and weight per cent carbon in each slice 45 5.5.2 Weight per cent carbon from slices cut along axis of batch 5 pellets sintered at 2373 K for various times 47 5.5.3 Weight per cent carbon from slices cut along axis of a batch 6 UC 2 pellet sintered at 2373 K for 6 h 47 5.5.4 Weight per cent carbon slices cut along axis of batch 7 UC 2 pellets sintered at 2373 K for 3,6, and 12 h 48 5.6.1 Mo-U phase diagram 50 5.6.2 Re-U phase diagram 50 List of Figures (continued) 5.7.1 Tungsten carbide forming in a plate of tungsten metal. UC2 pellet was located on top of tungsten carbide during sintering. Hardness indentations made with Vickers hardness tester 52 5.7.2 Tungsten carbide forming in tungsten metal after (a) 4 h and (b) 8 h 53 5.7.3 Tungsten carbide forming in tungsten metal after (a) 12 h and (b) 16 h... 53 5.7.4 Penetration depth of W 2 C formed while sintering UC 2 on tungsten 5.9.1 Schematic of high density regions of stacked UC 2 pellets on niobium after 6 hours at 2373 K 5.11.1 Sintered duplex composition UC X pellets. C/U for one end 1.95 and for the other, 1.50 5.11.2 Photo of a partially sintered duplex composition pellet cut lengthwise and polished. Composition of high density end, C/U = 1.5, ...

show abstract

Analysis of solid‐solid reactions: A review

Tamhankar

Doraiswamy

1979

AIChE Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper reviews some important aspects of the analysis of solidsolid reactions which include: fundamental considerations, experimental techniques, analysis of pellet-pellet reactions, analysis of mixed powder reactions, role of the gas phase, and reactor design. Illustrations are given wherever necessary. Examples of industrial applications, important systems studied, and the models used are tabulated.

show abstract

Kinetics of the Graphite‐Uranium Dioxide Reaction from 1400° to 1756°C

Cited by 33 publications

References 9 publications

Developing uranium dicarbide–graphite porous materials for the SPES project

Developing uranium dicarbide–graphite porous materials for the SPES project

Experimental investigation of uranium dicarbide densification and the influence of free carbon diffusion

Analysis of solid‐solid reactions: A review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About