Thermophysical investigations of the uranium–zirconium alloy system
- 1. Nonproliferation System Research Division, Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute, Yuseong, Daejeon 305-353 (Korea, Republic of)
- 2. Manchester Materials Science Centre, School of Materials, University of Manchester, Manchester, M1 7HS (United Kingdom)
- 3. Department of Nuclear Engineering, Texas A and M University, College Station, TX 77843 (United States)
Description
Highlights: • Phase transformation temperatures and enthalpies of U–0.1, 2, 5, 10, 20, 30, 40, and 50 wt% Zr alloys were measured using DSC–TGA. • The phase transformation of the (α-U, γ2) phase to the (β-U, γ2) phase at ∼662 °C was not evident in Zr-rich (>10 wt%) U–Zr alloys. • The absence of the phase transformation is rather consistent with the older U–Zr phase diagram that was experimentally assessed in the 1950s. • The current U–Zr binary alloy phase diagram may need to be revisited regarding the determination of the range of the (β, γ2) phase zone. - Abstract: The solid phase transformation behavior of uranium–zirconium (U–Zr) alloys (U–0.1, 2, 5, 10, 20, 30, 40, and 50 wt% Zr) was observed using differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) with thermogravimetric analysis (TGA). The phase transformation temperatures and enthalpies were measured from the alloys annealed at 600 °C for 72, 168, and 672 h. The observations indicated distinctive mismatches between the measured data and the existing U–Zr alloy phase diagram. Most notably, the phase transformation of the (α-U, γ2) phase to the (β-U, γ2) phase at ∼662 °C was not evident in Zr-rich (> 10 wt%) U–Zr alloys, while only two phase transformations were evident in the U–10Zr and U–20Zr alloys compared to the three isotherm lines extended over the two compositions in the current phase diagram. The absence of the phase transformation is rather consistent with the older U–Zr phase diagram that was experimentally assessed in the 1950s. This observation may lead to the conclusion that the (β-U, γ2) phase region is not correctly represented in the Zr-rich portion, or the hyper-monotectoid region, of the current U–Zr alloy phase diagram. It is evident that the phase diagram needs to be experimentally revisited to provide more reliable information for the development of metallic nuclear fuel performance models, if such models are to include phase-relevant effects, such as fuel constituent redistribution and fission gas swelling
Availability note (English)
Available from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2014.05.126Additional details
Identifiers
- DOI
- 10.1016/j.jallcom.2014.05.126;
- PII
- S0925-8388(14)01223-7;
Publishing Information
- Journal Title
- Journal of Alloys and Compounds
- Journal Volume
- 611
- Journal Page Range
- p. 355-362
- ISSN
- 0925-8388
- CODEN
- JALCEU
INIS
- Country of Publication
- Netherlands
- Country of Input or Organization
- International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
- INIS RN
- 47008252
- Subject category
- S36: MATERIALS SCIENCE;
- Descriptors DEI
- ANNEALING; BINARY ALLOY SYSTEMS; CALORIMETRY; COMPARATIVE EVALUATIONS; ENTHALPY; FISSION PRODUCTS; ISOTHERMS; PERFORMANCE; PHASE DIAGRAMS; PHASE TRANSFORMATIONS; SOLIDS; THERMAL GRAVIMETRIC ANALYSIS; URANIUM ALLOYS; ZIRCONIUM ALLOYS
- Descriptors DEC
- ACTINIDE ALLOYS; ALLOY SYSTEMS; ALLOYS; CHEMICAL ANALYSIS; DIAGRAMS; EVALUATION; GRAVIMETRIC ANALYSIS; HEAT TREATMENTS; INFORMATION; ISOTOPES; MATERIALS; PHYSICAL PROPERTIES; QUANTITATIVE CHEMICAL ANALYSIS; RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS; THERMAL ANALYSIS; THERMODYNAMIC PROPERTIES; TRANSITION ELEMENT ALLOYS
Optional Information
- Copyright
- Copyright (c) 2014 Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam, The Netherlands, All rights reserved.