Abstract
The existing Pu–Zr binary phase diagrams report the stability of the compound θ-(Pu,Zr) in the low temperature region between 300 and 0 °C. Furthermore, the current understanding is that θ-(Pu–Zr) is thermodynamically favored over the metastable δ-(Pu,Zr) phase. In an effort to shed light on the phases formed in Pu–Zr binary alloys and reduce uncertainties in the poorly defined boundary between the θ-(Pu,Zr), (θ+δ), δ-(Pu,Zr), and (θ+α-Zr) regions, Pu − 30Zr (in wt.%, equivalent 53 at.%) alloys were subjected to microstructural characterization, annealing, and differential scanning calorimetry (DSC). The results indicate that the alloy is composed of δ-(Pu,Zr) matrix, with a number of smaller, randomly distributed α-Zr precipitates. The phase transition temperatures (determined based on the DSC data) and phases identified in Pu − 30Zr alloys (based on crystallographic data) compare well to those predicted by the phase diagrams with the exception of the θ-(Pu–Zr) phase. Our data indicates that θ-(Pu–Zr) is metastable and can be observed only within a small temperature window (100–300 °C). The consecutive heating cycles remove θ-(Pu–Zr) from the system, and no traces of θ-(Pu–Zr) remain at room temperature, as evidenced by microstructural characterization. This calls for reevaluation of the binary Pu–Zr phase diagram, with particular attention paid to the existence of θ-(Pu–Zr) and its stability.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Article number | 151875 |
Journal | Journal of Nuclear Materials |
Volume | 528 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - Jan 2020 |
Externally published | Yes |
Funding
This work was supported by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Nuclear Energy under DOE Idaho Operations Office Contract DE-AC07-05ID14517, as part of Fuel Cycle Research and Development (FCRD) program of the US DOE and INL Laboratory Directed Research and Development (LDRD) program. Authors would like to acknowledge the staff of Fuel Manufacturing Facility (FMF), Electron Microscopy Laboratory (EML), and Analytical Laboratory at the Materials and Fuels Complex (MFC) at Idaho National Laboratory and Materials Characterization Suite (MaCS) at the Center of Advanced Energy Studies (CAES) for their effort in fabrication, handling, and transfer of the alloys used in this work. This work was supported by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Nuclear Energy under DOE Idaho Operations Office Contract DE-AC07-05ID14517 , as part of Fuel Cycle Research and Development (FCRD) program of the US DOE and INL Laboratory Directed Research and Development (LDRD) program. Authors would like to acknowledge the staff of Fuel Manufacturing Facility (FMF), Electron Microscopy Laboratory (EML), and Analytical Laboratory at the Materials and Fuels Complex (MFC) at Idaho National Laboratory and Materials Characterization Suite (MaCS) at the Center of Advanced Energy Studies (CAES) for their effort in fabrication, handling, and transfer of the alloys used in this work. Appendix A
Funders | Funder number |
---|---|
Center of Advanced Energy Studies | |
DOE Idaho Operations Office | DE-AC07-05ID14517 |
Fuel Cycle Research and Development | |
Idaho National Laboratory and Materials Characterization Suite | |
U.S. Department of Energy | |
Office of Nuclear Energy | |
Laboratory Directed Research and Development |
Keywords
- Metallic fuel
- Microstructure
- Phase identification
- Phase transition temperatures
- Plutonium-zirconium