Heats of immersion of U02 powders in water were d etermined
by calorimetric m easurements. The integral heat of immersion
at 25°C was found to be 490 erg/ cm2 with a n uncertainty± 70/o for
stoichiometric U02. The value is linearly increasing with increasing
non-stoichiometry of the powders up to 790 erg/cm!± 7° / o for U30 8•
The result is not influenc ed by different p a rticle size distribution,
obtained by some different me thods of synthesis of U02 powders

D. Kolar

English

Hrčak - Portal of scientific journals of Croatia

CCA-292 CR 0 AT IC A CHEMIC A ACT A 35 (1963) 123 546.791-31 :536.62 Original Scientific Paper Heat of Immersion of Uranium Dioxide in Water D. Kolar Nuclear Institute »J. Stefan« Ljubljana, Slovenia, Yugoslav ia Received February 5, 1963 Heats of immersion of U02 powders in water were determined by calorimetric measurements. The integral heat of immersion at 25°C was found to be 490 erg/cm2 with an uncertainty± 70/o for stoichiometric U02. The value is linearly increasing with increasing non-stoichiometry of the powders up to 790 erg/cm!± 7°/o for U30 8• The result is not influenced by different particle size distribution, obtained by some different methods of synthesis of U02 powders. INTRODUCTION In the past fifteen years a great number of investigators reported on physico-chemical characteristics of uranium dioxide, due to its superior performance as a fuel for nuclear power reactors. Specific surface area and surface characteristics were considered to be among the most important factors of different powders, affecting the sinterability and hereby the manufacture of nuclear fuel elements. The scope of the present work was to determine in the calorimeter the integral heat liberated upon immersion of outgassed oxide samples with different specific surface areas and different 0 /U ratios in water. The method itself could be used for the determination of specific surface area of powders in general. Further, the results were expected to shed some more light on the mechanism of incorporation of non-stoichiometric oxygen into the oxide lattice. Finaly, the results are of interest in view of the proposed use of water vapour to prevent the pyrophoricity of active U02 powders1• EXPERIMENTAL Materials Several samples were prepared by direct reduction of so-called ammonium diuranate (ADU) at 5500 to 650°C in hydrogen. Resulting pyrophoric U02 powders with surface areas between 1.6 and 9 m2/g were held several hours in a protective C02 atmosphere and were afterwards exposed to air. After being in contact with atmospheric oxygen for several days, weeks or months, samples were slowly oxidized to different 0 /U ratios (samples No. 2, 3, 7 and 8) . To reach higher O/U ratios, oxidation was carried out with a definite amount of athmospheric oxygen in a closed system at 150°C (samples No 5 to 11). U30 8 samples No. 12 and 13 were obtained by ignition at 600°C in air for several hours. Sample No. 5 was prepared by ignition of ADU in air to U30 8 and subsequent reduction to U02 in hydrogen at 600°C. To obtain the stoichiometric powder No. 1, the sample was transferred after reduction of ADU in hydrogen atmosphere into the bulbs which were attached to the reduction furnace. The whole system was evacuated to high vacuum and the bulbs were sealed off. Sample No. 4 was prepared by simultaneous hydrolysis anhd reduction of tl:\e product obtaiped fr<m1 tP.e reaction of VF6 wi~h NH~ in gas p ase. · · 124 D. KOLAR For calorimetric measurements, definite amounts of samples (2 to 6 g) were poured into weighed pyrex bulbs, outgassed at 10-5 mm Hg for at least 24 hours at 300°C and sealed off on the outgassing apparatus. The outgassing temperature was accurate to ± 10°c. Surface Area Measurements Specific surface areas were measured with a Perkin-Elmer sorptometer~ with an accuracy of ± 5°/o. Some values were rechecked on the standard B.E.T. apparatus and were found to be within the error of measurement. Determination of O/U Ratios Two methods were used: A) Oxidation to UaOs with simultaneous moisture determination. The initial O/U ratio was calculated from the weight gain and it is significant to about + 0.5°/o. B) Magnetic susceptibility measurements3 gave results with an accuracy of-± 1°/o. Calorimeter A thermistor calorimeter was described by Zettlemayer and coworkers4. The fundamental arrangement of our apparatus is similar to the instrument of Lapajne and Dolar5. A major modification was the use of a breaking rod for shattering the sealed evacuated sample bulbs. Some important details of the apparatus are as follows: The temperature of the closest surrounding of the calorimeter was kept constant to ± 0.001°c. The temperatures in the calorimeter were measured with thermistor C-7 (A60) (The Veco Corporation, USA) . The resistance at room temperature was 2 kiloohms ±20°/o and R/R50 = 5.6. The thermistor was employed in a bridge circuit, the second arm being an adj ustable resistor box (Norma, Wien) . The other two arms consisted of two resistors of 100 ohms each. The power was supplied to the bridge from a 6V battery over a potentiometer (6V/2V). The measuring instrument used was a portable galvanometer A 70 (Kipp-Zonen, Delft). Deviations were automatically transferred on to the chart by means of a instru-ment with a photocell (Nachlaufschreiber nach G. Wilhelmi, Lange, Berlin) . On the chart, temperature changes 0f 0.0004 °C within the calorimeter were detected. Since the measurements yielded total effects of 0.03 °c to 0.04 °c, the accuracy of measurement was within ± 1°/o. The calorimeter was calibrated by means of a 30 ohms manganine heater. The heater current and potential differ ence were determined by comparison, by means of a potentiometer (K 3, Leeds-Northrup) with a standard cell in a circuit described by Sturtevant6• The instrument used was a Leeds-Northrup Model 251 IV galvanometer with a sensitivity 10-7 A per mm of scale deflection. Oscillations of the potential differences during the heating period were less than ± 0.1°/o and of the current less than ± 0.2°/ir. The heating time was read on the automatically actuated precision timer with an accuracy of ± 0.1 sec. Heat of Bulb Breaking Heat effects of 0.05 to 0.2 cal due to the breaking of the bulb have been reported. Hollabaugh and Chessick7 found the parallel effects of evaporation and condensation of water negligible, i.e. within the error of measurements. In our experiments, the best results were obtained by tapping a breaker rod, mounted on the end with three sharp pins. The sample bulbs were accordingly pierced on three different spots simultaneously and totally shattered. The resulting heat effects were determined by several blank runs to be 0.150 cal ± 150/o. A correction of 0.150 cal was applied to all measurements. RESULTS From the shape of the calorimetric curve (amount of heat liberated versus time) for the stoichiometric U02 (sample No. 1) evidence was obtained of some slow heat effect besides that of the wetting. The subsequent chemical ana-lyses of u +6/U+4 ratio revealed the oxidation of the sample from U02.00 to U02 _06 • Accordingly, the experiments were repeated, using deoxygenated water and maintanin~ a slight overpressure of argon in the calorimet~r. Thi;! fa~t HEAT OF IMMERSION 125 equilibration of the calorimetric curve and chemical analysis (UO 2_01 ± 0_01 showed that the oxidation of the former sample was due to the oxygen dissolved in water. Such effects were not observed upon immersion of non-stoichiometric oxide powders, previously exposed to the air for some time. The values of the heat effects are collected in Table I, and point to adsoption rather than chemisorption. Several subsequent measurements of the amount of heat liberated per gram of each sample were within± 50/o (or closer) of the mean value. Since the surface area measurements were found to be within the same limits both values gave the uncertainty in an individual value of the heat of immersion per unit area of ± 70/o. · Cl -3 0.70 .~ 0.60 ' ~ 0.50 ~ O.L.O 0 .., 0.30 0 ~ 0.20 0. 10 ~0·--0 100 200 300 L.00 Temperature of out gassing, • C Fig. 1. Heat of wetting as influenced by outgasslng temperature. To ensure that the initial QIU ratio was not changed during the heating and outgassing, the 0 /U ratio of some samples was determined, after sealing off the bulbs, by magnetic susceptibility measurements. The results were equal within the error of m easurement. The strong influence of outgassing conditions upon the amount of heat liberated on wetting was noticed. The influence of outgassing temperature is shown in Fig. 1. It was further observed that the outgassing time should be at least 20 hours for active powders. Accordingly all samples were outgassed for at least 24 hours at 300°C. DISCUSSION Maxima were observed recently8 on the heat of wetting versus out-gassing temperature curves of Si02 and Ti02 • As it is seen from Fig. 1, the heat effects of U02 after a prolonged outgassing at elevated temperatures approach the steady value. Moreover, the data in Table I do not indicate any influence of particle size distribution - at least not in the region of 1.6 to 9 m2/g - on the amount of heat liberated per unit of surface area. Deviations of heat values on an area basis with increasing specific surface area of Ti02 samples were tentatively explained by poor crystallinity of fine particles, ~iving the lower h~at effects. ~ipce it i~ ~enerall! know11 that uo~ powderlj 126 D. KOLAR show poor crystallinity, especially in the surface phase of active powders, a linear relationship between the heat of wetting and specific surface area is to be expected. 900 E BOO ~ g:, 700 .... ... 0. 600 c: £ 500 QI 3: GOO 15 300 .... 0 :1! 200 100 2.00 2.10 2.20 2.30 21.0 2 .SO 2.60 O/U Ratio Fig. 2. Heats of wetting vs. O/U ratio of uo •. A strong influence of non-stoichiometry on the heat of wetting was observed. When the heat values, expressed on an unit area basis are plotted versus 0 /U ratio (Fig. 2) a linear relationship is obtained: hi = 448 n - 405 ± 10 where h1 = heat of wetting at 25°C on an area basis (erg/cm2) n = O/U ratio; 2.00 < n < 2.66 The parameters of the equation were obtained by the least square method and the error represents the standard deviation. TABLE I Heats of immersion (/:,,H1), specific surface areas (S) and O/U ratios of different uranium oxide powders Sample ~Hi (cal/g) S (m2/g) 0 /U 1 1.051 8.87 2.00 2 0.803 6.80 2.02 3 0.546 4.45 2.04 4 0.205 1.66 2.06 5 0.594 4.71 2.10 6 0.522 4.06 2.11 7 1.188 8.96 2.14 8 1.119 8.15 2.20 9 0.591 4.15 2.21 10 0.458 2.94 2.34 11 0.775 4.76 2.46 12 1.061 5.74 2.65 JS 0.696 3.62 2.6q HEAT OF IMMERSION 127 On simply rearranging the equation the specific surface area S (m2/g) of the uranium oxide powder could be calculated from the measured heat of immersion per gram, ~H1 (cal/g) and from the determined 0 /U ratio: 4.183 ~Hi S = 448n-405±10 The method is rapid and gives a good reproducibility. Since the 0 /U ratio could be measured by various methods with an accuracy of ± 0.5°/o or better, the precision with which the surface area can be determined depends mainly upon the accuracy of the value for the heat of wetting. The latter one is affected in several ways, through weighing, pretreatment, activation and evacuation of the samples besides that of calorimetric measurements. All these factors combined give rise to an error in the heat determination of ± 30/o to ± 5°/!1. Accordingly, the value of the specific surface area could be expected to be correct within the same limits. The linear increase of the heat of immersion with increasing O/U ratio should be a consequence of the structural and chemical characteristics of the surface phases of uranium oxide powders. However, it should be pointed out that all the samples were as received, active powders (> 2 m2/g), i .e. no attempt at equilibration has been made. To interpret the results proper1y, the annealed equilibrated samples were prepared and their structure was checked by the X-ray measurements. The results will be reported shortly. Acknowledgment. The work reported in this paper was supported by the Yugoslav Federal Nuclear Energy Commission. The author is grateful to Mr. J. Kristan and coworkers for construction of the calorimeter, and to prof. B. S. Brcic for helpflul discussions. We also wish to thank Mr. J . Snoj and Miss L. Drinovec for experimental assistance. REFERENCES 1. B. S. Br c i c and M. Cu k, V estnik Sloven. kem. druStva, in press. 2. L . S. Et tr e, N. Br en n er, and E. W. Ci e p 1 ins k y, Z. Physik. Chem. (Frankfurt), 219 (1962) 17. 3. J . K. D aws on and M. W. Lister, J. Chem. Soc. 1950, 2177. 4. A. C. Z e t t 1 em ayer et al., J . Phys. Chem. 57 (1953) 649. 5. S. Lap a j n e and D. D o 1 a r, Z. Physik. Chem. (Leipzig) 18 (1958) 112. 6. J . M. Sturt eva nt, Physical Methods of Organic Chemistry, Vol. 1 (ed. A. W e i s s berg er) Interscience 1949, p . 737. 7. C. H. Ho 11 ab au g h and J . J. Chess i ck, J. Phys. Chem. 65 (1961) 109. 8. T. H. W a d e and N. Ha ck er man, J . Phys. Chem. 65 (1961) 1681. IZVLECEK Omakalne toplote uranovih oksidov v vodi D. Kolar Omakalne toplote praskov uranovega dioksida so merjene v kalorimetru. Integr~lna omakalna toplota stehiometricnega U02 je izmerjena 490 erg/cm2 z nego-!ovostJ.o ± 7°/~., Vrednost linearno narasca z naraseajofo nestihiometricnostjo pra-skov m doseze 790 erg/cm2 ± 70/o pri U30 8 . Razlicna porazdelitev velikosti zrn doblj ena z razlicnimi metodami sinteze oksidnih praskov, ne vpliva na rezultat'. NUKLEARNI INSTITUT »JOZEF STEFA.Ne LJUBLJANA. . I Sprejeto 3. marca 1963, 

Heat of Immersion of Uranium Dioxide in Water

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Hrčak - Portal of scientific journals of Croatia