MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2611331039 · doi:10.2172/1340977

Report on in-situ studies of flash sintering of uranium dioxide

2017· report· en· W2611331039 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Alicia Raftery

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNuclear materials and radiation effects
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersLos Alamos National LaboratoryNational Nuclear Security AdministrationCanadian Foundation for Dietetic ResearchU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsDilatometerSinteringFlash (photography)Uranium dioxideMaterials scienceUraniumNuclear engineeringMetallurgyPhysicsEngineeringOpticsThermal expansion

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Flash sintering is a novel type of field assisted sintering that uses an electric field and current to provide densification of materials on very short time scales. The potential for field assisted sintering techniques to be used in producing nuclear fuel is gaining recognition due to the potential economic benefits and improvements in material properties. The flash sintering behavior has so far been linked to applied and material parameters, but the underlying mechanisms active during flash sintering have yet to be identified. This report summarizes the efforts to investigate flash sintering of uranium dioxide using dilatometer studies at Los Alamos National Laboratory and two separate sets of in-situ studies at Brookhaven National Laboratory’s NSLS-II XPD-1 beamline. The purpose of the dilatometer studies was to understand individual parameter (applied and material) effects on the flash behavior and the purpose of the in-situ studies was to better understand the mechanisms active during flash sintering. As far as applied parameters, it was found that stoichiometry, or oxygen-to-metal ratio, has a significant effect on the flash behavior (time to flash and speed of flash). Composite systems were found to have degraded sintering behavior relative to pure UO2. The critical field studies are complete for UO2.00 and will be analyzed against an existing model for comparison. The in-situ studies showed that the strength of the field and current are directly related to the sample temperature, with temperature-driven phase changes occurring at high values. The existence of an ‘incubation time’ has been questioned, due to a continuous change in lattice parameter values from the moment that the field is applied. Some results from the in-situ experiments, which should provide evidence regarding ion migration, are still being analyzed. Some preliminary conclusions can be made from these results with regard to using field assisted sintering to fabricate nuclear fuel. First, the pure UO2-based system shows promising behavior with flash sintering, but composite systems are likely to show better sintering behavior with spark plasma sintering. Efforts to develop these methods should therefore be tailored towards the likelihood of success. Additionally, modeling is a rapidly developing aspect of current flash sintering research and should be used in parallel with experiments. Ultimately, ongoing flash sintering studies on various materials, like those summarized in this report, are rapidly contributing to the feasibility of controlling this method for use in the future.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.143
Threshold uncertainty score0.730

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.056
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.292 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNuclear materials and radiation effectsFrench-language works237,207