Spark plasma sintering of fuel meats for U3O8 based dispersion fuels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
• Dispersion fuels created from spark plasma sintering obey the Master Sintering Curve theory. • Increasing Mo loadings and temperatures increase reduction rate of U 3 O 8 to UO 2. • Relative density increased in Al-U 3 O 8 as Al loading increased. • Mo-U 3 O 8 fuels densified but additional Mo did not affect density. Research and test reactors often use dispersion-type fuel due to its increased thermal conductivity and burn-up capabilities compared to conventional fuel. Al-U 3 O 8 (aluminumtriuranium octaoxide) dispersion fuels have several advantages over their competitors, such as higher service temperature and better stability of oxygen stoichiometry. However, the two-step fabrication of dispersion fuel causes undesirable porosity in cold-pressed fuel meats that is preserved in co-extruded fuel plates. To combat this, spark plasma sintering (SPS) was used for the fabrication of Al-15, 20, and 30 vol% U 3 O 8 and 8 and 12 vol% Mo-U 3 O 8 fuel meats for the Al-U 3 O 8 time. The in situ SPS data was used to construct and validate Master Sintering Curves (MSCs) with accuracies in Al fuels at 0.02 g/cm 3 , and Mo fuels at 0.07 and 0.17 g/cm 3 . The as-sintered fuel meats were characterised using x-ray diffraction (XRD) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) to understand chemical and physical changes following the SPS process. The pellets exhibited very high relative densities, the U 3 O 8 was observed to undergo reduction to UO 2 .
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".