Hostname: page-component-54dcc4c588-trf7k Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-13T20:35:35.816Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Electrochemical Corrosion of Electrodes in a Simulated Nuclear Waste Glass Melt

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 February 2011

S. K. Sundaram
S. K. Sundaram*
Affiliation:
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, WA 99352, sk.sundaram@pnl.gov
Get access

Abstract

Corrosion of potential candidate electrode materials, molybdenum and tantalum, in a simulated nuclear waste glass melt was investigated using electrochemical (dc-powered) and non-powered tests. Electrochemical corrosion data showed that tantalum was more corrosion-resistant than molybdenum in this melt. Tantalum also showed passivation. The non-powered test data showed that tantalum corroded more than molybdenum. This was attributed to penetration of protective passivation layer at the tantalum-glass interface by the glass melt. Microstructural features and chemistry across selected electrode-glass interfacial regions supported these results.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 500: Symposium EE – Electrically Based Microstructural Characterization II , 1997 , 309
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

1. Wicks, G.G., Report No. DPST-77–374 (1977).Google Scholar
2. Wicks, G.G., Report No. DP-MS-78–90 (1978).Google Scholar
3. Wicks, G. G., Report No. DPST-78–0465 (1978).Google Scholar
4. Wicks, G. G., Report No. DPST-79–526 (1979).Google Scholar
5. Palmer, R. A., Report No. RHO-SA-173 (1980).Google Scholar
6. Wicks, G. G., Report No. DPST-79–0580 (1980).Google Scholar
7. Rankin, W.N., Report No. DPST-81–0344 (1981).Google Scholar
8. Plodnic, M. J. and Routt, K. R., Report No. DPST-80–494 (1980).Google Scholar
9. Plodnic, M. J. and Routt, K. R., Report No. DPST-80–654 (1980).Google Scholar
10. Dierks, R. D., Mellinger, G. B., Miller, F. A., Nelson, T. A., and Bjorklund, W. J., Report No. PNL-3406(1980).Google Scholar
11. Timmerman, C. L., Report No. D7H35–84–13 (1984).Google Scholar
12. Hayward, P. J., George, I. M., Woods, M. P., and Busby, T. S., Glass Tech., 28, 43 (1987).Google Scholar
13. Polyakov, A. S., Borisov, G. B., Khasanov, Z. S., and Moiseenko, N. I. in Waste Management'89, (Vol. 1, Editors: Post, R. G. and Wacks, M. E., 1989), p. 37.Google Scholar
14. Borisov, G. B., Polyakov, A. S., and Khasanov, Z. S. in Waste Management'90. (Vol. 1, Editors: Post, R. G. and Wacks, M. E., 1990), p. 39.Google Scholar
15. Sundaram, S. K., Freeman, C. J., and Lamar, D. A. in Corrosion of Materials by Molten Glass, (Editor: Pecoraro, G. A., The American Ceramic Society, Ohio, 1995), pp. 311–412.Google Scholar