Hostname: page-component-54dcc4c588-r5qjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-12T03:32:36.246Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Properties and Genesis of Hot Particles from the ChernobylReactor Accident

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 September 2012

Peter Schubert-Bischoff ,
Werner Lutze  and
Boris E. Burakov
Peter Schubert-Bischoff
Affiliation:
Hahn-Meitner -Institut Berlin, Glienicker Strasse 100, 14109 Berlin, Germany
Werner Lutze
Affiliation:
University of New Mexico, Department of Chemical and Nuclear Engineering, Albuquerque, NM 87131, USA
Boris E. Burakov
Affiliation:
Khlopin Radium Institute, St. Petersburg, Russia
Get access

Abstract

On April 25, 1986, the nuclear reactor Unit 4 (RBMK) at Chernobyl, Ukraine,exploded. Besides molecular species, the fallout contained particles ofrelatively high specific activity (hot particles) with a wide range ofchemical compositions. The composition of a hot particle bears informationabout its genesis. Particle sizes ranged from a few to 100s of micrometers.Data on a hot particle, found in Berlin, Germany, is presented and discussedin context with earlier measurements on other particles to understand theirgenesis. The chemical composition was determined by electron probe microanalysis. Our particles are either reactor fuel (one) or fission productalloys (nine). The alloys were formed during normal reactor operation.Strongly varying concentrations of Fe and Ni suggest that at least some ofour particles reacted with molten structural material of the reactor. Theparticles were mobilized by fuel oxidation or fuel dust generation duringthe accident. The fission product composition can only be explained if weassume that the alloys remained in the solid state in the course of theaccident. Some particles may have been ejected during the explosion, otherslater while the reactor was burning. Activities (103Ru and 106Ru, originally up to 160,000 Bq) of our ten year oldparticles were re-measured but were no longer detectable. No long-livedγ-emitters were found. The 99Tc activity was calculated and foundto only lBq. The γ -spectrum of the fuel particle still shows137Cs (1 Bq) and 60Co (<1 Bq).

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 465: Symposium II – Scienfific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management XX , 1996 , 1319
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1997

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 Publication Series on Safety N 75-LNSAG-1, Studies of Causes and Consequences of the Chernobyl Accident, Conf. Proceedings, IAEA, STI/PUB/740. ISB N-92–0–423088–6, Vienna (1988)Google Scholar
2. Devell, L. et al. , Nature 321, 192 (1986)10.1038/321192a0Google Scholar
3. Anderson, E. B., Burakov, B. E., Pazukhin, E. M., Radiochimia 5, 139–144 (1992)Google Scholar
4. Broda, R., in report No. 1342/b, Institute of Nucl. Physics Krakow, Krakow, Poland (1986)Google Scholar
5. Balashazy, I., Radiation Protection Dosimetry 22 (4), 263–267 (1988)10.1093/oxfordjournals.rpd.a080116Google Scholar
6. Osuch, S. et al. , Health Physics 57 (5), 707–716, (1989)10.1097/00004032-198911000-00002Google Scholar
7. Saari, H. et al. , Health Physics 57 (6), 975–984 (1989)10.1097/00004032-198912000-00013Google Scholar
8. Mandjoukov, I.G., Burin, K., Mandjoukova, B., and Vapirev, E. I., Radiation Protection Dosimetry 40 (4), 235–244 (1992)10.1093/oxfordjournals.rpd.a081210Google Scholar
9. Sandalls, F. J., Segal, M. G., Victorova, N., J. Environm. Radioactivity 18 (1), 5–22 (1993)10.1016/0265-931X(93)90063-DGoogle Scholar
10. Kerekas, A., Falk, R., and Suomela, J., EUR-13574, Vol. 1, 211–222 (1991)Google Scholar
11. Tcherkezian, V., Shkinev, V., Khitrov, L., and Kolesov, G., Journal of Environmental Radioactivity 22 (2), 127–139 (1994)10.1016/0265-931X(94)90018-3Google Scholar
12. Kashparov, V. A. et al. , Radiochemistry 36, 98–104 (1994)Google Scholar
13. Burin, K., Tsacheva, Ts., Mandjoukov, I.., and Mandjoukova, B., INIS-mf-14777, Conf. in Gyulechitsa Bulgaria, Sept. 6–10 (1993) - abstract onlyGoogle Scholar
14. Bramman, J. I., Sharpe, R. M., Thorn, D., and Jates, G., J. Nucl. Mat. 25, 201 (1968)10.1016/0022-3115(68)90045-7Google Scholar
15. Schubert, P. and Behrend, U., Radiochimica Acta 41, 149–155 (1987)10.1524/ract.1987.41.4.149Google Scholar
16. Burakov, B. E. et al. , The Behavior of Nuclear Fuel in the First Days of the Chernobyl Accident, this proceedings volumeGoogle Scholar
17. Report of the US Department of Energy's Team Analyses of the Chernobyl Atomic Energy Station Accident Sequence, DOE/NE-0076, DE 87003614, Washington 1986 Google Scholar
18. Burakov, B. E. et al. , Radiochimica Acta 65, 199–202 (1994)Google Scholar
19. Kleykamp, H., KfK report No. 2696 (1979), Kernforschungszentrum Karlsruhe, GermanyGoogle Scholar
20. Kashparov, V. A. et al. Nuclear Technology 114 (2), 246–253 (1996)10.13182/NT96-A35253Google Scholar
21. Hastings, I. J., Rose, H. D., and Baird, J. J., J. Nucl. Mat. 61, 229–231 (1976)10.1016/0022-3115(76)90089-1Google Scholar