The measurement of the surface areas of uranium-dioxide ceramics by gas-adsorption methods reveals marked differences between sintered and hot-pressed specimens. This difference can be accounted for by the existence of a very fine interconnected pore system in hot-pressed materials and of a relatively coarse interconnected pore system, together with completely closed pores, in sintered materials. Differences are also observed between the pore system in the centre of a sintered material and that near its surface.
The relative merits of various methods of measurement are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BoothA. H., Chalk River Rep. (CRDC-721), 1957.
2.
BrunauerS., EmmettP. H., and TellerE., J. Amer. Chem. Soc., 1938, 60, 309.
3.
HalseyB. D., ibid., 1951, ‘73, 2693.
4.
BarrerR. M. and RobinsA. B., Trans. Faraday Soc., 1951, 47, 773.
5.
ClampittB. H. and GermanD. E., J. Phys. Chem., 1958, 62, 438.
6.
JoyA. S., “Proceedings of the 2nd International Congress on Surface Activity”, Vol. 2, p. 54. 1957: London (Butterworths).
7.
MaldenP. J. and MarshJ. D. F., J. Flips. Chem., 1959, 63, 1309.
8.
EmmettP. H. and BrunauerS., J. Amer. Chem. Soc., 1937, 59, 1553.
FaethP. A. and WillinghamC. B., “The Assembly, Calibration, and Operation of a Gas-Adsorption Apparatus for the Measurement of Surface Area, Pore Volume Distribution, and Density of Finely Divided Solids” (Mellon Inst. Indust. Research Tech. Bull.). 1955: Pittsburgh (Mellon Inst.).
12.
WootenL. A. and BrownC., J. Amer. Chem. Soc., 1943, 65, 113.
13.
BeebeR. A., BeckwithJ. B., and HonigJ. M., ibid., 1945, 67, 1554.
14.
JacksonJ. S., Powder Met., 1961, 8, 73.
15.
EichenbergJ. D., U.S. Atomic Energy Commission Publ. (WAPD-183). 1957.
16.
O'NeillJ. S., HeyA. W., and LiveyD. T., J. Nuclear Mat., 1961, 3, 125.
17.
BelleJ. and LustmanB., U.S. Atomic Energy Commission Publ.(WAPD-184), 1957.
18.
BiddleP. and LongG., Atomic Energy Research Estab. Rep. (R-3384), 1960.
