Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T20:53:46.284Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Corrosion Test Plan to Guide Canister Material Selection and Design for a Tuff Repository.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 February 2011

R. D. McCright ,
R. A. Van Konynenburg  and
L. B. Ballou
R. D. McCright
Affiliation:
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA 94550.
R. A. Van Konynenburg
Affiliation:
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA 94550.
L. B. Ballou
Affiliation:
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA 94550.
Get access

Abstract

Corrosion rates and the mode of corrosion attack form a most important basis for selection of canister materials and design of a nuclear waste package. Type 304L stainless steel was selected as the reference material for canister fabrication because of its generally excellent corrosion resistance in water, steam and air. However, 304L may be susceptible to localized and stress-assisted forms of corrosion under certain conditions. Alternative alloys are also investigated; these alloys were chosen because of their improved resistance to these forms of corrosion. The fabrication and welding processes, as well as the glass pouring operation for defense and commercial high-level wastes, may influence the susceptibility of the canister to localized and stress forms of corrosion.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 26: Symposium D – Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management VII , 1983 , 309
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1984

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.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Knuass, K. G., Oversby, V. M. and Wolery, T. J., Paper D4.5, This Symposium (1983).Google Scholar
2. Primak, W. and Fuchs, L. H., Physics Today, 7, 15 (1954).Google Scholar
3. Makepeace, C. E., J. of Testing and Evaluation, 2, 202 (1974).Google Scholar
4. Westinghouse Electric Corp., Report AESD-TME 3138 (1982).Google Scholar
5. Hockman, J. and O'Neal, W. C., LLNL Report, UCRL-89820 (1983).Google Scholar
6. Baxter, R. G., E. I. de Pont de Nemours & Co. Savannah River Plant, Report DP-1606 Rev. 1 (1983).Google Scholar
7. LaQue, F. L. and Copson, H. R., ed., Corrosion Resistance of Metals and Alloys, 2nd Edition, Reinhold Publishing Co., New York (1963).Google Scholar
8. Nuttall, K. and Urbanic, V. G., Atomic Energy of Canada, Ltd., Report AECL-6440 (1981).Google Scholar
9. Soo, P., ed. Brookhaven Nat'l Lab., Report BNL-NUREG 51494 Vol. 3 (1983).Google Scholar
10. Sedricks, A. J., Corrosion of Stainless Steels, J. Wiley & Sons, New York (1979).Google Scholar
11. Russell, E. W., McCright, R. D. and O'Neal, W. C., Paper D 7.19, This Symposium (1983).Google Scholar
12. McCright, R. D., Weiss, H., Juhas, M. C., and Logan, R. W., LLNL, Report UCRL-89988 (1983).Google Scholar