Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-tn8tq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-07T04:33:52.306Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of Crystallochemistry of Starting Materials on the Rate of Smectite to Illite Reaction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 February 2011

Tsutomu Sato ,
Takashi Murakami ,
Hiroshi Isobe  and
Toshihiko Ohnuki
Tsutomu Sato
Affiliation:
Japan Atomic Energy Research Institute, Tokai, Ibaraki 319–11, Japan
Takashi Murakami
Affiliation:
Ehime University, Matsuyama, Ehime 790, Japan
Hiroshi Isobe
Affiliation:
Japan Atomic Energy Research Institute, Tokai, Ibaraki 319–11, Japan
Toshihiko Ohnuki
Affiliation:
Japan Atomic Energy Research Institute, Tokai, Ibaraki 319–11, Japan
Get access

Abstract

A series of hydrothermal experiments was performed to determine the effect of layer charge of starting materials on the smectite to illite reaction rate that might be applied to nuclear-waste repository design. The experiments were conducted on K-saturated <2μm fractions of Wyoming smectite (SWy-1) and Tsukinuno smectite (SKu-F, commercially, Kunipia-F) in a closed system at temperatures of 95, 150, 200, 250, 300°C for run durations of up to 477 days with a 1:20 mass ratio of solid to deionized water. The mean layer charge and tetrahedral charge of SKu-F are larger than those of SWy-1. The proportion of smectite layers in illite/smectite interstratified minerals rapidly decreases, and then slowly decreases with increase in reaction time; a plot of In (100/% smectite) vs. time produces two distinct straight lines in all experiments. These lines are suggestive of two first-order kinetic processes with different rates for this reaction; the first process has a greater rate than the second one. An Arrhenius plot of the reaction rates for each process produces a folding and straight lines for the first and second processes, respectively, suggesting that there are at least two parallel processes in the first process, and a dominant process is different between high- and low-temperature reactions. The activation energies of the first and second processes determined from the plots are the same for the two starting materials, meaning that the reaction mechanisms for the two starting materials are the same. However, the rate of the first process is different between the two starting materials, although that of the second process is similar. The difference in the rate of the first process results possibly from the difference in the amount of layer charge between the two starting smectites.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 353: Symposium – Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management XVIII , 1994 , 239
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1995

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. Burst, J. F., Amer. Assoc. Petrol. Geol. Bull. 53, 73 (1969).Google Scholar
2. Bruce, C. H., AAPG Bulletin 68, 637 (1984).Google Scholar
3. Boles, J. R. and Franks, S. G., J.Sed. Petrology 49, 55 (1979).Google Scholar
4. Inoue, A., Utada, M. and Wakita, K., Applied Clay Science 7, 131 (1992).Google Scholar
5. Eberl, D. D. and Hower, J., Geol. Soc. Amer. Bull. 87, 1326 (1976).Google Scholar
6. Roberson, H. E. and Lahann, R. W., Clays and Clay Miner. 29, 129 (1981).Google Scholar
7. Howard, J. J. and Roy, D. M., Clays and Clay Miner. 33, 81 (1985).Google Scholar
8. Huang, W. L., Longo, J. M. and Pevear, D. R., Clays Clay Miner. 41, 162 (1993).Google Scholar
9. Bethke, C. M. and Altaner, S. P., Clays and Clay Miner. 34, 136 (1986).Google Scholar
10. Pytte, A. M. and Reynolds, R. C., in The thermal transformation of smectite to illite, edited by Naeser, N. D. and McCulloh, T. H. (Springer, New York, 1989) p. 133.Google Scholar
11. Velde, B. and Vasseur, G., Am. Miner. 77, 967 (1992).Google Scholar
12. Inoue, A., J. Clay Sci. Soc. Jpn. 31, 14 (1991).Google Scholar
13. Eberl, D., Whitney, G. and Khoury, H., Am. Miner. 63, 401 (1978).Google Scholar
14. Giiven, N. and Huang, W. L., Clays Clay Miner. 39, 387 (1991).Google Scholar
15. Laird, D. A., Scott, A. D. and Fenton, T. E., Clays & Clay Miner. 37, 41 (1989).Google Scholar
16. Watanabe, T., Sci. Repts. Dep. Geol. Kyushu Univ. 13, 225 (1977).Google Scholar
17. Whitney, G. and Northrop, R., Am. Miner. 73, 77 (1988).Google Scholar
18. Whitney, G., Clays & Clay Miner. 38, 343 (1990).Google Scholar
19. Whitney, G., Applied Clay Science 7, 97 (1992).Google Scholar