Uranium 235 or Plutonium 239: Which is Better for Atomic Bombs?

  • Thread starter brandy
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Uranium
In summary, the conversation discusses the pros and cons of using uranium 235 or plutonium 239 in an atomic bomb. While plutonium bombs have the advantage of using readily available Pu-239 from nuclear reactors, their design and construction is complex and requires precise implosion. On the other hand, U-235 is more suitable for bomb-making, despite the small quantity of U-234 present in natural uranium.
  • #1
brandy
161
0
pros and cons of using uranium 235 or plutonium 239 in an atomic bomb?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
  • #2
Plutonium bombs have the advantage that Pu-239 is available because it is made in the waste product of nuclear reactors and can easily be chemically reprocessed. However, the plutonium bomb design and construction is extremely difficult and precise. Plutonium is often contaminated by Pu-240, which is very reactive and decays before the chain reaction goes to completion. So to prevent this from happening, plutonium bombs use implosion. Explosives are detonated on all sides of a mass of Pu to compress it into a small "blob" where the three neutrons emitted can hit other Pu-239 atoms quickly and continue the chain reaction. But the explosions must be entirely balanced and uniform to implode the Pu properly and successfully detonate a Plutonium bomb.
 
  • #4
oops i meant to say uranium 234 and plutonium 239. also what is the costs of each.
 
  • #5
brandy said:
oops i meant to say uranium 234

:uhh: what are you supposed to do with U-234 ?
 
  • #6
vanesch said:
:uhh: what are you supposed to do with U-234 ?


put it in an atomic bomb?
what do u mean?
 
  • #7
brandy said:
put it in an atomic bomb?
what do u mean?

U 234 doesn't go bang - it's a relatively innocuous alpha emitter.
 
  • #8
Not to mention the fact that U-234 is 0.0055% of natural uranium. This means take 1000 kg of pure uranium, and only 55 grams of it is U-234. You're better off making a bomb out of the U235 you have. Plus it has a horrible fission cross section http://wwwndc.tokai-sc.jaea.go.jp/cgi-bin/Tab80WWW.cgi?/data/JENDL/JENDL-3.3prc/intern/U234.intern [Broken].
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #9
yes i meant to say u-235.
 
  • #10
brandy said:
yes i meant to say u-235.

Which is what you said initially...:wink:
 

What is the difference between uranium and plutonium?

Uranium and plutonium are both elements found on the periodic table. The main difference between the two is their atomic structure. Uranium has 92 protons and plutonium has 94 protons. This difference in atomic structure leads to differences in their physical and chemical properties.

Which is more commonly used in nuclear reactors, uranium or plutonium?

Uranium is the most commonly used fuel in nuclear reactors. It is more abundant in nature and easier to extract than plutonium. Additionally, uranium undergoes a nuclear reaction called fission, which releases energy, making it an efficient fuel for reactors.

How is uranium converted into plutonium?

Uranium can be converted into plutonium through a process called nuclear transmutation. In this process, uranium is bombarded with neutrons in a nuclear reactor, causing some of the uranium atoms to absorb the neutrons and become unstable. These unstable atoms then undergo a series of radioactive decays, eventually becoming plutonium.

What are the potential dangers of uranium and plutonium?

Both uranium and plutonium are radioactive elements, meaning they emit radiation. Exposure to high levels of radiation can be harmful to living organisms, causing damage to cells and potentially leading to cancer. Additionally, both can be used to create nuclear weapons, which poses a threat of nuclear warfare.

Can plutonium be used as a substitute for uranium in nuclear reactors?

Yes, plutonium can be used as a substitute for uranium in nuclear reactors. In fact, many countries use a mix of both uranium and plutonium in their nuclear fuel. However, plutonium is more expensive to produce and handle, and it also poses additional safety and security concerns due to its highly radioactive nature.

Similar threads

Replies
7
Views
1K
  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
13
Views
8K
  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
3
Views
1K
Back
Top