Fission of 238U with high energy neutrons & other questions

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the fission of uranium-238 (238U) when subjected to high-energy neutrons, particularly in the context of kinetic impacts involving metallic 238U and its isotopes, including uranium-235 (235U). Participants explore the implications of compression, the potential for non-sustained chain reactions, and the effects of contamination with other isotopes such as plutonium. The conversation touches on theoretical scenarios, experimental considerations, and the nature of nuclear reactions in such contexts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that compressing a ram of metallic 238U with 0.7% 235U could increase the probability of nuclear fission due to increased density, although they acknowledge that this fission would not be sustained.
  • Others argue that solids are negligibly compressed by pressure, and that the density of the material does not significantly affect fission probabilities, suggesting that criticality is not achievable with the given isotopic composition.
  • It is noted that the presence of 0.7% 235U might allow for some non-sustained chain reactions, but the spontaneous fission rate of 238U is considered too low to result in significant energy release.
  • Some participants mention that contamination with isotopes like 238Pu and 240Pu could potentially contribute to neutron production, which might influence reactions during impacts.
  • There are claims that traces of isotopes such as 250Cm or 252Cf could provide additional neutrons to 235U, but the feasibility of achieving criticality with such low concentrations is questioned.
  • One participant emphasizes that without weapon-grade uranium, the likelihood of achieving criticality or significant nuclear reactions is extremely low, suggesting that any reactions occurring would be mechanical or chemical in nature.
  • Another point raised is the concept of infinite multiplication factor, which is stated to be below unity for 238U, indicating that appreciable amounts of fissile isotopes are necessary to reach criticality.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views, with no consensus on the potential for nuclear reactions in the scenarios discussed. Some assert that significant reactions are unlikely, while others explore the theoretical implications of various isotopes and conditions.

Contextual Notes

Participants note limitations regarding the assumptions made about compression effects, the role of isotopic composition, and the nature of neutron interactions. The discussion remains speculative and does not resolve the complexities involved in the proposed scenarios.

Florent_FP
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Hi,
I have a question related to 238U.
I know of course that it can fission with neutrons above 1 MeV, but there is a elevated risk it would absorb the neutron and produce 239Pu instead.
Let's assume you have a ram of metallic 238U, with perhaps 0,7% 235U, and that you collide it very very quickly (perhaps 1800 meters per second) with a target.
Wouldn't the compression allow for an increase in the density of the metal, that would thus increase the probability of a nuclear fission ? Of course that nuclear fission would never be sustained.
Second, wouldn't the presence of 0,7% 235U also provide for some fuel for a non-sustained chain reaction ? Neutrons would be slowed down by the 238U...
The source of neutrons for the beginning of the non-sustained chain reactions would be the spontaneous fission of 238U (approx. 28 neutrons per second in a 2 kg rod of 238U).
So these non-sustained chain reactions would create some heat (perhaps a few thousands of degrees C), and some light, but no explosion at all ?

Thanks a lot in advance,
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Florent_FP said:
Hi,
Let's assume you have a ram of metallic 238U, with perhaps 0,7% 235U, and that you collide it very very quickly (perhaps 1800 meters per second) with a target.
Wouldn't the compression allow for an increase in the density of the metal, that would thus increase the probability of a nuclear fission ? Of course that nuclear fission would never be sustained.,

Solids are negligibly compressed by pressure ... You maybe thinking of a gun type fission bomb , where an explosive fires a chunk of U235 into another piece to make a sphere of the metal .. this shape has minimal neutron loss so creates criticality with the least mass ... compression is not a factor .

Florent_FP said:
Second, wouldn't the presence of 0,7% 235U also provide for some fuel for a non-sustained chain reaction ? Neutrons would be slowed down by the 238U...
The source of neutrons for the beginning of the non-sustained chain reactions would be the spontaneous fission of 238U (approx. 28 neutrons per second in a 2 kg rod of 238U).
So these non-sustained chain reactions would create some heat (perhaps a few thousands of degrees C), and some light, but no explosion at all ?

it would create some heat , perhaps a 0.000000000001C increase in temp ...28 neutrons a second is nothing.
 
If your material is prompt critical, it is a bomb.

If your material is critical only including delayed neutrons, it can give a stable reaction with some additional regulation - something you can use in a nuclear reactor.

With just 0.7% U-235, your material is not critical - the density doesn't matter, the U-238 will absorb too many neutrons. Fission will be completely negligible. Even if you get 0.99 new neutrons per initial neutron, that just gives a multiplication factor of 100. Your 28 neutrons per second from spontaneous fission lead to 1000 fission reactions per second, a power of some nanowatts. Completely negligible.

oz93666 said:
Solids are negligibly compressed by pressure
You just need more pressure. Fuel in nuclear weapons does get compressed. Plutonium for example has different phases with large differences in density - apply enough pressure and it goes to a lattice structure with a 23% higher density.
 
Ok thanks a lot.
Another possibility is the contamination by 238Pu and 240Pu. My question was actually related to the use of uranium in so-called "depleted" uranium weapons, which are not made with depleted uranium as :
- Asaf Durakovic found 0,7% 235U in several samples taken in Irak, as well as 236U (0,005%), indicating this is not natural uranium from the ground
- The US army itself acknowledged actual contamination with plutonium, neptunium and americium (during a press conference)
The presence of 236U confirms that there could be isotopes of, for instance, plutonium, together with the uranium.
My idea is that the "tip" of the rod, when penetrating into the target, gets compressed and that it would increase the probability that a limited reaction happens there (the 0,7% of 235U could react with the neutrons.from the spontaneous fissions of 238Pu and 240Pu).
This would explain actually why is there always, at the impact of a "depleted" uranium shell, a "flash" of light before the fireball.
The metal oxydises (the fire can reach 5000°C), it is "pyrophoric" like most metals, but someone told me there would need to be a "firestarter" somewhere, and suggested me some fission.
 
Actually, if there were traces of 250Cm or 252Cf, undetectable levels could be enough to provide a good chunk of neutrons to the 235U...
 
You would need weapon-grade uranium (enriched to ~90% - something that certainly doesn't get shot away) to have any chance to get criticality. Forget nuclear reactions. Everything that happens is mechanical or chemical.
 
I thought of subcriticality, not criticality. I also thought that the spontaneous fission could feed 238U with neutrons > 1 MeV. If there's even only trace amounts of 250Cm and 252Cf, these would get closer to 238U atoms when compressed... The neutrons get closer to 238U locally during a few milliseconds...
 
Subcritical is equivalent to "nothing nuclear happens" - see above, even if you are very close to criticality the energy released in fission processes is completely negligible. Unless you have a massive particle accelerator as spallation source nearby, but that is a different topic (accelerator-driven fission).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Florent_FP
Ok thanks a lot.
 
  • #10
Something important to keep track of is infinite multiplication factor.
It depends only on composition and is independent on size, density or presence of neutron reflectors.
For U-238, it is below unity. And you need appreciable amounts of fissile isotopes to reach unity.
 
  • #11
Florent_FP said:
Hi,
I have a question related to 238U.
I know of course that it can fission with neutrons above 1 MeV, but there is a elevated risk it would absorb the neutron and produce 239Pu instead.
Let's assume you have a ram of metallic 238U, with perhaps 0,7% 235U, and that you collide it very very quickly (perhaps 1800 meters per second) with a target.
Wouldn't the compression allow for an increase in the density of the metal, that would thus increase the probability of a nuclear fission ? Of course that nuclear fission would never be sustained.
Second, wouldn't the presence of 0,7% 235U also provide for some fuel for a non-sustained chain reaction ? Neutrons would be slowed down by the 238U...

In other words, do kinetic antitank projectiles made of DU or natural uranium have nuclear reactions during impact? Answer is "no".
 
  • #12
Nonsense. Such element would cost astronomical money to manufacture (billions per gram).

Uranium is better because tungsten is not pyrophoric, and mushrooms on impact, reducing penetration. Also, not sure tungsten is cheaper. DU is basically free since supply is vastly bigger than demand.
 
  • #13
nikkkom said:
Nonsense. Such element would cost astronomical money to manufacture (billions per gram).
Right.
What could be feasible is put highly enriched U-235 instead of depleted U, and thus build a fission bomb which is deformed into criticality not by internal high explosive, but by kinetic impact into target.
However, such a nuclear bomb needs to contain high critical mass of HEU, would be low yield and expensive.
 

Similar threads

Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Poll Poll
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
6K