Properties of Depleted and Natural Uranium?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the properties and applications of depleted uranium compared to natural uranium, focusing on their isotopic differences and implications for various uses, including military applications and engineering contexts. Participants explore whether the choice of uranium type is driven by desirable properties or availability.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants note that depleted uranium is valued for its high density, which is beneficial for applications like counterweights and armor-piercing ammunition.
  • Others mention that depleted uranium is a byproduct of enriching U-235 for reactor fuel, leading to questions about its utility beyond being a waste product.
  • There is a discussion about whether the isotopic composition of uranium affects the performance of materials like counterweights and armor alloys, with some suggesting that they would perform identically regardless of composition.
  • One participant argues that while depleted uranium is used for its density, using uranium with a higher U-235 content could pose increased radioactivity risks.
  • Another participant counters that U-235 is not significantly radioactive due to its long half-life, but acknowledges potential dangers if large quantities are concentrated.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of isotopic composition for performance and safety, indicating that multiple competing perspectives remain unresolved regarding the desirability and risks associated with different types of uranium.

Contextual Notes

Some participants highlight the economic factors and availability of depleted uranium as influencing its use, while others raise concerns about the radioactivity of higher U-235 concentrations, suggesting a complex interplay of factors that are not fully settled.

Delta Force
Messages
81
Reaction score
7
Depleted uranium is often used for applications in which high density is valued, such as counterweights, tank armor, and armor-piercing ammunition. Obviously there are going to be some differences between depleted uranium (defined as having 0.3% or less U-235) and natural uranium (averaging 0.72% U-235), but does it matter for most applications what type of uranium it is? In other words, is depleted uranium used because it has more desirable properties, or is it used simply because there isn't much else to do with uranium containing a low percentage of U-235?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
We enrich the U235 content to make it useful as reactor fuel. The waste product is depleted uranium. Different isotopes are chemically identical.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters
anorlunda said:
Different isotopes are chemically identical.

Does that mean that a counterweight or even an armor alloy would have identical performance regardless of the isotopic composition of the uranium used to make it?
 
Depleted uranium is used for applications because of its high density, which can provide a lot of weight in very compact package, its weight (1.67 x wt of lead) iits common uses today are the military applications described by many available sources online.

Another application is as counterweights on the control systems as well as aircraft trimming. On some earlier jet liners rods of this material was attached to the trailing edge and extended out behind the elevator blades.To my best remembrance, the rods weight served as inertial damping weights to help prevent elevator over controlling by the pilots. The depleted uranium as a material was selected for this application because its high density could provide the required weight in the most compact size rods.

Those of us traveling on those airliners in those days could see them while the aircraft were sitting on the airport paddocks.

By searching under "depleted uranium on aircraft" information about this can be found.
 
Delta Force said:
...is depleted uranium used because it has more desirable properties, or is it used simply because there isn't much else to do with uranium containing a low percentage of U-235?
Not 'or' but all together. Regarding 'desirable properties' it is cheaper and it is available: and there isn't much else to do with it.
 
Delta Force said:
Does that mean that a counterweight or even an armor alloy would have identical performance regardless of the isotopic composition of the uranium used to make it?

For all practical purposes, yes.
 
Delta Force said:
Does that mean that a counterweight or even an armor alloy would have identical performance regardless of the isotopic composition of the uranium used to make it?
Yes, but the other side of the coin is that you would not want to use something too high in U235 because it would be significantly more radioactive. It's both a danger and a waste.
 
russ_watters said:
Yes, but the other side of the coin is that you would not want to use something too high in U235 because it would be significantly more radioactive. It's both a danger and a waste
the Half-Life of U235 is 700 million years. It is not "significantly" radioactive nor dangerous in that sense.
 
gmax137 said:
the Half-Life of U235 is 700 million years. It is not "significantly" radioactive nor dangerous in that sense.

Unless, of course, you got too much of it together in one place...
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
6K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 46 ·
2
Replies
46
Views
16K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
8K
Replies
10
Views
13K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
6K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
451
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
8K