Why Is PU-239 Preferred in Nuclear Weapons Over Other Fissionable Isotopes?

  • Thread starter Thread starter The Prince
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Nuclear Uranium
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the reasons why plutonium-239 (Pu-239) is preferred in nuclear weapons compared to other fissionable isotopes such as uranium-233 (U-233), uranium-235 (U-235), and uranium-238 (U-238). It explores aspects of fissionability, critical mass, and the complexities involved in the production and assembly of these materials.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants note that U-238 is fissionable but not fissile, meaning it cannot achieve criticality on its own.
  • Others point out that both U-235 and Pu-239 can be used in nuclear weapons, with historical examples provided for each.
  • It is mentioned that the production of highly enriched U-235 is challenging due to the need for isotopic separation, while Pu-239 can be bred from U-238 in a reactor, making its extraction chemically simpler.
  • Some participants highlight that Pu-239 has a smaller critical mass and a larger neutron capture cross section, which may contribute to its preference in weapon design.
  • Concerns are raised regarding the radioactivity of U-233 and the complexities of bomb assembly techniques for Pu-239 compared to U-235.
  • A participant introduces a theory regarding the breeding of plutonium using spallation neutrons, suggesting potential dangers without uranium enrichment.
  • There is a discussion about the need for faster assembly of Pu-239 compared to U-235 due to its larger neutron background.
  • One participant mentions that the bomb-making process for U-235 is simpler than for Pu-239, which requires more sophisticated techniques.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express various viewpoints on the advantages and challenges of using Pu-239 versus other isotopes, indicating that multiple competing views remain and the discussion is unresolved.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes technical details about fissionability, critical mass, and production methods, which may depend on specific definitions and assumptions that are not fully explored.

The Prince
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
Hey there ,

1-I wonder why PU-239 is basically used in nuclear destructive weapons, while U-33, U-35,U-38 (with Energy more than 1 Mev) are fissionable materials as well??!


_ The Prince .
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
The Prince said:
Hey there ,

1-I wonder why PU-239 is basically used in nuclear destructive weapons, while U-33, U-35,U-38 (with Energy more than 1 Mev) are fissionable materials as well??!


_ The Prince .
The Prince,

As far as using U-238; as you point out, it is "fissionable" [ fissions for neutrons above
a 1 MeV threshold], instead of "fissile". So you don't get U-238 to go critical by itself.

As far as U-235 vs Pu-239; both can be used to make nuclear weapons, and have been.
The Little Boy bomb that destroyed Hiroshima was fueled by U-235.
The Fat Man bomb that destroyed Nagasaki was fueled by Pu-239.

The reason for using one over the other has to do with the cost of making the stuff.
In order to make a weapon with U-235, it has to be highly enriched. Natural Uranium
is only 0.7% U-235; the other 99.3% is mostly U-238.

In order to get a highly enriched Uranium; one that has a very high percentage of U-235;
you must separate the U-235 and U-238 isotopically. You can't do that by chemistry,
since they are both Uranium. It is difficult to separate the two isotopes.

The way you make Plutonium, is to fuel a reactor with a mix of U-235 and U-238. The
U-235 fuels the reaction, and the U-238 is a fertile material that can turn into Pu-239
when it absorbs a neutron. After irradiation in the reactor, one needs to separate out
the Pu-239. However, because the desired product is Plutonium and not Uranium;
it is chemically different, and chemical means can be used to separate out the Pu-239.

Dr. Gregory Greenman
Physicist
 
Pu-239 also gives you a smaller critical mass due to more neutrons/fission (Nu) and a larger neutron capture cross section
 
And the U-233 is too radioactive...
 
Other aspect.
Enrichment of uranium is very difficult, and breeding of plutonium also.
I think the theory of hungarian guys is dangerous (other topic), because that process open possibility to breeding of plutonium with spallation neutrons, without uranium enrichment.
 
tehfrr said:
Pu-239 also gives you a smaller critical mass due to more neutrons/fission (Nu) and a larger neutron capture cross section
tehfrr,

Yes - however that is offset by the larger neutron background of Plutonium vis-a-vis
Uranium. You have to assemble Plutonium faster than Uranium.

Of course that is a solved problem.

Dr. Gregory Greenman
Physicist
 
One advantage that U-235 has over Pu-239 is that the bomb making is easier. U-235 bomb can be set off by slamming two pieces together, while Pu-239 requires a much more sophisitcated technique (implosion).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 46 ·
2
Replies
46
Views
15K
Replies
10
Views
13K
Replies
27
Views
6K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
12K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K