Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 6 minor 41 references

Thermophysical and mechanical properties of UFe$_2$ fabricated by spark plasma sintering

T0 review · 2 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-07-12 · grok-4.5

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Dense UFe2 conducts heat better than related iron intermetallics at high temperature while remaining soft and ductile, so fuel-debris models must treat it as a distinct metallic phase.

desk verdict Clean experimental data paper that finally measures high-T thermal conductivity and expansion for UFe2; useful for Fukushima debris work, with only minor, non-load-bearing caveats. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.02918 v1 pith:KUMHRJZY submitted 2026-07-03 cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Yifan Sun , Hironobu Nakamura , Daisuke Okada , Hiroaki Muta , Yuji Ohishi , Ken Kurosaki This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mtrl-sci
keywords IntermetallicU–FeFueldebrisThermalconductivityMechanicalpropertiesSparkplasmasinteringUFe2
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

After the Fukushima Daiichi meltdown, solidified fuel debris contains metallic phases formed from uranium and the abundant iron of stainless-steel structures. One of those phases is the Laves compound UFe2, whose high-temperature heat transport and mechanical stiffness had never been measured. The authors arc-melted and spark-plasma-sintered nearly single-phase, 95 % dense UFe2, then measured its thermal expansion, thermal conductivity, elastic moduli and hardness from room temperature to 1073 K. Thermal conductivity rises steadily from 10 to 25 W m-1 K-1 and exceeds the values reported for Fe2Zr and Fe2B at elevated temperature; Young’s modulus (69 GPa), shear modulus (24 GPa) and Vickers hardness (5.6 GPa) are all markedly lower than those of the oxide, boride and other iron-intermetallic phases expected in the debris. The data therefore supply the missing numbers needed for thermal-management and structural assessments of heterogeneous fuel debris, and show that “metallic” debris phases cannot be treated as mechanically uniform.

What carries the argument

Dense, nearly single-phase polycrystalline UFe2 consolidated by spark plasma sintering, whose measured sound velocities, thermal expansion and laser-flash diffusivity are converted into fully dense thermal conductivity and elastic moduli for direct comparison with other debris phases.

What would settle it

A direct high-temperature dilatometry or HT-XRD measurement of the lattice parameter of the same dense UFe2 specimen from 473 K to 1073 K that shows a change in expansion coefficient large enough to reverse the ranking of thermal conductivity relative to Fe2Zr and Fe2B.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Polycrystalline UFe2 fabricated by arc melting plus spark plasma sintering has an electronic-dominated thermal conductivity that increases monotonically from 10 W m-1 K-1 at 306 K to 25 W m-1 K-1 at 1073 K—higher than Fe2Zr and Fe2B at high temperature—while remaining one of the softest and most ductile phases anticipated in fuel debris (E = 69 GPa, G = 24 GPa, HV = 5.6 GPa, B/G = 5.6).

Load-bearing premise

The density used to convert thermal diffusivity into thermal conductivity is the room-temperature geometric density corrected only by the expansion coefficient measured up to 473 K and then assumed constant all the way to 1073 K.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 6 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports the synthesis of dense, nearly single-phase polycrystalline UFe2 by arc melting followed by spark plasma sintering, and the measurement of its thermophysical and mechanical properties from room temperature to 1073 K. Phase purity and lattice expansion are established by room-temperature and high-temperature XRD; high-temperature stability under Ar and oxidation in air are assessed by TG-DTA. Thermal diffusivity is measured by laser flash, converted to thermal conductivity using a refitted literature heat capacity and a density corrected by the measured linear expansion coefficient, and porosity-corrected via Maxwell–Eucken. Ultrasonic sound velocities yield elastic moduli, Poisson’s ratio and Debye temperature; Vickers hardness is also reported. The central experimental claims are that κ rises monotonically from ~10 W m−1 K−1 near room temperature to ~25 W m−1 K−1 at 1073 K (electronic-dominated and higher than Fe2Zr and Fe2B at high T) and that UFe2 is mechanically compliant (E ≈ 69 GPa, G ≈ 24 GPa, HV ≈ 5.6 GPa) relative to other fuel-debris phases.

Significance. If the reported numbers hold, the paper supplies a previously missing high-temperature data set for the uranium end-member of the Fe2(Zr,U) Laves phase that is expected in metallic fuel debris. The monotonic rise of κ and the low elastic moduli/hardness relative to Fe2Zr, Fe2B and UO2 are directly usable for thermal-management and structural assessments during decommissioning of Fukushima Daiichi. Strengths include a transparent experimental chain (arc-melt + SPS, XRD phase ID, laser-flash α, ultrasonic velocities, Vickers), explicit porosity correction, and a clear comparison map of hardness versus Pugh ratio that places UFe2 among the softest, most ductile debris constituents. The work is a solid materials-property contribution rather than a conceptual advance, but it fills a documented gap for a technologically relevant intermetallic.

major comments (2)
  1. §2.2 and §3.3: Density used in κ = α Cp ρ is the room-temperature geometric density corrected only by αl measured by HT-XRD up to 473 K and then assumed constant to 1073 K. While TG-DTA under Ar shows no phase change and the absolute error is likely only a few percent, the manuscript should either (i) extend HT-XRD (or dilatometry) to the full temperature range of the laser-flash measurements or (ii) quantify the sensitivity of the reported κ(T) and of the high-T ordering versus Fe2Zr/Fe2B to plausible variations in αl. Without that bound the claim that UFe2 “surpasses” the other Fe intermetallics remains slightly under-supported.
  2. §3.4 and Table 2: The Vickers hardness (5.63 ± 0.14 GPa) is roughly seven times higher than the literature value of Yamanaka et al. (0.78 GPa). The authors correctly note that the indentation-size effect would, if anything, raise the earlier value, and they place their number in the broader range of uranium and Fe-based intermetallics. Nevertheless, because hardness is used to position UFe2 on the ductile/soft corner of the debris-phase map (Fig. 6), a short additional check (e.g., load-dependence series or microstructural comparison with the earlier specimen) would strengthen confidence that the discrepancy is not sample-quality related.
minor comments (6)
  1. §2.2: The statement that Cp was obtained by “refitting the heat-capacity curve reported by Rai and Raju” should include the explicit functional form and coefficients used, so that the κ values can be reproduced without re-digitizing the earlier figure.
  2. Eq. (8) and Fig. 4: The empirical fit κ(T) = T/(cT + d) + e is useful, but the physical interpretation of the constant offset e should be stated more carefully (residual lattice contribution versus systematic offset).
  3. Fig. 4 caption: Clarify that the Fe2B and Fe2Zr curves were extracted from scatter plots in the cited references; if possible, add error bars or a note on the original data density.
  4. §4.1: The Slack estimate of κlat holds γ and θD fixed at room-temperature values across the whole range. A brief remark that this is an approximation (and that electrical-resistivity data would allow an independent Wiedemann–Franz check) would improve transparency.
  5. Table 2 footnote a: Poisson’s ratio for Fe2Zr is derived from reported E and G; stating the formula used would avoid ambiguity.
  6. Minor typographical consistency: “UFe 2” versus “UFe2” spacing appears in several places (abstract, keywords, figure captions); unify to UFe2 throughout.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: primary results are direct experimental measurements of dense polycrystalline UFe2, not derived quantities that reduce to fitted inputs or self-citation chains by construction.

full rationale

The paper reports fabrication (arc-melt + SPS) and characterization of nearly single-phase UFe2, with thermal conductivity obtained from measured laser-flash diffusivity, literature Cp (refitted only to match the published curve of Rai & Raju), and geometric density corrected by HT-XRD expansion measured to 473 K (extrapolated). Elastic moduli and Debye temperature follow standard ultrasonic formulas from measured sound velocities; hardness is a direct indentation average. The empirical κ(T) fit and Slack lattice estimate are post-hoc descriptions of already-measured data, not used to generate or force the primary numbers or the high-T ordering versus Fe2Zr/Fe2B. Self-citations supply comparison values for related Fe intermetallics and oxides measured by overlapping authors; they do not underwrite uniqueness claims, force the UFe2 results, or close a definitional loop. No self-definitional equations, fitted-parameter-as-prediction, uniqueness theorems imported from the authors, or ansatz smuggling appear. The work is self-contained experimental data against external benchmarks.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

Experimental materials paper; load-bearing content is measured data plus a handful of standard continuum corrections and one empirical fit. No new physical entities are postulated. Free parameters are the three coefficients of the κ(T) fit, the conventional Maxwell–Eucken β, and the numerical prefactor in the Slack formula. Domain assumptions are the usual continuum relations for porosity, sound-velocity moduli, and the Pugh ductility threshold.

free parameters (3)
  • κ(T) fit coefficients c, d, e = c = 1.03e-2, d = 36.5, e = 2.38
    Empirical constants in κ(T) = T/(cT + d) + e fitted to the measured thermal-conductivity points (R² = 0.998); used only for visualization, not for the primary claim.
  • Maxwell–Eucken porosity factor β = 0.5
    Fixed at the conventional value 0.5 to correct measured κ to fully dense; not fitted but chosen by hand from literature practice.
  • Slack prefactor A = ≈3.1e-6
    Numerical constant ≈ 3.1 × 10−6 used to estimate lattice thermal conductivity; taken from standard literature, not re-fitted.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Maxwell–Eucken relation with β = 0.5 correctly converts porous to dense thermal conductivity
    Invoked in §2.2 Eq. (2) to report fully-dense κ; standard but approximate for the actual pore morphology.
  • ad hoc to paper Linear thermal-expansion coefficient measured 298–473 K remains constant to 1073 K for density correction
    Explicitly assumed in §2.2 when converting α to κ; no high-T dilatometry or HT-XRD above 473 K is supplied.
  • standard math Ultrasonic pulse-echo formulas (Eqs. 3–7) give the isotropic polycrystalline elastic moduli and Debye temperature
    Standard continuum relations used in §2.2; valid for dense, isotropic polycrystals.
  • domain assumption Pugh ratio B/G = 1.75 marks the ductile–brittle boundary
    Cited from Pugh 1954 and used in §4.2 / Fig. 6 to classify UFe2 as ductile; empirical rule of thumb.
  • domain assumption Slack formula with room-temperature γ and θD estimates lattice thermal conductivity above θD
    Applied in §4.1 Eq. (10) to partition κ; approximate and temperature-independent parameters assumed.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Thermophysical and mechanical properties of UFe$_2$ fabricated by spark plasma sintering." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/KUMHRJZY

@misc{pith2026260702918,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Thermophysical and mechanical properties of UFe$_2$ fabricated by spark plasma sintering},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/KUMHRJZY}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.02918}
}
abstract

Following the accident at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant in 2011, core meltdown produced fuel debris whose safe retrieval and management require reliable thermophysical and mechanical property data. Among the metallic phases identified in the debris, the U-Fe system is particularly important because of the abundant iron originating from in-vessel stainless steel structures. However, within this system, the high-temperature thermophysical properties of UFe$_2$ have received relatively little attention, with most prior studies focusing on its magnetic and electronic properties. To fill this data gap in the literature, we fabricated dense, nearly single-phase polycrystalline UFe$_2$ by arc melting followed by spark plasma sintering, and characterized its thermal and mechanical properties from room temperature to 1073 K. Results show that the thermal conductivity of UFe$_2$ increased monotonically from 10 Wm$^{-1}$K$^{-1}$ at 306 K to 25 Wm$^{-1}$K$^{-1}$ at 1073 K, surpassing those of the iron intermetallics Fe$_2$Zr and Fe$_2$B at high temperatures. In addition, UFe$_2$ is mechanically more compliant, displaying a Young's modulus $E$ of 69 GPa, a shear modulus $G$ of 24 GPa, and a Vickers hardness $H_{\mathrm{V}}$ of 5.6 GPa, all well below those of both Fe intermetallics. Consequently, during decommissioning, thermal-management and structural evaluations should take into account the comparatively high-conductivity and mechanically compliant nature of UFe$_2$ within the heterogeneous fuel debris.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.02918 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. XRD patterns of the UFe2 powdered sample. (a) HT-XRD patterns from room temperature to 473 K; the UFe2 peaks shift systematically toward lower angles owing to lattice expansion, with no new impurity phases forming, and the reference patterns for UFe2 [25] and UO2 [26] are shown for comparison. (b) Temperature dependence of the lattice parameter a(T), with a linear fit (dashed) giving αl = 12.5 × 10−6 K−1 . 4 [PITH_… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. SEM-EDS images of the prepared UFe2 sample after SPS. 3.2 High-temperature phase stability To further investigate the high-temperature stability of UFe2 above 473 K, in both air and an inert atmosphere, we performed TG-DTA analysis, shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. TG-DTA results of the UFe2 samples, with arrows indicating the heating direction. (a) Under flowing Ar, the mass change is negligible and no exothermic or endothermic peaks are observed up to ∼1073 K. (b) In air, oxidation produces a strong exothermic peak (∼640 K) and an irreversible mass gain. In contrast, the high-temperature behavior of UFe2 is markedly different in air (Figure 3b). Analysis of the first and sec… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Temperature dependence of the thermal conductivity of UFe2. Literature values for UO2 [28], Fe2B [13], and Fe2Zr [18] are shown for comparison. The Fe2B and Fe2Zr values were extracted from the scatter plots in the respective references. As with other Fe intermetallics…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Decomposition of the thermal conductivity of UFe2 into electronic and lattice contributions. The total conductivity (κtotal, represented by its empirical fit) is separated into an electronic part (κel, obtained by subtraction) and a lattice part (κlat) estimated from t…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Hardness versus Pugh ratio B/G for UFe2 and the principal phases expected in fuel debris. The dashed line marks the ductile–brittle boundary at B/G = 1.75. UFe2 occupies the soft, ductile region (lower right), whereas the borides are hard and brittle (upper left) and t…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

41 extracted references

  1. [1]

    Akira Nakayoshi, Joy L Rempe, Marc Barrachin, David Bottomley, Didier Jacquemain, Christophe Journeau, Viktor Krasnov, Terttaliisa Lind, Richard Lee, Donald Marksberry, et al. Review of Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station debris endstate location in OECD/NEA preparatory study on analysis of fuel debris (PreADES) project.Nuclear Engineering and Design,...

    2020

  2. [2]

    Masaki Kurata, Naoaki Okuzumi, Akira Nakayoshi, Hirotomo Ikeuchi, and Shinichi Koyama. Step-by-step challenge of debris characterization for the decommissioning of Fukushima-Daiichi Nuclear Power Station (FDNPS).Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology, 59(7):807–834, 2022

    2022

  3. [3]

    The key role of sample analysis in Fukushima Dai-Ichi decommissioning, debris management, and accident progression investigation.Frontiers in Nuclear Engineering, 2:1324221, 2023

    Bella Zubekhina, Anton Pshenichnikov, Yuji Nagae, and Masaki Kurata. The key role of sample analysis in Fukushima Dai-Ichi decommissioning, debris management, and accident progression investigation.Frontiers in Nuclear Engineering, 2:1324221, 2023

    2023

  4. [4]

    Technical Report JAEA-Review 2013-066, Japan Atomic Energy Agency, 2014

    Fuel Debris Characterization and Treatment Technologies Development for TEPCO’s Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station; 2012 Annual Research and Development Report. Technical Report JAEA-Review 2013-066, Japan Atomic Energy Agency, 2014

    2012

  5. [5]

    Characterization of solidified melt among materials of UO2 fuel and B4C control blade.Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology, 51(7-8):859–875, 2014

    Masahide Takano, Tsuyoshi Nishi, and Noriko Shirasu. Characterization of solidified melt among materials of UO2 fuel and B4C control blade.Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology, 51(7-8):859–875, 2014

    2014

  6. [6]

    High temperature reaction between sea salt deposit and (U,Zr)O2 simulated corium debris.Journal of nuclear materials, 443(1-3):32–39, 2013

    Masahide Takano and Tsuyoshi Nishi. High temperature reaction between sea salt deposit and (U,Zr)O2 simulated corium debris.Journal of nuclear materials, 443(1-3):32–39, 2013

    2013

  7. [7]

    Degradation and oxidation of B 4C control rod segments at high temperatures.Journal of Nuclear Materials, 400(2):138–150, 2010

    M Steinbrück. Degradation and oxidation of B 4C control rod segments at high temperatures.Journal of Nuclear Materials, 400(2):138–150, 2010

    2010

  8. [8]

    B 4C/Zircaloy reaction at temperatures from 1,173 to 1,953 K.Journal of nuclear science and technology, 34(4):367–374, 1997

    Fumihisa Nagase, Hiroshi Uetsuka, and Takashi Otomo. B 4C/Zircaloy reaction at temperatures from 1,173 to 1,953 K.Journal of nuclear science and technology, 34(4):367–374, 1997

    1997

Show all 41 references
  1. [9]

    Chemical interactions between B 4C and stainless steel at high temperatures

    F Nagase, H Uetsuka, and T Otomo. Chemical interactions between B 4C and stainless steel at high temperatures. Journal of nuclear materials, 245(1):52–59, 1997

    1997

  2. [10]

    Reaction behavior of B4C absorber material with stainless steel and zircaloy in severe light water reactor accidents.Nuclear technology, 90(2):226–244, 1990

    Peter Hofmann, Mario Enrique Markiewicz, and José Luis Spino. Reaction behavior of B4C absorber material with stainless steel and zircaloy in severe light water reactor accidents.Nuclear technology, 90(2):226–244, 1990

    1990

  3. [11]

    Thermophysical properties of uranium dioxide.Journal of Nuclear Materials, 102(1-2):17–25, 1981

    JK Fink, MG Chasanov, and L Leibowitz. Thermophysical properties of uranium dioxide.Journal of Nuclear Materials, 102(1-2):17–25, 1981

    1981

  4. [12]

    Thermo- physical and mechanical properties of cubic, tetragonal and monoclinic ZrO2.Journal of Materials Research and Technology, 23:648–655, 2023

    Xuemei Song, Yi Ding, Jimei Zhang, Caifen Jiang, Ziwei Liu, Chucheng Lin, Wei Zheng, and Yi Zeng. Thermo- physical and mechanical properties of cubic, tetragonal and monoclinic ZrO2.Journal of Materials Research and Technology, 23:648–655, 2023. 10

    2023

  5. [13]

    Mechanical and Thermal Properties of Fe2B.Transactions of the Atomic Energy Society of Japan, 15(4):223–228, 10 2016

    Fumihiro NAKAMORI, Yuji Ohishi, Masaya KUMAGAI, Hiroaki Muta, Ken Kurosaki, Ken-ichi Fukumoto, and Shinsuke Yamanaka. Mechanical and Thermal Properties of Fe2B.Transactions of the Atomic Energy Society of Japan, 15(4):223–228, 10 2016

    2016

  6. [14]

    Mechanical and thermal properties of bulk ZrB2.Journal of nuclear materials, 467:612–617, 2015

    Fumihiro Nakamori, Yuji Ohishi, Hiroaki Muta, Ken Kurosaki, Ken-ichi Fukumoto, and Shinsuke Yamanaka. Mechanical and thermal properties of bulk ZrB2.Journal of nuclear materials, 467:612–617, 2015

    2015

  7. [15]

    Hirotomo Ikeuchi, Kimihiko Yano, and Tadahiro Washiya. Chemical forms of uranium evaluated by thermody- namic calculation associated with distribution of core materials in the damaged reactor pressure vessel.Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology, 57(6):704–718, 2020

    2020

  8. [16]

    Suggestion of typical phases of in-vessel fuel-debris by thermodynamic calculation for decommissioning technol- ogy of fukushima-daiichi nuclear power station

    Hirotomo Ikeuchi, Kimihiko Yano, Naoya Kaji, Tadahiro Washiya, Yoshikazu Kondo, and Yoshikazu Noguchi. Suggestion of typical phases of in-vessel fuel-debris by thermodynamic calculation for decommissioning technol- ogy of fukushima-daiichi nuclear power station. American Nucle...

    2013

  9. [17]

    metallic debris

    Ayumi Itoh, Tatsuya Kanno, Takayuki Iwama, Shigeru Ueda, Takumi Sato, and Yuji Nagae. Experimental investigation of nonisothermal interaction between Fe-Zr melt and stainless steel forming “metallic debris” in Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station.Annals of Nuclear Energy, 2...

    2025

  10. [18]

    Thermal and Mechanical Properties of Fe2Zr.Transactions of the Atomic Energy Society of Japan, 18(1):37–42, 2019

    Daisuke Okada, Hiroto Ishii, Yuji Ohishi, Hiroaki Muta, and Ken Kurosaki. Thermal and Mechanical Properties of Fe2Zr.Transactions of the Atomic Energy Society of Japan, 18(1):37–42, 2019

    2019

  11. [19]

    Ferromagnetism of non-stoichiometric UFe 2 compounds.Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials, 13:310–312, 1979

    A Zentko, P Diko, J Miškuf, T Švec, A Košturiak, and J Dráb. Ferromagnetism of non-stoichiometric UFe 2 compounds.Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials, 13:310–312, 1979

    1979

  12. [20]

    Spin reorientation in UFe2 upon non-magnetic substitution in the uranium sublattice

    A V Andreev and RZ Levitin. Spin reorientation in UFe2 upon non-magnetic substitution in the uranium sublattice. Journal of alloys and compounds, 337(1-2):18–24, 2002

    2002

  13. [21]

    Moseley, Jennifer N

    Duncan H. Moseley, Jennifer N. Neu, Raphaël P. Hermann, Chad M. Parish, Josephine Libero-Cruzado, and Zachary E. Brubaker. Expanding the homogeneity range of UFe2: Formation of Laves phase UFe2+Ni.Journal of Alloys and Compounds, 1042:183819, 2025

    2025

  14. [22]

    Arun Kumar Rai and Subramanian Raju. High temperature thermal properties of UFe2: Measurement by drop calorimetry and modelling using quasi-harmonic Debye–Grüneisen formalism.Journal of thermal analysis and calorimetry, 112(1):73–82, 2013

    2013

  15. [23]

    Mechanical and thermal properties of uranium intermetallic compounds.Journal of Alloys and Compounds, 271–273:549–556, 1998

    S Yamanaka, K Yamada, T Tsuzuki, T Iguchi, M Katsura, Y Hoshino, and W Saiki. Mechanical and thermal properties of uranium intermetallic compounds.Journal of Alloys and Compounds, 271–273:549–556, 1998

    1998

  16. [24]

    Thermal conductivities of (U, Pu, Am)O2 solid solutions.Journal of Alloys and Compounds, 452:54–60, 2008

    Kyoichi Morimoto, Masato Kato, Masahiro Ogasawara, Motoaki Kashimura, and Tomoyuki Abe. Thermal conductivities of (U, Pu, Am)O2 solid solutions.Journal of Alloys and Compounds, 452:54–60, 2008

    2008

  17. [25]

    Compounds of uranium with the transition metals of the first long period.Acta Crystallographica, 3(1):34–40, 1950

    NC Baenziger, RE Rundle, AI Snow, and AS Wilson. Compounds of uranium with the transition metals of the first long period.Acta Crystallographica, 3(1):34–40, 1950

    1950

  18. [26]

    Neutron diffraction study of the in situ oxidation of UO2.Inorganic Chemistry, 48(16):7585–7592, 2009

    Lionel Desgranges, Gianguido Baldinozzi, Gurvan Rousseau, Jean-Claude Niepce, and Gilbert Calvarin. Neutron diffraction study of the in situ oxidation of UO2.Inorganic Chemistry, 48(16):7585–7592, 2009

    2009

  19. [27]

    Thermodynamics and phase equilibria of the iron—uranium system.Journal of nuclear materials, 184(1):47–52, 1991

    L Leibowitz and RA Blomquist. Thermodynamics and phase equilibria of the iron—uranium system.Journal of nuclear materials, 184(1):47–52, 1991

    1991

  20. [28]

    Thermal conductivity of uranium dioxide up to 2900 K from simultaneous measurement of the heat capacity and thermal diffusivity.Journal of Applied Physics, 85(2): 776–789, 1999

    C Ronchi, M Sheindlin, M Musella, and GJ Hyland. Thermal conductivity of uranium dioxide up to 2900 K from simultaneous measurement of the heat capacity and thermal diffusivity.Journal of Applied Physics, 85(2): 776–789, 1999

    1999

  21. [29]

    Thermophysical properties of spark plasma sintered UCo: a comparison with machine learning predictions.arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.01896, 2026

    Yifan Sun, Hironobu Nakamura, Masaya Kumagai, Yuji Ohishi, and Ken Kurosaki. Thermophysical properties of spark plasma sintered UCo: a comparison with machine learning predictions.arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.01896, 2026

    2026

  22. [30]

    Thermophysical and mechanical property assessment of UB2 and UB4 sintered via spark plasma sintering.Journal of Alloys and Compounds, 818: 153216, 2020

    Erofili Kardoulaki, Joshua Taylor White, Darrin David Byler, David Michael Frazer, Aditya Prahlad Shivprasad, Tarik A Saleh, Bowen Gong, Tiankai Yao, Jie Lian, and Kenneth James Mcclellan. Thermophysical and mechanical property assessment of UB2 and UB4 sintered via spark plas...

    2020

  23. [31]

    Thermal and mechanical properties of UO 2 and PuO 2

    M Kato and T Matsumoto. Thermal and mechanical properties of UO 2 and PuO 2. Technical Report NEA/NSC/R(2015)2, OECD Nuclear Energy Agency, 2015

    2015

  24. [32]

    Mechanical properties of (U,Ce)O2.Journal of Alloys and Compounds, 271–273:697–701, 1998

    Kazuhiro Yamada, Shinsuke Yamanaka, and Masahiro Katsura. Mechanical properties of (U,Ce)O2.Journal of Alloys and Compounds, 271–273:697–701, 1998

    1998

  25. [33]

    Thermophysical and mechanical properties of CrB and FeB.Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology, 56(9-10):859–865, 2019

    Yuji Ohishi, Mitsuyuki Sugizaki, Yifan Sun, Hiroaki Muta, and Ken Kurosaki. Thermophysical and mechanical properties of CrB and FeB.Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology, 56(9-10):859–865, 2019. 11

    2019

  26. [34]

    High pressure X-ray diffraction on UX2 compounds

    JP Itié, J Staun Olsen, L Gerward, U Benedict, and JC Spirlet. High pressure X-ray diffraction on UX2 compounds. Physica B+C, 139–140:330–332, 1986

    1986

  27. [35]

    Pressure-induced orthorhombic distortion of UMn 2.Journal of Alloys and Compounds, 298(1–2):177–180, 2000

    A Lindbaum, S Heathman, T Le Bihan, and P Rogl. Pressure-induced orthorhombic distortion of UMn 2.Journal of Alloys and Compounds, 298(1–2):177–180, 2000

    2000

  28. [36]

    The thermal conductivity of nonmetallic crystals.Solid State Physics, 34:1–71, 1979

    Glen A Slack. The thermal conductivity of nonmetallic crystals.Solid State Physics, 34:1–71, 1979

    1979

  29. [37]

    Lower limit to the thermal conductivity of disordered crystals

    David G Cahill, S K Watson, and R O Pohl. Lower limit to the thermal conductivity of disordered crystals. Physical Review B, 46(10):6131–6140, 1992

    1992

  30. [38]

    S. F. Pugh. XCII. Relations between the elastic moduli and the plastic properties of polycrystalline pure metals. The London, Edinburgh, and Dublin Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science, 45(367):823–843, 1954

    1954

  31. [39]

    Mechanical and thermal properties of ZrSiO4.Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology, 54(11):1267–1273, 2017

    Fumihiro Nakamori, Yuji Ohishi, Hiroaki Muta, Ken Kurosaki, Ken-ichi Fukumoto, and Shinsuke Yamanaka. Mechanical and thermal properties of ZrSiO4.Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology, 54(11):1267–1273, 2017

    2017

  32. [40]

    Mechanical properties and thermal conductivity of (U,Zr)SiO4

    Yuji Ohishi, Yifan Sun, Yuu Ooi, and Hiroaki Muta. Mechanical properties and thermal conductivity of (U,Zr)SiO4. Journal of Nuclear Materials, 556:153160, 2021

    2021

  33. [41]

    A study of the tetraborides of uranium and thorium.Trans

    KJ Matterson and H Jones. A study of the tetraborides of uranium and thorium.Trans. Brit. Ceram. Soc., 60:351, 1961. 12

    1961

Pith tools

Reviewed July 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.