4.8 Article

Are Nanoporous Materials Radiation Resistant?

Journal

NANO LETTERS
Volume 12, Issue 7, Pages 3351-3355

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/nl201383u

Keywords

Radiation damage; nanofoams; gold; computer simulations

Funding

  1. CONICET
  2. PICT
  3. University of Cuyo
  4. Center for Materials at Irradiation and Mechanical Extremes, an Energy Frontier Research Center
  5. U.S. Department of Energy at Los Alamos National Laboratory [2008LANL1026]
  6. CINT, a Department of Energy, Office of Basic Energy Sciences

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The key to perfect radiation endurance is perfect recovery. Since surfaces are perfect sinks for defects, a porous material with a high surface to volume ratio has the potential to be extremely radiation tolerant, provided it is morphologically stable in a radiation environment. Experiments and computer simulations on nanoscale gold foams reported here show the existence of a window in the parameter space where foams are radiation tolerant. We analyze these results in terms of a model for the irradiation response that quantitatively locates such window that appears to be the consequence of the combined effect of two length scales dependent on the irradiation conditions: (i) foams with ligament diameters below a minimum value display ligament melting and breaking, together with compaction increasing with dose (this value is typically similar to 5 nm for primary knock on atoms (PKA) of similar to 15 keV in Au), while (ii) foams with ligament diameters above a maximum value show bulk behavior, that is, damage accumulation (few hundred nanometers for the PKA's energy and dose rate used in this study). In between these dimensions, (i.e., similar to 100 nm in Au), defect migration to the ligament surface happens faster than the time between cascades, ensuring radiation resistance for a given dose-rate. We conclude that foams can be tailored to become radiation tolerant.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available