4.6 Article

An electrochemical study of hydrogen in molten 2LiF-BeF2 (FLiBe) with addition of LiH

期刊

ELECTROCHIMICA ACTA
卷 367, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.electacta.2020.137114

关键词

Hydrogen; Tritium; FLiBe; Beryllium; Beryllium hydride; FHR; MSR

资金

  1. DOE Office of Nuclear Energy's Nuclear Energy University Program [15-8352, IRP-17-14541]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found that LiH reacts with FLiBe to generate an electroactive species, allowing for accurate detection of introduced hydrogen using electrochemical methods, while the concentration of H-0 remains above 40%. It is speculated that covalent BeH2 may be formed in FLiBe after the addition of LiH.
The chemical and transport behavior of hydrogen isotopes in molten 2LiF-BeF2 (FLiBe) is of interest for the design of tritium management systems in nuclear fission and fusion reactors that use FLiBe. The chemical reaction of LiH with FLiBe is used to introduce hydrogen in the molten salt and electrochemical methods are used for in situ studies of hydrogen in FLiBe. LiH reacts with molten FLiBe to generate an electroactive species whose voltammetry peak is proportional to the added quantity of LiH. The cyclic voltammetry reaction potential of 2.009 +/- 0.050 V vs Be/Be2+ and the electron exchange of n = 0.8 +/- 0.5 are consistent with the one-electron oxidation of dissolved H in the zero valence state, H-0 to H+. The concentration of H-0 is estimated by linear sweep voltammetry at 60-80% of the hydrogen introduced by the reaction of 0.42 mol% LiH with FLiBe and after eleven hours it remains above 40%. It is postulated that covalent BeH2 is formed in FLiBe upon LiH addition, as a FLiBe-soluble quasi-stable intermediate product. The results provide an evaluation of LiH as a means of introducing dissolved hydrogen in FLiBe, enabling electrochemical methods as tools to advance the understanding of the chemistry of hydrogen isotopes in FLiBe. (C) 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据