Abstract Title
Comparison of Various TEM Sample Preparation Techniques of Nuclear Graphite
Additional Funding Sources
This project was made possible by the NSF Idaho EPSCoR Program and by the National Science Foundation under Award No. OIA-1301792.
Abstract
TITLE: Comparison of Various TEM Sample Preparation Techniques of Nuclear Graphite
The mechanical behavior and microstructure of nuclear graphite can dictate the lifetime of nuclear reactors. Nuclear reactors cause fast moving particles to collide with the graphite, thus introducing irradiation damage and lattice defects to the microstructure. Through transmission electron microscopy, one can ‘simulate’ and monitor the irradiation effects of nuclear graphite that would occur in a nuclear reactor.
Different TEM sample preparation techniques produce varying effects within samples; in turn, all techniques possess strengths and weaknesses in terms of difficulty, time consumption, and induced damage. This presentation identifies and describes the strengths and weaknesses associated with powder, ion mill, and oxidation (synthetic, nuclear grade graphite) TEM sample preparation techniques. Additionally, this research attempts to illuminate the benefits of using oxidation techniques[1] to prepare TEM samples of synthetic, nuclear grade graphite. By implementing oxidation techniques, the samples are theoretically artifact free; and by utilizing artifact free samples, all irradiation damage within the samples is a result of transmission electron microscopy.
FUNDING ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: **This project is based upon work supported by the U.S Department of Energy’s EPSCoR-State/National Laboratory Partnership Program (Award # DE-SC0016427). All TEM use and sample preparation was conducted at the Boise State Center for Materials Characterization (BSCMC).
MENTORS: Dr. Karthik Chinnathambi & Dr. Rick Ubic
Additional advising: Steve Johns
[1] Johns, S.; Shin, W.; Kane, J. J.; Windes, W. E.; Ubic, R.; Karthik, C. A new oxidation based technique for artifact free TEM specimen preparation of nuclear graphite. Journal of Nuclear Materials 2018, 505, 62–68 DOI: 10.1016/j.jnucmat.2018.03.058.
Comparison of Various TEM Sample Preparation Techniques of Nuclear Graphite
TITLE: Comparison of Various TEM Sample Preparation Techniques of Nuclear Graphite
The mechanical behavior and microstructure of nuclear graphite can dictate the lifetime of nuclear reactors. Nuclear reactors cause fast moving particles to collide with the graphite, thus introducing irradiation damage and lattice defects to the microstructure. Through transmission electron microscopy, one can ‘simulate’ and monitor the irradiation effects of nuclear graphite that would occur in a nuclear reactor.
Different TEM sample preparation techniques produce varying effects within samples; in turn, all techniques possess strengths and weaknesses in terms of difficulty, time consumption, and induced damage. This presentation identifies and describes the strengths and weaknesses associated with powder, ion mill, and oxidation (synthetic, nuclear grade graphite) TEM sample preparation techniques. Additionally, this research attempts to illuminate the benefits of using oxidation techniques[1] to prepare TEM samples of synthetic, nuclear grade graphite. By implementing oxidation techniques, the samples are theoretically artifact free; and by utilizing artifact free samples, all irradiation damage within the samples is a result of transmission electron microscopy.
FUNDING ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: **This project is based upon work supported by the U.S Department of Energy’s EPSCoR-State/National Laboratory Partnership Program (Award # DE-SC0016427). All TEM use and sample preparation was conducted at the Boise State Center for Materials Characterization (BSCMC).
MENTORS: Dr. Karthik Chinnathambi & Dr. Rick Ubic
Additional advising: Steve Johns
[1] Johns, S.; Shin, W.; Kane, J. J.; Windes, W. E.; Ubic, R.; Karthik, C. A new oxidation based technique for artifact free TEM specimen preparation of nuclear graphite. Journal of Nuclear Materials 2018, 505, 62–68 DOI: 10.1016/j.jnucmat.2018.03.058.
Comments
Th28