Engineering Papers⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Peterson, Miroslava

Publications and source records attributed to Peterson, Miroslava.

Low Activity Waste Glass Optimization with Property Models from Machine Learning, Part 2: Experimental Validation and Active Learning

The United States Department of Energy is responsible for managing legacy nuclear waste stored in underground tanks at the Hanford Site. To treat the waste, it is planned as the current baseline to separately vitrify low-activity waste (LAW) and high-level waste fractions. Previously, machine learning (ML) based glass property models (e.g., chemical durability, viscosity, electrical conductivity and SO3 solubility) were developed with prediction uncertainties. A waste glass optimization approach was then established to enable the capability of using these ML models in LAW glass formulation. In this study, the previous ML models were first experimentally validated, and the results were incorporated back into the database to update the ML models. The updated models and formulations showed increased waste loading while reducing the failure rate, demonstrating improved predictive accuracy, reduced uncertainties, and the effectiveness of active learning in guiding high-dimensional, nonlinear LAW glass design. This represents the first experimental validation of ML based LAW glass formulation, with practical benefits such as higher waste loading, shorter mission duration, and lower operational risk.

Lu, Xiaonan (ORCID:0000000179708148)↗

Towards informatics-driven design of nuclear waste forms

Informatics-driven approaches, such as machine learning and sequential experimental design, have shown the potential to drastically impact next-generation materials discovery and design.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Direct Feed High-Level Waste APPS Model Glass Testing (DFHLW APPS) Matrix

This report summarizes the data collected during the batching and melting of the Direct Feed High-Level Waste APPS Model Glass Matrix (DFHLW APPS) to serve as a quality-assured validation of the Aspen Process Performance Simulation (APPS) formulation method. Of 15 glasses tested, 12 satisfied all target property constraints. Two glasses, APPS-05 and -06, formed nepheline on canister centerline cooling heat-treatment and failed the Product Consistency Test response limits. Glass APPS-07-2 formed unacceptably high concentrations of crystals (primarily Na3Nd(PO4)2) when heat treated at 950 °C. All other glasses were found to be satisfactory. The measured property values were compared to predicted values from a set of current models. In many cases the current models were found to be inadequate for design of DFHLW glasses. These models are being adjusted to correct for mispredictions. Other models, e.g., density, toxicity characteristic leaching procedure, and sulfur solubility, are adequate for formulation of DFHLW glasses.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Evaluation of GlassNet for physics-informed machine learning of glass stability and glass-forming ability

Glassy materials form the basis of many modern applications, including nuclear waste immobilization, touch-screen displays, and optical fibers, and also hold great potential for future medical and environmental applications. However, their structural complexity and large composition space make design and optimization challenging for certain applications. Of particular importance for glass processing and design is an estimate of a given composition's glass-forming ability (GFA). However, there remain many open questions regarding the underlying physical mechanisms of glass formation, especially in oxide glasses. It is apparent that a proxy for GFA would be highly useful in glass processing and design, but identifying such a surrogate property has proven itself to be difficult. While glass stability (GS) parameters have historically been used as a GFA surrogate, recent research has demonstrated that most of these parameters are not accurate predictors of the GFA of oxide glasses. Here, in this work, we explore the application of an open-source pre-trained neural network model, GlassNet, that can predict the characteristic temperatures necessary to compute GS with reasonable performance and assess the feasibility of using these physics-informed machine learning (PIML)-predicted GS parameters to estimate GFA. In doing so, we track the uncertainties at each step of the computation—from the original ML prediction errors to the compounding of errors during GS estimation, and finally to the final estimation of GFA. While GlassNet exhibits reasonable accuracy on all individual properties, we observe a large compounding of error in the combination of these individual predictions for the PIML prediction of GS, finding that random forest models offer similar accuracy to GlassNet. We also break down the performance of GlassNet on different glass families and find that the error in GS prediction is correlated with the error in crystallization peak temperature prediction. Lastly, we utilize this finding to assess the relationship between top-performing GS parameters and GFA for two ternary glass systems: sodium borosilicate and sodium iron phosphate glasses. We conclude that to obtain true ML predictive capability of GFA, significantly more data needs to be collected.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗

Crystalline versus Glassy Nature of Iron Phosphate Waste Forms Subjected to Different Slow Cooling Curves

This report provides experimental details and associated results on the elemental distributions (compositions), crystalline/amorphous phase distributions, and microstructures for iron phosphate reference materials (DPF5-336) made with different cooling curves and starting from different temperatures (i.e., 1050°C and 1200°C). The primary goal of this work was to evaluate the properties of the DPF5- 336 reference material after it was melted and cooled at different rates to simulate the cooling profile of different types of canisters. Crystal fractions across the SCC#2, SCC#3, and SCC#5 samples were all similar ranging in crystal content of 35.66–41.14 mass% with amorphous fractions being the balance (64.34–58.86 mass%, respectively). This shows that the heat treatment profile did not seems to greatly affect either the total crystal content or the phase distributions. The quenched sample was almost completely amorphous (99.55 mass%) with very small peaks identified as Li 3 Fe 2 (PO 4 ) 3 whereas the SCC-treated materials showed peaks for what appear to be ten separate phases present in various concentrations. Another goal of these experiments was to see how the phase distribution affected chemical durability of these waste forms, but that information is being collected at Argonne National Laboratory and will be published in a separate report

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Enhanced Hanford Low-Activity Waste Glass Property Data Development: Phase 5 and Phase 6

This report summarizes the data collected on two test matrices of low-activity waste (LAW) glass compositions intended to expand the composition-property database: Low-Activity Waste (LAW) Phase 5: Expansion of LAW Glass Composition Boundaries and LAW Phase 6: High PCT and VHT Response Glass Matrix. Both matrix glass compositions were statistically designed to expand the LAW glass composition region. The analyses performed on these glasses include chemical composition (for target compositional verification), density, viscosity, electrical conductivity, crystal fraction, container centerline cooling with crystal identification, the product consistency test (PCT) response, the vapor hydration test (VHT) response, and sulfur solubility. Because of the slightly different scope of the two matrices, not all methods were applied to both matrices. Specifically, the following measurements were taken only on the LAW Phase 5: Expansion of LAW Glass Composition Boundaries glasses: crystal fraction as a function of temperature, density (ρ), viscosity (η), and electrical conductivity (EC, e). Combined, these data contribute a significant amount, 51 glasses, to the database for high LAW loaded enhanced waste glasses. Most of these data are focused near the boundaries of acceptable PCT and VHT responses, where prediction uncertainties are most impactful.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Aluminophosphate Waste Forms for Immobilizing Cations from Electrochemical Salt Wastes

This report provides experimental details and results of evaluating aluminophosphate waste forms for treating and immobilizing the salt cations from salt wastes generated during electrochemical reprocessing of used nuclear fuel. In the waste form process for these materials, chloride salt streams are reacted with NH 4 H 2 PO 4 , the chlorine is removed from the salts and driven off as NH 4 Cl (a solid condensate that can be captured), and then the product can be vitrified in conjunction with glass-forming chemicals (e.g., Fe 2 O 3 , Al 2 O 3 ) to create a high-durability waste form. This study was initiated with some literature review on aluminophosphates containing high alkali oxide content and some of this information is summarized in this report. Following literature review, three new samples were synthesized where two contained Fe 2 O 3 +Al 2 O 3 (i.e., samples G3 and G5 ) and one was only Al 2 O 3 (Fe 2 O 3 -free) (i.e., sample G6 ). In addition to these samples, G1 was also made, which is the baseline reference waste form referred to as DPF5-336 (made without Al 2 O 3 ). Samples G1, G3, G5, and G6 had phases of Li 3 Fe 2 (PO 4 ) 3 (likely), monazite (below XRD detection limits), AlPO 4 , and AlPO 4 , respectively. Characterizations on these materials included optical images, scanning electron microscopy, energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy, and X-ray diffraction. These samples were shipped to Argonne National Laboratory for chemical durability testing. Depending on how the samples perform in these tests, an additional phase of aluminophosphate formulations could be designed and tested. This report completes the milestone M4FT-23PN030104041 with details provided in Appendix B.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗