A channeling investigation of the structural modifications in uranium dioxide submitted to swift-ion irradiation and aqueous corrosion

Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research, Section B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms

Volumn 136-138, Issue , 1998, Pages 465-470

  Garrido, F ^a   Choffel, C ^a   Thome L ^a   Dran, J C ^a   Nowicki, L ^b   Turos, A ^b,c   Domagala, J ^d  

^a CENTRE DE CALCUL DE L INSTITUT NATIONAL DE PHYSIQUE NUCLEAIRE ET DE PHYSIQUE DES PARTICULES   (France)

^b SOLTAN INSTITUTE FOR NUCLEAR STUDIES   (Poland)

^c Department of Micro and Nanotechnology of Wide Bandgap Semiconductors   (Poland)

^d INSTITUTE OF PHYSICS   (Poland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER SIMULATION; CORROSION; CRYSTAL ATOMIC STRUCTURE; CRYSTAL LATTICES; CRYSTAL ORIENTATION; ION BOMBARDMENT; LEACHING; MONTE CARLO METHODS; RUTHERFORD BACKSCATTERING SPECTROSCOPY; SINGLE CRYSTALS; SURFACE TREATMENT; XENON;

POLYGONIZATION;

URANIUM DIOXIDE;

EID: 0032017493     PISSN: 0168583X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0168-583X(97)00717-9     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. For a general review, see the special issue on Radioactive Waste, Physics Today 50 (6) (1997).
2. C. Choffel, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Paris-Sud (1998).
3. L. Nowicki, A. Turos, C. Choffel, F. Garrido, L. Thomé, J. Gaca, M. Wojcik, Hj. Matzke, Phys. Rev. B 56 (1997) 534.
4. H. Homeyer, Nucl. Instr. and Meth. B 64 (1992) 301.
5. J.F. Ziegler, J.P. Biersack, U. Littmark, in: J.F. Ziegler (Ed.), The Stopping and Range of Ions in Solids, vol. 1, Pergamon Press, New York, 1985.
6. E. Cottereau, J. Camplan, J. Chaumont, R. Meunier, H. Bernas, Nucl. Instr. and Meth. B 45 (1990) 293.
7. L. Nowicki, to be published.
8. B.T.M. Willis, Proc. Roy. Soc. London, Ser. A 274 (1963) 134.
9. Hj. Matzke, J.A. Davies, N.G.E. Johansson, Can. J. Phys. 49 (1971) 2215.
10. B.T.M. Willis, J. Phys. (France) 25 (1964) 421.
11. It should be pointed out that U angular scans cannot be properly fitted with isotropic Gaussian distributions for U atoms, since the structure of the transformed layer is no longer cubic. Although O scans could also be fitted with bidimensional distributions, the larger uncertainty on the data does not allow to discriminate between isotropic and anisotropic representations.
12. D.J.M. Bevan, I.E. Grey, B.T.M. Willis, J. Solid State Chem. 61 (1986) 1.