RECEIVED BY m'"“ A1n 971988 = _OAK RIDGE NATIONAI. I.ABORA'I'ORY | , operated by - L UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION - ' : for ihe- Loy - U S. ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION ORNI. TM 2316 PHXSICAL PROPERTIES OF MOLTEN~-SALT REACTOR FU'EL, - COOLANT, AND FLUSH SALTS © Eaited by S. Cantor o - Contributors: L . 8, Cantor , e - J. W. Cocke = : :“: A. S. Dworkin - G, M. Watson | 1 » | NOTICE _' ’”\ - P . This document contains |nformuhon of a prellmmury nature and was prepared Ny prtmorlly for internal use at the Oak Ridge Naticnal Laboretory. It is subject %&v S T .to_revision or cotrecflun and therefore does not represent a final report. L e — : : DISTRIBUTION OF [His DOCUMENE (5 UNLIMUIER B4 i LEGAL : NOTICE This repon was prepared as an ‘aceount of Governmenf sponsored work. Ne:fhar the United Stufes " nor the Commission, nor any person acting on behalf of the Commission: A. Makes any warranty or representation, sxpresssd or implied, with respect to the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of the information contained in this report, or that the use of any information, apparatus, method, or procass disclosed in this roport may - not mfrmge privately owned rights; or B. Assumes any liabilities with respecl to the use of, or for damuges rasulhng from fhe use of any information, appurufus method, or process dlsclosed in this report, As used in the above, ''person acting on behalf of the Commission' includes any Vamployee or contractor of the Commlssion, or employes of such centractor, to the extent that such employee provides gccess ta, any information pursuant ta his employmem or l:onfrnct with the Commnssion : - or hls employment with such contractor, : “ar contracter of the Commission, or employee of such contractor prepares, disseminates, or - \f) Lj’ . ORNL-TM~ 2316 Contract No. W-7405-eng-26 REACTOR CHEMISTRY DIVISION PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF MOLTEN-SALT REACTOR FUEL COOLANT, AND FLUSH SALTS ’ Edited by S. Cantor Contributors: . Cantor . W. Cooke . 5. Dworkin . Robbins . Thoms . Watson W eYm = AUGUST 1968 CAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABCRATORY Oak Ridge, Tennessee opergted by UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION for the U.S5. ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION LEG AL NOTICE red work. Neither the United an account of Government sponsc nor any person aciing on behalf of the Commission: expressed or implied, with respect 1o the aceu- d i thie report, or that the use this report may not infringe This report was prepared a States, por {he Commission, A. Makes any warranty or representation, racy, completenesg, or usefuiness of the information containe of any infermation, apparatus, method, or process dizciczed in privately owned rights; or { to the use of, or for damages reaulting from the 1 b T e i B. Assumes any liabilities with respec use of any information, apparatus. method, or process disclosed in this report. -é.z; § WL T Ag uged in the sbove, ‘‘person acting on behalf of the Commigsion” includes any em= ; Mfi«::}{ C}F Thir ployee or contractor of the Commission, or employee of such contracier, to the extent that e Q;@C: (a4 Ex mp or employee of guch contractor prepares, R By Ep{_;; thpr ~,a.‘,\,,”?‘gi;-?fi fl fl ~ ntractor of the Commicsion, cess to, any informat ent with such centractor. ‘- A such employee or coO digseminates, or provides ac with the Commigsion, 0T nis employm ion pursuant ic his employment or contract iii a4 CONTENTS Page ADEETECE o v v i e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e s e e e e e e e e e 1 Compesition of Salt Mixtures 2 Introduction 3 Basis for Selectlng the Salts 3 Uncertainties Listed with the Phy81cal Propertles Values 6 For Further Informgtion 7 Viscosity . . 8 Thermal Conductiviiy .« ¢ ¢« ¢ o ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ o o« o o o« o o ¢ o o ¢ « + o 11 Electrical Conductivity . . ¢ ¢ v ¢ ¢« o o o o o 4 o « o o o + ¢ o« + « 14 Phase Transition Behavior . . . P I - Phase Diagram of LiF- Bng—ThF4 e e e e e s e e e e e e e e e e . 20 Phgse Disgram of NaBF,-NaF e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e 21 Heat Capacity (at constant pressure) . . . + « « « o v o ¢ v o« o « + 22 Heat of FUSION . « v ¢ v v v ¢ 4 & ¢ o s o & o o o o « o« v s e o o« 25 Density of Liguid e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e . 28 Expansivity (Volume Coefficient of Thermal Expansion) . . . . . . . . 30 Compressibility P Vapor Pressure e e e e e e e s e e e e e e e 4 e e e e e e e e . 33 Surface Tension Gt e e e e e e s e e e s e e e e e e e s e s e s . . 36 Solubility of Helium, Krypton, and Xenon . . . . . « « « « + « « « & 38 Solubility of BF3 Ga88 . ¢ o ¢ & o o« 4 « « o o ¢« 4 4 ¢ 4 o s 0 o o . 4l Appendix A. Isochoric Heat Capacity (C,), C /Cv, and Sonic Veloecity . . . 43 B. Thermal Diffusivity, Klnematlc V1800$1ty, and Prandtl Number . 41 C. Conversion FactOTs « + « o ¢ « « o o « o o« o o o o o ¢ o o « o« 45 Composition of Salt Mixtures . . . . + « « v ¢ « ¢ ¢ ¢« « ¢ v « ¢« « . 46 From the foregoing properties, calculated and appended: ABSTRACT For seven molten salt mixtures: four fuel mixtures, each containing LiF, BeF,, ThF,, UF, one flush salt, LiF-BeF, (66-34 mole %) two coolant salts, NaBF,-NaF (92-8 mole %) and single- component NaBF, estimates and/or experimental values are given for the follow- ing properties: viscosity, thermal conductivity, electrical conductivity, phase transition behavior, heat capacity, heat of fusion, density, expansivity, compressibility, vapor pressure, surface tension, solubility of the gases, He,Kr,Xe,BF, . isochoric heat capacity (CV) sonic velocity thermal diffusivity kinematic viscosity Prandtl number. the following have also been Composition of Salt Mixtures Symbol F Fuel- F, Breeder Mixtures ¥ Fy Flush Salt L,B (present MSRE coolant) Coolants C, C; Mole % Liquidus LiF BeF, ThF, UF, Temp. (°C) 73 16 10.7 0.3 500° + 5© 72 21 6.7 0.3 500° + 5°© 68 20 11.7 0.3 480° + 50 63 25 11.7 0.3 500° + 50 66 34 - - 458° + 1° (peritectic) NaBF, NaF g2 8 3850 + 1© ' {(eutectic) 100 - — 407° + 1° (melting point) '3 _________ INTRODUCTION In this document we have compiled physical property infor- mation, either measured or estimated, on seven salt mixtures that are presently of importance in the design of advanced molten salt reactors. The primary user of this compilation will, no doubt, be the nuclear reactor engineer who requires these data for the design and development of molten salt re- actors. Specialists in the chemistry of molten salts may be another audience interested in this report. We earnestly hope that all who critically examine or otherwise use these data will give us the benefit of their advice so that future ver - sions of-'this document can be greatly improved. Basis for Selecting the Salts The choice of salt mixtures has been primarily governed by recent changes in the Molten Salt Reactor Program: (a) the combining of fissile and fertile material within the same circuit (the "single-region" concept), and (b) the testing of coolant salts which are mainly NaBF,. Four mixtures have been selected for possible use as single-region fuel melts. These are: Composition (mole %) Salt Mixture LiF BeF, ThF, UF, F, 73 16 10.7 0.3 F, 72 21 6.7 0.3 F, 68 20 11.7 0.3 F, 63 25 11.7 0.3 4 Salts F;, and F; are fuel mixtures appropriate toa . prismatic configuration of the graphite moderator; the lesser concentrations of BeF, and ThF; in F; may be more favorable with respect to rare-earth fission product removal by reduc-- tive extraction. Salt F,, containing a relatively low concentration of thorium, might be used in a reactor (e.g., with random-packed graphite spheres) where good breeding performance is not a prime consideration. Mixture F,, on the other hand, could contribute to improved breeder performance mainly because the higher the beryllium concentration, the greater the opportunity to increase neutrons by the (n, 2n) reaction. It is worthwhile noting that for the purposes of estimating physical properties of salts F,-F,, the effects of the small concentration of UF, was almost always assumed to be the same as for the corresponding increase in the ThF, concentration. Although no firm decision has been reached as to the exact composition of the fuel salt for the next molten salt reactor, it is highly probable that the concentrations of LiF, BeF, and ThF, will be within the limits given for these components by the above four mixtures. Physical property information is also provided for: LiF-BeF, (66-34 mole %) symbolized as L;B. This mixture has been used in the MSRE as the coolant and as the flush salt for the fuel circuit. The inclusion of L;B e 5 in this report is justified by the good possibility that it will be a flush salt (and perhaps a coolant) in future molten salt reactors. As intermediate coclant (in this case the fluid which transports heat from the fuel salt to the steam generators) the salts which presently appear attractive contain mostly NaBF,. Two such salts are considered: Composition (mole %) Coolant NaBFg NaF C, 100 The salt symbolized as C; is a eutectic composition which melts at 385°C (725°F). Although a lower melting fluoroborate mixture would be desirable, it is not presently clear how much and which additive will substantially depress the melting temperature. Moreover, it seems likely that lower melting fluoroborate mixtures will not be very differ- ent from C, ; hence mixture Cg seems, at present, the leading candidate for the next coolant to be tried in a molten salt reactor. Another salt for which estimates are tabulated in this report is '"'pure' NaBF,, symbolized as C,. Since stoichio- metric NaBF, does not exist in the molten state without a very high partial pressure of BF; gas, C, cannot be considered a practical coolant. However, estimations of the physical properties of hypothetically pure molten NaBF; are useful for evaluating the contributions of NaBF, as a component in a salt mixture. In solution, [BF,] ion may be imagined to s behave like a halide ion, slightly larger and more polarizable than iodide ion. By applying this analogy, several properties of C, were estimated from the measured properties of molten Nail. For convenience, a list of salt compositions and their corresponding liquidus temperatures are given after the abstract (page 2) and at the end of this report (page 46). Uncertainties Listed with the Physical Property Values Each contributor has stated what he believes is the error associated with the experimental result or with the estimated quantity. For most cases, the uncertainty repre- sents considerably more than either '"goodness of fit'" of an interpolation or internal consistency available from thermo- dynamics. Instead, the uncertainty may be considered as the largest probable combination of systematic and random errors associated with the value given for the property. Where the listing is a property-temperature equation, the uncertainty is for the property calculated at the temperature substituted in the equation. In properties where the number of signifi- cant figures are not justified by the specified uncertainties, the extra significant figures are given to aid the reader in judging whether a particular salt is '"less than" or ''greater than' another salt for the property in question. Although the magnitudes of the uncertainties are highly intuitive and often disappointingly large, they should be ....... L taken seriously. Each contributor, while not necessarily qualifying as "expert' in the physical property, either possesses long experience in measuring the property or has carefully (and usually critically) reviewed the literature for that property. In other words, for each property the person whose name is given is at least a very interested observer and may also be an active participant, For Further Information --- It is best to contact the person (or persons) listed under the property heading. The editor hopes to provide addenda to this report as newer, more reliable, data become available. R VISCOSITY | i’ S. Cantor Viscosity-Temperature Equation Salt n in Centipoise, T in °K Uncertainty F; n = 0.084 exp (4340/T) 25% F, nmn = 0.072 exp (4370/T) 25% F, n = 0.077 exp (4430/T) 25% Fyu \ n = 0.0444 exp (5030/T) 25% L,B n = 0.116 exp (3755/T) 15% C C, n = 0.04 exp (3000/T) 50% Sources of Data and Methods of Estimation Salts ¥, -F,: Estimated empirically from viscosities in the system LiF-BeF,-UF, (ref. 1) and also from measurements of LiF-BeF, -ThF, (71-16-13 mole %).° It was assumed that the effect of ThF, concentration on viscosity was the same as that observed for UF,. L,B: Measured3 C; and C,: The equation was derived from (a) preliminary measurements of NaBF4,4 and (b) assuming that the temperature variation of viscosity for NaBF, is equal to that of NaI.5 Given the rather large uncertainty, the contribution of NaF (in C;) to the viscosity may be considered negligible. 9 Discussion Viscosities of Reactor Fuel Mixtures From the reported viscosity measurementsl of the system LiF-BeF, -UF,, two trends can be observed: (a) for LiF concentrations of 60 mole % or greater, substitu- tion of UF, for BeF, (at const. temp.) causes an increase in viscosity, (b) increasing LiF from 60 to 70 mole %, at const. temp. and at const. UF, concentration, decreases the viscosity by, at most, a factor of 1/2; for most compositions the factor is closer to 3/4. The data and trends observed for the system LiF-BeF, -UF, can servé to predict reliably (i.e., to within 25%) the viscosities in the slightly different system, LiF-BeF,-MF, (M is Th and/or U). Assuming that all single-region fuel mixtures will be restricted to the following ranges of component composition: 62 - 73 mole % LiF 15 - 30 mole % BeF, 6 - 16 mole % MF, , then one may conclude that the predicted viscosities have a rather narrow range of values, e.g., at 60000, 9 - 16 Centipoise at 700°C, 5 - 9 Centipoise 10 References 1. B. C. Blanke et al., "Density and Viscosity of Fused Mixtures of Lithium, Beryllium, and Uranium Fluorides," MLM-].OSé, DeCo 19560 2. Molten Salt Reactor Program Quar. Progr. Rept. Oct. 31, 1959, ORNL-2890, p. 21. 3. 8. Cantor and W, T. Ward, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, unpublished measurements. 4, L. J. Wittenberg, Mound Laboratory, Miamisburg, Ohio. Oscillating-cup viscometry. 5. G. J. Janz et al., ""Molten Salt Data. Electrical Conduc- tance, Density and Viscosity,;" Technical Bulletin Series Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, N. Y., July 1964, p. 79. 11 s THERMAL CONDUCTIVITY J. W. Cooke Thermal Conductivitya Salt in watt/(cm-OC) Uncertainty Fy 0.01," > + 257 R, 0.01, " >t 25% F, o.oosab > 1 25% Fy 0.007," >t 25% L,B 0.010 + 10% C, 0.005, + 50% C, 0.005, + 50% a As a first approximation, the temperature dependence of thermal conductivity may be neglected. Although the "thermal conductivity of molten salts does vary somewhat with temperature, uncertainties in measurements at a given temperature are usually greater than the tempera- ture dependence over the whole range of temperature (usually an interval of 200°C). bBefore assuming anything about the relative values of the four fuel melts, please read the caveat in the Discussion. Sources of Data and Methods of Estimation Salts F, - F,: Estimated by means of a theoretical expression derived by Rao1 and adapted to molten salts by Turnbull.2 The expression is T 1/2 2/3 k (in w em™ ©C!') = 11.9 x 107> 'm Pm (M/n)'?:E where_Tm = melting point (OK), Py = liquid density in g cm™? at o T,» M = average molar weight and n = average number of discrete 12 ions per molecule. Part of the expression, 11.9 x 103 Tml/2 o173/ u/ny %6 is a good approximation to the average maximum Debye lattice frequency for single ionic salts.Z It was found for eleven melten mixtures (nitrates or chlorides) that the above expression agreed with experimental results, on the average, to within 15%. For two fluoride melts, one LZB,3 the other, LiF-BeF, -ThF, -UF, (71.2-23-5-.8 mole %),° the theoretical expression yielded values approximately 25% less than experi- mental. Note that the latter is very similar in composition to F, . In applying the theoretical expression the liquidus tem- perature was substituted for Tm; in computing n, the following ions were assumed: Li+, F, (BeF,)?%", (ThFS)_I, (UFS)'I. Assumption of the more plausible ions, (ThF,)™® and (UF,)"3 leads to a lower and less reliable estimated thermal conduc- tivity. Also, 15% was added to the estimated value because of the previously noted discrepancy for the cases of the two similar fluoride mixtures. L,B: Measured’ C;, C: Very preliminary measurement3 on C, agrees with the theoretical expression. Discussion The relative conductivities of the four fuel mixtures, Fy-F,, are not more reliable than the absolute values. The tabulated condubtivities were obtained from a theoretical 13 equation that was greatly extended to apply to these mixtures. The dearth of accurate experimental data prevents adequate testing of the extended theoretical expression either absolutely or relatively. References 1. M. Rama Rao, Indian Journal of Physiecs 16, 30 (1942). Z. A. G. Turnbull, Australian Journal of Applied Science 12, 324 (1961). 3. J. W. Cooke, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, unpublished experimental results. The method of measurement is given on p. 15 in Proceedings of the Sixth Conference on Thermal Conductivity, Dayton, Ohio, Oct. 19-21, 1966, 14 ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY G. D. Robbins Salt Specific Conductivity - Temperature Equation Uncertainty « in (ohm-cm)™', t in °C F; k = 1.72 + 8.0 x 103 (t-500) + 20% F, = 1.63 + 7.3 x 10~3 (t-500) + 20% F, = 1.66 + 6.4 x 10-3 (t-500) + 20% F, = 1.94 + 7.1 x 1073 (t-500) + 20% L,B = 1.54 + 6.0 x 103 (t-500) + 10% C, = 2.7 + 13 x 1073 (t-500) + 50% C, = 1.92 + 2.6 x 10™3 (t-500) + 20% Sources of Data and Method of Estimation For 6 salts « was estimated empirically from data on related or analogous salt melts. Often the assumptions employed were not those which seemed physically most reasonable, but those which resulted in the most self-consistent correlation of the data. . Therefore, estimated k's are believed to have relatively large uncertainties. The number of significangt figures in the equations for « vs. t are not meant to contradict the listed uncertainties, but rather are intended to show differences between salt mixtures whose conductivities are predicted to be very similar. Salts F;, - F;: The following equations were employed in these estimates: M — e A.e Ke.—-—— Po T, (°K) o - © _ Tliquidus (°K) _ L L Mo XLifLiF * Etnr, Mnr, * #%Ber, MBer, s 15. e Ag = e€aquivalent conductivity at a corresponding temperature o Kg = specific conductivity at © Po = density at © Me = equivalent weight of a mixture M = formula weight of a component X = mole fraction X' = equivalent fraction At several values of O smoothed curves of Ag VS thF4 were obtained from conductivities of the system LiF-ThF, measured by Brown and Porter,1 Ligquidus temperatures reported in references 2 and 3 were used in calculating ©. Similar curves for LiF-BeF, were derived by plotting the experimental results for a single composition (66 mole % LiF)4 and assuming that the variation of Ag with X' in the LiF-BeF, system was equal to that in LiF-ThF,. (For these estimates UF, was treated as indistinguishable from ThF, .) The equations of « vs. t given above were then derived by assuming that Ae is additive in X%hF4 and Xéer for a given concentration of LiF. L,B: Preliminary measurements.4 C,: The rati AE AE appeared relativel onstant in 2 io aI/ [ pp relatively c the range © = 1.05 - 1.20 (data for Nal and KI from ref. 5). Assuming that = specific conductance & Aonapr, Poxpr, ~ Dewar’Mexr’ SP © ' data of Winterhager and Werner6 for KBF, were combined with density estimates for KBF, and NaBF47 to obtain values of AGNaBF4 vs. © (liquidus temperatures, from reference 8). 16 C;: Specific conductivity data in the range 47 to 77 mole ? were combined with those calcu- % NaBF, in the NaF-NaBF, system lated for pure NaBF, (see C,) to interpolate « for the composi- tion NaBF,-NaF (92-8 mole %). The large uncertainty listed reflects a lack of confidence in the data reported in reference 9. Discussion Specific conductivity is determined from resistance measure- ments according to the relation 1 k = — (g/a) \“‘ where (4/a) is the cell constant. For a given apparatus and set of experimental conditions, the measured value of resistance can vary with the frequency of the applied potential wave form.lo The values of ¢ listed above are valid for resistance extra- polated to infinite frequency (denoted as R®). Thus predicting the resistance of the melt which will be measured in a particu- lar experimental arrangement not only requires a value for conductivity «, but also presupposes a knowledge of the frequency dispersion characteristics of the measuring device. 17 REFERENCES 1. Brown, E.A. and B. Porter, U.S. Bureau of Mines Report of Investigations 6500 (1964). 2. Thoma, R.E., H. Insley, B. S. Landau, H. A. Friedman, and W. R. Grimes, J. Phys. Chem. 63, 1266 (1959). 3. Thoma, R. E., et al, ibid., 64, 865 (1960). 4. Robbins, G. D. and J. Braunstein, Molten Salt Reactor Program Semiannual Progress Report for Period Ending February 29, 1968, ORNL-4254. 5. Yaffe, I. S. and E. R. Van Artsdalen, J. Phys. Chem., ég, 1125 (1956). 6. Winterhager, H. and L. Werner, "Forschungsber. des Witschafts u. Verkehrsministeriums Nordrhein - Westfalen, No. 438, 1956. 7. Cantor, S., this report. 8. Bartomn, C. J., L. 0. Gilpatrick, J. A. Bornmann, H. Insley, and T. N. McVay, Molten Salt Reactor Program Semiannual Progress Report for Period Ending August 31, 1967, ORNL-4191, p. 158. 9. Selivanov, V. G. and V. V. Stender, Russian J. Inorg. Chem., 4, 934 (1959). 10. Robbins, G. D., "Electrical Conductivity of Molten Fluorides. A Review,'" ORNL-TM-2180, March 26, 1968. PHASE TRANSITION BEHAVIOR Type of Salt Transition Liquidus Fy Solidus Liquidus F, Solidus Ligquidus F, . Solidus Liquidus Solidus Peritectic L,B , Solidus ¢ Eutectic Solid-Solid C; Melting Point Solid-Solid a. 18 R. E. Thoma Temp . (°C). 500+5 444+5 500+5 4445 480+£5 440° 500+£5 448+£5 458+1 360+£3 3851 2451 407+1 245+1 Crystallization Sequence at Equilibrium Lig = LiF + L,T® + Lig Btwn 500-444: LiF+L,T+Liq LiF+L; T+Ligq = LiF+L;T+Li, BeFy Ligq = LiF + Ligq Btwn 500-495: Btwn 495-444: Same as for F, LiF + Liq LiF+L;T+Liq Lig = L,T + LT° + Ligq Btwn 480-448: L;T+LT+Lig Btwn 448-440: L,T + Liq L;T + Liq = LyT + L,B Liqg #=LTzd + Liq Btwn 500-495: LT, + Liq Btwn 495-490: LT, +LT+Liq 490: LT, +LT+Liq = L;T+Liq Btwn 490-448: LT + Lig Lig + LyT = Li,BeF, + L;T Liq = Li,BeF, + Liq Btwn 458-360: Li,BeF,+Liqg Li,BeF,+Ligq = Li,BeF, +BeF, Liq = NaBF, (cubic) + NaF NaBF, (cubic) +NaF- ¥ NaBF, (or- thorhombic) + NaF Ligq == NaBF, (cubic) NaBF, (cubic) = NaBF, (ortho- rhombic) L, T is an abbreviation for the solid solution, Li; (Th,Be)F,, shown as the peppered triangle in the accompanying phase diagram of LiF-BeF,-ThF, system. LT is the abbreviation for LiThF;. No precision has been assigned because this temperature has not been experimentally established. LT, is the abbreviation for LiTh,F,. 19 Sources of Data Phase equilibria in the system, LiF-BeF,-ThF; - see next page. Phase equilibria in the system, LiF-BeF, - R. E, Thoma, H, Insley, H. A. Friedman, and G. M. Hebert, Journal of Nuclear Materials 27, in press 1968. Phase equilibria in the system, NaBF,-NaF - C, J. Barton, L. O. Gilpatrick, et al,, MSRP Semiann. Progr. Rept. Feb. 29, 1968, USAEC Report 0RNLw4254. The phase diagram is given on page 21. TEMPERATURES IN °C COMPOSITION IN maois % 'X‘ . BLIFsThF, / * &73 f(..’; N X auFew, P-a88 Tha LiF ~BaF, - ThF, System. : -_‘vfi‘.@.uvmuufififih‘ REF. J. PHYS. CHEM., 64, 883 ({580} ORNL-DWG 88-24a2 580, e 5\ \7 'e'e'*'e"‘*“"e'e. wn‘x“flfi'i's‘&'fluv‘uuu W % % W3 W AVAVAVAVAVAVAVAVA' m k-237 0¢ TEMPERATURE (°C) ORNL-DWG 67—-9423A 1000 ¢ 900 \# 800 ~ 700 e 500 N 500 - \ 400 300 i Tttt NaF 20 40 60 80 NaBF NaBF, (mole %) The System NaF —NaBF,. 12 22 HEAT CAPACITY (at constant pressure) A. S. Dworkin Salt Cp in cal. g=! °c-'; t in °C Uncertainty F, liquid 0.34 + 4% solid 0.22 + 12.7 x 1075 t + 10 F, liquid 0.39 + 4 solid 0.27 + 12.7 x 10”% ¢t + 10 F; liquid 0.33 + 4 solid .21 + 12.7 x 107° t + 10 F, liquid 0.33 + 4 solid 0.2 + 12.7 x 1075 t + 10 L,B liquid 0.57 + 3 solid 0.317 + 3.61 x 10™% ¢t + 3 C; liquid 0.360 + 2 solid (243-381°C) 0.34 + 3 solid (25-243°C) 0.23 + 5.8 x 107 t + 6 C, liquid 0.36 + 2 solid (243-406°C) 0.33 + 3 solid (25-2439C) 0.23 + 6.0 x 107% t + 6 Sources of Data and Methods of Estimation Salts F; - F,: Liquid heat capacities were estimated by assuming mole-fraction additivity and assigning 16, 24, and 44 cal mole™! ©C-1 for the respective contributions of LiF, BeF,, and ThF,. The heat capacities for the solids were estimated by assuming that (a) temperature coefficient and (b) difference in Cp between liquid and solid are the same as that measured for LiF-BeF, -ThF, (72-16-12 mole %) .- L,B: Liquid Cp is the average of two independent sets of —— 2 measurements. Hoffman and Payne3 obtained 0.56 cal g-! Oc-!. The solid heat capacity obtained 0.577 cal. g! O C-!; Douglas 23. s is that of Douglas and Payne. Cy Measured1 C,: Meaéured}, Agrees within experimental error with that derived from C, by subtracting enthalpy contribution of NaF* assuming negligible heat of mixing between NaBF, and NaF. Discussion The values of 16 and 24 cal mole~! ©C-! were chosen for the respective Cp contributions of LiF and BeF, because 8 cal (g-atom) ™! OC"1 is the average observed for alkali and alkaline earth halides.” The Gy of 44 cal mole™ °c-! for the contribu- tion of ThFy; was assumed from the average value of 8.8 cal (g-atom)~! ©C-! for lanthanide halides.6 The validity of using the indicated additive contributions for estimating liquid heat capacities was checked by comparing with measured values of three related salts: Salt Mixture Estimated qg Measured Qp References L,B 0.57 cal g-tocC-! 0.57 2,3 LiF-BeF, -ThF, 72 - 16 - 12 m % 0.32¢ 0.324 1 LiF-ThF, 75 — 25 m % 0.24 0.25 7 24 References A. S. Dworkin, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, unpublished measurements. H. W. Hoffman and J. W. Cooke, Oak Ridge National Labora- tory, unpublished measurements. T. B. Douglas and W. H. Payne, Natl. Bur. Std. Report No. 8186, Washington, D. C., pp. 75-82. K. K. Kelley, U. S, Bureau of Mines Bulletin 584, (1960) p. 171. S. Cantor, Reactor Chem. Div., Ann. Progr. Rept. Dec. 31, 1965, ORNL-3913, pp. 29-32. A. S. Dworkin and M. A. Bredig, J. Phys. Chem. 67, 697 (1963); 67, 2499 (1963). R. A. Gilbert, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, unpublished nmeasurements. ........ 25 HEAT OF FUSION A. S. Dworkin Salt AHfusion (cal g~1) Uncertainty F, 62 + 10% F, 67 + 15 F, 58 + 15 F, 63 + 15 L,B 107 + 3 G, 31 + C, 29 + AH of solid transition (cal g~t) C 14.5 (at 243°C) + 2% C, 14.7 (at 243°C) L 2 Sources of Data and Methods of Estimation Salts F; - F,: Although there is no isothermal heat of fusion, estimations were made as if all the melting (or freezing) occurred at 500°C. The salts were treated as additive mixtures of the components, Li,BeF,, Li,ThF,;, and LiF or ThF,. Li,BeF,; was considered to be "formed" first from the BeF, present and the appropriate quantity of LiF. The remainder of the mixture was then considéred to consist of Li,ThF, and either LiF or ThF,, whichever was 'in excess." For example, for 1 mole of salt F,, .16 moles of BeF, and .32 moles of LiF form .16 moles of Li,BeF, while..1ll moles of ThF, and the remaining .41 moles of LiF give .11 moles of Li,ThF, and .08 moles of LiF. The estimation is then made on the basis of .16 moles Li,BeF,, .11 moles ThF, and .08 moles LiF. 26 The following heats of fusion were used in making the = estimations: Li, BeF, 10,600 cal mole~! (ref. 1) Li; ThF, 13,960 cal mole~! - (ref. 2) LiF 6,470 cal mole-! (ref. 3) ThF, 11,000 cal mole™! estimated by assuming the entropy of fusion is the same as that of UF, (ref. 4) L,B: Measured.l C, and C,: Méasured;5 .C, agrees within experimental error with that calculated by subtracting the .contribution of the heat of fusion of NaF6 from C, . Discussion Although the assumptions used in estimating AHfusion for salts F; - F, are highly intuitive, it is encouraging to note that the estimated and measured7 AH are respec- fusion tively 57.5 and 59 cal g~! for the salt mixture LiF-BeF, -ThF, (72-16-12 mole %) . For salts F; - F4, to obtain the heat necessary to convert the solid at the solidus temperature fo the melt at the liquidus temperature, an additional 10 to 15 cal g-! should be added to the above listed heats of ffision. For convenience in calculating the quantity of heat necessary to raise the salt from room temperature to any desired temperature, the following heat content equations (based on measurements) are included: 27 LiF-BeF, -ThF, (72-16-12 mole %) - ref. 5 Solid: H ~H;s; (cal g=l) = -5.28 + .207t + 6.33 x 10-5t%; (25 - 440°0) Liquid: H,-H,, (cal g=!) = 11.34 + .324t (500 - 750°C) t LiF-BeF, (66-34 mole %) Solid: H -H (cal g~1) i 0.3179t ~.1.806 x 107%t?; 0oC o (0 - 472°C) - ref. 1 (cal g=') = 32.632 + 0.561t; (472 - 600°C) - ref. 1 33.62 + 0.577 (t=-30); ref. 7 Liquid: Ht'HOOC I H -H;p (cal g™) NaBF, ~NaF (92-8 mole %) ref. 5 Solid: H,~H,; (cal g™') = -5.90 + .230t + 2.90 x 107*t?; (25 - 243°0) H -H,5 (cal g=') = 0.40 + .337t; (243 - 381°C) Liquid: H,-H,; (cal g™') = 22.1 + .360t; (381 - 600°C) References 1. T. B. Douglas and W. H. Payne, Natl. Bur. Std. Report No. 8186, Washington, D. C., pp. 75-82. 2. R. A. Gilbert, J. Chem. Eng. Data, 7, 388 (1962). 3. T. B. Douglas and J. L. Dever, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 76, — 4826 (1954). 4, E. G. King and A. U. Christensen, U. S. Bureau of Mines Report of Investigations 5709, 1961. 5. A. S. Dworkin, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, unpublished measurements. 6. K. K. Kelley, U. S. Bureau of Mines Bulletin 584, (1960) p. 171. 7. H. W. Hoffman.and J. W. Cooke, Oak Ridge National Labora- tory, unpublished measurements. 28 DENSITY OF LIQUID (S. Cantor) Density-Temperature Equation o (in g/cm3) salt t (in ©¢) Uncertainty Fy p = 3.628 - 6.6 x 10™% t 3% F, = 3.153 - 5.8 x 10™* t 3 F, = 3,687 - 6.5 x 107* t 3 F, = 3.644 - 6.3 x 107 t 3 1,B = 2.214 - 4.2 x 107 t 2 C =2.27 - 7.4 x 107% t 5 C, = 2.26 - 7.4 x 107 t 5 Sources of Data and Methods of Estimation Salts F, -~ F, - Estimated by additivity of molar volumes (see Ref. 1). LiF BeF, Th¥, a The following molar volumes were used: 600°C 800°C 13.411 cm? 14.142 cm? 23.6 24 .4 nd UF, 46.43 47.59 Ref. 2 1,3 2 Salt L,B - Three experimental determinations have been reported; refs. 5 and 6 were over a wide temperature range with the densities of ref. 6 averaging 3% higher than ref. 5. Reference 4 reports densities at 64900 which vary from 1.87 to 2.02 g ecm™3, The density-temperature equation given above 29 s was derived from additive molar volumes; this equation yields densities that are approximately the average of the densities of refs. 5 and 6. Salt C; = Preliminary pyknometric measurements.7 Salt C, - The relatively small concentration of NaF in C, would be expected to increase the density slightly over that for 'pure" NaBF,. The density-temperature equation was calculated by subtracting the contribution of NaF (ref. 1) from the molar volume of C;. References 1. 8. Cantor, Reactor Chem, Div., Ann, Progr. Rept. Dec. 31, 1965, USAEC Report ORNL-3913, pp. 27-=29. 2. D. G. Hill, S. Cantor, and W, T, Ward, J. Inorg. Nucl. Chem. 29, 241 (1967). 3. C. T. Moynihan, S. Cantor, unpublished measurements at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, 1966. 4, MSR Program Semiann. Progr. Rept. Aug. 31, 1965, USAEC Report ORNL-3872, p. 31. 5. B. C. Blanke et al., "Density and Viscosity of Fused Mixtures of Lithium, Beryllium and Uranium Fluorides," USAEC Report MLM-1086, Dec. 1956, p. 18. 6. B. J. Sturm and R. E. Thoma, Reactor Chem. Div. Ann. Progr. Rept. Dec. 31, 1965, USAEC Report ORNL-3913, pp. 50-=51. 7. 8. Cantor and J. Bornmann, unpublished measurements at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, 1968. 30 EXPANSIVITY (VOLUME COEFFICIENT OF THERMAL EXPANSION) S. Cantor Salt Estimated Value at 600°C2 Uncertainty F, 2.0, x 107*/9C 25% F, 2.0, 25 F, 1.9, 25 Fy 1.9, 25 L,B 2.1, 20 c, 4., 40 c, 4., 40 a . For estimating the expansivity at other temperatures, please substitute in the appropriate density-temperature equation. (see discussion below). Sources of Data and Methods of Estimation The expansivity is defined as 1 98V a = — (— where V, T and P are volume, temperature and pressure. Since density is inversely proportional to volume, the expansivity is usually derived from density-temperature data: o) =£ (P ordinarily one atm.) R il | | o Most density data for liquids are linear with and decrease with temperature, i.e., po and a are constants; t is usually in degrees Celsiwus. Thus, e 31 g expansivity is very simply a o = 2 (2) P The tabulated expansivities are consistent with the corresponding density-temperature equations in the "Density of Liquid" Section of this report, To calculate the expansivity for any temperature, substitute in equations (1) and (2). As a rough approximation, the expansivity is one half to one third of the temperature coefficient of density as given by the constant a in eqn. (1). References Same as for the '"Density of Liquid" section, page 29. 32 COMPRESSIBILITY (ISOTHERMAL)®? s S. Cantor Compressibility-Temperature Equation Bp in cm?dyne~!, T in °K I F, Bp = 2.3 x 107'% exp (1.0 x 107 T) i C, BT 9.0 x 10712 exp (1.6 x 107% T) The compressibilities pertain to the liquid and are all estimated; the uncertainty is a factor of 3. Zfsothermal compressibility is a function of pressure as well as temperature. The tabulated equations are less reliable at higher pressures (>50 atm). Methods of Estimation Salts F,-F,, L;B: Estimated empirically from the com- pressibility-temp. equations of LiF and Li, SO; (see ref. 1). C, and C,: Assumed to be slightly more compressible than Nal (see ref. 1). Reasonable values derived for Cp/CV and for sonic veloc- ities (see Appendix A of this report) lend support to these estimated compressibilities. References 1. S. Cantor, Reactor Chem. Div. Ann. Progr. Rept. Dec. 31, 1966, ORNL-4076, pp. 24-25. 33 VAPOR PRESSURE S. Cantor Pressure-Temperature Equation Uncertainty Salt@ o (P in torr, T in “K) in Pressure Fy v log P = 8.0 - 10, 000 A factor of 2 ' T fifty from F, 500-700°C Fy I,B log P = 9.04 - 19%299 A factor of ten from 500- 700°C b ¢, log P (of BF, vapor) = + 10% from 9.024 - 22720 400-700°C ’ T C, Pressure of BF, depends on amount of salt and on vapor volume (see Discussion below) a In no case is the composition of the vapor congruent with the composition of the melt, bThe pressures given by the equation are those in equilibrium with a melt whose composition is fixed at NaBF,-NaF (92-8 mole %). Sources of Data and Methods of Estimation Salts F,-F,: Estimated empirically from vapor pressure data of the LiF-BeF, systeml and of LiF-UF; (73-27 mole %mz Although the uncertainty is relatively large, please note that the vapor pressures for the 500 - 700°C temperature range are quite low (between 107? and 10~5 torr). IL,B: Estimated from data in the LiF-BeF, system.z 34 Cy: Experimentally determined.3 Discussion - The Dissociation Pressure of NaBF, When NaBF,; is thermally equilibrated at a temperature above its melting point the following dissociation occurs: NaBF, () = NaF(z) + BF;(g) (1) The dissociation product, NaF, dissclves in the NaBF,. The system described by the above equation is bivariant; thus, a constant partial pressure of BF,; above the melt requires that the temperature and the melt composition both be constant. For reaction (1) the BF, pressure is related to the composition of the melt by the equation: a K NaBF, (2) P = BF 3 aNaF where K is the equilibrium constant and a; is activity. The temperature dependence of K has been derived from experimental data3 and is given by -29,800 + 26 .41 RT (in °K) R 1n K (in atm) = (3) 29,800 cal and 26.41 cal (°k)~! are the enthalpy and entropy of the reaction; R, the gas constant, is 1.98717 cal (9K)-! (g-mole)~!}. A consequence of the bivariance of the NaBF,-NaF system is that the equilibrium BF; vapor pressure is difficult to predict for melts in which the concentration of NaBF,; is very large (>98 mole %). For these concentrations, aNaBF4 is virtually unity, but ANaF is very small (<0.1); hence, by i equation (2), P 35 BF tends to be quite high. Thus for any 3 experiment in which crystalline NaBF,; is encapsulated, the temperature of the sample should be kept as low as necessary or else sufficient vapor space should be included so as to permit the dissociation reaction (1) to occur. 1. References 5. Cantor, D. S. Hsu, and W. T. Ward, Reactor Chem. Div. Ann. Progr. Rept. Dec. 31, 1965, ORNL-3913, pp. 24-6. S. Cantor, Reactor Chem. Div. Ann. Progr. Rept. Dec. 31, 5. Cantor, C. E. Roberts, and H. F. McDuffie, Reactor Chen. Div. Ann. Progr. Rept. Dec. 31, 1967, ORNL-4229, pp. 55-57. 36 SURFACE TENSION J. W. Cooke, S. Cantor Surface Tension-Temperature Equation S Uncertainty Salt v in dynes/cm, t in °C Fy Fa F, y = 260 - 0.12 t +30,-10% Fy L,B C, v = 130 - 0.075 ‘t * 30% C, v = 120 - 0.075 t + 25% Sources of Data and Methods of Estimation Salts F,-F,, L,B: Estimated primarily from maximum bubble pressure measurements on NaF-—Ber,1 LiF—BeFZ—ThF4—UF4,2 LiF,3 and ThF43 melts. Measurements at one temp. (4800C) of LiF-BeF, (63-37 mole %94 by the ring method tends to support bubble pres- sure values. Sessile drop measurements5 on L,B, on LiF- BeF, -ZrF, -ThF, -UF, (70-23-5-1-1), and on other fluoride melts would have led to higher predicted values. The higher uncertainty in the positive direction expresses the possibility that the sessile drop investigations might have yielded more accurate surface tensions. Salt C, and C,: Assumed that NaBF, (C,) and Nar® exhibit (a) equal surface tensions at their melting points, (b) equal temperature coefficients of surface tension. Then 37 s it was assumed that NaF in C,; increased the surface tension over that of C, by 10%. References 1. MSRP Quar, Progr. Rept, July 31, 1960, ORNL-3014, p. 83. 2. MSRP Quar. Progr. Rept. April 30, 1959, ORNL-2723, p. 42. 3. G. J. Janz and J. Wong, *"Molten Salts: Surface Tension Data,' Troy, N. Y., Nov., 1967. Preprint of critical review of surface tension data of single-salt melts for the Standard Reference Data Project of the National Bureau of Standards. 4. B. J. Sturm, MSRP Quar. Progr. Rept. Oct. 31, 1958, 0RNL“’2626, po 940 5. P. J. Kreyger, S. S. Kirslis, F. F. Blankenship, Reactor Chem. Div, Ann. Progr. Rept. Jan, 31, 1964, ORNL-3591, pp. 38-42. 6., R. B, Ellis, 'Surface Tension, Viscosity, and Raman Spectra of Fused Salts,”" U. S. Atomic Energy Commission Report ORO-2073-12, April 14, 1967, p. 3. 38 SOLUBILITY OF HELIUM, KRYPTON, AND XENON G. M. Watson Unit of solubility =~ 10~8 moles of inert gas per (cm° melt-atm). Salt Temperature (°C) F 1 -\ 500 F 2 600 F, } 700 Fy 800 LB J 500 600 ¢y 700 800 500 600 ¢, 700 800 He 6.6 10.6 15.1 20,1 44 52 60 52 61 69 75 Kr 0.13 .55 20 40 69 106 32 61 100 148 Xe 12 28 54 91 21 46 84 136 All solubilities are estimated; is a factor of ten or greater. the uncertainty 39 Sources of Data and Methods of Estimation Sclubilities of noble gases were estimated by a method originally proposed by Blander et al.l The expression used in estimating the wvalues given above is: - 1 : . : -18,08 ri~y Kp BT (pclarization correction) exp ( RT > moles of gas/(cm3 melt-atm) = I r is the radius of the noble gas in Angstroms v is the surface tension of the liquid in dyne cm_l R in the pre-exponential term = 82,0561 cm3—atm (O‘K)m1 (g—mole)“l; in the exponential term R = 1.98717 cal )"t (g-mole)”! T is the absolute temperature in °k . The numerical values for the radii and for the '"polarization corrections' are: He Kr Xe Radius (Angstroms) 1.22 2.0 2.18 Polarization correction 0.14 1.0 1.34 The polarization corrections were determined empirically by comparison of experimental and calculated noble gas solu- bilities in NaF-ZrF, (53-47 mole %fl,z Na¥-KF~LiF eutectic,l’3 and LiF-BeF, (64-36 mole %9.3 The surface tensions used appear in this report on page 36. The rather large uncertainty in the gas solubilities can be rationalized from the following considerations: 40 Experimenta,ll"3 and calculated (using the equation given in the previous paragraph) solubilities agreed to within a factor of three, Calculated solubilities depend exponentially on the assumed value of the surface tension; for the salts of this report the surface tension, in each case estimated, has a large uncertainty. References M. Blander, W. R, Grimes, N. V. Smith, and G. M. Watson, J. Phys. Chem. 63, 1164 (1959). W. R. Chem. G. MO N. V. Grimes, N. V. Smith, and G. M. Watson, J. Phys. 62, 862 (1958). Watson, R, B. Evans III, W. R, Grimes, and Smith, J. Chem. Eng. Data 7, 285 (1962). S 41 SOLUBILITY OF BF; GAS S. Cantor, G. M. Watson Unit of Solubility - 10~ % moles BF; per (cm® melt-atm) Temperature (°c) Salt 500 600 700 800 Fl 3.4 1.1 0.44 0.19 F2 3.4 1.1 0.44 0.19 F3 2.8 0.95 0.39 0.20 F, 2.4 0.83 0.35 0.18 LZB 3.2 1.0 0.38 0.18 ¢y c See section on Vapor Pressures, page 33. All solubilities are estimated; the uncertainty is a factor of ten or greater. ' Sources of Data and Methods of Estimation Solubilities of BF; were assumed to be analogous to solubilities of HF. For LiF-BeF,-ZrF,-ThF,~UF, (65-28-5-1-1 mole %) the measured BF31 and HF2 solubilities both exhibited negative temperature dependence (inert-gas solubilities in fluoride melts are much smaller and show positive temperature dependence). The ratio of BF; to HF solubility in the range 500-800°C for this melt was the multiple used to estimate the 42 BF; solubility in L;B from the measured values of HF solu- bility.3 Solubility of HF in F;-F, was estimated by assuming the same ''free fluoride' concentration dependence as had been observed for LiF-BeF, mixtures.,* (For F,-F,, free fluoride + 3X is defined as X, .. minus (2X ), where X is mole LiF 4 BeF, MF percent; for LiF-BeF, mixtures, free fluoride equals XLiF minus ZXBer)' The BF; solubilities were then calculated by multiplying the estimated HF solubilities by the same ratios that were derived from the melt where both gas solu- bilities had been measured. References 1. J. H. Shaffer, W. R. Grimes and G. M. Watson, Nucl. Sci. Eng. 12, 337 (1962). 2. J, H., Shaffer and G. M. Watson, Reactor Chem. Div. Ann. Prog. Rept. Jan. 31, 1961, ORNL-3127, pp. 13-14. 3. P. E. Field and J. H. Shaffer, J. Phys. Chem. 71, 3218 (1967). 4. J. H. Shaffer and G. M. Watson, Reactor Chem. Div. Ann. Prog. Rept. Jan. 31, 1960, ORNL-2931, pp. 31-32. e 43 APPENDIX A ISOCHORIC HEAT CAPACITY (C), cp/cv, AND SONIC VELOCITY Ca v Salt Temp. cal cal cal p? O O 0 O C /C -1 C g K (g-mole)k (g-atom) K p Vv (m sec ™) ; ggg 8.295 17.8 7.15 1.15 2620 1 .29 17.6 7.08 .1z 2560 700 0.288 1.7.5 6.97 l.1g 2480 500 0.337 16,9 6°98 1.1g 2850 F, 600 0.33, 16.6 6,88 1.17 2760 700 0.32g 16‘4 6.79 1.19 2670 500 0.289 18.5 7.2, 1.1, 2610 F3 600 0.285 18,5 7.15 1.1 2520 700 0.285% 18.1 7.0% 1,17 2LL0 n de o0 189 % T R ) .28 = 7. : 1.15 2530 700 OGQSM 18,5 7.03 1.1z 2Lho 500 o,&89 16.2 6.91 1.17 2L20 L2B 600 o,u82 15.9 6.8l 1.1g 3310 700 0,475 1,5.7 6.72 1.2, 3200 500 0.31, 52.6 5.7}, 1.15 1400 C, 600 0.30g 325 5.6 1.17 1330 700 0.30g 3l.g 5.63 1.1g 1260 Theoretical CVC cal mole"l(oK)ml 500 0,512 Bh,g 30.47 1.16 1400 C, 600 0.30g 35.8 30.92 1.17 1330 700 0.30) 35.5 31.46 1.19 1260 a. Calculated from the equation, P C.=C - %L yhere q is expansivity; p, density; B isobhermal V. P PP compressibility. T b. Calculated from the equaticn, M= (ET;E**)l/Q where p is sonic velocity. VP c. Calculated by assuming g Cy = 6.R (harmonic oscillation of 2 ions) + 1.5R (free rotation of BFL ion) + Vibrational*heat capacity of BFi#. * Vibraetional frequencies obtained from K. Nakamoto, Infrared Spectra of Inorganic and Coordination Compounds, John Wiley and Sons, N. Y., 1963, p. 106. 44 APPENDIX B THERMAL DIFFUSIVITY,® KINEMATIC VISCOSITY,® AND PRANDIL NUMBER® Salt Temp. Therm. Diffy. Kin. Vise. Prandtl (°c) (cm? sec™t) (e gec”l) Number 500 2.153 x 1072 6.9 x 1072 32.3 By 600 2.17 3.75 17.5 700 2.22 2.2 10.5 500 2.35 x 1073 7.1lw x 1072 30.4 Fa 600 2.4¢ 3.8 15.4 700 2.45 2.3, 9.5 500 1.7¢ x 1077 7.05 x 1072 39., Fi 600 1.8 3.7 20. 5 700 1.8¢ 2.2¢ 12., 500 1.5, x 1077 8.9, x 1072 58.¢ F, 600 1.5 4.3z 27. 8 700 1.5 2.4y 15., 500 2.0¢ x 1073 7.4 x 1072 35.¢ L,B 600 2.1, 4.3¢ 20.4 700 2.1g 2.8¢ 13.4 500 1.8, x 10-7 1.0, x 107% 5.4 o 600 1.8 0.6g 3.6 700 1.97 Oo5o 2¢5 500 1.79 x 1073 1.0, x 10-2 5. Ca 600 1.8¢ 0.6g 3.9 700 1.95 Q.50 2.6 Calculated from the equations: k a X = 5 P ¥p b, v = P c Pr = Y = where k is thermal conductivity; p, density; Cp, specific heat. wvhere n is viscosity in poise (g ecm™ sec-?). % k 45 APPENDIX C CONVERSION FACTORS Multiply By To Obtain Viscosity centipoise 2.419 Ib_/hr-ft Thermal Conductivity watts/°Cecm 57.8 Btu/hr-ft-°F Heat Capacity cal/gm°°C 1.0 Btu/lby- °F Heat of Fusion cal/gm 1.8 Btu/lbp Density gm/cm3 62.43 1bm/ft3 Compressibility em?/dyne 6.894x10" in 2/1b . Pressure torr 0.019337 1bf/in2 (psia) Surface Tension dyne/cm 6.85 x 107 lbg/ft dyne/cm 2.203 x 107° 1b_/sec? 46 Composition of Salt Mixtures Mole % Liquidus Symbol LiF BeF, ThF, UF, Temp. (°C) F, 73 16 10.7 0.3 5009 + 50 Fuel- F, 72 21 6.7 0.3 500° + 5° Breeder o o ' + Mixtures F, 68 20 11.7 0.3 480° + 5 Fu 63 25 11.7 0.3 5000 = 5° Flush Salt L,B 66 34 - -- 458% + 1° {present MSRE (peritectic) coolant) NaBF, NaF Coclants C 92 8 3850 + 1° (eutectic) C, 100 - 4079 + 1° (melting point) ............. b7 T ORNL-TM~ 2316 INTERNAL DISTRIBUTION 1. R. K. Adanms 78. L. T. Corbin 2. G. M. Adamson 79. B. Cox 3. R. G. Affel 80. J. L. Crowley 4. L. G. Alexander 8l1. F. L. Culler 5. J. L. Anderson 82. D. R. Cuneo 6. R. F. Apple 83. J. M. Dale 7. C. F. Baes 84. D. G. Davis 8. J. M. Baker 85. R. J. DeBakker g. S. J. Ball 86. J. H. DeVan 10. C. E. Bamberger 87. S. J. Ditto 11. C. J. Barton 88-92. A. S. Dworkin 12 H. F. Bauman 93. I. T. Dudley 13. S. E. Beall 94. D. A. Dyslin 14. R. L. Beatty 95. W. P. Eatherly 15. M. J. Bell 36. J. R. Engel 16. M. Bender 97. E. P. Epler 17 C. E. Bettis 98. D. E. Ferguson 18. E. S. Bettis 99. L. M. Ferris 19. D. S. Billington 100. A. P. Fraas 20. R. E. Blanco 101. H. A. Friedman 21. F. F. Blankenship 102. J. H. Frye, Jr. 22. J. 0. Blomeke 103. C. H. Gabbard 23. R. Blumberg 104. R. B. Gallaher 24, E. G. Bohlmann 105. R. E. Gelbach 25. C. J. Borkowski 106. J. H. Gibbons 26. G. E. Boyd 107. L. O. Gilpatrick 27. C. A. Brandon 108. H. E. Goeller 28. M. A. Bredig 109. W. R. Grimes 29. R. B. Briggs 110. A. G. Grindell 30. H. R. Bronstein 111. R. W. Gunkel 31. G. D. Brunton 112. E. D. Gupton ~32. D. A. Canonico 113. R. H. Guymon 33-62. S. Cantor 114. J. P. Hammond 63. W. L. Carter 115. B. A. Hannaford 64. G. I. Cathers 116. P. H. Harley 65. 0. B. Cavin 117. D. G. Harman 66. A. Cepolino 118. W. O. Harms 67. F. H. Clark 119. C. S. Harrill 68. W. R. Cobb 120. P. N. Haubenreich 69. C. W. Collins 121. R. E. Helms 70. E. L. Compere 122. P. G. Herndon 71. K. V. Cook 123. D. N. Hess o 72. W. H. Cook 124. J. R. Hightower """" J. W. Cooke 125. M. R. Hill 126. 127. 128. 126G, 130. 131. 132, 133. 134. 135. 136. 137. 138. 139. 140, 141. 142. 143. 144, 145, 146. 147, 148. 149. 150, 151, 152. 153, 154, 155, 156. 157, 158. 159. 160. 161. 162. 163. 164. 165. 166. 167. 168. 169. 170. 171. 172. 173. 174. 175. 176. v—:}t:fl:u.:mi;:fqt-oom%:::wmaodcq:umwwgmmmmguuouqbgmmflozgow*usmr-amvuwmm HUuGrpPEH=EURMELAEIGEP GO~ =g R = cC ¥ - ¥ - FErfNGAIHGRAEEEENOrOHOMN Z - Hitch Hoffman Holmes Holz Horton Hudson nouye Jordon Kasten Kedl Keller Kelley Kelly Kennedy Kerlin Kerr Kirslis Koger Krakoviak Kress Krewson Lamb Lane Lawrence Lin Lindauer Litman Llewellyn Long Lundin Lyon Macklin MacPherson MacPherson Mailen Manning Martin Mauney lain McClung MeCoy McDuffie McGlothlan McHar gue McNeese McWher ter Metz Meyer Moore Moulton Mueller 418 177. 178. 179. 180. 181. 182. 183. 184. 185. 186. 187. 188. 189. 190-194. 195. 196. 197. 198. 199. 200. 201. 202. 203. 204. 205, 206. 207. 208. 209. 210. 211. 212. 213, 214, 215. 216. 217. 218. 219. 220. 221. 223, 224, 225. 226-230. 231. 232. 234. 235. 236-220. 241. g::pf-'p}-‘:u?dagda-a?um;meomfiwmgsmomuuosmwgwmswmauowmeaa*cl;—-mmr—.m - L3 » > urIn » o ? - HNSOrmOOQOunOArNYGEEqENmaHEN=HEHOQ=E 0000 N Hou=EEgQOr e FEhpEa=HE Nelms Nichols Nicholson Nogueira Qakes atriarca Perry Pickel Piper Prince Ragan Redford ichardson Robbins Rober tson Robinson Roller Romberger Rosenthal Ross Savage Schaffer Shilling ap Scott Scott Seagren Sessions Shaffer Sides Skinner Slaughter Smith Smith Smith Smith Smith piewak Steffy Stoddard Stone Strehlow Tallackson Taylor erry Thoma Thomason Toth Trauger Watson Watson Watts 49 242. C. F. Weaver 251. Gale Young 243, B. H. Webster 252. H. C. Young 244. A. M. Weinberg 253. J. P. Young 245. J. R. Weir 254. E. L. Youngblood 246, W. J. Werner 255. F. C. Zapp 247. K. W. West 256=-257. Central Research Library 248. M. E. Whatley 258-259. Document Reference Section 249. J. C. White 260-285. Laboratory Records (LRD) 250. L. V. Wilson 286. Laboratory Records - Record Copy (LRD-RC) EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION 287-288. D. F. Cope, AEC-ORNL, R.D.T. Site Office 289. J. W. Crawford, AEC-RDT, Washington 290. C. B. Deering, AEC~ORO 291. A, Giambusso, AEC,Washington 292. W. J. Larkin, AEC-QORO 293. C. L. Matthews, AEC-0ORO 294-295. T. W. McIntosh, AEC, Washington 296. C. E. Miller, Jr., AEC, Washington 297. B. T. Resnich, AEC, Washington 298. H. M. Roth, AEC-0ORO 299, Milton Shaw, AEC, Washington 300. W, L. Smalley, AEC-ORO 301, R. F. Sweek, AEC, Washington 302~317. Division of Technical Information Extension (DTIE)