Eleventh Arab Conference Oil the PeacefuJ Uses of Atomic Energy. Khartoum. Sudan. 16-20 Decanter 2012

PURIFICATION OF DIURANATE PRODUCED FROM GABAL GATTAR (GII) MINERALIZATION USING TRI BUTYL PHOSPHATE

JK. F. 2G. G. Mohamed 1w. M. Morsi

1Nuclear Materials Authority 2Faculty of Sciences^ Cairo University

ABSTRACT

Purification of the prepared sodium diuranate product to almost a ue was properly applied ؟nuclear purity grade, the solvent extraction techni to study the various relevant optimum conditions. For this purpose,organophosphorus solvents has been used; namely tri butyl phosphate (TBP). the produced sodium di- contains only a small amount of the deleterious impurities which can be purified by solvent was dissolved in so آ ﻣ أل2 س ue. The prepared ؟exfraction techni that the free acidity of the obtained solution attained 3M and its content assayed 202g/L.

Nitrate solution from the TBP route used to prepare UO3 from the former, it was first evaporated at 95°c to decrease its volume to only 25% and which would increase uranium concentration. By proper cooling greenish yellow ؛uranyl nifrate hexa hydrate crystals were formed and which were then let ٠ for air drying before denifration at 280-300°C for 4 hr !.INTRODUCTION

Several promising uranium occurrences have been discovered in Geble Gattar uranium prospect area in the Eastern Desert and are indeed hosted in younger granites (G-I to G-XII1) except GV occurrence, which is located in El-Hammamat sedimentary rocks. In this mineralization, uranium is mainly found as secondary minerals which are essentially represented by uranophane and beta uranophane .( and N4ahmoud؛J؛Sayyah and Attawiya)

Apart from the recently developed dry refining processes which are almost devoted for producing directly the reactor grade UF6 required for the enrichment processes and in which the refining and conversion procedures are combined, the wet refining processes do not involve conversion. In other words, the latter would only be concerned with uranium relying to nuclear purity in the form of UO3 or ammonium uranyl tri-carbonate (AUTC). In all the wet refining processes solvent extraction technique are applied using different types of organic solvents with special emphasis on TBP and tertiaty amines. In the present work, acrude uranium concentrate or yellow cake (sodium diuranate) prepared from Gattar uranium mineralization is subjected to a solvent extraction purification process (refining) phosphate (TBP). The ؛using the neutral organophosphours tributy target is to optimize the relevant factors in a manner to obtain a purified uranium concentrate that is would be suitable for use as a nuclear fiile. Most countries actually been concerned with TBP using different procedures, however, amines have also been suggested in Japan and Argentina.

2 . EXPERIMENTAL 2.1. Preparation of Gattar Sodium Diuranate

In order to obtain a uranium concentrate of the most possible purity, it was found suitable to precede its precipitation by eliminating most iron and aluminum by neutralization ofthe eluate solution till pH 3.5 .This is generally performed by a suitable alkali (NaOH) and the obtained iron cake would then be filtered and washed from possible entrained uranium values. The filtrate obtained after iron cake filtration and washing was farther neutralized till pH 7 using a dilute NaOH solution. At this pH, uranium is preeipitated as sodium di uranate (yellow cake) which was then filtrated, washed and dried at ۴ the prepared crude sodium diuranate as shown ٠ c. The analysis 110 in Table (1).

Table(l): Quantitative anaiytical data ofthe prepared sodium diuranate. Element Sodium Diuranate * u% 48.9 Na 88070 Fe 2522 Si 1822 Mg 1020 Ca 621.5 Al 281 Zn 140.8 o 98.5 Mn 8367 p 78.453 Mo 31 Cu 25.6 K 15.55 9.5 ٧ Sr 2.2

* Moisture content =6.28% * Loss of Ignition =23.22%

2.2. Purification ofUranyl nitrate working !iquor

uranate was-؛roper sample weights of the prepared sodium d? dissolved in stoichiometric a mounts of HNO3 acid to obtain a neutral solution ofuranyl nitrate; namely Na2U20 7+6HNCb — « U 0 2 (N0 3)2+2NaNCb+3H20

The obtained solution representing the feed for solvent extraction experiments was then filtered to remove the un- reacted residue and completed to volume with double distilled water. The .concentration in this solution attained 202gU/l ﺳ ﺎ س final 2.3. Solvent Extraction ?rocedure

The prepared uranyl nitrate feed solution was then subjected to solvent extraction experiments using the above mentioned organic solvent. These experiments were so planned to investigate the optimum conditions for uranium extraction. The relevant extraction conditions were studied; namely contact time, free acid of the aqueous, phase extractant concentration, uranium concentration, temperature as well as O/A ratio. For this purpose, the following stock solutions ofthe working solvent systems were prepared: * 25% (v/v) TBP (50ml of purified TBP added tol50 ml kerosene). After each extraction experiment the aqueous phase was separated for uranium analysis and the extracted amount was calculated by difference. In addition, a final extraction experiment was performed under the determined optimum conditions and in which uranium and the associated elements were analyzed.

In the applied extraction systems and before stripping, the obtained uranium-loaded organic layer was scrubbed to reduce the CO- extracted impurities content by contacting it with nitric acid or ammonium carbonate as follows: *0.1M H N O 3 at an O /A ratio o f l 5 : l in case o f using TBP extractant.

Besides distilled water, both acid and alkali reagents were applied for uranium stripping from the scrubbed uranium-loaded namely dilute HNO3 or HC1 acid solution or else؛ organic solvent ammonium carbonate solution. The most efficient solution was then used in the stripping process as follows :- *0.01 MHNO} acid solution at an O/A ratio of 1:1 through five contacts.

3. Analytical Procedures ١ ؛ Analysis of Uranium 3.1

Uranium analysis in the different stream solutions was performed by oxidimetric titration using ammonium metavanadate after a prior uranium reduction. 3.2. Instrumentation and Methods of Analysis

The crude uranium concentrate has been analyzed for several elements attaining up to 23 elements using different instrumental ,procedures. These elements inelude Al,A^Ba,Ca.€d ﻟ ﺴ ﺘ ﺎ ﺳ ﻪ1 Most .٢ ^ ,Co,Cr, Cu,Fe, K,Mg,Mn ,Mo,Na,Ni,P,P b,Si,Sr, Ti,Th, u,v of these elements have been analyzed by atomic absorption spectrometry (AAS) however, Al, p. Si, Th have been s^cfrophotometrically analyzed

(Absorption Spectrometric Analysis (AAS :،؛Atom .3.3

The behavior of the other elements accompanying uranium whether in the uranium concentrates was analysed using AAS. For this purpose a GBC 932-AA speetrometer supplied with acetylene and nitrous oxide burner heads was used.

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1. Study of Relevant Faetors for TBP Solvent Extraction of Gattar Concentrate

Tri butyl phosphate is a neutral organic phosphorous extractant that possesses three-open straight butyl chains attached by a phosphor group. It is a relatively cheap solvent and is characterized by its selectivity for uranium where it reacts with uranium according to the ’ ا following equation

U 0 2 (N0 3)2 .2TBP org ٠ TBP org و ه + U 0 2 (N0 3) 2 2

TBP is indeed one ofthe most common extractants in refining of uranium, however, the formed uranyl nitrate -TBP complex is highly stable, and its re-extraction (stripping) into water would therefore require either a large number of transfer stages or else an undesirably large ratio of water to solvent. Due to its relatively high specific gravity (0.98), TBP is usually diluted by an inert diluent; kerosene is actually the most applicable diluent .

4.1.1. Effect of Contact Time on TBP-Uranium Purification

Proper solution aliquots ofthe prepared uranyl nitrate solution (202gU/L) in 3M HN03 free acidity) were shaken for equilibration with equal volumes of 25% (v/v) TBP /kerosene under room temperature for different contact times ranging from 1 to 6 minutes. After phases separation, uranium was volumetrically determined in the aqueous phase while its concentration in the organic phase was calculated by difference. From the latter, both the extraction efficiency and the extraction coefficient were calculated. The obtained data are (.2) tabulated in Table (.2) [}[['’cranium purification ٠١١ Table؛،Table (2): Effect ©،'Contact tim؛، uIT assay at equilibrium g/L ،,/! D°a rv>_ %uO/TI س + ﻣ ﻤ ﺖContact Extracted Org phase Aq phase 42 160 0.26 20.79 1 2 67 135 0.49 33.16 3 78.5 123.5 0.63 3 8.86 48.51 0.94 04 أ 4 5 105 97 1.08 51.98 6 105 97 1.08 51.98

From above data, it is obvious that the extraction efficiency increases with increasing the contact time from 1 to 5 minutes, beyond which it become constant. In other words, as time increases from I to 5 minutes, the extraction efficiency of uranium increases from 20.79 to 51.98%. Therefore, 5 minutes would be considered as the optimum contact time for uranium equilibrium to be attained under the working conditions. Stiochiometrie calculation according to the above mentioned reaction reveals that the working 25% TBP/k (0 .9 4 M) would be actually saturated with 0.47 M u i.e. 111.86 g/L while the experimented data indicate that the obtained organic phase assays 105 g/L. It is interesting in this regard to mention that the relatively low extraction <ﺀ/ه 2 ة distribution coefficient (1.08) equivalent to about efficiency is actually due to the low TBP concentration in the organic phase. 4.1.2. Effect of Free acidity on TBP-Uranium Purification

Six solution aliquots of 202 gU/L with free acidities varying from 1 to 6 M HN03 were first prepared and were then subjected to TBP/k extraction experiments for 5 minutes contact time, with solvent concentration 25% (v/v) TBP in kerosene, at an O/A ratio of 1:1 under room temperature. After phase separation, uranium was volumetrically determined in the aqueous phase and from which the extraction efficiency and the extraction coefficient were calculated as mentioned above. These data are tabulated in Table (3).

-Table (3): Effect of free acidity of feed solution on TBP-Table Purification ™ ا ا؛ ا ا ا؛ - ا ا ا Free acidity u assay at equilibrium, g/l D°a %u M) Extrac،ed) phase ٩ ٨ Org phase 37,62 0.60 126 76 ١ 2 88 114 0.77 43-56 3 105 97 1.08 51.98 4 101 101 100 50.00 5 96 106 0.91 47.50 6 89 113 0.79 44.05

From the latter, it is obvious that the extraction efficiency increases as the free acidity of the uranyl nitrate solution increases until a maximum of about 52% is obtained at 3M free acidity after which it decreases steadily to about 44% at 6 M free acidity. Presence of free acid in the aqueous feed solution is usually important for extraction of uranium by solvent extraction. This is most probably due to the role played by the acid as a salting out agent that induces good In contrast, the presence of acid in high concentration ٠ extraction often inhibits the extraction to a great extent. This may be attributed to the competition created between the formed uranyl complex and the acid to be extracted by the applied solvent(8)

4.1.3. Effect of TBP -Solvent Concentration on Uranium Purification.

Six solution aliquots of the organic solvent of different TBP concentration in kerosene were prepared and shaken in separating funnels with equal volumes of the working aqueous feed solution of 2 0 2 gU/L at 3M HNO3 free acidity for 5 minutes contact time under room temperature. After phase separation, uranium was both the د س ,volumetrically determined in the aqueous raffinate phase extraction efficiency and the extraction coefficient were calculated and tabulated in Table (4).

Table (4): Effect ofTBP concentration on TBP uranium purification Sotoen، conc, % u assay at equilibrium, g/1 D°a %u phase Extracted ٩ ٨ v/v) Org phase) 15 59.8 142.2 0.42 29.6 20 82.1 119.9 0.68 41.62 25 105 97 1.08 51.98 30 125 77 1.62 61.88 35 144 58 2.48 71-28 40 166 36 4.61 82.16

From the latter, it is quite obvious that both the extraction coefficient and the extraction efficiency of uranium increase with increasing the solvent concentration. Thus, it has been possible to and about 82% extraction efficiency resulting in an آل ه attain 4.61 for organic phase of 166 gU/L. The latter is not for form the saturation capacity of 40% TBP (1.5M) which amounts to 178.5gU/L. However, the best organic concentration ratio is ٠ according to Harrington falling between 22 and 30% (v/v).

4.1.4 •Effect of Temperature on TBP-Uranium Purification

To study this effect, a series of extraction experiments were carried out under different temperatures varying from room (25 C) up to 80 C •In these experiments, the other conditions were fixed at 2 0 2 gU/L feed solution, at 3M HNO3 free acidity, for 5-minute contact time at an O/A ratio of 1:1 and using a solvent concentration of 25% (v/v) TBP/kerosene. After phase separation, uranium was volumetrically determined in the aqueous phases and both the extraction efficiency and extraction coefficient were calculated and tabulated in Table (5). Table (5 ): Effect of temperature on TBP uranium purification

Temperature, °c u assay at equilibrium, g/1 D°a % u Extracted Org phase Aq phase 25 105 97 1.08 51.98 40 105 97 1.08 51.98 50 94 108 087 46.53 60 88 114 0.77 4356 70 78 124 0.63 3861 80 75 127 0.59 3712

From the obtained data, it is noted that beyond 40°c, the uranium extraction is adversely affected; a matter which might be attributed to gradual dissociation of the organic phase. Accordingly, the room temperature (25°C) is recommended to be applied in uranium extraction by TBP.

4.1.5 Effect of Feed Uranium concentration on its TBP Purification

Four solution aliquots of different uranium concentrations (202 to 310g/L) at a fixed free acidity of3M HNO3 were prepared and shaken in separating funnels with equal volumes of the working organic solvent of 25% (v/v) TBP in kerosene for 5 minutes under room temperature. After phase separation, uranium was volumetrically determined in the aqueous raffinate phase where the extraction efficiency and extraction coefficient were calculated and tabulated in Table (6 ).

Table؛Table (6 ): Effect of feed uranium c،>neentrat on on TBP uraniun] purification؛on on TBP uraniun] purification assay at equilibrium, g/1 D°a % u ٧ Uranium eonc, g/1 phase Extracted ٩ ٨ Org phase 202 105 97 1.08 51.98 232 5 105.4 127.1 0.83 45.33

263.5 105.5 158 067 40.03 310 105.5 204.5 0.52 34.03 is evident that as the uranium ا؛ ,From the obtained data c©neentrati©n in the aqueous feed solution increases, both the uranium extraction efficiency and distribution coefficient decrease, however, the uranium concentration in the organic phase remained constant at about I05g/L. As previously mentioned, the latter represents almost the saturation ofthe working solvent with uranium.

4.1.6 Effect of O/A Ratio on Uranium-TBP Purification: Construction ofthe McCabe-Thiele Diagram.

By fixing uranium feed concentration at 202g/L ,in a free acidity of 3 M HNO3 , the organic solvent concentration (v/v) of 25% TBP /kerosene and 5 min as a contact time, a series extraction experiments were performed with varying ofthe O/A ratio from (1:3 to 3:1). After phase separation, uranium was volumetrically determined in the aqueous raffinate phase of each experiment. From the latter, both the extraction efficiency and the extraction coefficient were calculated and the obtained results are tabulated in Table (7).

A ra،io on TBP-urani،■،!! ^rification /()٢© Table (7): Effect

0/ A Ratio u assay at equilibrium, g/1 D°a %u Org phase Aq phase Extracted 1:3 105.8 166.7 0.63 17.45 1:2 105.4 149.3 0-71 26.08 1:1 105.0 97.0 1.08 51.98 2:1 92.0 18.0 5.1 91.08 3:1 67.2 0.4 168 99.8

The obtained data confirm actually that the working solvent of 25%TB? would be saturated by only 105gU/L whatever the applied aqueous phase ratio to the organic phase. On the other hand, uranium extraction efficiency increases from 51.98 up to 9 9 .8 ”/o as O/A ratio increases from 1/1 to 3/1, however at the expense of uranium concentration in the organic phase. This is actually attributed to the increase ofthe extracting sites ofthe applied solvent; a matter which depletes the uranium from the aqueous feed down to 0.4g/L (D a=168).

10 As a matter of the fact, it is inconvenient in practice to carry out a large number of multiple batch extraction with fresh solvent where a continuous counter current extraction is performed whether in vertical columns or in horizontally mounted mixer settlers. In such cases, mathematical calculation of the required number of stages cannot be determined by simple material balance formula. Instead, the graphical method is usually used to determine the number of required theoretical stages by constructing the McCabe-Thiele diagram using the available equilibrium data obtained by operating several organic - aqueous contacts at variable O/A ratios under the studied optimum conditions. For this purpose, the obtained equilibrium curve or the isotherm is first drawn and then a suitable operating line is fitted.

From the constructed McCabe-Thiele diagram shown in Fig it is obvious that the working 25% (v/v) TB? in kerosene would ,( ١) result in an operating line of slope 0.48 (equivalent to the A/O ratio). In other words, two stages in counter current system would be sufficient for almost complete uranium extraction from a feed solution of 202 gU/L.

Fig 25%؛Fig (1):-Mc€abe-Th (1):-Mc€abe-Th ele diagram of uranium extraction with؛ele diagram of uranium extraction with 25% TBP/K from (202g/L) feed concentration: at 3M HNO3 for 5 minutes contact time under room temperature 5 4.2. Behavior of Uranium Associated Elements in TBP Purification

follow the behavior of the uranium ass©eiated elements © ٢ during its purification with 25%(v/v) TBP/k, the previously recommended conditions for uranium extraction from the uranium feed solution (202g/L) using 25%v/v TBP/kerosene were applied .Thus, a proper volume of the aqueous phase was subjected to 2 successive contacts, each with an equal volume of the working ©rganic phase. The trace elements impurities associated with uranium in the feed solution before and after its twice extraction were then properly determined as previously mentioned. It has to be indicated here in that uranium left in the raffinate assayed only 0.5g/l.

From the obtained data tabulated in Table (8 ), it is obvious that Si and Mo were extracted to the extent of the about 20% while were extracted in the range ©fab©ut 10 ٧ Na, Fe, Ca, Al, Cr, Mn and tol2%.On the other hand, while Mg and Zn were extracted in the range of about 7 to 8.5%, K and Cu co-extraction is as low as 2.8 and 0 .6 % respectively.

Table (8): Concentration ofthe uranium-associated elemental impurities during ______TBP purifieation ofthe sodium diuranate product Element Concentration (ppm) % extracted Before After extraction Extracted with uranium* with u extract؛on Na 20889 18850 2039 9.8 Fe 833 735 98 11.8 Si 1108 878 230 207 Mg 376 349 27 7.2 Ca 176 157 19 10 Al 106 93.2 12.8 12.1 o 68.3 61.2 71 10.4 Zn 48.25 44.1 4.15 86 117 2 15 7 ل Mn V 10.5 9.2 1.3 12.4 K 7 68 0.2 2.8 Cu 6.65 6.61 0.04 0.6 Mo 21 165 4.5 21.4 *by difference

12 4.3. Scrubbing and Stripping

As previously mentioned, the optimum conditions of uranium extraction by TB? were applied for two contacts to obtain a uranium- nearly sa^ated solvent phase (100.75 g/L). The loaded solvent was first scrubbed for removal of undesirable impurities that have been CO- extracted with uranium. Scrubbing has been conventionally carried out using 0.1M HN03 solution at an O/A ratio of 15:1 and the obtained aqueous scrub solution was then analyzed for the determination of uranium loss. Having a uranium assay in the scrub solution of 2 .8 g/l, the uranium assay in the organic phase would be 100.75 g/L.

Re extraction (stripping) of uranium from the scrubbed loaded solvent was achieved by its shaking with 0.01M HNO3 solution at an O/A ratio of 1:1 through five successive contacts. Stripping with 0.01M HNO3 was preferred than distilled water to avoid the any precipitation of uranium in the aqueous phase which would slow down the phase separation. Uranium and associated trace elements the obtained strip solutions whether ط impurities have been analyzed previously scrubbed or not.

٦ ١ Concentration ofthe uranium-associated elements in the strip solutions :(و) Table (not scrubbed and scrubbed)

Element Concentration, ppm l oaded Solvent Stripped Solution Not Scrubbed Scrubbed u 100.75 20.15 20.14 1312 181.2 .5 وNa 101 49 9.6 Fe n Si 115 20.2 17.6 Mg 13.5 3.2 2.04 Ca 9.5 1.4 1.2 Al 6.4 1.8 1.3 O 3.6 1.0 0.84 Zn 2.08 0.7 0.6 Mn 1.0 0.2 0.17 0.17 0.2 0.7 ٧ K 0.1 Nil Nil Cu 0.02 Nil Nil Mo 225 0.2 Nil

From the obtained analytical results (Table 9 ), it would be clear that a prior scrubbing stage has only slightly decreased the trace elem ents

4.4. Preparation of

The uranium-loaded scrubbed TBP solvent has been conveniently stripped by 5 successive contacts of 1:1 O/A ratio with from the uranyl nitrate ث 0آل N HNO3 acid solution. To prepare 1 0 . 0 loaded TBP ﺳ ﺎ س solution obtained by scrubbing and stripping the solvent, a suitable sample volume (20.14 gU/L) was first subjected to uranyl nitrate crystallization. For this purpose, the working sample solution was evaporated at 95 c to increase its uranium concentration, After attaining a volume of about 25% of the original volume, the

14 solution assaying bout 80g/l was left to cool where greenish yellow crystals of uranyl nitrate hexahydrate have been obtained. After proper separation ofthe latter from the residual solutions, the crystals were left for air drying followed by their denitration in a drying oven at 280- 300 C for 4 hours and where the evolved nitrogen dioxide could be water-trapped to regenerate nitric acid for recycle.

٢١٢ ١ r©-؛xide Product Compared Via ] اﺳﺈاﺀا؛آال Compar Analysis o f،؛tiv؛< ا٠) ( Table ( Solvent

Element Feed Materia} Uranium Trioxide product Na2U207 (ppm) TO? Weldon spring product u% 48.9 80.7 82.2 Na 88070 2 Nil Fe 2522 118 45 Si 1822 44 18 Mg 1020 64 40 Ca 621.5 15 Nil Nil 8 281 ٨١ Zn 140.8 12 Nil 5 10 98.5 ى Mn 83.67 6 <10 Cu 25.6 Nil Nil Mo 24 Nil <10 K 15.55 Nil Nil Nil Nil 9.5 ٧

The obtained UO3 product was also quantitively analyzed and the obtained results are shown in table (1 0 ) in comparison with those From the latter, it is clearly evident that the ■ ؛ of Weldon spring uranium assay is only 80.7% as compared to the stoichiometric the value of 83.22%. This might be due to incomplete de-nitration and/on drying. Absence of Na in Weldon Spring product is due to processing of an ammonium di-uranate product. On the other hand, it is interesting to indicate that both Fe and Cr in the prepared product are almost similar to those of Weldon Spring product. In the meantime, Si is higher in the prepared product while Mg is lower with respect to the ٧ reference product. Finally, it has to be indicated that Cu, Mo ,K and are completely absent from the prepared product. It can thus be mentioned that the prepared product is almost nuclear pure. 5. CONCLUSIONS The present work was thus directed towards proper purification (refining) ofthe experimentally prepared sodium diurinate using TBP as organophosphorus compound. In this study, the different relevant factors; namely the contact time, the free acidity, the temperature and the uranium concentration in the feed solution besides the solvent concentration in the organic phase and the O/A ratio have been studied. Except otherwise cited, a nitrate feed solution assaying 202gU/L was prepared for these studies from the precipitated sodium diuranate (yellow cake).

Using 25% (v/v)TBP in kerosene, the determined, optimum extraction conditions involved 5 min contact time, 3M HNO3 free acidity, room temperature and 1:1 O/A ratio. Construction of the corresponding McCabe-Thiele diagram shows that two theoretical ideal stages would be required in countercurrent operation for complete uranium extraction at a feed rate A/O of 0.48 slope of the operating line). Proper chemical analysis of the nitrate feed and the resultant raffinate solution revealed that 20% of Si and Mo were while were extracted in the range of about 10 ٧ Na, Fe, Ca, Al, Cr, Mn and to 12 %. On the other hand, Mg and Zn were extracted in the range of about 7 and 8.5% respectively while K and Cu were slightly extracted by only 2.8 and 0.6% respectively. Before uranium stripping from the obtained loaded solvent, it was subjected to a scrubbing step with 0.1M HNO3 solution at an O/A ratio of 15:1 for reducing the CO- extracted impurities •This was then followed by stripping with 0.01M HNO3 at an O/A ratio of 1:1 through five successive contacts. Analysis ofthe previously scrubbed and the directly stripped solutions indicated that scrubbing under the mentioned conditions has only slightly decreased the associated elements.

16 REFERENCES

( 1 ) Sayyah, T. A. and Attawiya, M. Y. (1990) "Contribution of the ' of uranium occurrence of Gabel Gattar area Eastern Desert, Egypt" Arab. j. Nuel. Sci. Appl. Cairo, V23, No.l p.171.184. (2) Mhamoud K. F., (2000)" Mineralogical and geochemical characteristics of some uranium occurrences in Gattar area as a basis for preparation of high grade uranium concentrate". pH D., thesis Fac. Sc., Shams Univ. (3) W.Davies and W.Gray .Talanta, 11, 1203(1964). (4) C.D, Harrington and A,E,Ruehle (eds.), “Uranium Production Technology “ Princeton, New Jersey ■D.Van Nostrand, New Jersey 1959. (5) M.s Abd-EJ-Gany,Ms. Uranium Recovery from Sulfate Leach (s,Fac.Eng,Cairo (2000؛Pulps of some Egyption ore^hD.tThes (6 ) J.w Clegg and D.D Foley “Uranium Ore Processing “Addison .Wesley Publishing Company ,INC., USA(1958). (7) T.Braun and G. Ghersini ,j .chromatography Library, (1975). (8 ) ‘ H.Serag, A.Abdella "refining of uranium using Tri- Butyl phosphate " El-Mansoura univ-1993. (9) C.A.Blake .D.E.Horner and J.M. Schmitt.U.S. At -Energy Comm., ReptORNL-2259.,(1959).

17 Eleventh Arab Conference on the Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy. Khartoum. Sudan, 16-20 December 2012

اﻟﻤﻠﺨﺺ اﻟﺮﺑﻰ

ﺗﻨﻘﻴﺔ ﻣﻨﺘﺞ ﺛﻨﺎﺋﻰ ﻳﻮداﻧﺎت اﻟﺼﻮدﻳﻮم ﻣﻦ ﺗ ﻤ ﺪﻧ ﻚ ﺟﺒﻞ ﺟﺘﺎر (GII) ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺨﺪام ﺛﺎﻫ ﻰ ﺑﻴﻮﺗﻴﻞ اﻟﻔﻮﺳﻔﺎت ﺧﺎﻟﺪ ﻓﺆادحمﻤﻮدي ﺟﻬﺎد ﺟﻨﻴﺪى * * وﻟﻴﺪ حمﻤﺪ ﻣﺮﺳﻰ *

* ﻫ ﻴ ﺌﺔ ا ﻟ ﻤ ﻮ ا د ا ﻟ ﻨ ﻮ و ﻳ ﺔ

* * ﻛﻠﻴﺔ اﻟﻌﻠﻮم ﺟﺎﻣﻌﺔ اﻟﻘﺎﻫﺮة

ﻣ ﻨ ﺘ ﺞ ﻗ ﺎ ﺋ ﻰ ﻳﻮرﻧﺎت اﻟ ﺼﻮﺑﻴﻮ م ا ﻟ ﺨ ﺎ م ا ﻟ ﺘ ﻰ ﺗﻢ ﺗ ﺤ ﻀﻴﺮ ﻫﺎ ﻣ ﻦ ﺗ ﻤ ﻌ ﺪ ﻧ ﺎ ت ﺟﺒ ﻞ ﺟ ﻨ ﺎ ر ر ﺟ ﺌ ﺎ ر 2 ا ﺗ ﻢ ا ﺳ ﺘ ﺨ ﺪ ا ﻣ ﻬ ﺎ ﻟ ﺪ ر ا ﺳ ﺔ ا ﻣ ﻜ ﺎ ﻧ ﻴ ﺔ ﺗ ﻜ ﺮ ﻳ ﺮ ﻫ ﺎ ﺑ ﺎ ﺳ ﺘ ﺨ ﺪ ا م ﺛ ال ﺛ ﻰ ﺑ ﻴ ﻮ ﻳ ﻞ ا ﻟ ﻔ ﻮ ﺳ ﻔ ﺎ ت ﺑ ﻐ ﺮ ض ا ﻟ ﺤ ﺼ ﻮ ل ﻣ ﻨ ﺘ ﺞ ﻋ ﺎ ﻟ ﻰ ا ﻟ ﻨ ﻘ ﺎ و ة ، ﻣ ﻦ ﺧ ال ل ا ﻟ ﻈ ﺮ و ف ا ﻟ ﺘ ﻰ ﺗ ﻢ د ر ا ﺳ ﺘ ﻬ ﺎ و ﺟ ﺪ ا ﻧ ﺴ ﺐ ا ﻟ ﻈ ﺮ و ف ﻫ ﻰ ا ﺳ ﺘ ﺨ ﺪ ا م %25 ﺣ ﺠ ﻢ/ ﻣ ﺠ ﻢ ﻣ ﻦ ﺛ ال ﺋ ﻰ ﺑ ﻴ ﻮ ﺗ ﻴ ﻞ ا ﻟ ﻔ ﻮ ﺳ ﻔ ﺎ ت ﻓ ﻰ ا ﻟ ﻜ ﻴ ﺮ و ﺳ ﻴ ﻦ و ﺑ ﺄ ذ ا ﺑ ﺔ ﺣ ﺘ ﺞ ﻗ ﺎ ﻧ ﻰ ﻳ ﻮ ر ﻧ ﺎ ت ا ﻟ ﺼ ﻮ د ﻳ ﻮ م ﺗ ﺮ ﻛ ﻴ ﺰ ه 202 ﺟﻢ/ﻟرت ﺑ ﺎ ال ﺿ ﺎ ﻓ ﺔ اىل ا ﺳ ﺘ ﺨ ﺪ ا م ﺷ ﺒ ﺔ و ﺳ ﻂ ﻣﺎﺋﻰ اىل ﻋﻀﻮى ل٠. ل ﻟﻤﺪة 5 دﻗﺎﺋﻖ ﻋﻨﺪ ﺑ ﺮ ﺟ ﺔ ﺣ ﺮا ر ة اﻟﻐﺮﻓﺔ . وﺑﺎﺳﺘﺨﺪام ﺿ ﻨ ﻰ ﻣ ﻜﺎ ب ﺛﻴ ﻞ ﻟﺤ ﺴﺎب ﻋﺪد

ﻣ ﺮ ا ﺣ ﻞ ا ال ﺳ ﺘ ﺨ ال ص ﻋ ﻠ ﻰ ا ﻟ ﻤ ﺴ ﺘ ﻮ ى ا ﻟ ﺼ ﻨ ﺎ ﻋ ﻰ و ﺟ ﺪ ا ن ﻋ ﺪ د 2 ﻣ ﺮ ﺣ ﻠ ﺔ ﻧ ﻈ ﺮ ﻳ ﺔ و ﻣ ﻌ ﺪ ل ﺗ ﻐ ﺬ ﻳ ﺔ ﺳ ﺎ د ل/ ﻋ ﻀ ﻮ ى 0.48 ) ﺑ ﺮ ﺟ ﺔ ﻣ ﻴ ﻞ ( ﻛ ﺎ ﻓ ﻴ ﺔ . و ﻓ ﻰ ﻧ ﻬ ﺎ ﻳ ﺔ أ ﻟ ﻌ ﻤ ﻞ ﺗ ﻢ ﺗ ﺤ ﻀ ﻴ ﺮ ﻣ ﻨ ﺘ ﺞ ﺛ ال ﺋ ﻰ ا ﻛ ﺴ ﻴ ﺪ اﻟﻴﻮراﻧﻴﻮم ﻣﻦ ﺧال ل ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺎت ﺗﺒﻠﻮر ﺑﻠﻮرا ت ﻧﺘﺮا ت اﻟﻴﻮراﺋﻴ ﻞ ﻳﺘﺒﻌﻬﺎ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺗﺒﺨﻴﺮاﻟﻨﺘﺮات , ﺗﻢ ﺗ ﻄ ﻴ ﻞ ا ﻟ ﻤ ﻨ ﺘ ﺞ ا ﻟ ﻤ ﺘ ﺤ ﺼ ﻞ ﻃ ﻴ ﺔ و و ﺟ ﺪ ا ﻧ ﻪ ﻳ ﻤ ﻜ ﻦ ﻣ ﻘ ﺎ ر ﻧ ﺘ ﻪ ﺑ ﻤ ﻨ ﺘ ﺞ وﻳﻠﺪون ﺳ ﺒ ﺮ ﺋ ﺞ

8 ا