Thermodynamic and Transport Properties of LiF and FLiBe Molten Salts with Deep Learning Potentials
Source abstract
Abstract
Molten salts have attracted interest as potential heat carriers and/or fuel solvents in the development of new Gen IV nuclear reactor designs, high-temperature batteries, and thermal energy storage. In nuclear engineering, salts containing lithium fluoride-based compounds are of particular interest due to their ability to lower the melting points of mixtures and their compatibility with alloys. A machine learning potential (MLP) combined with a molecular dynamics study is performed on two popular molten salts, namely, LiF (50% Li) and FLiBe (66% LiF and 33% BeF2), to predict the thermodynamic and transport properties, such as density, diffusion coefficients, thermal conductivity, electrical conductivity, and shear viscosity. Due to the large possibilities of atomic environments, we employ training using Deep Potential Smooth Edition (DPSE) neural networks to learn from large datasets of 141,278 structures with 70 atoms for LiF and 238,610 structures with 91 atoms for FLiBe molten salts. These networks are then deployed in fast molecular dynamics to predict the thermodynamic and transport properties that are only accessible at longer time scales and are otherwise difficult to calculate with classical potentials, ab initio molecular dynamics, or experiments. The prospect of this work is to provide guidance for future works to develop general MLPs for high-throughput thermophysical database generation for a wide spectrum of molten salts.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Machine Learning in Materials Science · Molten salt chemistry and electrochemical processes · Nuclear Materials and Properties
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina 29208, United States
Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Massachusetts Lowell, Lowell, Massachusetts 01854, United States
Funding
National Science Foundation · Office of Nuclear Energy
References (51)
Show source-provided references
1. A Technology Roadmap for Generation IV Nuclear Energy Systems. Nuclear Energy Research Advisory Committee Generation IV International Forum, 2014, GIF-002-00.
2. Andrew, C. K. A. Comparison of Advanced Nuclear Technologies; Columbia SIPA, 2017; p 112.
3. 10.1016/j.anucene.2013.08.00210.1016/j.anucene.2013.08.002 ↗
4. 10.1016/j.jrras.2013.10.00810.1016/j.jrras.2013.10.008 ↗
5. 10.1080/09506608.2020.180122910.1080/09506608.2020.1801229 ↗
6. Yoshioka R. · 2017
7. Molten Salt Chemistry Workshop. Innovation Approaches to Accelerate Molten Salt Reactor Development and Deployment; Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Technology and Applied R&D; 2017.
8. 10.1016/j.molliq.2020.11405910.1016/j.molliq.2020.114059 ↗
9. Cadwallader, L. C.; Longhurst, G. R. Flibe Use in Fusion Reactors: An Initial Safety Assessment. Idaho National Laboratory, 1999. No. March, 1–25.10.2172/752080 ↗
10. 10.1016/j.jnucmat.2012.12.00610.1016/j.jnucmat.2012.12.006 ↗
11. 10.1007/s00214-012-1143-910.1007/s00214-012-1143-9 ↗
12. 10.1021/jp061002u10.1021/jp061002u ↗
13. 10.1039/b912532a10.1039/b912532a ↗
14. 10.1080/00268976.2015.104652710.1080/00268976.2015.1046527 ↗
15. 10.1080/00268976.2011.61752310.1080/00268976.2011.617523 ↗
16. 10.1021/jp411781n10.1021/jp411781n ↗
17. 10.1016/j.jnucmat.2014.03.01410.1016/j.jnucmat.2014.03.014 ↗
18. 10.1039/d0ta10576g10.1039/d0ta10576g ↗
19. 10.1021/acsami.1c0060410.1021/acsami.1c00604 ↗
20. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.14300110.1103/PhysRevLett.120.143001 ↗
21. 10.1007/s12039-012-0225-510.1007/s12039-012-0225-5 ↗
22. 10.1016/j.solmat.2014.03.02810.1016/j.solmat.2014.03.028 ↗
23. 10.1016/j.jfluchem.2008.07.01810.1016/j.jfluchem.2008.07.018 ↗
24. 10.1080/00268976.2014.89739610.1080/00268976.2014.897396 ↗
25. 10.1021/jp505033210.1021/jp5050332 ↗
26. 10.1016/j.cpc.2018.03.01610.1016/j.cpc.2018.03.016 ↗
27. Abadi, M.; Barham, P.; Chen, J.; Chen, Z.; Davis, A.; Dean, J.; Devin, M.; Ghemawat, S.; Irving, G.; Isard, M.; Kudlur, M.; Levenberg, J.; Monga, R.; Moore, S.; Murray, D. G.; Steiner, B.; Tucker, P.; Vasudevan, V.; Warden, P.; Wicke, M.; Yu, Y.; Zheng, X. TensorFlow: A System for Large-Scale Machine Learning. 12th {USENIX} Symposium On Operating Systems Design And Implementation ({OSDI} 16), 2016; Vol. 2016, pp 265–283.
28. Zhang, L.; Han, J.; Wang, H.; Saidi, W. A.; Car, R.; Weinan, E. End-to-End Symmetry Preserving Inter-Atomic Potential Energy Model for Finite and Extended Systems. 2018, arXiv:1805.09003.
29. 10.1006/jcph.1995.103910.1006/jcph.1995.1039 ↗
30. 10.1088/0022-3719/7/16/00910.1088/0022-3719/7/16/009 ↗
31. 10.1016/j.molliq.2017.03.08810.1016/j.molliq.2017.03.088 ↗
32. 10.1103/PhysRevB.102.03520310.1103/PhysRevB.102.035203 ↗
33. 10.1063/1.306458810.1063/1.3064588 ↗
34. 10.1038/s41467-020-20427-210.1038/s41467-020-20427-2 ↗
35. Janz G. · J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data · 1988 · 17 · 311
36. 10.1016/j.molliq.2019.11216510.1016/j.molliq.2019.112165 ↗
37. 10.1016/j.commatsci.2015.09.05210.1016/j.commatsci.2015.09.052 ↗
38. 10.1063/1.169173510.1063/1.1691735 ↗
39. 10.1063/1.273496510.1063/1.2734965 ↗
40. 10.1021/acsnano.1c0146610.1021/acsnano.1c01466 ↗
41. Golyshev V. D. · High Temp. - High Press. · 1992 · 24 · 677
42. Golyshev V. D. · Teplofiz. Vysok. Temp. · 1983 · 21 · 899
43. Gierszewski P. · 1980
44. Kato Y. · High Temp. - High Press · 1983 · 15 · 191
45. 10.1021/acs.jctc.5b0035110.1021/acs.jctc.5b00351 ↗
46. Janz G. J. · 197810.6028/NBS.NSRDS.61p1 ↗
47. 10.1080/00986445.2014.97025410.1080/00986445.2014.970254 ↗
48. 10.1016/0022-3115(81)90186-010.1016/0022-3115(81)90186-0 ↗
49. 10.1063/1.501966710.1063/1.5019667 ↗
50. 10.1016/j.cpc.2020.10762410.1016/j.cpc.2020.107624 ↗
51. 10.1103/PhysRevMaterials.3.02380410.1103/PhysRevMaterials.3.023804 ↗