Heat Mass Transfer (2011) 47:1385–1393
DOI 10.1007/s00231-011-0800-1
ORIGINAL
An empirical model for the thermal conductivity of compacted
bentonite and a bentonite–sand mixture
Won-Jin Cho • Jae-Owan Lee • Sangki Kwon
Received: 29 March 2010 / Accepted: 10 February 2011 / Published online: 30 April 2011
 Springer-Verlag 2011
Abstract The thermal conductivities of compacted ben-
tonite and a bentonite–sand mixture were measured to
investigate the effects of dry density, water content and
sand fraction on the thermal conductivity. A single
expression has been proposed to describe the thermal
conductivity of the compacted bentonite and the bentonite–
sand mixture once their primary parameters such as dry
density, water content and sand fraction are known.
1 Introduction
In the nuclear industry, the geological repository for high-
level radioactive wastes would be constructed in the bed-
rock at a depth of several hundred meters below ground
surface. The repository would be expected to be of a room-
and-pillar design, and the high-level waste packed in a
disposal canister would be deposited in an array of large-
diameter boreholes drilled on the floors of emplacement
rooms. After the emplacement of a disposal canister, the
gap between the canister and the wall of the borehole
would be filled with a buffer material. The engineered
barrier system consists of a waste form, a disposal canister
and a buffer. Compacted bentonite and a bentonite–sand
mixture have been considered as a potential buffer mate-
rial. The coupled thermal, hydraulic and mechanical
(THM) processes occurring in the engineered barrier sys-
tem such as the heat generation from waste, the intrusion of
groundwater from a surrounding rock, and the stress
changes due to the swelling of buffer material are critical
W.-J. Cho (&)  J.-O. Lee  S. Kwon
Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute, P.O. Box 105,
Yuseong, Daejeon 305-600, Korea
e-mail: wjcho@kaeri.re.kr
issues in the performance assessment of a high-level
radioactive waste repository. The thermal conductivity of
the buffer material is a key parameter for the analysis of a
coupled thermal–hydraulic-mechanical process occurring
in an engineered barrier system of the repository.
A number of investigators have reported on the thermal
conductivity of soil and tried to develop relationships to
estimate the thermal conductivity [1–5]. Some of these
models are based on soil structure which cannot be estimated
easily, and the others are experimental correlations. Knutsson
[6], Börgesson et al. [7] and Ould-Lahoucine et al. [8]
reported on the thermal conductivity of compacted bentonite
and a bentonite–sand mixture. Ould-Lahoucine et al. [8]
evaluated the existing correlations for predicting the thermal
conductivity of compacted bentonite and a bentonite–sand
mixture. However these correlations contain parameters
which are difficult to measure or estimate, and are not able to
represent the thermal conductivity of compacted bentonite
and a bentonite–sand mixture in a single expression.
In this study, the thermal conductivity of compacted
bentonite and a bentonite–sand mixture with various dry
densities, water contents and sand fractions were measured,
and an attempt has been made to suggest a single expres-
sion to describe the thermal conductivity of compacted
bentonite and a bentonite–sand mixture once their primary
parameters such as dry density, water content and sand
fraction are known.
2 Experimental
2.1 Material
The bentonite was a calcium bentonite produced from
Kyungju, Kyungsangbuk-do, Korea. The chemical
123
1386
Fig. 1 X-ray diffraction patterns of the Kyungju bentonite
composition of the bentonite is 56.8% SiO2, 20.0% Al2O3,
6.0% F2O3, 2.6% CaO, 0.8% MgO, 0.9% K2O, 1.3% Na2O,
0.2% FeO, 1.3% SO3 and 0.8% TiO2. It has a cation-
exchange capacity of 58 meq/100 g, and Ca2? is the pre-
dominant exchangeable cation (Fig. 1). The bentonite
contains montmorillonite (70%), feldspar (29%), and small
amounts of quartz (*1%), and the bentonite was passed
through a 200 mesh ASTM standard sieve. The sand was
obtained from Jawoldo, Kyungki-do, Korea. The sand was
washed in water, sieved to remove large particles, and
dried. The particle size distribution by ASTM C 136-84 [9]
is shown in Fig. 2. The sand mainly consists of quartz,
feldspar and muscovite. The detailed physical and miner-
alogical properties of the bentonite and sand have been
reported [10].
2.2 Measurement of thermal conductivity
The thermal conductivities of the compacted bentonites
with a dry density of 1.2 to 1.8 Mg/m3 and the bentonite–
sand mixture with a dry density of 1.6 and 1.8 Mg/m3 were
measured within the water fraction range of 10.65–20 wt%
and the dry sand fraction range of 10–30 wt%. To measure
the thermal conductivities, compacted bentonite and
bentonite–sand mixture blocks with dimensions of
150 9 60 9 20 mm were fabricated. The pre-determined
amounts of bentonite powder and the bentonite powder-
sand mixture depending on the dry density with the
required water fraction were prepared. The bentonite and
bentonite–sand mixture were uniaxially compacted to the
desired density in a stainless steel hexahedral mould which
has inside dimensions of 150 9 60 9 20 mm using a
hydraulic press. A quick thermal conductivity meter
(Kyoto Electronics, QTM-500) was used to measure the
thermal conductivities of the bentonite and bentonite–sand
123
Heat Mass Transfer (2011) 47:1385–1393
mixture blocks. The hexahedral sample block was placed
on the receiving plate, and the probe (PD-11) was put on the
sample block. The thermal conductivity was measured by
transient line source method. The measurement of thermal
conductivity was performed three times for each experi-
mental condition. All the measurements were done at 25C.
3 Results and discussion
The measured thermal conductivities of the compacted
bentonite are listed in Table 1, and are shown in Fig. 3. As
observed in the figure, the thermal conductivity of the
compacted bentonite with a constant water content
increases with an increasing dry density. The water content
is defined as the ratio of the weight of water to the weight
of a dry solid. As the dry density of the bentonite increases,
the contact among the bentonite particles is improved and
it leads to a better heat conduction resulting in an increase
in its thermal conductivity. In the case of the same dry
density, the thermal conductivity of the bentonite increases
with an increasing water content. The relation between the
thermal conductivity and water fraction are generally linear
and can be expressed as;
k ¼ 0:0378 ww  0:0571 ðqd ¼ 1:2 Mg=m3 Þ r2 ¼ 0:92
k ¼ 0:0681 ww  0:2519 ðqd ¼ 1:4 Mg=m3 Þ r2 ¼ 0:95
k ¼ 0:0599 ww  0:0232 ðqd ¼ 1:5 Mg=m3 Þ r2 ¼ 0:97
k ¼ 0:0640 ww  0:0236 ðqd ¼ 1:6 Mg=m3 Þ r2 ¼ 0:95
k ¼ 0:0574 ww þ 0:2129 ðqd ¼ 1:8 Mg=m3 Þ r2 ¼ 0:94
ð1Þ
where k is thermal conductivity (W/mK), ww is the weight
percentage of water (wt%), qd is dry density of bentonite
(Mg/m3). r2 is the R-squared. The comparisons between the
thermal conductivities calculated using Eq. 1 and the
measured ones for the compacted bentonites with various
dry densities and water fractions are shown in Fig. 4. As
the water fraction of the bentonite increases, water with a
higher thermal conductivity replaces air with a lower
thermal conductivity in a void of the compacted bentonite,
and it leads to an increase of the thermal conductivity of
the compacted bentonite. With the water addition, the
thermal conductivity of the bentonite with higher dry
density increases rapidly. It may be attributed to the fact
that the void of the compacted bentonite with high density
is small, and approaches easily a saturated condition with
increasing water fraction.
The measured thermal conductivities of the compacted
bentonite–sand mixtures with a dry density of 1.6 and
1.8 Mg/m3 are listed in Table 2, and are shown in Figs. 5
and 6, respectively. As observed in the figures, the thermal
conductivity of the mixture increases with an increasing
Heat Mass Transfer (2011) 47:1385–1393 1387

Fig. 2 Particle size distribution

curve for the Jawoldo sand

sand and water weight fraction and water content. The increasing sand weight fraction. The thermal conductivity
relation between the thermal conductivity of the mixture of the mixture also increases with increasing water fraction.
and water fraction can be fitted to the straight lines as To describe the thermal conductivity of the compacted
follows; bentonite and the bentonite–sand mixture using a single

k ¼ 0:0672 ww þ 0:0763 ðqd ¼ 1:6 Mg=m3 ; ws ¼ 10 wt%Þ r2 ¼ 0:94

k ¼ 0:0649 ww þ 0:1639 ðqd ¼ 1:6 Mg=m3 ; ws ¼ 20 wt%Þ r2 ¼ 0:95
k ¼ 0:0496 ww þ 0:5160 ðqd ¼ 1:6 Mg=m3 ; ws ¼ 30 wt%Þ r2 ¼ 0:93
ð2Þ
k ¼ 0:0802 ww  0:0874 ðqd ¼ 1:8 Mg=m3 ; ws ¼ 10 wt%Þ r2 ¼ 0:98
k ¼ 0:0861 ww þ 0:0335 ðqd ¼ 1:8 Mg=m3 ; ws ¼ 20 wt%Þ r2 ¼ 0:96
k ¼ 0:1098 ww  0:1051 ðqd ¼ 1:8 Mg=m3 ; ws ¼ 30 wt%Þ r2 ¼ 0:89

where ws is weight percentage of sand in the mixture.
(wt%), qd is dry density of bentonite–sand mixture (Mg/
m3). r2 is the R-squared. The comparisons between the
thermal conductivities calculated using Eq. 2 and the
measured ones for the mixtures with various dry densities
and water fractions are shown in Figs. 7 and 8. The sand
particles have a higher thermal conductivity than the ben-
tonite particles, and it leads to an increase in the thermal
conductivity of the bentonite–sand mixture with an
expression in terms of the dry density, the water content
and the sand fraction, the following assumptions were
introduced.
– Bentonite and sand form a homogeneous, two-compo-
nent mixture.
– The void of the compacted bentonite and bentonite–
sand mixture is filled initially with air, and as the water
fraction increases, water replaces air in the void.

123
1388 Heat Mass Transfer (2011) 47:1385–1393

Table 1 Thermal conductivities of the compacted bentonite Table 1 continued

Dry density Sand Water Degree of Thermal Dry density Sand Water Degree of Thermal
(Mg/m3) fraction fraction saturation conductivity (Mg/m3) fraction fraction saturation conductivity
(wt%) (wt%) (W/mK) (wt%) (wt%) (W/mK)

1.2 0 10.65 0.2575 0.3482 1.6 0 10.65 0.4682 0.6754

10.65 0.2575 0.3648 10.65 0.4682 0.6873
10.65 0.2575 0.3549 10.65 0.4682 0.6360
13.00 0.3227 0.4265 13.00 0.5868 0.8058
13.00 0.3227 0.4011 13.00 0.5868 0.7434
13.00 0.3227 0.4427 13.00 0.5868 0.7533
15.00 0.3812 0.5177 15.00 0.6932 0.9805
15.00 0.3812 0.5297 15.00 0.6932 0.9432
15.00 0.3812 0.5321 15.00 0.6932 0.9423
18.00 0.4741 0.5584 18.00 0.8621 1.1698
18.00 0.4741 0.5865 18.00 0.8621 1.2059
18.00 0.4741 0.5426 18.00 0.8621 1.1869
20.00 0.5400 0.7502 20.00 0.9819 1.2000
20.00 0.5400 0.7545 20.00 0.9819 1.1620
20.00 0.5400 0.7158 20.00 0.9819 1.2737
1.4 0 10.65 0.3466 0.5085 1.8 0 10.65 0.6436 0.8325
10.65 0.3466 0.5150 10.65 0.6436 0.8044
10.65 0.3466 0.5214 10.65 0.6436 0.8139
13.00 0.4344 0.6347 13.00 0.8067 0.9156
13.00 0.4344 0.5894 13.00 0.8067 0.8853
13.00 0.4344 0.5629 13.00 0.8067 0.9361
15.00 0.5132 0.6928 15.00 0.9530 1.1292
15.00 0.5132 0.7480 15.00 0.9530 1.1636
15.00 0.5132 0.7258 15.00 0.9530 1.1448
18.00 0.6383 0.9855 18.00 1.0 1.2930
18.00 0.6383 1.0781 18.00 1.0 1.2624
18.00 0.6383 1.0328 18.00 1.0 1.2489
20.00 0.7270 1.0577 20.00 1.1 1.2959
20.00 0.7270 1.1213 20.00 1.1 1.3474
1.5 0 10.65 0.4023 0.5888 20.00 1.1 1.3261
10.65 0.4023 0.6388
10.65 0.4023 0.6537 – The thermal conductivity of the compacted bentonite
13.00 0.5042 0.7008 and the bentonite–sand mixture is a weighted sum of
13.00 0.5042 0.7157 the thermal conductivity of the components (bentonite,
13.00 0.5042 0.7224 sand, water and air).
15.00 0.5957 0.9018
15.00 0.5957 0.9189 Sass et al. [11] suggested that the thermal conductivity
15.00 0.5957 0.9316 of rock aggregate can be estimated by the geometric mean
18.00 0.7408 1.0900
of the mineral components’ thermal conductivities;
18.00 0.7408 1.0330 k ¼ ku1 u2 u3 un
1  k2  k3 . . . kn ð3Þ
18.00 0.7408 1.0031
20.00 0.8437 1.1906
where k1 … kn are the thermal conductivity of the nth
mineral components, and u1 … un are the fraction
20.00 0.8437 1.1470
occupied by the nth mineral. This geometric mean model
20.00 0.8437 1.1918
was extended to apply to the compacted bentonite and

123
Heat Mass Transfer (2011) 47:1385–1393
Fig. 3 Thermal conductivities of the compacted bentonite
Fig. 4 Thermal conductivities of the bentonites as a function of the
water fraction
bentonite–sand mixture. The compacted bentonite and
bentonite–sand mixture are described as a porous medium
with the void in the matrix. To describe the thermal
conductivities of partially saturated compacted bentonite
and bentonite–sand mixture in terms of the porosity and the
water content, the equation for geometric mean model is
rewritten as;
ub
k ¼ kus uw ua
s  kb  kw  ka ð4Þ
where ks, kb, kw and ka are the thermal conductivities of
sand, bentonite, water and air, respectively. us, ub, uw and
ua are the volume fraction of sand, bentonite, water and air,
respectively, and defined as
1389
us ¼ qd xs =qrs
ub ¼ qd ð1  xs Þ=qrb
uw ¼ ð1  us  ub ÞS1 ¼ ð1  qd xs =qrs  qd ð1  xs Þ=qrb ÞS1
ua ¼ ð1  us  ub Þð1  S1 Þ ¼ ð1  qd xs =qrs  qd
ð1  xs Þ=qrb Þð1  S1 Þ ð5Þ
where us, ub, uw and ua are the volume fraction
(dimensionless) of sand, bentonite, water and air,
respectively. qd, qrs and qrb are the dry density of the
compacted bentonite or the bentonite–sand mixture (Mg/
m3), particle density of sand and bentonite (Mg/m3),
respectively. xs is the gravimetric sand fraction
(dimensionless), and Sl is the degree of saturation
(dimensionless). The degree of saturation is defined as
the ratio of the water content to the saturated water content.
In real situation, bentonite particle, sand, water and air in
the compacted bentonite and bentonite–sand mixture
would not be tightly contacted one another, and are not
homogeneously distributed. Considering these facts, the
modified geometric mean model was suggested as:


ua p
k ¼ kmus
s  knub
b  kuw
w  ka ð6Þ
where m, n and p are the exponents that take into account
the unreality of the geometric mean model. If the
arrangement of bentonite, sand, water and air phase is an
ideal configuration, the exponent m, n and p are equal to 1.
The values of kw and ka are 0.6 W/mK and 0.03 W/mK
at 25C. The thermal conductivities of sand and bentonite,
ks, kb depend on the thermal conductivity of its constituent
minerals. However, the constituent minerals of bentonite
and sand differ greatly from sample to sample, and the
thermal conductivities of bentonite and sand calculated
using the thermal conductivity of its constituent minerals
would involve the considerable uncertainties. Therefore, it
is more desirable to estimate ks, kb directly from the
thermal conductivity data for the mixture. The exponent m,
n and p depend on the configuration of components of the
mixture, and in the nature should be estimated from the
comparison between the theoretical model and the mea-
sured data. In this study, ks, kb, m, n and p are calculated
from the regression based on the thermal conductivity data
in Tables 1 and 2. Then the modified geometric mean
model for the thermal conductivity of bentonite and ben-
tonite–sand mixture, k at 25C is


ua p
k ¼ 4:302mus  1:232nub  kuww  ka
ð7Þ
m ¼ 1:303; n ¼ 2:099; p ¼ 0:564
where k is the thermal conductivity (W/moK), kw and ka are
0.60 and 0.03 W/mK, respectively. The R-squared of Eq. 7
was 0.83. The values of m and n are higher than 1.0 and on
the other hand p is lower than 1.0. It implies that the
123
1390 Heat Mass Transfer (2011) 47:1385–1393

Table 2 Thermal conductivities of the compacted bentonite–sand

mixture
Dry density Sand Water Degree of Thermal
(Mg/m3) fraction fraction saturation conductivity
(wt%) (wt%) (W/mK)

1.6 10 13.08 0.5727 0.9097

13.08 0.5727 0.8837
13.08 0.5727 0.9221
15.00 0.6819 1.1760
15.00 0.6819 1.1258
15.00 0.6819 1.1540
18.00 0.8481 1.3042
18.00 0.8481 1.2958
18.00 0.8481 1.2760
20.00 0.9660 1.3882 Fig. 5 Thermal conductivities of the bentonite–sand mixture with a
dry density of 1.6 Mg/m3
20.00 0.9660 1.4053
20.00 0.9660 1.4001
1.6 20 13.08 0.5800 0.9991
13.08 0.5800 0.9998
13.08 0.5800 0.9881
18.00 0.8521 1.3944
18.00 0.8521 1.3853
18.00 0.8521 1.3993
20.00 0.9705 1.4193
20.00 0.9705 1.4166
20.00 0.9705 1.4225
1.6 30 13.08 0.5829 1.1174
13.08 0.5829 1.1481
13.08 0.5829 1.2296
18.00 0.8564 1.3972
18.00 0.8564 1.4096
20.00 0.9754 1.5366 Fig. 6 Thermal conductivities of the bentonite–sand mixture with a
20.00 0.9754 1.5469 dry density of 1.8 Mg/m3
20.00 0.9754 1.4441
1.8 10 13.08 0.7888 0.9883
relative contribution of the volume fraction of bentonite
13.08 0.7888 0.9538
and sand to the overall thermal conductivity is larger than
13.08 0.7888 0.9761
that of water and air.
15.00 0.9319 1.0662
The comparisons between the thermal conductivities
15.00 0.9319 1.1101
calculated using Eq. 7 and the measured ones for the
15.00 0.9319 1.1111
compacted bentonites with various dry densities and water
1.8 20 13.08 0.7943 1.1667
contents are summarized in Fig. 9. As shown in the figure,
13.08 0.7943 1.1385
both agree well except for some data in the case of 1.2 and
13.08 0.7943 1.1045
1.4 Mg/m3. It shows that the deviations of the measured
15.00 0.9383 1.3916
data from the calculated values are less than 20%. The
15.00 0.9383 1.3398
comparison between the thermal conductivities calculated
15.00 0.9383 1.3530
using Eq. 7 and the measured ones for the bentonite–sand
1.8 30 13.08 0.7994 1.3045
mixtures at a dry density of 1.6 and 1.8 Mg/m3 with vari-
13.08 0.7994 1.3071
ous sand weight fractions and water contents are summa-
13.08 0.7994 1.3812
rized in Fig 10. As with the case of bentonite, the
15.00 0.9444 1.5486
deviations of the measured data from the calculated values
15.00 0.9444 1.5852
are also less than 20%. To test the applicability of the
15.00 0.9444 1.4914
proposed correlation to other compacted bentonites and

123
Heat Mass Transfer (2011) 47:1385–1393
Fig. 7 Thermal conductivities of the bentonite–sand mixtures with a
dry density of 1.6 Mg/m3 as a function of the water fraction
Fig. 8 Thermal conductivities of the bentonite–sand mixtures with a
dry density of 1.8 Mg/m3 as a function of the water fraction
bentonite–sand mixtures, the calculated thermal conduc-
tivities using Eq. 7 are compared to the thermal conduc-
tivities of bentonite and bentonite–sand mixture reported in
the literatures [7, 8, 12, 13]. The comparisons between the
calculated thermal conductivities and the reported ones for
the compacted bentonite and the bentonite–sand mixture
with various dry density, sand weight fractions and water
1391
Fig. 9 Comparison between the calculated thermal conductivities
and the measured data for the compacted bentonite
Fig. 10 Comparison between the calculated thermal conductivities
and the measured data for the bentonite–sand mixture
contents are summarized in Figs. 11 and 12. As with the
case of present experimental data, the deviations of the
reported data from the calculated values are also less than
20%. Although the reported thermal conductivities are for
sodium bentonite, not for calcium bentonite of present
study, and the mineral compositions differ from those of
the sample used in the present study, the proposed
123
1392
Fig. 11 Comparison between the calculated thermal conductivities
and the reported data for the compacted bentonite
Fig. 12 Comparison between the calculated thermal conductivities
and the reported data for the bentonite–sand mixture
correlation can predict the thermal conductivities of ben-
tonite and bentonite–sand mixture with the error range of
20%. From these results, Eq. 7 is proven to be useful
to describe the thermal conductivity of the compacted
bentonite and the bentonite–sand mixture. The proposed
123
Heat Mass Transfer (2011) 47:1385–1393
Fig. 13 Comparison between the thermal conductivities of com-
pacted bentonite measured in the axial and the radial directions
expression is expected to be valid for the compacted ben-
tonite and the bentonite–sand mixture with a dry density of
1.2–1.8 Mg/m3, and a sand weight fraction of 0–0.3.
The thermal conductivities of the compacted bentonite
are nearly constant at a temperature range of 20–100C
[14]. Therefore the thermal conductivities of the com-
pacted bentonite and the bentonite–sand mixtures in the
temperature range up to 100C can be simulated using
Eq. 7. The microstructure of the montmorillonite which is
a major component of the bentonite has been known to be
composed of stacks of lamellae and a void filled with or
without a clay gel [15]. The possible impacts of the
microstructural anisotropy of the compacted bentonite on
the thermal conductivity were investigated. The thermal
conductivities were measured in two directions for a
compacted bentonite block with a dry density of 1.6 and
1.8 Mg/m3. One direction is a section oriented perpendic-
ular to the compaction direction (axial direction), and the
other is a section oriented parallel to the compaction
direction (radial direction). The results are shown in
Fig. 13. As shown in the figure, the thermal conductivities
in the two directions agree well for the bentonite with a
water content of 0.15. For the bentonite with a water
content of 0.22, there is a little difference between the
thermal conductivity from the two directions, but the dif-
ference decreases with an increasing dry density. Therefore
the impacts of the microstructural anisotropy of the com-
pacted bentonite on the thermal conductivity seem not to
be important.
Heat Mass Transfer (2011) 47:1385–1393
4 Conclusions
The effects of the dry density, water content and sand
fraction on the thermal conductivity of compacted ben-
tonite and a bentonite–sand mixture were investigated. The
thermal conductivity of the compacted bentonite and the
bentonite–sand mixture with a constant water content
increased with an increasing dry density. In the case of the
same dry density, the thermal conductivity increases with
an increasing water content. The thermal conductivity of
the mixture also increased with an increasing sand weight.
A single expression was proposed to predict the thermal
conductivity of the compacted bentonite and the bentonite–
sand mixture.
Acknowledgments This work was supported by Nuclear Research
& Development Program of the National Research Foundation (NRF)
grant funded by the Korean government (MEST).
References
1. Côté J, Konrad JM (2005) A generalized thermal conductivity
model for soils and construction materials. Can Geotech J
42:443–458
2. Gangadhara R, Singh DN (1999) A generalized relationship to
estimate thermal conductivity of soils. Can Geotech J 36:67–773
3. Abu-Hamdeh NH, Reeder RC (2000) Soil thermal conductivity:
effects of density, moisture, salt concentration, and organic
matter. Soil Sci Soc Am J 64:1285–1290
1393
4. Tavman IH (1996) Effective thermal conductivity of granular
porous materials. Int Comm Heat Mass Transf 23:169–176
5. Usowicz B, Lipiec J, Ferrero A (2006) Prediction of soil thermal
conductivity based on penetration resistance and water content or
air-filled porosity. Int J Heat Mass Transf 49:5010–5017
6. Knutsson S (1983) On the thermal conductivity and thermal
diffusivity of highly compacted bentonite. SKB Technical Report
83-72, SKB
7. Börgesson L, Fredrikson A, Johannesson L (1994) Heat con-
ductivity of buffer materials, SKB Technical Report 94-29, SKB
8. Ould-Lahoucine C, Sakashita H, Kumada T (2002) Measurement
of thermal conductivity of buffer materials and evaluation of
existing correlations predicting it. Nucl Eng Des 216:1–11
9. American Society for Testing and Materials (1991) Annual book
of ASTM Standards, vol 04.08
10. Cho WJ, Lee JO, Kang CH, Chun KS (1999) Physico- chemical,
mineralogical properties of domestic bentonite and bentonite–sand
mixture as a buffer material in the high level waste repository,
KAERI/TR 1388/99, Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute
11. Sass JH, Lachenbruch AH, Munroe RJ (1971) Thermal conduc-
tivity of rocks from measurements on fragments and its appli-
cation to heat-flow determinations. J Geophys Res 76:3391–3401
12. Fujita H, Sugita Y, Noda M, Kiyohashi H (1992) Measurement of
thermophysical properties of buffer material (I). PNC Report
PNC TN8410 92-057, Power Reactor and Nuclear Fuel Devel-
opment Corporation
13. Suzuki H, Tanigushi W (1999) Measurement of thermophysical
properties of buffer material (II). JNC Report JNC TN8430
99-006, Japan Nuclear Cycle Development Institute
14. JNC (1999) H12 Project to establish technical basis for HLW
disposal in Japan, Support Report 2, Japan Nuclear Cycle
Development Institute
15. Pusch R (1999) Microstructural evolution of buffers. Eng Geol
5:33–41
123