ANS is committed to advancing, fostering, and promoting the development and application of nuclear sciences and technologies to benefit society.
Explore the many uses for nuclear science and its impact on energy, the environment, healthcare, food, and more.
Division Spotlight
Materials Science & Technology
The objectives of MSTD are: promote the advancement of materials science in Nuclear Science Technology; support the multidisciplines which constitute it; encourage research by providing a forum for the presentation, exchange, and documentation of relevant information; promote the interaction and communication among its members; and recognize and reward its members for significant contributions to the field of materials science in nuclear technology.
Meeting Spotlight
ANS Student Conference 2025
April 3–5, 2025
Albuquerque, NM|The University of New Mexico
Standards Program
The Standards Committee is responsible for the development and maintenance of voluntary consensus standards that address the design, analysis, and operation of components, systems, and facilities related to the application of nuclear science and technology. Find out What’s New, check out the Standards Store, or Get Involved today!
Latest Magazine Issues
Feb 2025
Jul 2024
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
March 2025
Nuclear Technology
Fusion Science and Technology
February 2025
Latest News
Colin Judge: Testing structural materials in Idaho’s newest hot cell facility
Idaho National Laboratory’s newest facility—the Sample Preparation Laboratory (SPL)—sits across the road from the Hot Fuel Examination Facility (HFEF), which started operating in 1975. SPL will host the first new hot cells at INL’s Materials and Fuels Complex (MFC) in 50 years, giving INL researchers and partners new flexibility to test the structural properties of irradiated materials fresh from the Advanced Test Reactor (ATR) or from a partner’s facility.
Materials meant to withstand extreme conditions in fission or fusion power plants must be tested under similar conditions and pushed past their breaking points so performance and limitations can be understood and improved. Once irradiated, materials samples can be cut down to size in SPL and packaged for testing in other facilities at INL or other national laboratories, commercial labs, or universities. But they can also be subjected to extreme thermal or corrosive conditions and mechanical testing right in SPL, explains Colin Judge, who, as INL’s division director for nuclear materials performance, oversees SPL and other facilities at the MFC.
SPL won’t go “hot” until January 2026, but Judge spoke with NN staff writer Susan Gallier about its capabilities as his team was moving instruments into the new facility.
Chikara Konno, Yukio Oyama, Yujiro Ikeda, Seiya Yamaguchi, Koichi Tsuda, Kazuaki Kosako, Hiroshi Maekawa, Masayuki Nakagawa, Takamasa Mori, Tomoo Nakamura, Mohamed A. Abdou, Edgar F. Bennett, Karl G. Porges, Mahmoud Z. Youssef
Fusion Science and Technology | Volume 28 | Number 2 | September 1995 | Pages 273-295
Technical Paper | Fusion Neutronics Integral Experiments — Part II / Blanket Engineering | doi.org/10.13182/FST95-A30646
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
Fusion neutronics experiments are performed on a full-coverage blanket with various configurations of a beryllium neutron multiplier. In the basic experimental system, a lithium carbonate enclosure contains a lithium oxide test zone and a deuterium-tritium neutron source to simulate a neutron spectrum in a fusion reactor. Five beryllium configurations are adopted to examine the effects of neutron multiplication and reflection by beryllium. The measurements are carried out along the central line in the test zone. Various measurement techniques are applied to obtain the tritium production rate distribution, which is one of the most important parameters for assessing the total tritium breeding ratio in a fusion blanket. In addition, the reaction rates and the neutron spectrum are measured to provide test data for confirmation of calculation results. These data are compared among six different configurations of the experimental system. Consistency between the different techniques for each measured parameter is also tested among different experimental systems. The experimental results are compared with the calculations by DOT3.5 using JENDL-3/PR1 and /PR2. The calculation differs from the experimental data by <10%, except for the beryllium zone.