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
Nuclear Nonproliferation Policy
The mission of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Policy Division (NNPD) is to promote the peaceful use of nuclear technology while simultaneously preventing the diversion and misuse of nuclear material and technology through appropriate safeguards and security, and promotion of nuclear nonproliferation policies. To achieve this mission, the objectives of the NNPD are to: Promote policy that discourages the proliferation of nuclear technology and material to inappropriate entities. Provide information to ANS members, the technical community at large, opinion leaders, and decision makers to improve their understanding of nuclear nonproliferation issues. Become a recognized technical resource on nuclear nonproliferation, safeguards, and security issues. Serve as the integration and coordination body for nuclear nonproliferation activities for the ANS. Work cooperatively with other ANS divisions to achieve these objective nonproliferation policies.
Meeting Spotlight
Utility Working Conference and Vendor Technology Expo (UWC 2024)
August 4–7, 2024
Marco Island, FL|JW Marriott Marco Island
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
Jul 2024
Jan 2024
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
August 2024
Nuclear Technology
Fusion Science and Technology
Latest News
Vogtle-3 shuts down for valve issue
One of the new Vogtle units in Georgia was shut down unexpectedly on Monday last week for a valve issue that has since been investigated and repaired. According to multiple local news outlets, Georgia Power reported on July 17 that Unit 3 was back in service.
Southern Company spokesperson Jacob Hawkins confirmed that Vogtle-3 went off line at 9:25 p.m. local time on July 8 “due to lowering water levels in the steam generators caused by a valve issue on one of the three main feedwater pumps.”
Panayiotis J. Karditsas
Fusion Science and Technology | Volume 29 | Number 4 | July 1996 | Pages 615-626
Technical Paper | Experimental Device | doi.org/10.13182/FST96-A30702
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
A preferred route is suggested for implementing the design rules and requirements of the design codes for the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER), such as ASME and RCC-MR, and for preliminarily assessing which of the in-service loading conditions inflicts the greatest damage on the structure. The current ITER design schedule and possible construction time require in the short term either enhancing the existing design codes and procedures or developing new ones. The time involved in such processes is great and, when coupled with the introduction of new technology, requires adherence, as much as possible, to existing design codes; any necessary modifications to the existing framework must be minor. The rationale for using the rules for strain-deformation and fatigue limits in the design and the reasons why this method is thought to be the most appropriate for a device like ITER are presented and analyzed. Some of the relevant design code rules and constraints are presented, and lifetime and fatigue damage, with some data on fatigue life for Type 316 stainless steel, are predicted. A design curve for strain range versus the number of cycles to failure is presented, including the effect of neutron damage on the material. An example calculation is performed on a first-wall section, and preliminary estimation of the fatigue usage factor is presented. One must observe caution when assessing the results because of the assumptions made in performing the calculations. The results, however, indicate that parts of the component are in the low-cycle fatigue region of operation, which thus supports the use of strain-life methods. The load-controlled stress limit approach of the existing codes leads to difficulties with in-service loading and component categorization, whereas the strain-deformation limit approach may lead to difficulties in calculations. The conclusion is that the load-controlled approach shifts the emphasis to the regulator and the licensing body, whereas the strain-deformation approach shifts the emphasis to the designer and the structural analyst.