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.
P. Komarek (compiler), G.L. Kulcinski (compiler)
Fusion Science and Technology | Volume 8 | Number 1 | July 1985 | Pages 1075-1080
Nuclear Technology Development Issue and Need (Finesse) | Proceedings of the Sixth Topical Meeting on the Technology of Fusion Energy (San Francisco, California, March 3-7, 1985) | doi.org/10.13182/FST85-A39915
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
This study considers an “alternate” approach to obtaining the data base required for building a tokamak demonstration reactor (DEMO). The present generation of physics machines (JET, TFTR, T-15, JT-60) is followed by a larger tokamak physics machine (called a NET-P class device) which achieves ignition and perhaps long pulse operation with a D/T-plasma and a respectable neutron wall loading, but with low duty factor and low neutron fluence. In parallel with this machine is a tandem mirror based technology test device (called TASKA class device), which provides high neutron fluence operation with a much smaller plasma volume and fusion power level. It also provides extended neutron testing of blanket modules, materials test samples, neutral beam and RF heating technology, magnets, tritium handling technology, and other components in an integrated facility. Furthermore, fission reactor facilities and simulation test stands would provide additional data. Even though this study is not all-inclusive, some important conclusions may be drawn. Overall, it appears that the “Alternate Plan” could provide the required physics and most of the engineering data for building a DEMO with less risk, in a shorter time, and with perhaps less cost than the present approach of building a single large tokamak aimed at both physics and engineering testing. This conclusion is valid in an overall sense, but some drawbacks remain. The detailed conclusions with respect to the various physics and technology aspects are given in the paper.