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
International Conference on Mathematics and Computational Methods Applied to Nuclear Science and Engineering (M&C 2025)
April 27–30, 2025
Denver, CO|The Westin Denver Downtown
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
Apr 2025
Jan 2025
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
June 2025
Nuclear Technology
Fusion Science and Technology
May 2025
Latest News
Argonne’s METL gears up to test more sodium fast reactor components
Argonne National Laboratory has successfully swapped out an aging cold trap in the sodium test loop called METL (Mechanisms Engineering Test Loop), the Department of Energy announced April 23. The upgrade is the first of its kind in the United States in more than 30 years, according to the DOE, and will help test components and operations for the sodium-cooled fast reactors being developed now.
Sandro Sandri, Luigi Di Pace
Fusion Science and Technology | Volume 34 | Number 3 | November 1998 | Pages 629-633
Safety and Environment (Poster Session) | doi.org/10.13182/FST98-A11963684
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
In the current design of the ITER cooling system heat exchangers (HXs), the primary water flows in the shell side of the component and the secondary water in the tube bundle and the channel head. This is the inverse of the more classical design previously proposed for this ITER component. The reason for this change is basically the need to reduce the collective dose to the operators working inside the HX channel head. In order to evaluate the effectiveness of this change, the radiological dose accumulated by all the personnel involved in the different working activities connected with the HX operation was assessed. The collective dose was calculated by using a procedure already applied to assess the occupational radiation exposure (ORE) since the end of the ITER conceptual design phase (CDA). Two main sources of radiological dose for the primary heat transfer system (PHTS) of ITER were considered in the assessment: the tritium in the room atmosphere and the activated corrosion products (ACPs) in the cooling loops. In this paper the HX structures are described and two models are selected for the comparison. The working activities needed to keep the HXs in operation are identified and classified. ACPs and tritium concentrations data, evaluated with suitable computer codes or by specific analyses also made by other authors, are used to calculate the dose rate during the various working activities. The final collective dose evaluation for the personnel working at HXs is mainly based on the practice developed at the pressurized water reactors (PWRs) and uses many information and data coming from there. In fact, the ITER heat transfer system (HTS) has many similarities with the PWRs cooling system and the majority of its components are the same as those already used by these plants. Furthermore the working procedures required to inspect and maintain the HXs according to the above approach are presented and discussed. The conclusion of this work includes the results of the comparison between the two HX design models in terms of dose rate and collective dose and points out the benefits of the current design for the ITER staff. Nevertheless, some concern relevant to the inspection and maintenance activities is still present.
