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
Fusion Energy
This division promotes the development and timely introduction of fusion energy as a sustainable energy source with favorable economic, environmental, and safety attributes. The division cooperates with other organizations on common issues of multidisciplinary fusion science and technology, conducts professional meetings, and disseminates technical information in support of these goals. Members focus on the assessment and resolution of critical developmental issues for practical fusion energy applications.
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.
E. Dewald, B. Kozioziemski, J. Moody, J. Koch, E. Mapoles, R. Montesanti, K. Youngblood, S. Letts, A. Nikroo, J. Sater, J. Atherton
Fusion Science and Technology | Volume 55 | Number 3 | April 2009 | Pages 260-268
Technical Paper | Eighteenth Target Fabrication Specialists' Meeting | doi.org/10.13182/FST08-3458
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
We use X-ray phase contrast imaging to characterize the inner surface roughness of deuterium-tritium (D-T) ice layers in capsules for future ignition experiments. It is therefore important to quantify how well the X-ray data correlate with the actual ice roughness. We benchmarked the accuracy of our system using surrogates with fabricated roughness characterized with high precision standard techniques. Cylindrical surrogates with azimuthally uniform sinusoidal perturbations with 100-m period and 1-m amplitude demonstrated 0.02-m accuracy limited by the resolution of the imager and the source size of our phase contrast system. Spherical surrogates with random roughness close to that required for the D-T ice for a successful ignition experiment were used to correlate the actual surface roughness to that obtained from the X-ray measurements. We compare first the average power spectra of individual measurements. The accuracy mode number limits of the X-ray phase contrast system benchmarked against surface characterization performed by atomic force microscopy are 60 and 90 for surrogates smoother and rougher than the required roughness for the ice. These agreement mode number limits are about 100 when comparing matching individual measurements. We will discuss the implications for interpreting D-T ice roughness data derived from phase contrast X-ray imaging.