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.
Explore membership for yourself or for your organization.
Conference Spotlight
2025 ANS Winter Conference & Expo
November 9–12, 2025
Washington, DC|Washington Hilton
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
Oct 2025
Jul 2025
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
November 2025
Nuclear Technology
Fusion Science and Technology
October 2025
Latest News
Researchers use one-of-a-kind expertise and capabilities to test fuels of tomorrow
At the Idaho National Laboratory Hot Fuel Examination Facility, containment box operator Jake Maupin moves a manipulator arm into position around a pencil-thin nuclear fuel rod. He is preparing for a procedure that he and his colleagues have practiced repeatedly in anticipation of this moment in the hot cell.
D. C. Hunt, Robert E. Rothe
Nuclear Science and Engineering | Volume 46 | Number 1 | October 1971 | Pages 76-87
Technical Paper | doi.org/10.13182/NSE71-A22337
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
The results of criticality measurements on enriched (93.16% 235U) uranium metal spheres symmetrically immersed in enriched (93.18% 235U) uranyl nitrate solution cylinders are reported. The solution cylinders are 26.5, 38.4, and 51.1 cm in diameter with heights ranging from 16 to 70 cm. Solution concentrations, expressed in grams of uranium per liter, are 11.47, 12.55, 13.12, 21.25, 24.20, 24.72, 103.0, and 104.8. Twenty-seven critical systems are identified. The experimental critical parameters of each system are compared with computed values obtained by transport (DTF) and Monte Carlo (KENO) methods. Results from neither, method exhibit a systematic difference from experimental values; the average difference in the critical radius is 2.5% for DTF and 2.0% for KENO. The effects of experimental perturbations are determined experimentally and calculationally.
