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
Reactor Physics
The division's objectives are to promote the advancement of knowledge and understanding of the fundamental physical phenomena characterizing nuclear reactors and other nuclear systems. The division encourages research and disseminates information through meetings and publications. Areas of technical interest include nuclear data, particle interactions and transport, reactor and nuclear systems analysis, methods, design, validation and operating experience and standards. The Wigner Award heads the awards program.
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
Apr 2025
Jan 2025
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
May 2025
Nuclear Technology
April 2025
Fusion Science and Technology
Latest News
General Kenneth Nichols and the Manhattan Project
Nichols
The Oak Ridger has published the latest in a series of articles about General Kenneth D. Nichols, the Manhattan Project, and the 1954 Atomic Energy Act. The series has been produced by Nichols’ grandniece Barbara Rogers Scollin and Oak Ridge (Tenn.) city historian David Ray Smith. Gen. Nichols (1907–2000) was the district engineer for the Manhattan Engineer District during the Manhattan Project.
As Smith and Scollin explain, Nichols “had supervision of the research and development connected with, and the design, construction, and operation of, all plants required to produce plutonium-239 and uranium-235, including the construction of the towns of Oak Ridge, Tennessee, and Richland, Washington. The responsibility of his position was massive as he oversaw a workforce of both military and civilian personnel of approximately 125,000; his Oak Ridge office became the center of the wartime atomic energy’s activities.”
T. J. van Rooyen, G. P. de Beer
Nuclear Science and Engineering | Volume 114 | Number 2 | June 1993 | Pages 87-101
Technical Paper | doi.org/10.13182/NSE93-A24020
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
Prompt fission neutrons (PFNs) constitute the most important component of the source term for nuclear reactor shielding calculations. The determination of the PFN source term for reactor shielding calculations has traditionally been performed using a number of simplifying assumptions. Very simple closed analytical expressions are normally used for the PFN spectrum. The Watt PFN spectrum for 235U, with coefficients determined by Cranberg et al., has become a virtual industry standard in the reactor shielding community. The source term is usually treated as a separable function of spatial location and energy, only the 235U spectrum is considered, and the effect of burnup on the source term is neglected. In reality, the PFN spectra of 235U, 238U, and 239Pu differ markedly, and their fractional contributions to fission are a function of burnup, which, in turn, is a time-dependent function of the spatial position within the reactor core. Recent theoretical developments have led to the advent of sophisticated microscopic models for the calculation of PFN spectra and multiplicities of various fissioning systems. Spectra for 235U, 238U, and 239Pu, calculated with the Madland-Nix model with fragment spin correction, were used in this investigation. An improved reactor source term model that calculates spectrally and spatially burnup-compensated source terms for nuclear reactor shielding calculations is developed and applied to a typical light water reactor (LWR).,Neutron, gamma-ray, and total absorbed dose rate distributions were calculated through four diverse biological shields with a thickness of 250 cm. At end-of-life core conditions, the traditional source term model leads to an underestimate of the transmitted absorbed dose rates by slightly more than a factor of 2. This discrepancy lies within the error margins quoted for LWR shielding calculations. We conclude that despite their age and simplicity, the Watt formula and the simple source term model are of sufficient accuracy for continued service. The more rigorous source term model presented here may be useful for accurate benchmark calculations and for the design of highly efficient shields for high-burnup reactors.
