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
Nuclear Energy Conference & Expo (NECX)
September 8–11, 2025
Atlanta, GA|Atlanta Marriott Marquis
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
Jul 2025
Jan 2025
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
August 2025
Nuclear Technology
Fusion Science and Technology
July 2025
Latest News
Hash Hashemian: Visionary leadership
As Dr. Hashem M. “Hash” Hashemian prepares to step into his term as President of the American Nuclear Society, he is clear that he wants to make the most of this unique moment.
A groundswell in public approval of nuclear is finding a home in growing governmental support that is backed by a tailwind of technological innovation. “Now is a good time to be in nuclear,” Hashemian said, as he explained the criticality of this moment and what he hoped to accomplish as president.
S. G. Carpenter, J. M. Gasidlo, J. M. Stevenson
Nuclear Science and Engineering | Volume 49 | Number 2 | October 1972 | Pages 236-239
Technical Note | doi.org/10.13182/NSE72-2
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
The effective delayed-neutron fractions of 235U and 239Pu have been determined for two fast critical assemblies from measurements of the absolute fission rate and the apparent reactivity worths of a calibrated 252Cf neutron source. The experimental values of βeff for the two fissile isotopes, 0.0078 to 0.00233, respectively, are in reasonable agreement with calculations. The results do not explain the 30% discrepancy in measured and calculated reactivity values in fast critical experiments.
