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
Isotopes & Radiation
Members are devoted to applying nuclear science and engineering technologies involving isotopes, radiation applications, and associated equipment in scientific research, development, and industrial processes. Their interests lie primarily in education, industrial uses, biology, medicine, and health physics. Division committees include Analytical Applications of Isotopes and Radiation, Biology and Medicine, Radiation Applications, Radiation Sources and Detection, and Thermal Power Sources.
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.”
Meng-Jen (Vince) Wang, Glenn E. Sjoden
Nuclear Science and Engineering | Volume 195 | Number 11 | November 2021 | Pages 1154-1175
Technical Paper | doi.org/10.1080/00295639.2021.1906587
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
We present a systematic computational dose rate evaluation for a packaged 1.8-Ci 241AmBe source using both Monte Carlo and deterministic approaches, with some experimental measurements for correlation. The 241AmBe source is stored in an extended 55-gal-drum container. Computational dose rate analysis is performed using MCNP6 (Monte Carlo) and PENTRAN (SN) on the Center for High Performance Computing system at the University of Utah. Limited information is available regarding internal drum shielding construction, and a reverse engineering approach is presented here to estimate the dose rate and compare with measured experimental values. Our analysis shows that a deterministic three-dimensional quadrature (SN) and anisotropic scattering (PN) order of S20P2 is sufficient for dose rate calculations of the 241AmBe source with polyethylene surrounding the source as shielding material. Higher quadrature orders, i.e., at least S70 for neutrons and S40 for photons, are needed in the presence of air due to severe streaming effects, and this is dependent upon the distance between the source and measurement locations. With air surrounding the 241AmBe source, the Monte Carlo method is considered to be better for neutron dose calculations while the SN method is considered better for photon dose calculations. Good agreement from both computational verification and experimental validation are observed for the dose “hot spot” in the extended 55-gal drum. The differences noted between the MCNP6/PENTRAN calculations are within 6% for the neutron dose rate and 30% for the photon dose rate. It is observed that more than 95% of the dose is attributed to neutrons. Detailed studies including a literature data validation, PENTRAN SN convergence study, buildup factor analysis, and dose rates with different shielding materials are presented in the narrative.
