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
Nuclear Criticality Safety
NCSD provides communication among nuclear criticality safety professionals through the development of standards, the evolution of training methods and materials, the presentation of technical data and procedures, and the creation of specialty publications. In these ways, the division furthers the exchange of technical information on nuclear criticality safety with the ultimate goal of promoting the safe handling of fissionable materials outside reactors.
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.
Vincent Bouineau, Gilles Bénier, Dominique Pêcheur, Joël Thomazet, Antoine Ambard, Martine Blat
Nuclear Technology | Volume 170 | Number 3 | June 2010 | Pages 444-459
Technical Paper | Materials for Nuclear Systems | doi.org/10.13182/NT10-A10330
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
The waterside corrosion kinetics of Zircaloy-4 are accelerated in pressurized water reactors (PWRs) in comparison with autoclaves. Beyond this comparison, an enhancement of oxidation rate - called phase III - can be observed from the third reactor cycle. This results in significant oxide thicknesses at high burnups. Several hypotheses have been devised to explain this phase III of Zircaloy-4 in PWRs, but none have been fully validated. In an attempt to better understand the oxidation acceleration phenomenon affecting Zircaloy-4 in PWRs, we decided to analyze the in-reactor corrosion of Zircaloy-4 by quantifying the acceleration factor KPWR. This was defined as the multiplication factor to be applied to the oxidation rate in an autoclave to obtain the kinetics in a PWR (with an equivalent metal-oxide interfacial temperature and taking into account both the power and thermal-hydraulic histories). This analysis was based on oxide thicknesses formed on Zircaloy-4 cladding containing UO2 or mixed-oxide fuel and having been irradiated for one to six cycles in French PWRs. This analysis enabled us to demonstrate the following:1. KPWR is always >1, which clearly shows an acceleration in the Zircaloy-4 oxidation kinetics in a reactor.2. KPWR is equivalent to [approximately]2 for rods having been subjected to one or two cycles.3. Above two reactor cycles, KPWR increases with the level of irradiation and ends up reaching values close to 6. This KPWR increase is representative of phase III.4. KPWR and its variations are not directly related to the increase in the fluence. Phase III is not associated with a burnup threshold.5. Phase III seems to be related to a threshold that is a function of the oxide layer thickness.6. The precipitation of hydrides could be used to define a threshold that is a function of the oxide layer thickness above which phase III occurs. This hypothesis is consistent with the thickness at which KPWR increases. Furthermore, phase III observed is consistent with the known increase in the oxidation kinetics of samples with hydride rims in an autoclave.Therefore, acceleration of the oxidation kinetics in a reactor (compared with an autoclave) is not constant but does seem to be a complex function of different variables such as time, temperature, and both the thermal and neutron fluxes. Furthermore, the precipitation of hydrides seems to be a first-order factor triggering phase III of Zircaloy-4 in a reactor.
