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
Fusion Energy
This division promotes the development and timely introduction of fusion energy as a sustainable energy source with favorable economic, environmental, and safety attributes. The division cooperates with other organizations on common issues of multidisciplinary fusion science and technology, conducts professional meetings, and disseminates technical information in support of these goals. Members focus on the assessment and resolution of critical developmental issues for practical fusion energy applications.
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.
Joel A. Kulesza
Nuclear Technology | Volume 175 | Number 1 | July 2011 | Pages 228-237
Technical Paper | Special Issue on the 16th Biennial Topical Meeting of the Radiation Protection and Shielding Division / Radiation Transport and Protection | doi.org/10.13182/NT11-A12294
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
In the computational fluid dynamics analysis to determine the necessary cooling airflow rates in the reactor cavity of a nuclear power plant during operation, the heat generated in the sacrificial bioshield and adjacent components is a significant source term. Traditionally, a three-dimensional (3-D) flux synthesis method is used to calculate the heat generation rate in the bioshield for reactors with a cylindrical reactor cavity because there is minimal azimuthal variation. However, the AP1000™ reactor incorporates an octagonal reactor cavity design with 12 ex-core detectors, leading to potentially significant impacts on the azimuthal heat generation rate distribution. Therefore, it was of interest to benchmark the traditional flux synthesis method with full 3-D discrete ordinates methods. Because of an uncertainty in the amount of mesh refinement necessary to have confidence in the results, a sensitivity study on the mesh refinement was performed with a parallel 3-D discrete ordinates code. This allowed a comparison with an industry-standard serial 3-D discrete ordinates code in terms of both execution speed and calculated results.The results suggest that for angular positions where the flux synthesis method incorporates an axial model, there is relatively good agreement with 3-D methods (within ±20%). In areas remote from axial models, there are differences of up to a factor of 2 in a nonconservative direction. Furthermore, a recently developed parallel 3-D discrete ordinates radiation transport code was shown to produce results generally consistent with the industry-standard 3-D code used (within 2.5%). Finally, the parallel code completed its calculations in 10% of the time required by the serial code for an identically sized problem.