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
Radiation Protection & Shielding
The Radiation Protection and Shielding Division is developing and promoting radiation protection and shielding aspects of nuclear science and technology — including interaction of nuclear radiation with materials and biological systems, instruments and techniques for the measurement of nuclear radiation fields, and radiation shield design and evaluation.
Meeting Spotlight
Conference on Nuclear Training and Education: A Biennial International Forum (CONTE 2025)
February 3–6, 2025
Amelia Island, FL|Omni Amelia Island Resort
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
Jan 2025
Jul 2024
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
February 2025
Nuclear Technology
January 2025
Fusion Science and Technology
Latest News
Reboot: Nuclear needs a success . . . anywhere
The media have gleefully resurrected the language of a past nuclear renaissance. Beyond the hype and PR, many people in the nuclear community are taking a more measured view of conditions that could lead to new construction: data center demand, the proliferation of new reactor designs and start-ups, and the sudden ascendance of nuclear energy as the power source everyone wants—or wants to talk about.
Once built, large nuclear reactors can provide clean power for at least 80 years—outlasting 10 to 20 presidential administrations. Smaller reactors can provide heat and power outputs tailored to an end user’s needs. With all the new attention, are we any closer to getting past persistent supply chain and workforce issues and building these new plants? And what will the election of Donald Trump to a second term as president mean for nuclear?
As usual, there are more questions than answers, and most come down to money. Several developers are engaging with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission or have already applied for a license, certification, or permit. But designs without paying customers won’t get built. So where are the customers, and what will it take for them to commit?
J. T. Mihalczo, G. C. Tillett, D. L. Selby
Nuclear Technology | Volume 30 | Number 3 | September 1976 | Pages 422-433
Technical Paper | Uranium Resource / Instrument | doi.org/10.13182/NT76-A31655
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
The modified source multiplication method was used to determine the reactivity from the count rate data as fuel assemblies were removed from the engineering mock-up core for the Fast Flux Test Facility (FFTF). The count rate was monitored with a fission detector in the center of the core and in each of the three shield lobes [simulating the low-level flux monitor (LLFM)] as the ZPR-9 assembly was unloaded to simulate, in a reverse manner, the proposed initial loading to critical for the FFTF. Some conclusions from this interpretation are: 1. The inverse count rate from a fission counter in the center of the core is an excellent way to monitor the initial loading of the reactor. 2. The inverse count rates from each of the LLFMs are not adequate for monitoring the initial loading, since they were not a smooth function of the number of fuel assemblies loaded even after correction for changes in detection efficiency. 3. The reactivity versus fuel loading (obtained from the interpretation of the inverse count rate data from the LLFM detectors using an inverse kinetics rod-drop calibration at 0.8 dollar sub-critical) was not a smooth function of the fuel loading because of difficulties in calculating the required changes in detection efficiency for detectors in the shield. However, a similar interpretation for the in-core detector showed a smooth dependence of reactivity on fuel loading. 4. The reference asymmetric loading pattern for startup does not present any interpretational difficulties with a detector in the core, and, thus, the symmetric loading pattern has no real advantages with an in-core detector and requires more time. 5. The initial startup of the FFTF should be monitored with an in-core detector. These conclusions are consistent with those obtained with the prototype fast reactor in the United Kingdom (with its in-core detector) and with the Phenix reactor in France (with its detector outside the core).