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
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?
Robert C. Doerner, Theodore H. Bauer,Charles L. Fink, William F. Murphy, Arthur E. Wright
Nuclear Technology | Volume 58 | Number 3 | September 1982 | Pages 465-482
Technical Paper | Nuclear Fuel | doi.org/10.13182/NT82-A32981
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
Received September 28, 1981 Accepted for Publication February 26, 1982 Issues related to the potential for a large-scale sodium vapor explosion in a carbide-fueled liquid-metal fast breeder reactor accident were addressed in the AX1 test in the Transient Reactor Test Facility. Test design and operating conditions were selected to meet the spontaneous nucleation temperature criterion for an energetic, explosive molten fuel-sodium interaction. Although that criterion appears to have been achieved, thermal and mechanical analyses of the test data indicate that the interaction was not especially energetic. Comparison to similar tests on oxide fuel indicates that, under the particular test conditions employed, the conversion of thermal energy to mechanical work is similar for the two fuel types. Transient bulk fuel motion was extensive, with axial fuel motion generally coinciding in time and space with the ejection of the coolant from the original fuel region. Posttest examination of the hardware revealed that nearly all of the fuel had mixed on a microscopic scale with the stainless steel cladding. Relative proportions of iron, chromium, and nickel in the mixture varied widely. The melting point of the mixture was apparently much lower than that of stainless steel.