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
Education, Training & Workforce Development
The Education, Training & Workforce Development Division provides communication among the academic, industrial, and governmental communities through the exchange of views and information on matters related to education, training and workforce development in nuclear and radiological science, engineering, and technology. Industry leaders, education and training professionals, and interested students work together through Society-sponsored meetings and publications, to enrich their professional development, to educate the general public, and to advance nuclear and radiological science and engineering.
Meeting Spotlight
Utility Working Conference and Vendor Technology Expo (UWC 2024)
August 4–7, 2024
Marco Island, FL|JW Marriott Marco Island
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
Jul 2024
Jan 2024
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
August 2024
Nuclear Technology
Fusion Science and Technology
Latest News
Four million nuclear jobs by 2050: Who will do them?
Industry leaders from around the globe met this month to discuss the talent development that will be necessary for the long-term success of the nuclear industry.
The International Conference on Nuclear Knowledge Management and Human Resources Development, hosted by the International Atomic Energy Agency, was held in Vienna earlier this month. Discussed there was the agency’s forecast for nuclear capacity to more than double—or hopefully triple—by 2050 and the requirement of more than four million professionals to support the industry.
Marco Cigarini, Mario Dalle Donne
Nuclear Technology | Volume 84 | Number 1 | January 1989 | Pages 33-53
Technical Paper | Nuclear Safety | doi.org/10.13182/NT89-A34194
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
Calculations of the reflooding phase during a loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA) have been performed for two homogeneous advanced pressurized water reactors (APWRs) with a wide [pitch-to-diameter (p/d) ratio = 1.2] and a tighter (p/d = 1.123) fuel rod lattice as well as for a reference 1300-MW(electric) pressurized water reactor (PWR). The FLUT computer code, developed by the Gesellschaft für Reaktorsicherheit in Garching for the reflooding phase of a PWR, has been improved: A new criterion for the determination of the onset of the upper quench front and a new water droplet model for the dispersed flow film boiling have been introduced in the code, as well as new friction factor correlations more suitable for the core geometry of an APWR. Finally, the interfacial drag coefficients between steam and water are not independent of the geometry as in FLUT, but rather the flow channel geometry is taken into account. The new version of the code (FLUT-FDWR) has been tested on the base of various reflooding experiments in PWR (FLECHT, FEBA, SEFLEX) as well as APWR (FLORESTAN) core geometries. In all the cases investigated, the FLUT-FDWR predictions are relatively good and generally better than with the original FLUT version. The reactor calculations with FLUT-FDWR indicate that the maximum cladding temperatures in the APWRs during the reflooding phase are lower than those for the PWR. This is due to the lower temperatures for the APWRs at the beginning of the reflooding phase and to the higher isostatic water pressure above the APWR cores, which are shorter and therefore placed in a lower position inside the reactor pressure vessel. The cladding temperatures calculated for the PWR and the two APWRs are quite acceptable and considerably lower than those calculated during the blowdown phase of the LOCA.