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
Aerospace Nuclear Science & Technology
Organized to promote the advancement of knowledge in the use of nuclear science and technologies in the aerospace application. Specialized nuclear-based technologies and applications are needed to advance the state-of-the-art in aerospace design, engineering and operations to explore planetary bodies in our solar system and beyond, plus enhance the safety of air travel, especially high speed air travel. Areas of interest will include but are not limited to the creation of nuclear-based power and propulsion systems, multifunctional materials to protect humans and electronic components from atmospheric, space, and nuclear power system radiation, human factor strategies for the safety and reliable operation of nuclear power and propulsion plants by non-specialized personnel and more.
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.
Thomas B. Rezentes, Mark A. Prelas, Eric Lukosi, Matthew L. Watermann, Jack Crawford, and Richard H. Olsher
Nuclear Technology | Volume 187 | Number 1 | July 2014 | Pages 96-102
Technical Note | Radiation Transport and Protection | doi.org/10.13182/NT11-105
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
A computer-based investigative technique, using the Los Alamos Monte Carlo code MCNP5 version 1.51 (Radiation Safety Information Computational Center), was completed to assess the shallow dose equivalent (SDE) reported on the Landauer, Inc.,TM Luxel+ optically stimulated light (OSL) dosimeter. Experimental test irradiations were conducted on 18 OSL dosimeters through various controlled exposures to the source (10 mCi 90Sr). The reported SDE for each test irradiation was compared to the results for SDE calculated using MCNP5. All test irradiation experiments were conducted with the 90Sr source placed in direct contact with the dosimeter with slight placement changes across the dosimeter face. It was found that these slight adjustments caused vast differences in reported doses by Landauer. The SDE determined in a tissue matrix using MCNP5 was studied for two of the dosimeter badge geometries, and it was found that some qualitative agreement exists between the reported and simulated doses in contradiction with the experimental results. Further simulated analysis was not conducted because precise source-dosimeter geometries and the algorithm used by Landauer to analyze its Luxel+ OSL dosimeters were not known. These results indicate that a future study should be conducted with more rigorous simulated benchmarking to verify these results.
