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
Apr 2025
Jan 2025
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
May 2025
Nuclear Technology
April 2025
Fusion Science and Technology
Latest News
General Kenneth Nichols and the Manhattan Project
Nichols
The Oak Ridger has published the latest in a series of articles about General Kenneth D. Nichols, the Manhattan Project, and the 1954 Atomic Energy Act. The series has been produced by Nichols’ grandniece Barbara Rogers Scollin and Oak Ridge (Tenn.) city historian David Ray Smith. Gen. Nichols (1907–2000) was the district engineer for the Manhattan Engineer District during the Manhattan Project.
As Smith and Scollin explain, Nichols “had supervision of the research and development connected with, and the design, construction, and operation of, all plants required to produce plutonium-239 and uranium-235, including the construction of the towns of Oak Ridge, Tennessee, and Richland, Washington. The responsibility of his position was massive as he oversaw a workforce of both military and civilian personnel of approximately 125,000; his Oak Ridge office became the center of the wartime atomic energy’s activities.”
Jiyun Zhao, Pradip Saha, Mujid S. Kazimi
Nuclear Technology | Volume 161 | Number 2 | February 2008 | Pages 124-139
Technical Paper | Thermal Hydraulics | doi.org/10.13182/NT08-A3918
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
To compare the stability features of a supercritical water-cooled reactor (SCWR) design with that of a typical boiling water reactor (BWR), a stability analysis model for a typical BWR has been developed in addition to an already-developed model for the SCWR as presented in a companion paper. The homogenous equilibrium two-phase flow model, which is adequate at high pressures, is applied to the BWR stability analysis. The reactor core is simulated by three channels according to the radial power distribution and the inlet orifice coefficients. Similar to the SCWR model, the neutronic kinetic equation is expanded based on modes (reactivity modes). The model is evaluated based on the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station stability test data, and the results agree well with the experiment.The SCWR is found to be less sensitive to the coolant density neutronic reactivity coefficient than the typical BWR, since most of the neutronic moderation function is provided by the water rods, where the density variation is either zero (if the water rods are insulated) or small (if the water rods are not insulated). The BWR is found to be less sensitive to changes in power level than the SCWR but has the same sensitivity level to the flow rate as the SCWR.A stability envelope that combines the single-channel and in-phase stability modes is developed. The decay ratios for the SCWR together with those for the typical BWR and the new Economic Simplified Boiling Water Reactor at nominal operational conditions are shown in the map. The stability sensitivity to operating conditions is also shown in the map, by increasing the power to 120% of nominal value and decreasing the flow rate to 80% of nominal value. It is found that the SCWR is more sensitive to the single-channel stability compared to the core-wide in-phase stability for all cases.