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.
Explore membership for yourself or for your organization.
Conference Spotlight
2026 Annual Conference
May 31–June 3, 2026
Denver, CO|Sheraton Denver
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
Nov 2025
Jul 2025
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
December 2025
Nuclear Technology
Fusion Science and Technology
November 2025
Latest News
U.S. Army chooses nine sites for possible microreactor by 2030
As part of the Janus Program, announced in October, the Department of the Army is seeking potential commercial vendors to build microreactor power plants at nine military installations that are under consideration.
J. Martin Taccetti, Thomas P. Intrator, Frederick J. Wysocki, Katherine C. Forman, Donald G. Gale, Sean K. Coffey, James H. Degnan
Fusion Science and Technology | Volume 41 | Number 1 | January 2002 | Pages 13-23
Technical Paper | doi.org/10.13182/FST02-A196
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
Two experiments showing continuous, real-time measurements of the radial convergence of a high-aspect-ratio aluminum flux conserver are presented. These results were obtained by measuring the compression of both axial and radial components of an internal low-intensity magnetic field. Repeatable flux conserver compressions of this type, uniform to 10:1 compression ratio, form a step toward achieving magnetized target fusion, where a plasma of appropriate temperature and density would be introduced into the flux conserver for compression to fusion conditions. While X radiographs show this compression ratio was achieved, the magnetic field probe signals were cut off earlier. Axial component measurements resulted in compression ratios of 7:1 and 6.3:1, for the first and second compressions, before the magnetic probe signals were lost. Radial component measurements disagree with the axial probe results. Although the discrepancy between axial and radial probe measurements is not completely understood, possible explanations are presented.