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 ANS Annual Conference
May 31–June 3, 2026
Denver, CO|Sheraton Denver
Latest Magazine Issues
Mar 2026
Jan 2026
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
April 2026
Nuclear Technology
February 2026
Fusion Science and Technology
Latest News
NRC looks to leverage previous approvals for large LWRs
During this time of resurging interest in nuclear power, many conversations have centered on one fundamental problem: Electricity is needed now, but nuclear projects (in recent decades) have taken many years to get permitted and built.
In the past few years, a bevy of new strategies have been pursued to fix this problem. Workforce programs that seek to laterally transition skilled people from other industries, plans to reuse the transmission infrastructure at shuttered coal sites, efforts to restart plants like Palisades or Duane Arnold, new reactor designs that build on the legacy of research done in the early days of atomic power—all of these plans share a common throughline: leveraging work already done instead of starting over from square one to get new plants designed and built.
John D. Bess, Leland M. Montierth, Oliver Köberl, Luka Snoj
Nuclear Science and Engineering | Volume 178 | Number 3 | November 2014 | Pages 387-400
Technical Paper | doi.org/10.13182/NSE14-13
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
Benchmark models were developed to evaluate 11 critical core configurations of the HTR-PROTEUS pebble bed experimental program. Various additional reactor physics measurements were carried out as part of this program; currently, only a total of 37 absorber rod worth measurements have been evaluated as acceptable benchmark experiments for cores 4, 9, and 10. Dominant uncertainties in the experimental Keff for all core configurations come from uncertainties in the 235U enrichment of the fuel, impurities in the moderator pebbles, and the density and impurity content of the radial reflector. Calculations of Keff with MCNP5 and ENDF/B-VII.0 neutron nuclear data are greater than the benchmark values but are within 1% and also within the 3σ uncertainty, except for core 4, which is the only randomly packed pebble configuration. Repeated calculations of keff with MCNP6.1 and ENDF/B-VII.1 are lower than the benchmark values but are within 1% (∼3σ), except for cores 5 and 9, which calculate lower than the benchmark eigenvalues by <4σ. The primary difference between the two nuclear data libraries is the adjustment of the absorption cross section of graphite. Simulations of the absorber rod worth measurements are within 3σ of the benchmark experiment values. The complete benchmark evaluation details are available in the 2014 edition of the International Handbook of Evaluated Reactor Physics Benchmark Experiments.