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 Nuclear Energy Conference & Expo (NECX)
August 24–27, 2026
Dallas, TX|Hilton Anatole
Latest Magazine Issues
Jun 2026
Jan 2026
2026
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
July 2026
Nuclear Technology
June 2026
Fusion Science and Technology
May 2026
Latest News
North American construction is back—smaller and faster—at OPG’s Darlington
“The nuclear renaissance is real here,” said Ontario Power Generation’s Subo Sinnathamby on May 8, one year to the day after OPG secured a final investment decision to build the first of four planned BWRX-300 reactors at its Darlington nuclear power plant, and shortly after the new reactor’s foundation was lifted into place. “We got our license to construct in April and our [final investment decision] in May, and we’ve been off to the races since.”
J. J. Yugo, D. E. Williamson
Fusion Science and Technology | Volume 21 | Number 3 | May 1992 | Pages 1909-1913
Magnetic | doi.org/10.13182/FST92-A29998
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
Electromagnetic forces due to eddy currents strongly influence the design of components for the next generation of fusion devices. An effort has been made to benchmark two computer programs used to generate transient electromagnetic loads: SPARK and EddyCuFF. Two simple transient field problems were analyzed, both of which had been previously analyzed by the SPARK code with results recorded in the literature. A third problem that uses an ITER inboard blanket benchmark model was analyzed as well. This problem was driven with a self-consistent, distributed multifilament plasma model generated by an axisymmetric physics code. The benchmark problems showed good agreement between the two shell-element codes. Variations in calculated eddy currents of 1–3% have been found for similar, finely meshed models. A difference of 8% was found in induced current and 20% in force for a coarse mesh and complex, multifilament field driver. Because comparisons were made to results obtained from literature, model preparation and code execution times were not evaluated.