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
Aug 2026
Jan 2026
2026
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
October 2026
Nuclear Technology
September 2026
Fusion Science and Technology
August 2026
Latest News
Second round of Launch Pad selections includes eight newcomers
The National Reactor Innovation Center at Idaho National Laboratory has announced 13 project selections across 12 companies for the Nuclear Energy Launch Pad, a Department of Energy–led program that integrates reactor and fuel facility authorization, testing, and deployment support for private nuclear developers.
The Launch Pad emerged from the Reactor Pilot Program and Fuel Line Pilot Program.
According to INL, projects selected include reactor development and nuclear fuel cycle advancements, including fabrication, enrichment, and conversion technologies.
B.B. Glasgow, W.G. Wolfer
Fusion Science and Technology | Volume 8 | Number 1 | July 1985 | Pages 546-552
Material Engineering — Behavior | Proceedings of the Sixth Topical Meeting on the Technology of Fusion Energy (San Francisco, California, March 3-7, 1985) | doi.org/10.13182/FST85-A40096
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
Ferritic steels have been shown to swell much less than 316 austenitic stainless steel. For this reason ferritic steels are being considered for fusion reactor applications as an alternative to 316 austenitic stainless steel. A lifetime analysis based on crack propagation has been done for ferritic steel using typical first wall parameters. The results for ferritic steel are compared to results from a similar analysis done for 316 austenitic stainless steel. The comparison shows that ferritic steels have lower thermal stresses than 316 austenitic stainless steel by a factor of about 2. Because of the lower thermal stresses, the cyclic stresses resulting from the plasma-on/plasma-off cycles are reduced and the predicted fatigue crack growth rate is less for ferritic steels. The analysis predicts a lifetime more than 10 times longer for ferritic steel than for 316 austenitic stainless steel. The comparison clearly shows the great potential of ferritic steel over 316 austenitic stainless steel as a first wall material to achieve the high wall loading desired for future fusion reactors.