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
Jul 2026
Jan 2026
2026
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
September 2026
Nuclear Technology
August 2026
Fusion Science and Technology
Latest News
In transition: Commercializing fusion power
Commercial fusion power is closer than ever. There are now around 30 U.S. fusion companies, several of which claim to be on track to connect to the grid as early as the 2030s.
Tokamak and laser inertial confinement approaches benefit from decades of research at facilities such as the National Ignition Facility (NIF) at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and ITER, with alternative concepts including stellarator, magnetic mirror, and Z-pinch confinement also making notable progress as private and government funding for fusion increases.
H. H. Hassan, G. H. Miley
Nuclear Science and Engineering | Volume 40 | Number 3 | June 1970 | Pages 449-459
Technical Paper | doi.org/10.13182/NSE70-A20196
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
Space-time nuclear reactor kinetic calculations based on the well-known computer program WIGLE are compared with measurements from neutron-pulse-propagation experiments. Transients were induced in a heavy-water-moderated, natural uranium subcritical assembly using a coupling extending through a graphite thermal column to a pulsed TRIGA reactor. Results are reported for five keff values ranging from 0 to 0.92, involving cases both with and without cadmium control rods inserted. A unit-cell-homogenization technique was adopted for analysis purposes, with special attention being given to proper parameter assignment, such as neutron velocity averaging. Calculation results compare favorably with experimental results for the interior of the assembly; however, differences as large as 7% are noted near interfaces or boundaries.