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.
Division Spotlight
Education, Training & Workforce Development
The Education, Training & Workforce Development Division provides communication among the academic, industrial, and governmental communities through the exchange of views and information on matters related to education, training and workforce development in nuclear and radiological science, engineering, and technology. Industry leaders, education and training professionals, and interested students work together through Society-sponsored meetings and publications, to enrich their professional development, to educate the general public, and to advance nuclear and radiological science and engineering.
Meeting Spotlight
2024 ANS Annual Conference
June 16–19, 2024
Las Vegas, NV|Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino
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
Apr 2024
Jan 2024
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
May 2024
Nuclear Technology
Fusion Science and Technology
Latest News
College students help develop waste measuring device at Hanford
Workers at Hanford recently used a new tool that uses radar to measure the depth of waste in underground tanks. (Photo: DOE)
A partnership between Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS) and Washington State University has resulted in the development of a device to measure radioactive and chemical tank waste at the Hanford Site. WRPS is the contractor at Hanford for the Department of Energy’s Office of Environmental Management.
Washington State engineering students worked with WRPS personnel to design what the DOE is calling “a safer and more efficient way” to measure the depth of the waste in Hanford’s large underground tanks.
Jesse M. Brown, R. C. Block, A. Youmans, H. Choun, A. Ney, E. Blain, D. P. Barry, M. J. Rapp, Y. Danon
Nuclear Science and Engineering | Volume 194 | Number 3 | March 2020 | Pages 221-231
Technical Paper | doi.org/10.1080/00295639.2019.1688087
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
Often discrepancies can be found in the corresponding cross sections of different evaluated nuclear data libraries. Traditional integral benchmarks that are used to validate such libraries are sensitive to cross-section values across many different energies. This means an erroneously low cross section at one energy may compensate for an erroneously high cross section at another energy, and the integral benchmark value may still be met. While the evaluated cross section may agree with that single benchmark, it could affect other systems differently. To reduce the potential for this error, an energy differential validation method is proposed herein for continuous energy Monte Carlo neutron transport models in the resolved resonance region and the unresolved resonance region (URR). The proposed method exposes the underlying physics of the URR and validates both the average cross section and resonance self-shielding effect driven by the fluctuations in that cross section. This is done by measuring the neutron transmission of a thick sample that, by its nature, exaggerates the resonance self-shielding effect. This validation method is shown to be very sensitive to the cross-section model used (resolved versus unresolved) and the fluctuation correction employed, allowing it to probe the validity of the previously mentioned cross-section evaluations. Tantalum-181 is used as an example to demonstrate the impact of different resonance evaluations. It was found that the JEFF-3.3 and JENDL-4.0u evaluations made reasonable choices for cross-section models of 181Ta; none of the current evaluations, however, can be used to properly model the validation transmission over all energies. It was also found that updating resonance parameters in the URR provided better agreement with the validation transmission.