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
August 2026
Nuclear Technology
July 2026
Fusion Science and Technology
Latest News
Deployable Energy achieves criticality at INL
Ahead of the July 4 deadline set by President Trump in Executive Order 14301, the nuclear community has been following the developments of the Department of Energy’s Reactor Pilot Program, in which companies have been pursuing DOE authorization to build and test their first-of-a-kind nuclear technologies. The EO set an ambitious goal of three reactors achieving criticality by July 4, 2026.
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.