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 ANS Annual Conference
May 31–June 3, 2026
Denver, CO|Sheraton Denver
Latest Magazine Issues
Jan 2026
Jul 2025
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
February 2026
Nuclear Technology
January 2026
Fusion Science and Technology
Latest News
The spark of the Super: Teller–Ulam and the birth of the H-bomb—rivalry, credit, and legacy at 75 years
In early 1951, Los Alamos scientists Edward Teller and Stanislaw Ulam devised a breakthrough that would lead to the hydrogen bomb [1]. Their design gave the United States an initial advantage in the Cold War, though comparable progress was soon achieved independently in the Soviet Union and the United Kingdom.
Olin W. Calvin, Namjae Choi
Nuclear Science and Engineering | Volume 198 | Number 6 | June 2024 | Pages 1255-1275
Research Article | doi.org/10.1080/00295639.2023.2241807
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
The Chebyshev Rational Approximation Method (CRAM) has become one of the dominant methods for solving the Bateman equations for nuclear fuel depletion analysis. Since its introduction over a decade ago, several improvements have been made to CRAM improving its accuracy and reducing its run time. We analyzed its run time using two previously published methods for solving the CRAM system of equations, direct matrix inversion (DMI) and sparse Gaussian elimination (SGE), for depletion systems of varying numbers of nuclides to see how the two methods perform relative to one another. In addition to these two methods, we introduced the Gauss-Seidel (GS) method for solving the CRAM system of equations and compared its performance relative to DMI and SGE for depletion systems with varying numbers of nuclides. We demonstrated that for practical purposes, GS is faster than SGE and DMI and achieves a practical level of accuracy. All testing was performed using the CRAM implementation in the Griffin reactor physics analysis application.