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
Jun 2026
Jan 2026
2026
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
July 2026
Nuclear Technology
June 2026
Fusion Science and Technology
May 2026
Latest News
Tennessee fusion regulations take effect
On June 9, Tennessee became the first U.S. state to implement its own regulatory framework for nuclear fusion machines. It’s a notable step in the rapidly developing field of fusion regulation, and will help Tennessee prepare to regulate Type One Energy’s proposed commercial fusion power plant near Oak Ridge.
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.