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
December 2025
Fusion Science and Technology
November 2025
Latest News
The top 10 states of nuclear
The past few years have seen a concerted effort from many U.S. states to encourage nuclear development. The momentum behind nuclear-friendly policies has grown considerably, with many states repealing moratoriums, courting nuclear developers and suppliers, and in some cases creating advisory groups and road maps to push deployment of new nuclear reactors.
Janelle Bottom, David Wood, Tamzidul Mina, Savannah Bradley, Michal Rittikaidachar, Alexandria Miera, Jason Wheeler
Nuclear Science and Engineering | Volume 199 | Number 8 | August 2025 | Pages 1337-1350
Research Article | doi.org/10.1080/00295639.2024.2316948
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
Tank farm workers involved in nuclear cleanup activities perform physically demanding tasks, typically while wearing heavy personal protective equipment (PPE). Exoskeleton devices have the potential to bring considerable benefit to this industry but have not been thoroughly studied in the context of nuclear cleanup. In this paper, we examine the performance of exoskeletons during a series of tasks emulating jobs performed on tank farms while participants wore PPE commonly deployed by tank farm workers. The goal of this study was to evaluate the effects of commercially available lower-body exoskeletons on a user’s gait kinematics and user perceptions. Three participants each tested three lower-body exoskeletons in a 70-min protocol consisting of level treadmill walking, incline treadmill walking, weighted treadmill walking, a weight lifting session, and a hand tool dexterity task. Results were compared to a no exoskeleton baseline condition and evaluated as individual case studies. The three participants showed a wide spectrum of user preferences and adaptations toward the devices. Individual case studies revealed that some users quickly adapted to select devices for certain tasks while others remained hesitant to use the devices. Temporal effects on gait change and perception were also observed for select participants in device usage over the course of the device session. Device benefit varied between tasks, but no conclusive aggregate trends were observed across devices for all tasks. Evidence suggests that device benefits observed for specific tasks may have been overshadowed by the wide array of tasks used in the protocol.