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
Fusion Energy
This division promotes the development and timely introduction of fusion energy as a sustainable energy source with favorable economic, environmental, and safety attributes. The division cooperates with other organizations on common issues of multidisciplinary fusion science and technology, conducts professional meetings, and disseminates technical information in support of these goals. Members focus on the assessment and resolution of critical developmental issues for practical fusion energy applications.
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
May 2024
Jan 2024
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
June 2024
Nuclear Technology
Fusion Science and Technology
Latest News
Bipartisan Fusion Energy Act pushes for regulatory clarity
Sen. Alex Padilla (D., Calif.) introduced the Fusion Energy Act (S. 4151) last month with a bipartisan group of cosponsors—John Cornyn (R., Texas), Cory Booker (D., N.J.), Todd Young (R., Ind.), and Patty Murray (D., Wash.). The legislation would codify the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s regulatory authority over commercial fusion energy systems to streamline the creation of clear federal regulations that will support the development of commercial fusion power plants—and would require a report within one year on a study of risk- and performance-based, design-specific licensing frameworks for “mass-manufactured fusion machines.
“Congress must do everything in its power to ensure continued U.S. leadership in developing commercial fusion energy facilities,” said Padilla as he introduced the bill. “The Fusion Energy Act would provide regulatory certainty for investors as the NRC develops and streamlines frameworks for such facilities.”
Vincent Bouineau, Gilles Bénier, Dominique Pêcheur, Joël Thomazet, Antoine Ambard, Martine Blat
Nuclear Technology | Volume 170 | Number 3 | June 2010 | Pages 444-459
Technical Paper | Materials for Nuclear Systems | doi.org/10.13182/NT10-A10330
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
The waterside corrosion kinetics of Zircaloy-4 are accelerated in pressurized water reactors (PWRs) in comparison with autoclaves. Beyond this comparison, an enhancement of oxidation rate - called phase III - can be observed from the third reactor cycle. This results in significant oxide thicknesses at high burnups. Several hypotheses have been devised to explain this phase III of Zircaloy-4 in PWRs, but none have been fully validated. In an attempt to better understand the oxidation acceleration phenomenon affecting Zircaloy-4 in PWRs, we decided to analyze the in-reactor corrosion of Zircaloy-4 by quantifying the acceleration factor KPWR. This was defined as the multiplication factor to be applied to the oxidation rate in an autoclave to obtain the kinetics in a PWR (with an equivalent metal-oxide interfacial temperature and taking into account both the power and thermal-hydraulic histories). This analysis was based on oxide thicknesses formed on Zircaloy-4 cladding containing UO2 or mixed-oxide fuel and having been irradiated for one to six cycles in French PWRs. This analysis enabled us to demonstrate the following:1. KPWR is always >1, which clearly shows an acceleration in the Zircaloy-4 oxidation kinetics in a reactor.2. KPWR is equivalent to [approximately]2 for rods having been subjected to one or two cycles.3. Above two reactor cycles, KPWR increases with the level of irradiation and ends up reaching values close to 6. This KPWR increase is representative of phase III.4. KPWR and its variations are not directly related to the increase in the fluence. Phase III is not associated with a burnup threshold.5. Phase III seems to be related to a threshold that is a function of the oxide layer thickness.6. The precipitation of hydrides could be used to define a threshold that is a function of the oxide layer thickness above which phase III occurs. This hypothesis is consistent with the thickness at which KPWR increases. Furthermore, phase III observed is consistent with the known increase in the oxidation kinetics of samples with hydride rims in an autoclave.Therefore, acceleration of the oxidation kinetics in a reactor (compared with an autoclave) is not constant but does seem to be a complex function of different variables such as time, temperature, and both the thermal and neutron fluxes. Furthermore, the precipitation of hydrides seems to be a first-order factor triggering phase III of Zircaloy-4 in a reactor.