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
2025 ANS Winter Conference & Expo
November 9–12, 2025
Washington, DC|Washington Hilton
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
Oct 2025
Jul 2025
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
November 2025
Nuclear Technology
Fusion Science and Technology
October 2025
Latest News
Researchers use one-of-a-kind expertise and capabilities to test fuels of tomorrow
At the Idaho National Laboratory Hot Fuel Examination Facility, containment box operator Jake Maupin moves a manipulator arm into position around a pencil-thin nuclear fuel rod. He is preparing for a procedure that he and his colleagues have practiced repeatedly in anticipation of this moment in the hot cell.
Gerald R. Luetkehans, John Toman, Bennie G. DiBona
Nuclear Technology | Volume 27 | Number 4 | December 1975 | Pages 539-558
Technical Paper | Nuclear Explosive | doi.org/10.13182/NT75-A24334
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
Project Rio Blanco is a joint government-industry experiment utilizing nuclear explosives to stimulate gas production from thick, relatively impermeable, gas-bearing lenticular sand and shale sequences. Three 30-kt explosives spaced vertically in a single wellbore at intervals of 390 and 460 ft were detonated simultaneously on May 17, 1973. No significant adverse effects were experienced, and damage resulting from ground motion was as predicted. The initial reentry into the upper explosive region indicates that coales-cense of the top cavity and fracture region with the lower ones did not occur as expected. Reentry into the bottom cavity indicated that similarly, communication does not exist between the lower two chimneys. The fracture height of the upper region was about as predicted from previous experience with single-chimney geometry as was the cavity radius resulting from the bottom detonation. All indications are that yields were as predicted, and to date there is no valid explanation as to the lack of intercommunication between the fracture regions of the three explosives. Production test data from the top chimney indicated a reservoir capacity of only 0.73 md-ft, which is 6 to 10 times lower than expected. Subsequent testing of an evaluation well and other data lends further evidence that, although significant stimulation most surely occurred, the gas contained in the sandstones was much less than had been originally anticipated. Properties deduced from production test data from the bottom chimney are in much better agreement with predetonation estimates. Further investigations are required to fully evaluate the experiment.