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 Annual Conference
May 31–June 3, 2026
Denver, CO|Sheraton Denver
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
Dec 2025
Jul 2025
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
January 2026
Nuclear Technology
December 2025
Fusion Science and Technology
November 2025
Latest News
What’s the most difficult question you’ve been asked as a maintenance instructor?
Blye Widmar
"Where are the prints?!"
This was the final question in an onslaught of verbal feedback, comments, and critiques I received from my students back in 2019. I had two years of instructor experience and was teaching a class that had been meticulously rehearsed in preparation for an accreditation visit. I knew the training material well and transferred that knowledge effectively enough for all the students to pass the class. As we wrapped up, I asked the students how they felt about my first big system-level class, and they did not hold back.
“Why was the exam from memory when we don’t work from memory in the plant?” “Why didn’t we refer to the vendor documents?” “Why didn’t we practice more on the mock-up?” And so on.
N. M. Levitz, G. J. Vogel, E. L. Carls, E. Grosvenor, B. Kullen, D. Raue, W. Murphy
Nuclear Technology | Volume 6 | Number 2 | February 1969 | Pages 147-155
Technical Paper and Note | doi.org/10.13182/NT69-A28246
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
A total of 2.3 kg of PuF4 was fluorinated to PuF6 with elemental fluorine in a fluidized bed of alumina in three campaigns, each consisting of three separate fluorination runs followed by a fluorination-cleanup step in which any plutonium deposited in the lines and equipment was recovered. Each run involved 260 g of −325 mesh PuF4 powder; a single ∼6.5-kg bed of nominal 48–100 mesh alumina was used in each campaign. A 93% F2-7% N2 gas mixture, which was recycled, served as the fluidizing gas and reactant. The temperature of the fluidized alumina bed was increased incrementally to 550°C, and the total fluorination time for each run was 3 to 5 h. The PuF6 was collected in traps at ∼−65°C and subsequently was sorbed on NaF. Plutonium material balances were 97, 101, and 99%. Average production rates of PuF6 were 2.4 to 4.1 lb PuF6/(h ft2) but rates >6 lb PuF6/(h ft2) were attained in initial 30-min fluorination periods. Fluorine utilization efficiency (the ratio of fluorine reacted to that which could theoretically react based on equilibrium considerations) averaged 22, 17, and 28% although efficiencies near 100% were calculated for the earlier portions of a run, when large quantities of plutonium were present. Over 96% of the plutonium charged was recovered as PuF6 while ½% was discarded as waste in the alumina bed of the fluorinator. Less than 2% of the PuF6 was decomposed to PuF4 by radiation, and this was refluorinated and recovered without difficulty.