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
Isotopes & Radiation
Members are devoted to applying nuclear science and engineering technologies involving isotopes, radiation applications, and associated equipment in scientific research, development, and industrial processes. Their interests lie primarily in education, industrial uses, biology, medicine, and health physics. Division committees include Analytical Applications of Isotopes and Radiation, Biology and Medicine, Radiation Applications, Radiation Sources and Detection, and Thermal Power Sources.
Meeting Spotlight
International Conference on Mathematics and Computational Methods Applied to Nuclear Science and Engineering (M&C 2025)
April 27–30, 2025
Denver, CO|The Westin Denver Downtown
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
Apr 2025
Jan 2025
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
June 2025
Nuclear Technology
Fusion Science and Technology
May 2025
Latest News
INL’s new innovation incubator could link start-ups with an industry sponsor
Idaho National Laboratory is looking for a sponsor to invest $5 million–$10 million in a privately funded innovation incubator to support seed-stage start-ups working in nuclear energy, integrated energy systems, cybersecurity, or advanced materials. For their investment, the sponsor gets access to what INL calls “a turnkey source of cutting-edge American innovation.” Not only are technologies supported by the program “substantially de-risked” by going through technical review and development at a national laboratory, but the arrangement “adds credibility, goodwill, and visibility to the private sector sponsor’s investments,” according to INL.
M. Guyot, P. Gubernatis, C. Suteau, R. Le Tellier, J. Lecerf
Nuclear Technology | Volume 185 | Number 1 | January 2014 | Pages 21-38
Technical Paper | Fission Reactors | doi.org/10.13182/NT12-123
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
To consolidate the safety assessment for liquid-metal fast breeder reactors (LMFBRs), hypothetical core disruptive accident (HCDA) sequences have been extensively studied over the past decades. Numerous analyses of the so-called initiating phase (or primary phase) of a HCDA have been made with the safety analysis system code SAS4A. The SAS4A accident analysis code requires that subassemblies or groups of subassemblies be represented together as independent channels. For simulating a severe accident sequence, a subassembly-to-channel assignment procedure has to be implemented to produce the consistent SAS4A input decks. Generally, one uses imposed criteria over relevant reactor parameters to determine the subassembly-to-channel arrangement. The multiple-assembly-per-channel approach introduces corewide coherency effects, which can affect the reactivity balance and therefore the overall accident development. In this paper, a subassembly-to-channel assignment procedure based on the subassembly power-to-flow ratio is presented and implemented to generate the SAS4A input decks over a range of parameter values. The corresponding SAS4A calculations have been performed on a large LMFBR. The purpose of the present series of calculations is to investigate the magnitude of errors encountered in the analysis of the initiating phase related to the subassembly-to-channel arrangement selection, by comparison with a one-subassembly-per-channel reference solution. It appears that a refinement in the channel arrangement substantially reduces corewide coherency effects. Analysis of the calculations also suggests that an accurate representation of the scenario requires the number of channels to be on approximately the same order of magnitude as the total number of subassemblies. Numerical results are examined to provide the reader with quantitative measurements of bias related to subassembly-to-channel arrangement.