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
Mar 2026
Jan 2026
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
April 2026
Nuclear Technology
February 2026
Fusion Science and Technology
Latest News
Swiss nuclear power and the case for long-term operation
Designed for 40 years but built to last far longer, Switzerland’s nuclear power plants have all entered long-term operation. Yet age alone says little about safety or performance. Through continuous upgrades, strict regulatory oversight, and extensive aging management, the country’s reactors are being prepared for decades of continued operation, in line with international practice.
M. F. Kennedy, A. B. Reynolds
Nuclear Technology | Volume 20 | Number 3 | December 1973 | Pages 149-160
Technical Paper | Reactor | doi.org/10.13182/NT73-A31354
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
Calculational models were developed for estimating the transport of sodium vapor and the relatively large (≥10-µm) fuel particles resulting from a fuel-coolant interaction to the secondary containment in an LMFBR core disruptive accident. Following the formation of a large sodium vapor bubble resulting from a fuel-coolant interaction, a potential sequence of events was analyzed. This analysis covers bubble condensation, bubble rise time, aerosol fallout during the bubble rise, gas flow rate through the cover, cover-gas escape during the bubble rise, bubble and cover-gas mixing, and aerosol escape to the secondary containment. Two parametric calculations were made for specified accident conditions for a 1000-MW(e) LMFBR conceptual design. The bubble did not condense in this analysis. Results of the analysis indicated that 2 and 10% of the fuel that took part in the fuel-coolant interaction eventually reached the secondary containment for the two assumed flow areas through the cover, i.e., 0.1 and 1.0 ft2, respectively.