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 Nuclear Energy Conference & Expo (NECX)
August 24–27, 2026
Dallas, TX|Hilton Anatole
Latest Magazine Issues
Jul 2026
Jan 2026
2026
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
September 2026
Nuclear Technology
August 2026
Fusion Science and Technology
Latest News
$40M investment to spur new nuclear developments in Idaho and Wyoming
On Monday, the U.S. Department of Commerce announced that its Economic Development Administration (EDA) intends to award $31 million to the Intermountain-West Nuclear Energy Corridor (INEC) Tech Hub. The Idaho Advanced Energy Consortium (IAEC), the group that leads the INEC Tech Hub, subsequently announced that matching donations from its stakeholder partners will bring the total investment up to $40 million.
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.