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.
Timo A. Vanttola, Markku K. Rajamäki
Nuclear Technology | Volume 85 | Number 1 | April 1989 | Pages 33-74
Technical Paper | Nuclear Safety | doi.org/10.13182/NT89-A34225
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
Some of the most frequently presented scenarios for the initial power excursion of the Chernobyl accident are evaluated based on computer simulations. The applied transient model uses one-dimensional descriptions of the reactor core and the main flow circuit. According to the simulations, a slow flow decrease caused by gradual slowing down of the four main circulation pumps could have initiated the accident only if the void reactivity coefficient had been considerably larger than the original Soviet figure. On the other hand, a faster flow reduction, such as pump cavitation or deliberate stopping of even some of the pumps, would have produced enough void for prompt criticality. However, this scenario is sensitive to the size of the void coefficient and to the amount of flow reduction. The most probable initiator was considered to be the positive scram caused by the graphite followers of the manual control rods. Such a mechanism would naturally have brought the additional reactivity to the bottom half of the reactor, and the timing of the power surge would have been the reported one. The simulations indicated that the positive scram was possible only because of the double-humped axial power profile that probably prevailed in the reactor before the accident. The simulations also demonstrated the inability of the shutdown system in this sequence.