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
Jun 2026
Jan 2026
2026
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
July 2026
Nuclear Technology
Fusion Science and Technology
Latest News
New York publishes paper on new nuclear options, launches Nuclear Reliability Backbone
New York’s ambitious efforts to add at least 5 gigawatts of new nuclear power raise several questions: How much will it cost the state, the federal government, and ratepayers? Where does private investment fit into the picture? What nuclear reactor designs should developers pursue?
To provide clarity and direction to these and other concerns, the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority and Department of Public Service issued the preliminary draft of its advanced nuclear policy options paper on June 12.
Joshua Kaizer
Nuclear Technology | Volume 190 | Number 1 | April 2015 | Pages 65-71
Technical Paper | Thermal Hydraulics | doi.org/10.13182/NT14-38
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
Empirical models are applicable over limited ranges of their predictor variables. The space defined by those ranges, the application domain, is the entire space over which the empirical model is applied. One important assumption is that the model’s predictive behavior is consistent over the entire application domain. This assumption is commonly made for critical heat flux (CHF) models when they are applied in reactor safety analysis. The intention of this work is to demonstrate that the current assessment methods used to justify this assumption may not always identify subregions in the application domain where the model’s predictive capability is degraded. This is accomplished by intentionally placing a nonconservative subregion in a CHF model and demonstrating that the current assessment methods are unable to identify that nonconservative subregion. As the existence of a nonconservative subregion may impact reactor safety analysis, a new method is proposed that does identify the nonconservative subregion. This new method is a multidimensional approach capable of demonstrating if the CHF model’s predictive behavior is likely due to random effects or is due to a degraded predictive capability in a given subregion.