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
Nuclear Energy Conference & Expo (NECX)
September 8–11, 2025
Atlanta, GA|Atlanta Marriott Marquis
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
Jul 2025
Jan 2025
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
August 2025
Nuclear Technology
Fusion Science and Technology
July 2025
Latest News
DOE issues new NEPA rule and procedures—and accelerates DOME reactor testing
Meeting a deadline set in President Trump’s May 23 executive order “Reforming Nuclear Reactor Testing at the Department of Energy,” the DOE on June 30 updated information on its National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) rulemaking and implementation procedures and published on its website an interim final rule that rescinds existing regulations alongside new implementing procedures.
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.