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.
Aerospace Nuclear Science & Technology
Organized to promote the advancement of knowledge in the use of nuclear science and technologies in the aerospace application. Specialized nuclear-based technologies and applications are needed to advance the state-of-the-art in aerospace design, engineering and operations to explore planetary bodies in our solar system and beyond, plus enhance the safety of air travel, especially high speed air travel. Areas of interest will include but are not limited to the creation of nuclear-based power and propulsion systems, multifunctional materials to protect humans and electronic components from atmospheric, space, and nuclear power system radiation, human factor strategies for the safety and reliable operation of nuclear power and propulsion plants by non-specialized personnel and more.
2020 ANS Annual Meeting
June 8–11, 2020
Online Virtual Meeting
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
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
Fusion Science and Technology
ITER reaches major construction milestone
The 1,250-ton cryostat base is positioned over the ITER tokamak pit for installation. The base is the heaviest lift of the tokamak assembly. Photo: ITER
ITER, the world’s largest international scientific collaboration, is beginning the assembly of the fusion reactor tokamak that will include 12 essential hardware systems provided by US ITER, which is managed by Oak Ridge National Laboratory. The first major machine element to be installed is the 1,250-ton base of the cryostat, which was placed into the tokamak assembly pit on May 26. ITER is located in southeastern France.
Robert W. Carlsen, Paul P. H. Wilson
Nuclear Technology | Volume 195 | Number 3 | September 2016 | Pages 288-300
Technical Paper | dx.doi.org/10.13182/NT15-138
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
Because of the diversity of fuel cycle simulator modeling assumptions, direct comparison and benchmarking can be difficult. In 2012 the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development completed a benchmark study that is perhaps the most complete published comparison performed. Despite this, various results from the simulators were often significantly different because of inconsistencies in modeling decisions involving reprocessing strategies, refueling behavior, reactor end-of-life handling, etc. This work identifies and quantifies the effects of selected modeling choices that may sometimes be taken for granted in the fuel cycle simulation domain. Four scenarios are compared using combinations of either fleet-based or individually modeled reactors with either monthly or quarterly (3-month) time steps. The scenarios approximate a transition from the current U.S. once-through light water reactor fleet to a full sodium fast reactor fuel cycle. The Cyclus fuel cycle simulator’s plug-in facility capability along with its market-like dynamic material routing allow it to be used as a level playing field for comparing the scenarios. When they are under supply-constraint pressure, the four cases exhibit noticeably different behavior. Fleet-based modeling is more efficient in supply-constrained environments at the expense of losing insight on issues such as realistically suboptimal fuel distribution and challenges in reactor refueling cycle staggering. Finer-grained time steps also enable more efficient material use in supply-constrained environments resulting in much lower standing inventories of separated Pu. Large simulations with fleet-based reactors run much more quickly than their individual reactor counterparts. Gaining a better understanding of how these and other modeling choices affect fuel cycle dynamics will enable making more deliberate decisions with respect to trade-offs such as computational investment versus realism.