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 Annual Conference
May 31–June 3, 2026
Denver, CO|Sheraton Denver
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
Dec 2025
Jul 2025
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
January 2026
Nuclear Technology
December 2025
Fusion Science and Technology
November 2025
Latest News
What’s the most difficult question you’ve been asked as a maintenance instructor?
Blye Widmar
"Where are the prints?!"
This was the final question in an onslaught of verbal feedback, comments, and critiques I received from my students back in 2019. I had two years of instructor experience and was teaching a class that had been meticulously rehearsed in preparation for an accreditation visit. I knew the training material well and transferred that knowledge effectively enough for all the students to pass the class. As we wrapped up, I asked the students how they felt about my first big system-level class, and they did not hold back.
“Why was the exam from memory when we don’t work from memory in the plant?” “Why didn’t we refer to the vendor documents?” “Why didn’t we practice more on the mock-up?” And so on.
Amir Ali, Kerry J. Howe, Edward D. Blandford
Nuclear Technology | Volume 204 | Number 3 | December 2018 | Pages 318-329
Technical Paper | doi.org/10.1080/00295450.2018.1480212
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
A series of experiments on vertical head loss modules or columns to measure conventional and chemical head loss was carried out to support the resolution of Generic Safety Issue 191 for the Vogtle nuclear power plant (NPP). The head loss (conventional and chemical) was measured on multi-constituent fibrous debris beds of different particulate-to-fiber ratios (η). The debris beds were generated on a horizontal screen following the new procedure developed at the University of New Mexico and are summarized herein. The generated debris beds have been shown to produce repeatable and stable conventional head loss (CHL) and have the ability to detect chemical surrogates. Prototypical Vogtle NPP containment debris materials were used to form three different particulate-to-fiber–ratio (η) debris beds: 6.89 (thin bed), 2 (intermediate bed), and 1.15 (thick bed). The particulates were presented as 90% epoxy paint, 5% inorganic zinc, and 5% latent debris dirt by mass. The obtained results show that the measured CHL increased as the particulate mass increased in the debris beds. The average measured CHL values were 9.37, 6.4, and 5.66 H2O'' for η = 1.15, 2, and 6.89 debris beds, respectively. The debris beds with η = 2 and 1.15 were selected for the chemical head loss experiments.
Standard aluminum (Al) chemical precipitates with specific batches were introduced to the head loss columns, and chemical head loss was measured. Precipitates prepared following the WCAP-16530-NP-A procedure [Lane et al., WCAP-16530-NP-A, “Evaluation of Post-Accident Chemical Effects in Containment Sump Fluids to Support GSI-191,” Westinghouse Electric Company (2008)] or formed in situ by injecting metal salts under two different rates (0.75 and 7.5 mL/min) were tested. The results show that the thin debris bed (~10 mm) was more sensitive to the chemical precipitates prepared following the WCAP procedure compared to the intermediate debris bed (~25 mm) and thick debris bed (~55 mm). The measured chemical head loss was 0.35, 0.1, and 0.02 H2O''/mg of Al filtered by the debris beds. The in situ injection method has shown higher measured chemical head loss per unit mass of filtered precipitates than the WCAP surrogates for the debris beds of η = 2 (intermediate bed) and 1.15 (thick bed). Also, the results show a nonconclusive effect on the injection rate of metal salt to form in situ chemical precipitates on the measured chemical head loss.