scholarly journals Recent Topics of Nuclear Criticality Safety in the United States.

Author(s):  
Yuichi KOMURO
2021 ◽  
Vol 247 ◽  
pp. 17005
Author(s):  
Douglas G. Bowen ◽  
Travis M. Greene

The ANSI/ANS-8.1 standard, “Safety Standard for Operations with Fissionable Materials Outside Reactors,” has been available since 1964 as ASA N6.1-1964. In 1969, this standard was revised as ANSI N16.1-1969, “Nuclear Criticality Safety in Operations with Fissionable Materials Outside Reactors.” This version of the standard includes a variety of subcritical limits (SCLs) for uniform aqueous solutions and metals containing fissile nuclides for 233U, 235U, and 239Pu. Furthermore, SCLs are also included for uranium-water lattices. In the 1983 version of ANSI/ANS-8.1 (a revision of ANSI N16.1-1975), the suite of SCLs in the standard expanded to include 235U enrichment limits for homogeneous uranium-water mixtures and dry/damp oxides, uniform aqueous solutions of low-enriched uranium, and uniform aqueous mixtures of Pu(NO3)4 containing 240Pu, in addition to the SCLs included in ANSI N16.1-1969. The SCLs have changed little in subsequent revisions (ANSI/ANS-8.1-1998 and ANSI/ANS-8.1-2014). The ANSI/ANS-8.1-2014 standard is currently being revised to include new SCLs (uranium metal and compounds with enrichments up to 20 wt. % 235U) and possible updates to the current SCLs already in the standard, although these SCLs will not be available to the nuclear criticality safety community for a number of years. The bases for these SCLs were documented in journal articles such as Nuclear Science and Engineering, and the American Nuclear Society’s meeting transactions; however, the bases were ambiguous enough that sites and regulators in the United States are reluctant to endorse them for safety purposes. The purpose of this paper is to present the results of a comparison study for the SCLs in the ANSI/ANS-8.1-2014 standard using modern codes and cross sections (SCALE/ENDF/B-VIII) to provide some assurance about their quality (bias and bias uncertainty) for use in nuclear criticality safety applications.


Author(s):  
A. Hakam ◽  
J.T. Gau ◽  
M.L. Grove ◽  
B.A. Evans ◽  
M. Shuman ◽  
...  

Prostate adenocarcinoma is the most common malignant tumor of men in the United States and is the third leading cause of death in men. Despite attempts at early detection, there will be 244,000 new cases and 44,000 deaths from the disease in the United States in 1995. Therapeutic progress against this disease is hindered by an incomplete understanding of prostate epithelial cell biology, the availability of human tissues for in vitro experimentation, slow dissemination of information between prostate cancer research teams and the increasing pressure to “ stretch” research dollars at the same time staff reductions are occurring.To meet these challenges, we have used the correlative microscopy (CM) and client/server (C/S) computing to increase productivity while decreasing costs. Critical elements of our program are as follows:1) Establishing the Western Pennsylvania Genitourinary (GU) Tissue Bank which includes >100 prostates from patients with prostate adenocarcinoma as well as >20 normal prostates from transplant organ donors.


Author(s):  
Vinod K. Berry ◽  
Xiao Zhang

In recent years it became apparent that we needed to improve productivity and efficiency in the Microscopy Laboratories in GE Plastics. It was realized that digital image acquisition, archiving, processing, analysis, and transmission over a network would be the best way to achieve this goal. Also, the capabilities of quantitative image analysis, image transmission etc. available with this approach would help us to increase our efficiency. Although the advantages of digital image acquisition, processing, archiving, etc. have been described and are being practiced in many SEM, laboratories, they have not been generally applied in microscopy laboratories (TEM, Optical, SEM and others) and impact on increased productivity has not been yet exploited as well.In order to attain our objective we have acquired a SEMICAPS imaging workstation for each of the GE Plastic sites in the United States. We have integrated the workstation with the microscopes and their peripherals as shown in Figure 1.


2001 ◽  
Vol 15 (01) ◽  
pp. 53-87 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Rehfeld

Every ten years, the United States “constructs” itself politically. On a decennial basis, U.S. Congressional districts are quite literally drawn, physically constructing political representation in the House of Representatives on the basis of where one lives. Why does the United States do it this way? What justifies domicile as the sole criteria of constituency construction? These are the questions raised in this article. Contrary to many contemporary understandings of representation at the founding, I argue that there were no principled reasons for using domicile as the method of organizing for political representation. Even in 1787, the Congressional district was expected to be far too large to map onto existing communities of interest. Instead, territory should be understood as forming a habit of mind for the founders, even while it was necessary to achieve other democratic aims of representative government.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document