ML20212C964
| ML20212C964 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | University of Missouri-Columbia |
| Issue date: | 02/27/1987 |
| From: | Alger D, Meyer W MISSOURI, UNIV. OF, COLUMBIA, MO |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM), Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8703040034 | |
| Download: ML20212C964 (166) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:Research Reactor Facility UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI February 27, 1987 Research Park Columbia, Missouri 65211 Telephone (314) 882-4211 Submittal in accordance with 10CFR50.64. Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 Attention: Document Control Desk
REFERENCE:
Docket 50-186 University of Missouri Research Reactor License R-103
SUBJECT:
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION SUPPORTING THE UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI RESEARCH REACTOR'S UNIQUE PURPOSE EXEMPTION REQUEST. The staff at the University of Missouri Research Reactor (MURR) was requested, in letters dated December 20, 1986 and February 11, 1987, to submit additional information in support of our request for a unique purpose exemption for MURR. The responses to the four questions posed in the December 30, 1986 letter and the single question asked in the February 11, 1987 letter follow in a format where each of the Commission's questions is stated and immediately followed by MURR's response to the question. QUESTION 1 FROM LETTER DATED DECEMBER 30, 1986 QUESTION 1: An important justification for a unique purpose exemption is that the reactor program contributes significantly to the national interest and cannot be accomplished without the use of HEU fuel. In 1984 a Major Materials Facility Committee of the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences reviewed major neutron research facilities in the United States. Please provide us with any comments or recommendations of this Committee, or any comparable group, with respect to your facility, that may establish your reactor program's contribution to the national interest. 8703040034 870227 /n PDR ADOCK 05000186 f't/ P PDR W ut
+a t(l COLUMBIA KANSAS CITY ROLLA ST. LOUIS i, an equal opportunity institution
- .. - - . . . . -.. - ., ~ .
, Di rector.'
- February 27,'1987-Page 2 ANSWER: ,
-Th'e University of Missouri Research Reactor'(MURR) is a nationally and internationally recognized research resource. Substantial evidence of the MURR
. programs' contribution. to the national interest will be presented in the following paragraphs. That:more supporting evidence is not available is because MURR hasL not felt a strong need to solicit plaudits' from its users; when the steadily'
' increasing demand.of users for the reactor was a sufficient positive statement.
~
~
I The staff at MURR ' feels that organizations choose to deal with our Facility because of the uniqueness of our Facility, the' quality of the resoured and the
- quality of the results. The fact that MURR has developed nationally significant .
._research programs is reflected by the quality and quantity of productive long
< term interactions with a diverse user group, including educational institutions, national laboratories, and . industries. The national significance of the programs at MURR have not gone unnoticed despite our practice of nonsolicitation of approv-
- al. The Department of Energy has recognized the nationally significant contri- r butions of MURR over its operating history. . This recognition is reflected in
. passages from Department of Energy correspondence as follows:
l "The 10 MW University of Missouri research reactor
..is the largest and probably the most versatile reactor in the university community." (Harold H. Young, letter
=
' dated June 4,-1982, see ENCLOSURE A).
"The unique characteristics of the 10 megawatt research facility makes the university research reactor a national asset in the field of neutron scattering and ,
diffraction research and other basic physical, biologi-
- cal and biomedical areas of science." (Alvin W.
Trivelpiece.. letter dated October 25, 1982, see ENCLOSURE B). 4 J ! "The Missouri Research Reactor has certainly established an enviable record in research, education and public service during its 20 year lifetime." (Richard E. Stephens, letter dated September 9, 1986, see ENCLOSURE C). , j A sampling of several years of Department of Energy supported Reactor Sharing programs is attached (ENCLOSURE D) to illustrate the magnitude of MURR's inter-actions with a national array of user organizations. 4 f
d 1 L Director
. February. 27, 1987 Page 3 The National Research Council of the National Academy of. Science has recog-
. nized the significance of MURR as a national resource for research in two separate-t committee reports.
- 1) The National Research Council report on The Major Facilities for Materials Research and Related Disciplines (1984) lists MURR and MIT with the five national laboratories as national centers for neutron research l (ENCLOSURE'E).
-2) The National Research' Council report on The Current Status of Neutron Scattering Research and Facilities in the United States again lists MURR as one of two major university reactor facilities along with the five '
national laboratories (ENCLOSURE F). Other unsolicited recognition of the national significance of MURR programs have appeared in the following publications:
- 1) Physics Today (January 1985), " Neutron Scattering in Condensed-Matter
> Physics." MURR was listed as one of four user Facilities available to the nation's researchers (ENCLOSURE G).
- 2) Review of. Scientific Instrumentation (April 1984), " National Facilities i For Research in the Physics of Condensed Matter." MURR again is listed -
as one of four national Facilities, with Brookhaven National Laboratory i and Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ENCLOSURE H). s
-3) Focus on Research in Energy, Health and Environment, an ORNL publication, 4 (August 1986) " USA's Most Powerful University Reactor Enters Third Decade.". The article was written to recognize the 20 years of service that MURR has provided to local, state and national users. The article
' describes several of MURR's nationally significant programs. (ENCLOSURE I) The MURR has the unique capabilities (high flux and high fluence) to provide backup to the National Laboratories for the production of medical radioisotopes. With the recent shutdown of the High Flux Isotope Reactor at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, MURR has been requested to produce radioisotopes that are critical to several of ORNL's national programs (ENCLOSURE J). MURR has received letters from the Department of Physics, Purdue University and the Department of Materials Science, University of California, Berkeley, expressing their view of the importance of the MURR Facility to their programs - (ENCLOSURES K & L). Dr. Luis W. Alvarez of Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory has ex-
- pressed his intent to move his iridium study relating to the demise of dinosaurs
~
- to MURR after the Berkeley reactor shuts down.
Two external reviews of the MURR Facility that were solicited in 1980 as part j of a report to the Vice President for Academic Affairs, reflect the opinion that MURR is a national resource. 1
- u. ee , .-4. , . - , m., ,-,m,, yr - , , _ _ _ _ - , -- ,-, ,. - ,-,. ,, e. . - - . . - , . _ _ . - , _ _ . , -,, - , , _ , , - - _ _ , _ _ , , . _ , . ,,,1.,.w ,- , - - , , ,
i-Director February 27, 1987-L - Page 4
- 3. . .
' One of the reviewers, Dr. John King, Nuclear Engineering Department, Uni-
' versity of Michigan, stated that "the scientific potential of MURR is coming to
- fruition, and certainly in some areas already operates at a "world class" level, 4
capable of competing with the best 7 or.8 neutron centers in the world." He wrote j further that "the operating ~ spirit of MURR today is to maintain a robust mixture of basic research, academic service and commercial enterprise. ' This is a unique combination, quite.different from that of national laboratories and any academic h institution to my knowledge. In sqy opinion it is basic to the present success of the MURR program." (ENCLOSURE M) 4
'A second reviewer, Dr. David L. Price, Director, IPNS Program, Argonne National Laboratory made the following observation " ... .
it is also very
;. important to maintain strong ties with the national and international scientific community. The program at MURR.has the potential for being front-rank in this j' community (it is already in some areas) . . ." (ENCLOSURE N)
Very graphic examples of many of MURR's unique qualities and capabilities are captured in the response to the National Research Council's questionnaire dated
;. October 30, 1986 (ENCLOSURE 0). The highlights of MURR accomplishments and programs include many national first-of-a-kind programs and programs unique to-MURR. One recent most-cited Physical-Science Article involved the use of the MURR Facility to determine the structure of a newly developed magnetic material, magn'aquench (ENCLOSURES P & Q).
Recently (MURR's 20th Anniversary), MURR received congratulatory commenda-tions from both the state and city in which MURR is located. These' commendations reflect-the importance of the Facility to the state of Missouri and the city of i Columbia. They also reflect pride in MURR's accomplishments both locally and on a national level (ENCLOSURES R & S). Attached to this response are details of the most recent National Research Council Committee Meeting (February 2-4,1987) to evaluate the need for university ! reactors.(ENCLOSURE T). These comments are responses by the MURR attendees to . this workshop on University Reactors. In this respect they may not be objective, however, they are very enlightening. The final paper generated by the National Research Council as a result of this workshop is not yet available, however, the
- staff at MURR feels it will also support our contention that the MURR should be 4
considered a national asset and provide the basis to be granted a unique purpose
, exemption. Again, although this paper is not yet available, the Commission may
- wish-to include this report (when it is available) in its evaluation process in deciding the issue of a unique purpose exemption for the MURR.
A review of the Physics Department at the University of Missouri in October j 1985 by a team including William F. Brinkman, Vice President of Research, Sandia i National Laboratories, George H. Vineyard, Brookhaven National Laboratory, and i Robert L. Wild, University of California, Riverside, had the following to say t; about the national significance of MURR: 1
- 1. "Overall our impression of the research of the department is that it is of
, . high quality. The presence of a first class research reactor allows the depart-
- ment to create a central activity of first-rate research that represents its
- t. !
r, ,- < -. a -e---- -...+,..~,.,,,a - -
. - .~ - - . - ,% ,e--, , , - - - - , - - - , - . . -,-.-m-,m.-,y,wr,, 4 w y.,.v,,,- .yvm-
Director February 27, 1987 Page 5 core strength. This Facility naturally leads to a strong emphasis on condensed matter physics. The work on structural studies of Lithium, magnetically hard materials, and absorbed films is all excellent work involving the use of tMi Facility or of others like it at the national laboratories. The reactor on campus may soon become the only operating reactor on a university campus where graduatg students are regularly trained and as such is a unique national resource." (ENCLOSURE U) The concluding comment in Brinkman's review of the Physics Department contains a message that the Commission may want to consider in determining the uniqueness of a research reactor on a university campus. The message (or warning) is developed further in the National Research Council's report Physics Through The 1990's (ENCLOSURE V is a condensed summary appearing in PHYSICS TODAY, April 1986). The message is in two parts:
- 1) "It happens that more than half of the nation's basic research is carried out within universities, where 53% of PhD physicists work, and that most basic research in physics is done not by teams at large facilities and national laboratories, but by small groups in their own labs, most often in universities." This message is generic in nature regarding university research reactors, but points out the danger in weighing too heavily the strengths and abilities of the national laboratories with respect to their ability to contribute to the nation's technical future well-being.
In other words, national laboratories may not be the appropriate yard-stick to use when measuring the national significance and contributions of university research programs.
- 2) "The picture is complicated further by the " graying of physics" -- the fact that physicists everywhere in the U.S. (including the national laboratories) represent an aging population." The future contributions of the national laboratories depend on the vital role of a world class research reactor on a university campus. National laboratories tend to
" consume" PhD researchers instead of producing them. There is no substitute for the research freedom and hands-on experience afforded with a world class reactor located at a major university. The MURR is one of these unique Facilities that can supply the national laboratories with the PhD's necessary to keep the U. S. on the leading edge of science and engineering.
The University of Missouri recently had the opportunity to have Dixie Lee Ray tour the Research Reactor Facility and give the invited Croft Lecture to the College of Engineering. She answered a student's question after her lecture that paraphrased the first question in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission December 30, 1987 letter. When asked:
"Can the research done at the University of Missouri Research Reactor justify the risks of using highly enriched uranium fuel?"
Dixie Lee Ray answered:
"The research is priceless and the risks are minimal." (ENCLOSURE W)
Director. February 27, 1987 Page 6 QUESTIONS 2 AND 3 FROM LETTER DATED DECEMBER 30, 1986 QUESTION 2: Provide a quantitative discussion which demonstrates that your reactor core is cf special design and could not perform its intended function without using HEU fuel. Discuss whether the reactor could a ntinue to provide adequate support for the University's programs if LEU fuel were to be used. Provide the bases for these determinations. QUESTION 3: Research projects which are based on neutron flux levels or spectra attainable only with HEU fuel can be considered as a basis for a unique purpose exemption. Provide quantitative estimates, and the bases therefore, of the impact on your programs resulting from changes in neutron flux densities, fluences, and/or neutron spectra if LEU fuel were substituted for HEU fuel. Address LEU fuels currently available and any LEU fuels expected to be available within several years. ANSWER TO QUESTIONS 2 AND 3: As stated in our September 26, 1986 Unique Purpose exemption request: MURR has a reactor core of special design that could not perform its intended function without using HEU fuel. We quantitatively calculated that the highest uranium density LEU fuel that is currently available, U 3Si2-Al with 4.8 g U/cm3, can pro-vide only 63% of the minimum critical mass required for a six day operating cycle at 10 MW. The cdculation was based on the actual minimum grams of U-235 required in our current HEU fuel elements and still be critical at 10 MW with equilibrium xenon and control rods fully withdrawn. This calculation did not include any additional U-235 needed to make up for the negative reactivity of the additional U-238 in the LEU. In response to the second question, we will expand our quan-titative analysis to include technically feasible LEU fuels. To perform this analysis some assumptions need to be made and their bases given. e The MURR needs to operate at 10 MW and provide a peak thermal flux of 6 x 1014 n/cm2 sec. for over 85% of the total time to provide adequate support for the University's programs. (
Reference:
Letter from MURR to NRC dated September 26,1986) e The MURR core design provides practically no flexibility for changing the core geometry. (
Reference:
" Conversion of Research and Test Reactors To Low-Enriched Uranium (LEU) Fuel", HEARING before the Subcommittee on Energy Development and Applications . . . , pages 711, 717 from NUREG/CR-3666) 3 e The highest estimated practical density for LEU is 7.0 g U/cm . (Refer-ence: Use and Development of Low and Medium Flux Research Reactors, Proceedings of an International Symposium (1984), Cambridge, Massachusetts, pages 141-143) e The safety margins and fuel reliability should not be lower than for the current design based on HEU.
Director e4 February 27, 1987 Page 7
-For comparison purposes four fuel types were looked at. The first fuel type is our recently completed new HEU fuel design which is being reviewed by the Nuclear
- Regulatory Commission. The second is our currently used HEU core, which has been in use since 1972 and serves as the benchmark for our computer modeling. The third
.is a l_EU core loaded to 4.8 g U/cm3 , which is the highest LEU loading presently available. The last core-is a LEU core loaded to 7.0 g U/cm 3
, which is the'esti-mated highest LEU loading practical. These calculations were made using our bench-marked AMPX-II and BOLD VENTURE IV code systems (
Reference:
"MURR Upgrade Neutron-ics Analysis Using AMPX-II/ BOLD VENTURE IV Computation System Benchmarked To The Destructive Analysis of Fuel Element 775F3," MURR Internal Report, University of Missouri Research Reacteor Facility, Upgrade Group, September 1,1986, in NRC file under Docket 50-186) The cross sections were produced starting with a 27 energy group library and collapsed to four energy group cross sections using the appro-priate modules from AMPX-II. The cross sections were then used in our two dimen-sional (R-Z) four energy group HURR BOLD VENTURE IV model to give the keff, flux and power distributions.
BOLD VENTURE RESULTS FOR HEU AND LEU CORES : Core HEU HEU LEU LEU Fuel Type UAlx UAlx U3 Si2 U3 Si U Loading 3.00 1.55 4.8 7.0 (g/cm )3 U-235 10.16 Kg 6.2 Kg 4.08 Kg 5.96 Kg U-238 0.57 Kg 0.35 Kg 16.2 Kg 23.6 Kg keff(a) 1.118 1.096 0.968(c) 1.003(c) Core 3200 MWD (b) 1200 MWD 0 MWD (c) 0 MWD (c) Lifetime U-235 input 10.5 Kg 17.1 Kg no power history is for 3300 MWD /YR possible for LEU core l l U-235 in 6.3 Kg 12.9 Kg l spent fuel for 3300 MWD /YR (a) Based on code results for xenon free, control rods fully withdrawn, and 110 F; and corrected to agree with experimental benchmark by subtracting 0.018. (b) Based on peak burnup of 3.0 x 1021 fissions /cm3 . (c) The 4.8 g/cm3 core cannot go critical and the 7.0 g/cm 3core may or may not be able to just get critical with no xenon or samarium. l
Director February 27, 1987 Page 8 Neither the currently available LEU (4.8 g U/cm3 ) nor the estimated highest practical density LEU (7.0 g U/cm )3 are capable of producing any power in the MURR reactor. The results for them have been compared against the current HEU fuel (1.55 g U/cm3 ) and our new core design (3.0 g U/cm3 ). The reactor power multi-plied by the operatir.g time equals the energy produced by the reactor. It is measured in MWD (Mega Watt-Days) units. 1.26 grams of U-235 is used up (fissioned or transformed to U-236) per MWD of energy produced. The grams U-235 needed in the fuel cycle is always greater than the 1.26 g U-235 used up per MWD because the usable U-235 in the fuel cycle is only the excess grams in the fuel element greater than the amount required to be critical with equilibrium xenon and control rods fully withdrawn out of the core. Thus the heavily loaded HEU core can reduce the amount of HEU needed in the fuel cycle from the current 5.15 g U-235/ MWD to 3.28 g U-235/ MWD. The University of Missouri programs at MURR cannot be supported using a LEU core due to the inability of the LEU cores to produce any power or significant flux level. The research programs as described in our September 26, 1986 submittal are based on-the high flux and fluence which is only achievable with a high power density and an operating schedule greater than 85% of the total time available. The inability to produce any neutron flux makes a discussion of the differences in neutron spectra from HEU to LEU as asked for in the third question pointless. QUESTION 4 FROM LETTER DATED DECEMBER 30, 1986 QUESTION 4. Provide any supplemental information that you believe has a signifi-cant bearing on the viability of your reactor programs if you were required to convert to LEU fuel. ANSWER: Any supplemental information is insignificant compared to the answer to the second question. QUESTION FROM LETTER DATED FEBRUARY 11, 1987 10 CFR 50.64(b)(3) requires that any licensee granted a unique pur-pose exemption from the use of LEU fuel must use HEU fuel of enrich-ment as close to 20% as is available and acceptable to the Commission. If fuel of any enrichment from 20% to 93% were available and you were granted a unique purpose exemption, what would be the lowest enrich-ment fuel that your reactor could use and still reasonably accomplish its primary projects, programs, or commercial activities? In your answer, please justify your final choice of enrichment based upon the physical and technical limitations of your reactor and its supporting programs. l
' Directer February 27, 1987 Page 9 ANSWER: The staff at the University of Missouri Research Reactor (MURR), in formu-lating its initial request for a Unique Purpose exemption, did not overlook the implications of 10CFR50.64(b)(3), with regard .to utilizing HEU fuel of enrichment as close to 20% as available and acceptable to the Commission [ medium enriched uranium (MEU)]. The staff interpreted this paragraph to be an issue that would be addressed after the unique purpose determination Dy the Commission. We feel that upon closer inspection of 10CFR50.64(b)(3), the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) will agree with our interpretation. The question of the applicability of a MEU fuel at MURR is no triv'ial analyt-ical task and has no direct bearing with respect to whether or not our facility should be granted a unique purpose exemption as defined in 10CFR50.2. We feel that it is appropriate to have the unique purpose determination made prior to expending considerable rescurces to evaluate the issue of MEU fuel avail-able and acceptable to the Commission (as defined in 10CFR50.2). A thorough fuel design evaluation will be required to determine what enrichment of MEU, if any, would be feasible for our reactor to continue our present and currently proposed activities. We believe the Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has underestimated the magnitude and complexity of a MEU fuel for use at the MURR. Having recently submitted a new fuel design to the Nuclear Regulatory Com-mission, MURR staff has a very good feel for the type of questions that have to be answered and the magnitude of the analyses involved after you have already com-pleted the arduods task of proving a viable fuel type and loading density. The analyses have to show: there are no unreviewed safety questions, that the fuel will meet the technical specifications or support a revision to technical specifications, and that the other safety analyses in the Hazards Summary Report are still appli-cable or are redone. To perform these analyses requires several different computer codes and code systems and a staff with the training and experience to use them. The following is just part of the work involved:
- Determine the appropriate multigroup cross sections for all the materials in the reactor and fuel for each fuel type and enrichment to be analyzed. Correct cross sections and nodel dimensions are the basis for the criticality and power distribution analysis. Cross sections are dependent on neutron spectrum which changes with fuel loading and enrichment.
- Perform static two and three dimensional neutronics calculations using a multigroup diffusion code system to determine criticality, flux and power distributions for all possible loadings, e Perform fuel depletion studies to determine fuel lifetimes, and flux and power distributions as a function of different power histories on the eight fuel elements that make up the MURR core.
- Perform thermohydraulic analyses for the various core loadings that look like they may work after completing the above analyses on them.
This is to insure the core design meets the safety limits for our reactor.
Director February 27, 1987 Page 10-
- _ Perform reactivity transient analyses for core (s) that meet the requirements of the above analyses. This is needed to verify the fuel design meets the safety analyses assumptions in the Hazards Summary Report, such as the maximum step insertion of reactivity, that will not cause fuel damage.
Based on the recently submitted new fuel design study, MURR staff estimates that a similar design study required to answer your February 11, 1987 question would require approximately 18 man-months and $30,000 in computer funds. Both the time and cost would be much greater if we did not have the experience and codes from the previous study. If a MEU fuel type is available that is acceptable to the Commission, this type of study could be performed but at the expense of delay-ing other major MURR programs that are of national interest. If the Commission determines the study is critical enough to justify the expense, it should consider funding both the personnel and computer costs under the provisions of " Federal Government funding .for conversion" as defined in 10CFR50.2. Consideration of a fuel of enrichment other than the current HEU is attendant to determining the feasiblity of conversion to MEU. Referencing pages 6515 and 6516 of the Federal Register, Vol. 51, No. 37, Tuesday, February 28, 1986: "In the definitions of 10CFR50.2, the Commission sets forth its views on elements to be considered in determining the Federal Governments obligations to provide funding for conversion-related activities. The funding could include, but is not necessarily limited or extended to . . . . (6) reasonable costs attendant to preparing analyses and presenting documentation required by the final rule or necessary to obtain Nuclear Regulatory Commission approval for the conversion process" to a fuel acceptable by the Commission (as defined in 10CFR50.2). The MURR staff feels the information supplied above sufficiently answers the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's request for additional information. However, if any additional information or clarification is needed to support the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in concluding that MURR meets the definition of " Unique Purpose" as defined in 10CFR50.2, please feel free to call Charlie McKibben or me at 314-882-4211. Sificerely, b Walt A. Meyer, r
+.
Acting Reactor nager Enclosure - References for Response to Question 1. Endorsement: r-
}
Reviewed and Approved s) k Don M. Alger Associate Director i ROTA"Y PDei ' L U M C C553MI L: '). NY C'%I:;1" ' 1,1: D ISS.E3 L ~. -. J! :Di L:
ENCLOSURE A REFERENCES FOR RESPONSE TO QUESTION 1 l
r--- a /$ o g A-w ~
< s
-?" (* .
ER-44 , 1 * ~: . ' ~ Unive'rsity Research Reactor Support William R. Bibb Director Energy Programs and Support Division Oak Ridge Operations This is in reply to a telephone discussion with Mr. James Rounsaville, in your of fice, regarding Department of Energy (DOE) assistance provided to the University of Missouri research reactor. The 10MW University of Missouri research reactor is the largest and probably the most versatile reactor in the university community. Under our University Reactor Fuel assistance program, DOE provides assistance in the form of fabrication costs for the fuel elements. We also provide support for reactor sharing so that the university can make its facilities available to other colleges and universities for research and training purposes. The University of Missouri does not have to be considered a private reactor when determining competitien by DOE. If we can provide any additional details please let us know. Harold H. Young, Chief Laboratory Programs Branch Division of University and Industry Programs Office of Field Operations Management Office of Energy Research cc: , _a John Maddox, ER-70 Jim Rounsaville, Oak Ridge Operations 4
* % .)
ENCLOSURE 8 REFERENCES FOR RESPONSE TO QUESTION 1 j l l f
..%9 /
g I(!!)I Department of Energy Washington, D.C. 20585 OCT 2 5199? Dr. Robert M. Brugger Director Research Reactor Facility, Research Park University of Missouri Columbia, Missouri 65211
Dear Dr. Brugger:
We wish to acknowledge the important role filled by the Univer-sity of Missouri in maintaining an outstanding research and educational facility in the nuclear sciences and engineering. This high performance University of Missouri research reactor has provided essential education, research and service support to not only the University of Missouri, but to other universities
~
and federal laboratories as well. The unique characteristics of the 10 megawatt research facility makes the university research . reactor a national asset in the field of neutron scattering and diffraction research and other basic physical, biological and biomedical areas of science. The Department of Energy recognizes these contributions and through such efforts as the DOE University Reactor Sharing Pro-gram encouragcs the University to continue making its facility available to other academic and research institutions. In light of the increasing costs required to operate and maintain the reactor research facility, we commend the university for its ability to bring in revenue from private sources to offset part of the total facility costs. We concur that these resources are essential not only to reduce the need for federal or state support, but also to aid in the support of well-trained students that can ensure the safe and orderly development of nuclear technology and basic research in the physical sciences. I Sincerely,
, f '! ,
W; ,f. %s l;&gg r .' u Alvin W. Trivelpiece Director, Office of
- Energy Research I
.e. ,
ENCLOSURE C REFERENCES FOR RESPONSE TO QUESTION 1 i
D:p rtm:nt cf En:rgy v f *1 4 s Washington. DC 20585 '
/
.? 9 1986 SEP 7[ij) <, ) $
Dr. C. Peter Magrath President University of Missouri Columbia, Missouri 65211
Dear Dr. Magrath:
I am responding to your letter of July 10, 1986, to Dr. Alvin W. Trivelpiece, Director of the Office Energy Research in the Department of Energy (DOE), regarding possible support for the planned upgrade of the The Missouri Research
, University of Missouri Research Reactor (MURR).
j
' Reactor has certainly established an enviable record in research, educat, ion and public service during its 20 year lifetime.
My staff and I have been in contact with Dr, Robert Brugger on this request. We have also discussed the' proposed rea. c tor upgrade with staff in those DOE research programs concerned with the use of reactors for energy-related R&D. The expansion program you describe will definitely require a broadly based funding effort. I am pleased to see that the upgrade has received strong University and State s'upport. I must quickly note that the budget situation facing all DOE programs in the next several years is, of course, a veryOur firs constrained one. Given our needs through our University Reaptor Fuel Assistance Program. tight budget situation, the chadces We will, for providing substantial support for however, keep this request in mind as the MURR upgrade are slim. we review our funding plans and priorities over the next fiscal year and will keep in touch with ,Dr. Brugger regarding possible next steps. I want to wish you every success as you proceed to upgrade the capabilities of MURR. Sincerely,
/ /$
f v / h. Richard E. Stephens, Director Division of University and Industry Programs Office of Field Operations Management Office of Energy Research ec: Dr. Robert Brugger Director
/
Research Reactor Facility RESEARCH REACTOR FACILITY University of Missouri E C ElVE T SEP 1'.11986
,((
JE C EIV E UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI
s ENCLOSURE D REFERENCES FOR RESPONSE TO QUESTION 1
4
+ .
., '8 - : g en8
--~ g88 8'E O O 8 O gt 8 8 8- 8 8 O 8- 8
- 9
- e. '. --
'O N .= en m- . . en . 8 O., e.n .O =.= .N .=.
e l 0 N - M. am en . == d*e en me == N N ** M . ane gQ ea g a p g b 8 0 0 O -C O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O en 8 eD 8 O O - OO-'. O O O O O -O O O O O O O O O O e4 O O ~ m. O O en - O N O ee O en 'N O- Cs et . en C O O O O e 4
=e N
- en e om O en O
O N A O
== $ O == == . N rw f G .N d") == en en N @ == == N me , q M
' > 0 In. 0 8 , -
5 O O O O O O O C O O O O O O O O 4 8 e 9- O O O O O O O O O O - O O O C O O O N O O O O Oo en es e O O en O O O O O O - O eD en
.e e ec -
O
==
en O en N
==
C N O en eC en en
==
4' @ en N ' P= O= . == Cm en 8 8 " t i. E m 8 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O eD e o O O O. O O O O O O O O O O O O O CP G O en O O O O O O O O e en O en en o so me 8 @- N en en N E en EE en en '*e en en . en e en en 8 8 == == M == == @ == O== N we @ N b e l 9 a N eO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O .O O, en e O O O O O O C O O O O O O CO O O C os O O O O O O O O O O O at ~ O O ' O, en en en SD @
== e 9 me - en er
==
=e M
m-en ' == - eC en
-e en
==
N N
=e CPe
*e N s 8 N
> 0 is. B B
== 0 O
C C O O O O O O O O O O O o O O O O O O O O O O O eD e O O O O cc m O .O= Cm 8 0 0- 0 0 C
== 8 4 m N @ O en @ N O m 4 O @
g 3 m == 4 == N N N
==
> 0 b 8 0
0 O O O O .O O O O O O O N -e O m C e O O O O == so o e eD e o O O O O O O M m en O en O N O O en O N N O oc cm 8 en =e == m me B 4 h O en O en en me = * - en CD st en N =a ** 4 N *= ** N N Q $ 5 N it > 0
< la. 0 3 5 4 5 O O O O O O O O O O O
@8 O O O O O O C.
O r= e O O O O O O O O O .O O O C C N O O N E en .e O ** m @ CP @ me N em . Cm = 99 0 4
== =* =* dL E I B ==
4 .> 9
- C Is. O W2 0 9 O O O en e C O O O O O O O O O O su:
O O O O O O O O O O O O
.O em O O O en C en O O O N t= cm eO O O O C N en N O
.Oe @ == @ at N U == 9 co O 4 ac CF
== ** == 4 eq $ B == M su a
taa > t , E b B B
> - O O O O O O O O O O O O O ee .O O O O C O O O O O
.la.
. N 3 O O O O =e O O N 4D o N v3 CP O O . 4 O O O 4 m N Ch - N en g en 4 @ 40 4 == tn Cm om I == == CP
==
p
.a 3 0
>* O pe In. 9 E O 3 9 O O O O m f. O O O O O O O O C O O O O O O O N & O O O O O an S O O O O O en C en m N N N
.CP=9 cr. e -a em 4 CP
== == == m g 3 == ==
> 0 h 8 0
9 O O O O O O O O O O N e O O O O r* 9 O O O O O O en C O 9 O O O O C en o N m N en en C.h.3 == .e in
=ie .O. CF
.g e N.* .e N .
>* O b S s
-8 e O O
O O O O O O O O O O O Q O O N 8 an en N v N Clm e o %7 Q m M 4 cm N
-= a- N O %,
= ** @
s 9 == =
> B in. 0 9
5 O O O O O 0 9 O O O O N e O C C m N N CP e N C O
- 9 m O 4 m N 4C m
9 5 ** *e
>= 8 h 5 9
0 O O Cm e o O O ec n O O en CP y en N
== 0 C 4
>= 0 h 9 4
5 8 5 E e 4 C C C 9 s e e ** v 4 y ec > > > > = > C > & * * * * > C C ** 0 C 93
== C ** ==et
- e 4
*e C C C C *
- C C 5 0 l=
E e. D L L L & C =OC E R D 4 2 e es se 4 == C b
= -
C 5 at D w a C e == 0 = C W == 3 % v = ** e C W w O
^ C C W ti &
- b * &
> B 9 .a=
C
==
b g 6 ==
.* w C
E
==
E e a m. = w w w C -* E > 3 & e W 5 D Z
~
m a e a W W 4 L a= e t.== p w m. == == em. C .ee w w q *C ene em*
- w e=8 b U2 e w en. E % C m W C Ut L L Q C 3 W3 C
'eC 3O O C -d O E ** C C Z E as e -
g g C
> C T 4 > > *= E > aC
#.a e> nr > w > a c
e > *n == m. Z U e O at C ea ll:
"& *
- C 8 ** **
.a e == .3 c a . - C C
- 'll 4 &.
e & C & 4" C C E C O 2 B C
- C 9 C C
- K L L = 3 R i=
= aa 5' ' l5 3
#C
- ss E L m 3 D in 2 O C Em 8e la
, ee%
. - DOE /ER/10725-1
' DOE REACTOR SHAPING - MURR SEPTDGER 1,1983 TO AUGUST 31, 1984 PRINCIPLE FACULTY / STUDENT REACTOR SHARING MURR INSTITUTION PROJECT DESCRIPTION INVESTIGATOR PARTICIPANTS SUPPORT SUPPOR1 Boston University Milunski, A. 3 /5 Relationship of Trace Elements to Neural Tube 5000 1834 School of Medicine Defects Brigham Young Adams, B. 2 / 3 Depth-Probe Studies of Texture in Drawn Brass 8000 Univer'ity Adams, B. 2 / 2 Texture Analysis of 2024 Aluminum Tubing 1000 Columbia College Grev D. 1 / 3 Study of Type and Extent of Trace Element 1125 Contamination of Blood Samples George Washington Wessels,B. 3 / 1 Radiolabeling Monoclonal Anitbodies with Re-186 865 University Medical for Use in Radicimmunotherapy Biodistribution Centir-Radiology Studies Georgia Institute Noonan, D. 2 / 1 Prompt Gama Spectroscopic Analysis of Boron 2500 cf T;chnology Content in Rat Tissue Samples Harvard University Willett, W. 5 / 3 Defining the Relationships Between Selenium 4324 School of Public Uptake and the Occurrence of Human Cancer and Health Heart Disease Indiana State Swez, J. 1 / 7 Analysis of Air Filters from h ere afaute, 239 University Indiana lowa State University Roberts, D. 1 / 1 hAA on Ancient Mexican Pottery Shards to Establish Sample Origin 2087 Roberts, D. 1 / 1 NAA on Crushed Ore from Saudi Arabia for Elemental Composition Staudenmann, J. 2 / 1 Gama Ray Diffraction Study of Niobium Single 4800 Crystals Lincoln University Makdant D. 2 / 1 Effect of Fiber on the Uptake of Seleniue 4482 Memphis State 5en Gupta P. 2 Pnase Transition of Anorthite at 180*C 50C0 5500 Unive rsity New Mexico Institute Kyle, P. 1 / 4 NAA of Rocks from New Mexico and Antarctica 16f4 1164 cf Mining and TIchnology Cohen, J. 2 / 2 heutron Inelastic Studies of Phonons in.Al(Cu) 10000 Northwestern UnivIrsity Cohen, J. Residual Stress Analysis 4000 3 / 2 Oklahoma State Halliburton, L. 1 / 1 heutron Irradiation of Quartz Crystals 9C University-Physics Department Investicate the Solubility of Quartz Under 288';
Princaton University Brantley, S. 3 / 1 hon-Equilibrium Conditions heutron Studies of (v3 ,,Cr,)203 20000 Purdue University Honig, J. 3 / 1 Detenrine Volatile / Mobile Trace Elements in 1413 2330 Lipschutz, M. 1 / 4 Meteorites Stsphens College Anderson, H. 2 / 2 Trace Element Analysis of Various Biological 462s Materials Cotton, F. Single-Cry?tal Neutron Diffraction Structure Study 10000 Texas A & M 2 H0 cf V(H O)6 5 2(CF 50 3 I34 2 Cotton, F. 2 Structure of Chromiurn-Alue by Single-Crystal heutron Diffraction 6500 University of Arizona Boynton, W. 1 / 2 N asuring Trace Element Abundances in Meteorites 171E by AAA Denahue, D. 3 / 2 Croduction of Radioisotopes for Use in Tander 16C Accelerator Mass Spectrophotometer subtotal 39,071 75.12E
~
.,,5 e
- c,
-!NSTITUTION PRINCIPLE FACULTY / STUDENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION REACTOR SHAR N m INVESTIGATOR PARTICIPANTS SUPPORT SUPPOR7 University of Sears. D. 1 / 2 NAA of Type !!! Ordinary Chondrites and 650 Arkansas Enstatite Chondrites University of Haller, E. 2 / 2 Neutron Irradiation of Germanium Single- 514 Calif rnia-Berkeley Crystal Samples University of Chicago Grossman, L. 4 / 1 Instrumental and Radiochemical NAA of Tiny 702 Inclusions in Meteorites University of Boolchand, P. 2 / 1 Mossbauer Studies of Heusler Alloys 336 108
-Cincinnati Deutsch, E. 4 / 1 Irradiation of Re-185 to Produce Re-186 for 3070 1690 Preparation of Therapeutic Skeletal Agents Jha, S. 3 / 1 Site and Probe Dependence of Hyperfine Magnetic 580 Field in Alloys
< University of Iowa Svare, C. 2 NAA of Blood for Total Mercury Content 1848 School of Dentistry Univ;rsity of Ehmann, W. 5 / 3 Trace Element Research in Biomedical Research 3786 1213 kentucky and Fossil Fuel Chemistry University of Lager, G. 2 Neutron Scattering Studies of Hydrated Minerals 5000 2500 Lcuisville
'UnivIrsity of Whalen, D. 3 Single-Crystal Neutrcq Diffraction Structure 5000 Maryland Study of Tetrahydronaphthalene Epoxide UnivIrsity of Sattelberger, A. 3 Neutron Diffraction Structure Study of the Low 4376 7024 Michigan Valent Tantalum Complex Washington University Bhattacharyya, D. 4 / 1 Decipher Major and Trace Elements and REF Fingerprints on Precambrian Bonded Iron .
Formations Brannon, J. 2 / 1 Chemical Analysis of Powdered Rock Samles Korotev, R. 3 Standardization of Doped, Glassed Fly Ash 2060 325 Against Normal Fly Ash Korotav R. 3 Trace Element Analysis of Filters of Air ! Particulates for Air Pollution Study Pasteris, J. 3 / 1 INAA of REE and Other Trace Elements in Bulk Kipterlite Sagles and Perovskite Separates
~ Wright State Look, D. 5 Neutron Irradiation and DLTS Analysis of GaAs 1150:
and AIGaAs Samples subtotal, p. 2 22,342 19,590 subtotal, p. 1 39,071 75,128: subtotal 61,413 94,718 Ettimatzd Number of People Toured: 3,782 Grantee Salary and Wages-Tour Guide 3.441 Grantee Staff Benefits 146 3,587 3,587 TOTAL 65,000 94,718
D0t/ER/10725 2 DOE REACTOR SMARinG .. sR;RR
- ' SEPTEG ER 1, 10 4 TO AUGUST 31, 1965 REACTOR 5 HARING Mute PRINCIPLE FACULTf/ STUDENT SUPPORT PROJECT DESCRIPTION SUPPORT INSTITUTION INVESTIGATOR PARTICIPANTS Columbt a Blaner/ Goodman 2 tmlversity l
University of M. Criqui 1 10000.00 2775.00 Cali forni a. Determination of Selentwa in naman Sera San Diego (part of the the hattonal Heart. Lung and Blood Institute-Lipid Research Center Program. University of Lippel/Mebane 2 a non-grant-funded project) Clactanatt University of 5. Sangdtwala/ 2 North Caroline. H. Tyroler Chapel Ht11 George Washington B. Wessels 3 / 1 Radiolabeitng lbnoclonal httbodies with Re.186 85.00 University for Use in Radioissnunotherapy 81odistribution Studies lbitt Elemental NAA of manan Tissue Specimens 1000.00 7500.00 Harvard School of W. Willett 3 / 7 Pubile Health Single Crystal Neutron Diffraction Studies of - 45750.00 Memphis State P. SenGupta 3 Untversity Magnetoplumbtte and MgA1.xCr2 04 P. Kyle Instrumental NAA of Silicate Materials 3062.98 3225.20 New Mexico 2 / 3 Institute of Mining and Technology Single Crystal Neutron Diffraction Studies of 25125.00 Northwestern T. Marks 3 / 2 121verstty 3 )4]2 Nd[51(CH (CH3 )2 51(C$(CH 3 )3]2 at 50K Purdue University M. Lipschutz 1 / 3 Neutron Irradiation of Meteorites and Monitor Vials to Determine volatile / Mobile Trace Elements for Studying Thermal Histories During Meteorite 7445.38 2647.92 Formation and Evolutton Purdue University A. Ramdas 2 / 2 Study of Line Width of B Acceptors in $1 with Phosphorus Donors as a Compensating Igurity j Selenium and Other Trace Element Essentiallty 1000.00 6100.00 Stephens College H. Anderson 2 / 2 Studies Using the Rat Ibdel Single Crystal Neutron Diffraction Studies of 14250.00 T; mas A&M F. Cotton 3 / 2 University KA1.xCr 3 m(50 4 )212H 2O at 50K and 295 K University of W. Boynton 2 Trace Element Analysts of Meteorites by MAA 314.50 Arizona Study of the Composition of Two Stony Meteorite 654.65 University of D. Sears 1 / 1 Arkansas. Classes--Enstattte Chondrite and thequilibrated Fayetteville Ordinary Chondrite University of B. Norman 1 / 1 Determination of Selenium in Ren Iglants 5100.00 Ca11 f ornt a. Davi s' NAA Determination of Composition of Terrestrial 6292.61 170.00 University of J. Wasson 3 Cali forni a.Los and Extraterrestrial Dust from Greenland Ice Core Angeles Sanples University of E. Deutsch 3 / 1 Irradiation of Re.185 for Use in Preparation of Cincinnatt Therapeutic Skeletal Agents r 2172.39 5906.32 University of S. Jha 2 / 1 Irradiation of Palladium Metal Powder to Measure Cincinnati Site Dependence and Probe Dependence of fiyperfine Fields in Alloys j subtotal 32,027.51 118,549.44
. ',* f 00E/ER/10725-2 page 2 .. REACTOR $NARING ItsRR PRINCIPLE FACULTf/$7UDENT SUPPORT SUPPORT 1RSTITUT10N INVESTIGATOR PARTICIPANTS PROJECT DESCRIPTION NAA of Nair Samples for Selentum Analysts 2425.00 hiversity of 0. 01stunbosun 1 theden imiversity of W. Emmann 4 / 3 Irradiation of ihman Tissue $suples to Rentucky Determine Trace Element Relationships to Neurological Diseases 3294.86 Diversity of W. Ehmann 4 / 3 1rradiation of Coal /5 hale Souples to Kentucky Determine Trace Element Material talances in the Conversion of Processing of Fossil Fuels j Stagle-Crystal Neutron Diffraction to 1000.00 4250.0C University of G. Lager 2 Louisville Setermine Crystal Structure of a Silicate Hydrous Garnet including Positions of the liydrogen Atoms Single Crystal neutron Diffraction Study of 666.64 17333.3d University of D. Whalen 3 / 2 Maryland Tetrahydronaphthalene Epoxide 5tngle-Crystal Neutron Diffraction Study on 1339.75 3125.0t University of D. van der Helm 1 / 1 Oklahoma Lu2(H)(C5$H )6*N8( M )6*2 M Trace Elements and Cancers of the Larynx. 5780.00 2260.01 University of D. Thomas 2 / 1 Washington. Esophagus and Mouth Seattle Washington W. heinus 4 verify Accuracy of Measurement of tone Mineral .
University Content using Ikiel Energy Computed Tomography l Washington 5. Bowring 1 / 1 INAA of Volcante and Plutonic Rocks from the Early ) University Protozoic. Wopeay Orogen (Great Bear Magmatic Zone) f I Washington R. Korotev 2 Elemental Malyses of Coal Flyash 830.96 841.9 University Washington R. Korotey 2 Analyze Geochemical Reference Standards University Against Flyash Washington D. Bhattachryya 4 / 1 ' Determine Major and Trace Element and REE University Compositions of Late Proterozoic Banded and Phanerozoic Minette Iron Formations to Constrain Genetic Models in Terms of Source. Sedimentation and Diagenetic Controls Washington K. Stefert 4 INAA for Major and Trace Elements in Rocks University /lowa fra the Duluth Complex. funnesota State thiversity Washington Y. ()ui 4 INAA for Major and Trace Ele'eents of Igneous University / Institute Rocks and Sediments from China ) i of Geochemistry. Peoples' Republic of China Academy of $ctence Page 2 Subtotal 12,912.21 30.234.E ( Page 1 Subtotal 32.027.51 118,549.4 Estimated Ihanber of People Who Toured IRJRR: 2510 l Grantee Salary and Wages--Tour Guide 5047.68 Grantee Staff Benefits 12.60 5.060.28 449.1 5060.28 l 149.233.1 TOTAL 50.000.00 j l l l l
. .e. ,, . 1 ' f, -
y, .
^'
V $' 00E/EA/10725 3 b
/ !
; DOC REACTOR SHARI4C -- MURR /
~ SEPTEM8ER 1.1985 70'AJCJ5T 31,1986l #
/ ,
A
' . , a / /
PRINCIPAL FACULTT/5YUDENT i '& ' REA1f0kh411G MURR
$JPPORT t
INSTITUTION INVEST! GATOR PARTICIPANTS PROJECT DESCRIPTION C PF,;ti
,. f ,
.)
Brigham Young 8. Adais 2 3 Yerify analysis -for measuring crystallo- . 5625.00 University graphic tenture gradients using over- C lapping probe technique
~
Carnegle Institute 5. Shirey 1 MAA related to geocheetcal atudy of 2500.00 Ef Washington evolution of the Archaen earth's crust in . 3 northern Minnesota ant +,outhern Ontario y[ Harvard W. Willett 1 NAA of human nafis for contestt of trace 5000.00 17250.01 ' ' Universtty elements and einerals fe*, evaluation as a ' dietary monitor and'ss rdatet to breast cancer incidence Harvard W. W111ett 1 NAA of human nells frF. Iung cancer patients 5000.00 45700.00 University at time of diagnosts' tor trace elements and fj minerals G Indiana State J. Swez t NAA of air filter sancies from the Terre 249.00 ; University Haute Area uring v4 pious weather conditt:,ns / for evaluation by Environmental Physics
'shadent class M ,
Iowa State K. Set fert 1 NAA of rock powders to determine the role of 3800.00 ' University
. fractional crystallnation in the formation 2 06 a magic layered comples Memphis State P. SenGupta 3 isngle crystal neutron diffraction 5000.00 C26750.00 University studies of magnetopluebine and . ;
MgA12 -mCr 04 Instrumental NAA of silicate materials 251[.25 3 New Mexico P. Kyle
- 2 3 httitute of Mining and Technology Southwest Missourt E. Mantet 1 1 Study of variation of antimony and i 2210.00 State University silver centent of the eineral galena,' ,
and cadelvu in sphalertte to establish tre moveme1t of ore splution that forw.d the southeast Missouri ore depotits 3 , Stephens College H. Anderson 2 2 'selentus and other trace element !000.00 1340.00 essentf ality f tadies using the rst model University of W. Boynton '2 2 Trace eleme.it analysts of meteorites by 630.48 Arizona NAA University of D. Sears 2 Cooosittet of coreonents from two rare . 600.00 Arkansas but particularly significant stony meteorite classes (enstattte chondrate, ts. ,ught to have formed in a strange cheetcal environment close to the sus; and unequflibrated ordtoary oondrite - particularly prieltive solar system material) University of J. Wasson 1 1 NAA of deep sea afdtsents to determine ' 345.00 Californfa-Los concentration of tr and other noble metals Angeles for definf ng background flux of entra-terrestrial matter as well as investiga-tion of sedimentary hortions which may record major tapact events University of P. Boolchand 1 3 Investigation of molecular structure of 480.00 Cincinnati network classes usf ag artie absorption and s291 eelssion Mossbauer spectroscopy subtotal 35950.73 TCM 4 A % _
Y" ?
,_ .1
", ;f' . f . _
b j. /* * ' / . 00E/ER/10725-3
" .* > DOC REACTOR SHARING -- PRJRR f SEPTEMSCR 1. 1985 TO AJtuST 31. 1986 page 2 e PRINCIPA FACULTY / STUDENT REACTOR SHARIN MORR PARTICIPANTS PROJECT DESCRIPTION SUPPORT SUPP3RT INSTffdTION INVEST! GAT 01 r, i ,~
omversity of E. Deutsch 3 1 Irradiation of Re-185 for use in 6585.00 800.00 Cincinnati preparation of therapeutic skeletal
- g. ,
agents
d Univ'e ilty of 5. Jha Net. tron irradiation of 8 LOPd, Hf. 854, 255.00 Ctor,innett a205n. Hg and 6 " Er for probes in f.
< hyperfine magnetic field measurements in
';7 f
' ferromagnetic alloys by PAC and Mossbauer techniques University of A. Parr 1 Development of technique to radiolabel 1298.04
*t Kontacts . intact dosage forms for in vivo studies Uni veh'I ty o'f W. Wolf 4 'h Preparing Pt-195m for radiolabeling 2841.77 Southern cisplatin and other platinum-containing California drugs for studies on blodistribution and radiopharmacottnetic studies on amtmals t
; end humans Virginia Foly M. Hud1trky 1 Single crystal neutron diffraction structure 2578.20 6796.80 Tech determination of C 12H1740 Washington J. Allan 3 INAA of Tholetitle basalts from q University Fernandina Volcano (Galapagos Islands) f to understand mantle source region for Fernandina lavas and for modeling the evolution of magma within the Fernandina Volcano structure 1080.00 Washington 5. Sowring 3 1 Analysts of volcanic and plutonte rocks
- University from Early Proterozoic, Wopeay 0rogen (Great Bear Magmatic Zone) i' Washington R. Korotev 1 Standardization of multtelement, Lpiversity geochemical reference standards j
- p. 2 subtotal 20.638.01 7.596.80
- p. I subtotal 38.950.73 45.040.00 Estimated Number of People Who Toured MURR: 2552 Sa'ary and Wages -Tour Guide $394.75 Suff Genef1ts 16.51 T4TG 5.411.26 TOTAL 65,000.00 52,636.00 l s
/
l
- s t ,
r-
, ;=-- ., <; r s
T-n f s ', g
.=g i '
g
-h g
- d- -
x ., ENCLOSURE E y 6
$ i REFERENCES FOR RESPONSE TO QUESTION 1
',x 4,.
r t j
\
s e
/
- - s
*b I
l . 1 Major Facilities
, for Materials Research and Related Disciplines Major Materials Facilities Committee Commission on Physical Sciences, Mathematics, and Resources National Research Council I
NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS Washington, DC 1984 i
=___z..,,
l I 12 L currently operates a 0.24' CeV storage ring and is commissioning a 0.75 - to 1.0 GeV ring. The 20 beam lines on the latter serve an estimated . 150 users annually. The Stanford Synchrotron Research Laboratory (SSRL), at the Stanford Linear Accelerator center, uses a 3.5 GeV stor-I- age ring dedicated to synchrotron radiation part of the year and in a parasitic mode the rest of the year. Counting beam lines in a current upgrade program, the 19 end stations serve a user community of 300 scientists. -In addition, one undulator beam line 'is to be built on a 15 GeV storage ring at the same site. The Synchrotron _ Ultraviolet Radiation Facility (SURF), at the i National Bureau of Standards, is a 0.24 GeV ring dedicated to synchro-tron radiation use. Its 13 beam lines serve about 40 users annually. Expanded descriptions of these facilities and a definition and history. of the user community, as well as its characteristics, can be found in two previous reports (references 5, 8). Of the storage rings listed above, only three--two at NSLS and. one at SRC--were designed.to be sources of synchrotron radiation, and those three were all designed prior to a full recognition of the impor-tance of insertion devices. Consequently, they were designed to en-phasize the radiation from the bending magnets, with capabilities for the later addition of a limited number of insertion devices. (For a j description of insertion devices, see Chapter 11 and references 5, 8, 4 18, 19, 20, 26.) L i Foreign Synchrotron Radiation Facilities. Many synchrotron radiation facilities exist elsewhere, offering strong competition to U.S. scientists. These are extensively described in other reports (references 5, 8). The principal operating sources are in England (SRS), France (ACO, super ACO), West Germany (HASYLAB, BESSY), Japan (Photon Factory), and the USSR (VEPP-3, VEPP-4). There are other facilities in some of these countries, as well as in Italy and Sweden. l Construction is under way for facilities in the People's Bapublic of China, and there are plans for facilities in Taiwan, India, and Brazil. None of the facilities mentioned above is more advanced than our newest facilities, NSLS and SRC. However, the European Science Foundation is planning to build a 5 to 6 GeV storage ring very similar to that pro-posed for the United States. I Neutron Scattering Facilities There are, currently, active neutron scattering programs at five dif-ferent national centers: Argonne (ANL), Brookhaven (BNL), Los Alamos (LANL), National Bureau of Standards (NBS), and Oak Ridge (ORNL). The BNL, NBS, and ORNL facilities center around steady state reactor sources, while ANL and LANL involve pulsed spallation sources. There are also reactor based neutron scattering programs at the University of Missouri, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and other univer-sities. This section focuses on the national centers for neutron research.
- - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _o
.U t
ENCLOSURE F REFERENCES FOR RESPONSE TO QUESTION 1 i l l B t
e L 1 s Current Status of Neutron-Scattering ; Research and Facilities l in the United States Panel on Neutron Scattering
. Solid State Sciences Committee Board on Physics and Astronomy
' Commission on Physical Sciences. Ntathematics.
and Resources l National Research Council t 4 9 e I i l I N Al1()N AL AC AL)I'MY PRI~55
% ashington.1) C. 19M
ji-h i qualitatively new rese. g fields. 6 It should be noted t
- 3. CURRFRF STA11]S OF NEUTRON-SCATTERING FACILITIES IN THE also serve a wide vari UNITED STATES needs that are unrelat g
At present, about half oi I b, In this chapter we describe briefly the existing neutron- neutron sources (about o neutron scattering, whil D scattering facilities at the five National Laboratory neutron We highly important and dive sources and two major university reactor facilities. [ production, chemical trac l also provide a sammary of the trends in users and publications 1 $ physics, ultracold neuted y associated with U.S. neutron facilities. In Chapter 4 we This multiple program ud
- provide a comparison with facility development and user States is beneficial, sin' t' trends at foreign laboratories.1 It is clear from these '
and cost-effective opel data that there has been a striking increase in users and h create serious d if f ical. b change in user patterns over the past decade along with or withdraws support, schedule of source operat g
**3 # "'**#
- i I A varie ty of sources of information were used by the for scattering research a Panel in assembling summaries of users, publications, instrumentation, and total neutron-scattering budgets. Summaries. The reses
- These included the earlier National Academy of Scie nce s hours a day in a quasi-cor and Department of Energy reports cited in the Introduction,
{- the Annual and special reports of the DOE and its National g,, ,, [ Laboratories, the National Bureau of Standards, and the are currently more curta; University of Missouri, along with those of the Institut O Laue-Langevin at Grenoble and other neutron-scattering centers in Europe. The Panel went further, however, to assure up-e
"' to-date suitably coordinated information and statistics by individually contacting the major neutron centers in p '
the United States, Western Europe, Japan, and Canada concerning
} users, publications, and other information relevant to the g comparisons made in the report. It should be noted that High Fluz Beam Reactor (-
8 the Panel did not attempt to provide similar comparisons with neutron-scattering facilities in the Soviet Union, Eastern Europe, India, or other neutron efforts worldwide. The High Flux Beam Reac [ A summary of these facilities can be found in the earlier fuel and D2 0 as a mode NAS and DOE reports mentioned above. 6 E I! Wa .- -- _
.c l ,
7 l qualitattv-ly new research opportunities in a variety of fields. It should be noted that in general U.S. neutron sources ING FACILITIES IN *[1IE - also serve a wide variety of scientific and programmatic needs that are unrelated to neutron scattering research. At present, about half of the total operating costs of major ths existing neutron- neutron sources (about $13.5 million) are associated with ional Laboratory neutron neutron scattering, while the remainder is related to other reactor facilities. To highly important and diverse national needs, including isotope la users and publications Production, chemical trace analysis, radiation damage, nuclear ! ties. In Chapter 4 we , Ph ysics, ultracold neutron research and radiation standards, ty development and user This multiple program use of neutron sources in the United States is beneficial, since it can provide broad-based support It is clear from those
' However, it can sometimes g increast in users and and cost-effective operation.
past decade along with create serious difficulties if one of the programs loses or withdraws support, thus threatening the stability or schedule of source operation.
.mation were used by the .
f users, publications, for scattering research are briefly described in the following on-scattering budgets. . summaries. The research reactors in general operate 24 nal Academy of Sciences ted in the Introduction, hours a day in a quasi-continuous schedule with brief shutdowns .
.he DOE and its National '
for maintenance and refueling. The pulsed-source schedules 2 of Standards, and the b those of the Institut are currently more curtailed, as noted in the summaries. - estron-scattering centers [
, however, to assure up- ,
ornation and statistics ajor neutron centers in ', FACILITY DESCRIPTIONS _ nn, and Canada concerning , 3rnation relevant to the , It should be noted that High Fluz Beam Reactor (HFBR)-Brookhaven National Laboratory vide similar comparisons , es in the Soviet Union, utron efforts worldwide. . The High Fluz Beam Reactor is a 60-MW reactor using enriched be found in the earlier fuel and D 0 as a moderator and primary coolant. The core
! 2 8
v 13 In addition, ORNL operates a 5-m SANS instrument with an cry Rasctors (ORNL) area detector and a two-axis diffractometer. Proposals for the NSF-supported SANS facility are reviewed D at ths Oak Ridg6 National by a special committee and scheduled as they are received; 31 of 100 MW. Light water there is normally a three- to four-month waiting period. 3 ths annular fuel region. Other ORNL instruments are available to users either by transuranium isotopes are informal arrangements or by written proposals that are reviewed
- s. There are four horizontal by Oak Ridge staff members, ter with an average flux se beans deliver neutrons University of Missouri Research Reactor (MURR) o variabis incident energy fixed E0 triple-axis unit; MURR is a 10-MW pressurized-water, beryllium-reflected flux-roseter; an ultrasonically trap reactor located in Columbia, Missouri. There are six a liquid diffractometer; beam ports with four used for neutrcn-scattering research.
ictometer; a double perfect- The fluz available at the source end of the beam ports is (SANS) instrument; and a 10 14 neutrons /cm2 -sec. There are currently seven neutron-ictor. The last instrument scattering instruments: two four-circle single-crystal as operated by the National diffractometers; one triple-axis spectrometer; two powder o Research. A new high- diffractometers--one with a p o s i t ion-s ens itive detector, r with a curved position- the other with a five-detector system; a fixed-wavelength spsd with Japanese support (4.7 A) small-angle scattering facility that uses a multidotector crystallographic studies. and has 4.5-m flight paths before and after the sample;
- tor (ORR) operates at 30 and a double-crystal monochromator-interferometer instrument.
nd coderator and berylliam Facilities are open to outside users by informal arrangements no of this reactor is for with neutron-scattering staff members at MURR. i but there are six horizontal The reactor has a number of other major facilities { sr scattering experiments, used for gamma-ray scattering (diffraction, quasi elastic Lube entrances is about 2 scattering, and Compton scattering), neutron activation Laboratory operates three analysis, radio pharmaceutical and transmutation-doped silicon ; triple-axis dif fractometer, l production, radiation-offects studies, neutron radiography, l a two-axis diffractometer. and kev neutron beams for tomography and cross-section work. i f I
R 14 ] meets twice a year to d An improved triple-axis spectrometer and another dif fractometer The total time availab are expected to be built during the next 2 years, and an currently is 60 percen engineering study has been funded for a possible doubling (6 months /ye ar .in 1982-19 t of the reactor @over. in 1986. A total of e is planned for completion s! Weapons Neutron Research/ Proton Storage Ring Facility (WNR/PSR) 14s Alamos National Laboratory d. I Summa The WNR/PSR being developed at the Los Alamos National Laboratory Other neutron-diffractio- - is a pulsed spallation neutron source for neutron-scattering university reactors for R research in condensed-matter physics, chemistry, materials g notably several instrumon science, biology, and polyme rs. It is an interdisciplinary 3 facility that is shared with nuclear- and neutrino physics In Table 1 we summarize l A beam of 800-MeV protons is provided by the currently available at l research. table shows that there are Los Alamos Meson Physics Facility (IAMPF) . At present, l e.g.. with 114 instrur j the WNR can utilize only about 0.5% (~5 A) of the LAMPF 40 under development l beam. However, the PSR will permit by 1986 the use of 100 effectiveness of thess I pA of LAMPP protons with a much reduced pulse width of 0.27 related to intensity, ener l psec. At that time, the peak thermal neutron flus in the l pulse is expected to be 10 16 ,,,g,,,,f,,2-sec at 12 Hz, for e x ample , factors tt single table. In general,
- I making WNR/PSR directly competitive in neutron intensity in the United State with the new British pulsed source (SNS) at the Rutherford internationally in the
" Laboratory.
W At present six beam lines are available for condensed- with resolutions }.0.2 meV 8 for both steady-state I matter research, three each for elastic and inelastic scattering research, high-resolutio Two of these instruments, a filter dif fe rence
; studies.
interferometry. In a u spectrometer for vibrational spectroscopy and a single-crys tal y dif f ractometer, are operated in a user mode, while the remaining instrumentation and e instruments are under development. A general purpose powder unavailable or not ful diffractometer is expected to become a user instrument in will be summa rized. 1984. A program advisory committee (shared with ANL) currently I I I I
-- - _ _ _ _ _ __ \
J. n . 16 TABl.E 1 Sammary of Neutron Scattering Instruments Available. It should also be no j in the United States described above, there ar il at the various neutron c A. RESEARCH REACTORS
- 1. Diffractometerr focusing collimators, neu
{ Two-Azis Four- all of which are impor t ar Two- (Multisector Four- Circle instrumentation for reac Axis or PSD) Circle (PSD) BNL - 1 2 1" some cases U.S. laborat MIT 2 - - - 1* b advances, our efforts in NBS - 1 l ORNL 1 1 1 - of support and manpower comp
- g. MURR -
2 2 - projects in Europe (soc g 2. Spectrometers As a result, the implement' o In t e r- Three- Time-of- Polarized based on these developmet ferometer SANS Axis F11aht Be a m 8 5* in the United States. BNL - 2 - - MIT 1 - - - - NBS - 1 4* 1 - ORNL - 3 4 1 2 i MURR 1 1 1 - - 1 IllE I B. PULSED NEUTRON SOURCES The U.S. neutron-scatte
- 1. Diffractometers (Elastic) considerably since the LE
! Single Crystal Council (Neutron Resent . Powder SANS Beam i ANL 2 8
1 1 1 Academy of Sciences, Was l 1ASL 1 1 number of users and in
- 2. Time-of-Flight Spectrometers A summary of the total Chopper Crystal Filter ne u t ro n- s c a t te r ing facil Analvrer Analyzer Analyzer ANL 2 1
- given in Figure 1. For t1 1.ASL - -
1 has been defined as a s 0
- Dedicated high-resolution powder dif fractome ters. in a neutron-scatterin b These inst rume nts configured primarily for biological structure a given year. A scientis research.
*0ne of these three-axis instruments is sometimes used for polarized more than once to perfor geenstudies.
Primarily for structure of liquids and glasses. e u _ . . . .. ^r
O* ENCLOSURE G REFERENCES FOR RESPONSE TO QUESTION 1 i
se* q man Neutron scatter.ms m condensed-matter physics Because neutrons interact with atomic nuclei and magnetic fields in a sample, rather than electron clouds, they provide information that is complementary to that probed by electrons and photons. John D.' Axe and Robert M. Nicklow Since its discovery 50 years ago, the neutrons, by definition, have energies increase the flux of cold neutrons from i in- existing reactor sources, one can add neutron has commanded public atten- comparable to those of thermally %o cold moderators such as liquid hydro-tion and respect. As an intermediary duced fluctuations in solids (about in nuclear fission, it is woven into the eV), making them the natural choice gen. Guide tubes, which transport political fabric of modern life and for studying the thermally important neutron beams by total internal reflec-seems destined to remain so. But the dynamics of solids by inelastic scatter- tion to areas well away from the source, neutron plays many other,less promi- ing. (By constrast, x rays or electrons where the backgrounds are low, nent and controversial roles as well. It with wavelengths around 1 A have further increase cold neutrons. the usefulness Roger Pynn and Brianof these has, for example, technological applica- energies around 12 kev and 3.5 eV, tions in tields as diverse as logging oil respectively.) In addition, the neutron Fender, in their article on page 46, wells, detecting art forgeries and dop- has a magnetic moment, which couples describe the use of such guide halls and ing electronic semiconductor materi- strongly to the magnetization of mate- of the new instruments that are de-als, as D. Allan Bromley has reviewed rials on an atomic scale. Neutrons are signed to use the cold neutrons pro-in those pages.2 thus ideally suited for the study of duced by the guide tubes for studies It is by now widely appreciated that magnetic structures and short-wave- involving ultrahigh resolution. In this neutrons have several uniquely valu- length magnetic fluctuations, suchasasmagnetism article weandwill collective deal withexcita-topics-such able properties for probing condensed spin waves. matter. Unlike electromagnetic radi- Perhaps less well known than these tions-that are the traditional domain ation or electron beams, the other special properties of neutrons is the of solid-state physics and thermal neu-widely used probes, neutrons interact energy range available for neutron- tron sources. with atoms principally through the scattering studies, which has expanded Critical phenomena short-range, strong nuclear interac- greatly due to new developments in One can argue with much justifica-tions, which vary erratically from nu- instrumentation over the last decade. cleus to nucleus. This property can be Figure 1 is a representation of energy- tion that the major conceptual advance used to advantage in structural investi- momentum space as it appears to a in physics during the last decade has gations of materials containing light modern practitioner of neutron scatter- been the widespread use of scaling elements and can be made more power- ing. Regions accessible to subthermal arguments to solve intractable rnany-fut by ingenious isotopic labeling (cold), thermal and epithermal (hot) body problems. In condensed-matter schemes. (Peter Moore discusses such neutrons are shown superimposed on physics the central problem to yield to schemes in his article on biological the dispersion relations of various exci- these powerful new theoretical tech-tations that are of interest to con- niques was the fundamental under-applications of neutron scattering, on page 62.) Thermal neutrons have a densed-matter physics: with current standing of phase transformations. wavelength distribution peaked techniques one can study excitationsager's For many years, famous going solution back of the to On-Ising around 1.6 A, well. suited for studying energies varying over rome seven or- model in two dimensions, the primary variations in atomic density on a micro- ders of magnitude. Studies that in- - scopic scale. Furthermore, thermal volve large energy or momentum trans- test subjects-the Drosophila fruit fers naturally require epithermal neu. flies, as it were-- of theoretical research -5 trons. Pulsed spallation neutron on phase transitions have been magnet-John Are is a seneor physicist at Brookhaven sources driven by proton accelerators le systems. Thus experimental studies National Laboratory, where he works on promise to expand our capabilities m of the behavior of magnetic systems neutron spectroscopy. lattice dynarnacs and this area, as Gerard I,ander and David have always been of great interest, if structural phase transitic,ns s sohds Robert Pnce describe in their article on page for no other reason than to test the Nickic* is a physicist at Oak Ridge Nat.onal Laboratory, where he uses neutron scattenng 38 At the other ext *eme. une can only relevance of simplified model calcula- j to study latbce dynarmes and magnet.c excita-achieve the uitimate energy resolution tions to real materials. using sery-low +nergy neutrons. To While one can investigate thermal j tions. t 27 I
- ~ *~~' .
PH_YSICS TODAY / JANUARY 1985 -- - _3
4 US research reactor user facilities Average Number of Feesity User contacta Power thermal Sun instrumenta Upgrade proposala (10'* rvem sec) High Flux lootope Reactor H. A. Mook Solid State Dmson 100 MW 10 9 New reactor eth about 60x10'* n/ W. C. Koeh6er. Nttional C6nter for cm aec Sun, hot and cold sources. Smen-A.igte Scattenng Research beam guides about 30 anstruments Oak Ridge Natonal Laboratory Oak Ridge. TN 37831 High Flus Beam Reactor G. Srwene. Physics Department 60MW 9 11 Guide han for co@ source and thermal Brooklaven Natonal Laboratory beam guides with 10 additional Upton. NY 11973 enstruments Nabonal Bureau of Standards R. S. Caner 20 MW 2 9 Add cold source. beam guides. and Reactor Nationai Bureau of Standards guede haR mth 35 additonal Washington DC 20234 eistruments Missou.s Urwersity R. M Brugger. Director 10 MW 1 8 increase thermal aux to 2.5x10'* n/ Research Reactor Research Reactor Facihty. Research cm sec. add three new instruments Park. Columbia MO 65211 Average tus a measured at the beam hbe see G H Vineyard. L M Fahcow, " National Faolmes for Research m the Physcs of Condensed Maner." Rev so inst um S6. 62o (Isa4). for a more detadee descrsman of currere tocches ferromagnets near the percolation at least their effects, have been ob. Only recently has evidence for this so-threshold exhibit " reentrant" behav- served in neutron-scattering experi. called Peierls instability been found in lor: with decreasing temperatures, one ments in real, quasione-dimensional real materials. A particularly striking t sees successively paramagnetic, ferro- " easy plane" ferromagnets and antifer- example of the effect of a charge-magnetic and finally spin-glass behav- romagnets in strong magnetic fields- density wave on phonon dispersion has for. The spin-wave stiffness softens at although the results for the ferromag. been seen in a neutron-scattering both the paramagnetic-ferromagnetic netics are still somewhat centroversial. study" on the quasi-one-dimensional cnd ferromagnetic-epin-glass tranfor- For " easy axis" antiferromagnets, soli- metal potassium cyanoplatinate, often mations.a ton-like effects (such as Doppler shifted called KCP. scattering from moving domain walls The results of the KCP study show low-dimensional magnetism and creation and annihilation of do- clearly that the charge-density wave The study of elementary excitations main-wall pairs) are expected even in has a wavelength incommensurate in low-dimensional magnets (especially the absence of external magnetic fields, with the crystal structure. This incom-quasi-one-dimensional magnets) has and they have been observed.7 mensurability arises because the wave-been an active field as well. The vector, q, of the unstable phonon mode fundamental reason for this interest is Charge fluctuations has a length determined by the Fermi that collective propagating excitations While it is widely accepted that surface of the electrons (in fact,it just occur in these systems at temperatures neutrons are indispensable for study- spans the Fermi surface, so for this one-high enough that magnetic long-range ing spin fluctuations, many physicists dimensional case the wavevector is just order is absent. The qualitative expla- find it at first surprising to learn that 2kr ). For KCP the size of the Fermi nation is that short range magnetic they are also very useful for the study surface bears no rational relationship order still exists on a scale given by a of charge fluctuations. The reason is to the interatomic spacings of the correlation length, and these quasi- that charge-fluctuation modes in con- undistorted structure; the two periods ordered regions can support collective densed matter are not pure, particular- are not rational multiples of each excitations with wavevectors larger ly for frequencies at or below those other. The resulting distorted struc-than the reciprocal correlation length. characteristic of phonon modes: A ture cannot reconcile the competing But the absence of long range order charge fluctuation (in the electron spatial periodicities: Because it has makes it impossible to use conventional cloud) exerts forces on the charged lost at least one element of discrete procedures to linearize the problem, atomic nuclei; because neutrons are translational symmetry it can nolong-leaving the theorist with nontrivial strongly couphd to the nuclei, the er be considered a conventional crystal-nonlinear problems to solve. Fort u- charge fluctuations are manifested line structure. As one might suppose, nately such problems are somewhat through anomalies in the resulting these incommensurate structures pos-easier to solve in one dimension than in neutron-scattering data. One can sess many unusual properties and have three dimensions, although one-dimen- think of the result as an anomaly in the psed interesting conceptual problems sional systems are harder to realize neutron-phonon scattering These ef- for theorists. For example, new gapless experimentally. The result has been a fects are particularly pronounced in excitations (that is,like acoustic rather rich dialogue between theorists and quasi-one-dimensional metals, materi- than optic phonons) called "phasons " experimentalists.' Models of one-di- als with a chain-like structure that appear in incommensurate structures; mensional systems show,in addition to exhibit st rong metallic conduction only these have no counterpart in conven-spin wave-like modes, localized large- along the chain direction. A one- tional crystals. Recent neutron-scat-amplitude excitations called solitons, dimensional electron gas of uniform tering studies
- have elucidated some of which preserve their integrity as they density is unstable to sinusoidal modu- their properties propagate along the magnetic chains. lation of the charge density, that is, it The KCP results also demonstrate it is believed that such excitations, or readily forms charge-density waves. clearly that structural phase transfor-PHYSCS TODAY / JANUARY 1995 29
%+
- 00) sot Polarized-neutron scattering. The O" ,
' (' %/ \* /i nuclear (non-spin-tfip) scattenng (bl2ck) and magratic (spin-flip) secttenng (color)
, for Cum Mru at 10 K demonstrating that atomic short-range ordenng can be separated from magnetic effects by polarized-neutron techniques.ao p,gure 8 .
f
/ ( ;
f
/ ;
(( '
'N
{ k ! I t r 000 100 h ' ) Mn concentration. The correlation commensurate or incommensurate (See the article by Mildred Dressel-h 11ngth associated with this modulation with respect to the underlying graphite haus, March 1984, page 60.) ' Again 1 is about 10 unit-cell lengths of the face- substrate. By changing coverage and graphite is the most studied host sub-i centered cubic cell at all concentra- temperature it has been possible to strate, but there are many other inter-p ti:ns Coexistent with these large mod- map out phase diagrams involving esting hosts as well; alkali atoms are )- ulated regions are smaller regions, order-disorder, commensurate-incom- the most frequently studied interca- , htving net ferromagnetic moments in mensurate and solid-liquid transfor- lants. Neutron scattering has helped
- which the spin correlations are deter. mations. Other systems that have been elucidate the nature of the stacking of I
l mined by the atomic short-range order. studied on graphite by elastic neutron the intercalant layers, and inelastic I The interactions between these small, scattering include O 2 , CF., C 2 H. (eth- neutron scattering has been used to f;rromagnetic regions and the larger ane) and CsD is (pentane, isopentane); study gaps that open in the phonon ( modulated regions are undoubtedly an these exhibit more complex phases and modes of the graphite compounds as a essential element in understanding the transformations. result of intercalation, providing im-complicated magnetic behavior of this Currently underway are preliminary portant information on the nature of l system. studies of inelastic neutron scattering the intercalant-host binding. Recent of physisorbed and chemisorbed spe- measurements ** with high energy reso-l Surface monolayers j cies; these have been carried out on lution made on graphite with interca-The standard probes for studies of many of the systems noted in the lated Rb and Cs show that at high ! surface structure (low-energy electron previous paragraph, but many oppor- temperature the disordered metal lay-diffraction, Auger spectroscopy and tunities remain. Ethylene on graphite ers may be characterized as highly photoelectron spectroscopy) depend for can serve as a representative of the viscous two dimensional fluids. sensitivity and surface specificity upon current state of the art. Figure 9 Further dynamical studies of the or-the large cross section associated with shows28 } the change in neutron scatter- dered intercalant phases, particularly + charged-particle scattering. But the ing that accompanies a change in those with incommensurabilities, ! lirge scattering cross sections necessar- ethylene orientation resu. ting from an should prove very rewarding. l J ily imply significant multiple scatter- increase in coverage. ; } ing that often complicates interpreta- Even modest flux increases available Future prospects j tion. By contrast, neutron scattering, at neutron-scattering facilities, com- The most copious sources of thermal } ifit can be seen at all,is usually readily bined with improvements in exfoliated neutrons have been-and still are- 3
- )
j interpretable. Thus, although neu- single-crystal substrate preparation, fission reactors, and over the years trons are a weak probe, they have would perhaps usher in a new era in most neutron-scattering research has ) contributed significantly to our knowl- such studies, allowing measurement of been carried out with these sources. t. ' edge of surface structures. To compen- the dispersion of individual phonon The current status of high performance sate for the lack of sensitivity, one uses branches rather than average phonon research reactors in the US is summar- {- substrates with large surface areas. density.of-states. A similar qualitative ized in the table. Although these reac. Many of the pioneering structural stud- advance occurred for bulk phonons tors are comparable in raw flux with tes of atoms and simple molecules with the advent of the contemporary the reactors anywhere else, develop-physisorbed on graphite (which has a high. performance reactors in the mid ment of cold. neutron facilities in the specific area of about 40 m2 /g) have 1960s. been carried out with neutrons. US is well behind that of Western Closely related to the phenomenon of Europe, which ur.dertook major expan. Systems studied include II,. D,, lle*, exfoliation is the process of intercala- sion in this area in the last decade. IU, Ar and Ne, all of which are tion, in which atoms of a second sub. Only recently have new cold neutron adsorbed as triangular structures with stance are inserted between lamellar guide halls been proposed for both the IIttice constants that may be either sheets of an appropriate host material. Ifigh Flux Beam Reactor at Brookha-34 PHYSICS TODAY / JANUARY 1985
~
- . ~ , , . . _ , - .n_,_---- -
f ENCLOSURE H REFERENCES FOR RESPONSE TO QUESTION 1 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . - _ - . . . _ _ . _ _ _ . . _ _ _ . _ . A
]
f $SE' RFACILITIES APPmn A National facilities for research in the physics of condensed matter I George H. Vineyard Physics Department. Brookhaven NationalLaboratory, Upton. New York,11973 i L. M. Fahcov Department ofPhysics, Uniwessty ofCalifornia. Berkeley. California 94720 (Received 21 October 1983; accepted for publication 15 Noveraber 1983) Brief descriptions are given of 23 national facilities in the U. S. that are ofimportance to research in the physics of condensed matter. These facilities range from nuclear reactors and synchrotron sources to high voltage electron microscopes and facilities for the preparation ofspecial materials g and submicron structures. They take a variety of forms and are located in several kinds of ! institutions, but are alike in beirg available to qualified sci-ntists from other laboratories. The primary purpose, size, major experimental equipment, and method of operation are described for each facility. PACS numbers: 29.25.Dz,61.90. + d,07.80. + x,89.20. + a INTRODUCTION It is evident that a strong trend toward national user facilities is stillin full swing, and that more centralized facili- j At the American Physical Society meeting in Los Angeles in I ties for condensed matter research will soon become avail-March of 1983 an invited poster session was held on Nation-aMe. Decisions on what new centers are most needed should cl Facilities of Importance to Condensed Matter Physics. be aided by this overview of what exists now. The session was arranged by the Division of Condensed O in the following, a short synopsis of each facility is giv-Matter Physics. There were 23 facilities featured, ranging en, including its primary purpose, major equipment, size, from nuclear reactors and synchrotron sources to high-vol-I and method ofoperation. Sources from w hich one can obtam t ge electron microscopes and facihties for the preparation m re inf rmation are also provided. of unique materials or submicron structures. Most of the The facilities are grouped under the following headings: facilities on display have come into operation within the last (1) neutr n s urces; (2) synchrotron radiation sources; (3) five years, many within the last one or two. This fact reficcts fac es f r m roanalysis, micr fabrication, and surface the rapid increase in the importance oflarge research devices studies; (4) electron microscopes; and 15). cnd combinations oflarge devices in condensed matter phys-The w riters are indebted to the operators of the various ics, together with the necessity that, because of their cost facilities for their cooperation in supplymg mformation. such facilities be deseloped on a national basis and widely shared. Thus a pattern of usage is developing in condensed 1. NEUTRON SOURCES matter physics which has been common in particle physics Nuclear reactors base been the traditional sources of for many years, and institutional arrangements are evolving neutron beams for condensed matter physics since the for accomplishing this objectise effectisely anc' fairly. All 1940's. Four U. S. reactors which are national facilities are these central facilities are governmentally funded. Only two, described in this section. Also included is a facihty within a howeser, are operated directly by the federalFovernment; facility, the National Center for Small Angle Scattering Re-the others are operated by contractors, many in nationallab- search at Oak Ridge. ora'ones, some m state universities. More recently pulsed neutron sources drisen by medi-Even though the 23 facilities included all of the very um energy accelerators have come on the scene, and two of ltrge national facilities which are of prime importance to these which are now national facihties are represented. condensed matter physics, the display was not exhaustive. The main focus in w hat follows is on neutron scattering; Other facihties exist that w ere not included because of space radiation damage in materials has not been emphasized. limitationt The list, how eser, gives an excellent siew of the Most of these facihties, however, also offer capabilities for present national posture. It shows that the United States is in expming specimens to 5anous kinds of radiation. a strong position, but aho makes it clear that condensed matter physics is a dy namic arca in which rapid grow th and A. High Flux Beam Reactor, Brookhaven National frequent change must occur It is hoped that this review will Laboratory, Upton, NY be s aluable to potential users and will assist in the wide dis. The liigh Flux Beam Reactor illFBR) prosides the semination ofinformation on what is asailable and how the scientific community with one of the most intense thermal interested researcher goes about gaining access to these neutron sources in existence today. The liFBR began oper-centers at mg in 19M at a pow er of 40 M W. It has had a cold neutron 620 Rev. Sci. tnstrum 55 (4). AprH 1984 0034-6748/84/04062011$01.30 i 1984 Americaninstitute of Physics 620
$7
,w . m
. yy .
- g. y g g ; q
{' j , I 58 2 i facility with liquid-hydrogen moderator operating since State Disision, Oak Ridge National Laboratory Oak Ridge, Aphi 1981. The reactor w as recently upgraded and has been TN 37830. operating at 60 NfW since September 1982. Stany types of C. Research reactor facility (MURR), University of experiments are possible at the if FBR, including magnetic Missouri, Columbia, MO g and nonmagnetic structure studies, phonon and magnon dis- The University of Niinouri operates a 10-Niw reactor ( persion measurements, and diffuse scattering studies. Be- as a neutron and gamma radiatien source for condensed t cause of the relatively high energy resolution and the sensi- matter research. Interested parties from outside the Univer-tivity of neutrons to magnetic moments and to the nuclei of sity are encouraged to make use of the facility through coop-almost all elements of the periodic table, neutron scattering eratise experiments with members of the staff, or through makes feasible many studies which would be difficult or im- the Reactor Sharing Program, supported by the Department possible with x rays. Facilities ofinterest to solid-state physi- of Energy. At NIURR there are facilities to conduct experi-cists at the HFDR include seseral triple-axis neutron spec- ments in at least four areas related to condensed matter trometers which can be used for both elastic and inelastic physics research. (1) For neutron scattering, two triple-axis scattering measurements with incident neutron energies spectrometers are available to measure dispersion relations; between 2 and 200 meV. A wide variety of different sample two single-crystal diffractometers and one powder diffrac-environments is available, including temperatures from 35 tometer are available to measure atomic and magnetic order-mK to 1500 K, magnetic fields up to 7 T, and pressures up to ing in condensed matter systems; one small-angle neutron 35 kbar. scattering spectrometer is available for polymer and molecu-For additional information contact D. It Grier or G. lar biological studies; a neutron interferometer can be used Shirane, Physics Department, Brookhasen National Labo- for special experiments.12) For gamma scattering, three ratory, Upton, NY 11973. unique instruments are available: 51UGS, which is a gam-ma-ray diffractometer for structure studies; QUEGS, which B. High flux isotope reactor, Oak Ridge National is a gamma diffractometer with Niossbauer energy analysis 1.aboratory, Oak Ridge, TN for quasielastic gamma measurements; and COGS, which is The fligh Flux Isotope Reactor serves the condensed a Compton spectrometer now available for measuring mo-matter physics community by providing high intensity mentum distnbution of electrons. (3) Trace element analysis beams of thermai neutrons. The scattering facilities available can be done by instrumental, radiochemical, and prompt include eight different instruments, not counting the 30-m neutron activation; it allows the characterization of elements Small-Angle Neutron Scattering (SANS) instrument de. in condensed matter samples. l3) Analyses of deep levels in scribed elsewhere. They are: (1) the triple-axis polarized. the band gap of semiconductors can be made by using deep-beam spectrometer, which permits polarization analysis ex. level transient spectroscopy, current transient spectroscopy, periments; (2) and (3) two general-purpose triple axis and the newly developed charge transient spectroscopy, spectrometers used for most of the phonon dispersion mea. which allows 10"' deep lesels per cebic centimeter to be de. surements, but which are also useful for modest resolution tected. quasielastic studies and fairly high resolution powder dif. For additional information contact R. Nf. Brugger, Di-fraction studies;(4) a liquid ditfractometer with a linear posi. rector, Research Reactor Facility, Research Park, Colum-tion-sensitive detector; (5) a double perfect-crystal, sery. bia,510 65211. high resolution SANS spectrometer which has been used D, NBS research reactor, National Bureau of primarily to study vortex lattices in superconductors; (6) a Standards, Gaithersburg, MD four-circle diffractometer for crystallographic studies; (7) a The N DS research reactor is expected to double its pow-more limited triple-axis unit with a fixed incident energy of er to 20 Niw by the end of 1983. In Starch of 1983 it had 25 14.7 meV; and (8) a time-of flight correlation chopper spec- ex perimental facilities installed for materials reseach, activa-trometer. The latter has been equipped recently with a sys- tion analysis, radiation standards, and nuclear physics. Ten tem of ultrasonically pulsed sihcon crystals to monochroma- of the horizontal beam ports are dedicated to condensed tize and pulse the neutron beam incident on the sample. matter science, with a wide variety of neutron scattering in-A new two-dimensional detector has been developed; it struments installed. Special features include: (1) a three-axis utilizes a 12 in. diam neutron-sensitive LiF-ZnS phosphor, spectrometer with two low t>ackground analyzer systems to an image intensifier, and a telesision camera system. This allow measurements ranging from soft modes and spin wave detector has been extremely usefulin the obsersation of dif- excitations in solids (as low as 1.0 meV) to the spectroscopy fuse scattering, superlattice formation, and powder patterns, oflow levels of hydrogen and molecular species in metals as well as crystal characterization, all in real time liess than a and catalysts (30-300 meV);(2) a multidetector high resolu-second). The system also has image storing capabilities. tion ditTractometer used to study complex structures by Some of the auxiliary equipment includes furnaces, powder diffraction, e.g., magnetic intermetallic compounds, closed-cycle refrigerators, helium four cryostats, a helium- catalysts, and ionic conductors; (3) a biological diffraction three cryostat, a superconducting magnet, and a helium- station used to study the structure of proteins; (4) a depth three-helium four d.lution refrigerator with a srlit-coil su- profiling facility for the nondestructise determination of perconducting magnet, which is capable of reaching 7 mK density profiles of selected elements near surfaces; and 15) a and a field of 5 T. small. angle neutron scattering facility with continuously For additionalinformation contact II. A. Nfook, Solid vanable wavelengths from 4 to 10 A, a wase vector transfer 421 Rev. Sct. Instrum., Vol. 5 5, No. 4, April 1944 National User Factittlee $21
y __
,9 s' " -
ENCLOSURE I REFERENCES FOR RESPONSE T0 QUESTION 1
Jacus on Hewarch in Energy. He:lth, and Eaironment August lH4 ,4 A reprinted by permission from Oak Ridge Associated Universities smaller, lighter electnc motors. GM may begin using the matenal in auto-mobile starter motors later this year, e a with many other uses to follow USAa3s Most Powerful UniversitvJ Trac.ing and Treat.ing Disease MuRR s hgh fiux density also Reactor Enters Third Decade makes it ideal for neutron activation analysis, a fast, accurate process that Editor's note This is the 24th research projects are in progress and measures trace amounts of many featured Express research article on some 20 tons of samples are irradi- elements. ORAU member institutions The arte ated in one of its most unusual and intn-cles, suggested by ORAU Councers Centrally located in Columbia. Mo . guing applications, the selenium level University Programs Committee, are the reactor, known by its call letters, in toenail clippings from a cohort of prepared by the pubhc relations office MURR. serves all four University of 70.000 nurses is being measured us-of each institution. Missouri campuses. In addition it is a ing neutron activation analysss. The University of Missoon has been ~ a member of ORAU since 1981 and ,
, y is represented on the ORAU Councd m. i. g; .
of Sponsonng Institutions by Dr John W ~ ~ i, ~ L
~
Park vice chancedar for academic af-
- y m* W ,I
^
lairs at 1 Rol:a campus Dr Don H. M MURR Derector Blount, e an of graduate school and vice pre;ast for research. Is the
' hh ' ~
;. 4 o
t Dr. Robert Brugger adjusts equipment jy',s r earch campus tepresentative for the Colum- '% bia campu at a narrow nuclear
'\ ### ""
The highest flux highest power, ste6dy-state univers:ty-owned reactor - b
*Q : 4 '
in the United States, the University of f .. . t e Missoun Research Reactor, this year e celebrates 20 years of operation dedr cated to education research, and ser-oE g ,
'E '
vice. " l 4 Functioning around the clock seven , , , days a week, the reactor operates at -- full power (currently 10 megawatts) valuable resource for the nation's The hypothesis of the study, more than 90 percent of the time. In scientists and those overseas designed by Ha vard University, is that a typical year, more than 100 Sening Industry an inm sd nsk of sain types of j cancer can be carre!ated with below-
&. - ,)
Thanks to its high flux density, six beam ports, and rehable performance. normal dietary intake of selenium. Toenails are ar alyzed because they 7' t
~
MURR is a va!uable tool for industry reflect the bods s long-term selenium For example, its gamma ray diffrac- balance. k *QTp - 4' tometer, the only one in the nation. was used by EG&G Inc . Santa Bar-A inal involving selenium and breast cancer is under way, and other 4 v ( f* . bara Calif , to measure imperfections in a mercunc iodide crystal grown a-NAA-cependent epidemiological stu-dies are ongoing or planned. 9 f board an orbmng space shuttle Besides helping determine disease
',f'
/ i Mercunc iod'de is used in radiation detectors If space. grown crysta's causes. MURR plays a key role in d-agnosis and treatment, pnman!y F/ / a dP v
have fewer imperfections than earth-grown ones. as preliminary results through the development and produc-tion of radioisotopes For example a s suggest. more sensitive detectors unique agent for imag'ng blood flow could resu!t Greater sensitivity would in the brain. propylene amine
, , make lower radiation doses feastble oxime / technetium 99-m. is currently
- I with medical imag,ng devices and undergoing clinical tna's 7 2 would be beneftcial in instruments The agent. the product of colla-such as rad:ation monitors boration between researchers on the gf. MURR also helped General Motors' University's Columbia campas. MURR "i
- g$4u 7_ Delco Remy d vision develop an ex- personnel and Amersham Interna-
\ M I. '
tremely powerful permanent magnet, tional, allows ine= pensive, widely avad-Magnequench MURR he! ped deter- able SPECT scanners to proauce cere-A neutron intederometer dessned and budt at the Unnersity of Ussevn is used mine the matenafs crystal structure. bra' blood flow images Such images. in senior research scentiSt Dr Heimut part of the key to its strength. an important diagnost:c tool. hereto-Kaser s neutron scarrenng research Magnequench will make pc a ble fore were avadable at just a few major
m
~~
students' science fair projects. for- ~ nation's most powerful universit example research reactor. N /
- Each year dozens of scientific p - About the University of Missouri
- 4 , pers. seminars colloquia. and talks J* are given as a result of work per. The first state university west of lW,,b, ?
. formed at MURR the Mississippi River the University of
. . , 9.* iW. Missoun began in Columbia in 1839 y Reactor Upgrade Planned with 77 students. Today the Univer-l4-2 , Jf,,. Although already pre-eminent in its sity has four campuses and 52.000
, :;_t [ j ,
field, the University of Missouri facility students, about 25 percent of whom
,A .
plans significant improvements as it are enrolled in graduate or profes-9 begins its third decade of operation. sional studies. - Plans call for a fuel element up. The University's 225.000 alumni grade, a power increase (to the 30 hold positions of prominence megawatt range), addition of a cold throughout the world in academia, i
'k neutron source and an increase in the business and industry, science and facility's size. With research needs medicine, government, and the media.
% . calling for higher neutron output, such The president of the University, which
- . ;,, changes are essential if MURR is to is governed by a nine-member Board
'l w @M g% continue to fulfill its unique role as the of Curators, is Dr. C. Peter Magrath Wayne Pearson. a graduate research assistant at MURR uses gamma ray dif-
;yg. ' ,.
,b fc fraction to help compare charactenstics of 7 p ,
j_ + ~ f a crystal growth in space with a simdar m y J one produced on earth l' V medical centers. '
'4 Several new radiotherapeuticals are , %
being developed with MURR's help. i _ 47 N /,/ UM-Columbia researchers have pro-duced an agent with great promise _7
, ,, %(( f
[ for treat:ng bone cancer and signed a hg g :r j research and development major agreement with Dow Chemical Co irgg ,e
. 4L
./
Scientists on the University's Rolla campus, in conjunction with a Georgia firm, are perfecting irradiated gfass mi-h, , fh .1
; he
/
( crobeads for liver cancer therapy And, patent disclosures have been Graduate research assistants Theresa Suthvan. left, and Lesa Wetter use neutron ac-twation analysis to measure selenium in toenad samples. part of stud <es to odentify links filed on agents to treat arthntis_ between trace elements and cancer Performing Many Roles MURR also fulfills may other needs: OPERATING EXPERIENCE UNIVERslTY of MISSOURI RESEARCH REACTOR
- Physicists from UM-Columbia and g elsewhere use the reactor for neu- i ,ow. . ,n m.,.. . ,,,e tron interferometry studres of fun- ss eo! , ' g "s damental quantum mechanica! ,o wof ne
^
i phenomena, such as gravity's ef- l l ""9 fect on neutrons $
' " * ~ ' " * * ' * *- coe i o Researchers from UM-Kansas City i" .
are providing Army scientists with J, ss ooo
, [
data from neutron scattenng stud- 5a 3 nooI
'x ;
I tes to help develop liquid propel- E t g ' lants for munitions Such liquids are { " "'
;' to no su. . ieo m.i.J.
gM/ ne *i y l safer to handle and more reliable - than powder charges- 2,,ocol ~ ', # i ^
- MURR provides educational oppor- ,o og J tunities for graduate and undergra- ' " ' '"*C""8"*
.ne duate students from UM and other ;
# ,,,. / lo secondary institutions, including o
'"' * 8 " "" ' ' "
i schools The reactor has irradeted food for some Missoun high school camoaa vtaa L
m-. O p. ENCLOSURE J REFERENCES FOR RESPONSE TO QUESTION 1 l f {
, ' 4
& c M EMM N M [ggy MD 97 .AAf4ts8 edAfutTTA EsE81GY Sv5fgaAE. seC
- December 19, 1986 Robert Brugger University Of Missouri Research Reactor (MURR)
Research Park , Columbia, Missouri 65211
Dear Bob:
i We appreciate your willingness to irradiate osmium-191 in the University of Missouri reactor while the High Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR) is tegorarily out ' of service. As described in the enclosed reprints, we have developed a new, improved Os-190/Ir-191m radionuclide generator system which is currently in
- clinical use in Europe and will enter clinical trials in the U.S. soon. In addition, we are also continuing igortant studies of applications of iridium-191m here at Oak Ridge and in conjunction with investigators at several i
other institutions, including the Massachusetts General Hospital, and thus i continue to have an important need for osimium-191. Thus, we would not be able to continue this important work during the hiatus while the HFIR is shut down if an alternative irradiation facility with the necessary flux were not available. Although we do not have the production figures for osmium-191 for your reactor. I have sunnarized below our experience in the HFIR and additional production data are also included in the enclosed reprints. From our experience, to obtain sufficient specific activity, an irradiation for 10-14 days at a flux of about 5 x 101" n.cm2 /sec is required. Thus, with your reactor we would expect that 7-10 l' days at 8 x 101" or two weeks at 3.8 x 10 1
" would be sufficient, if the target can be returned to us promptly for processing.
In addition to the production of osmium-191, we also require copper-64 and tungsten-188 for our research program supported by the the Office of Health and Environmental Research (OHER) at the Department of Energy. The copper-64 is important for our developmental studies with various new radiopharmaceuticals, and for work in conjunction with collaborators (J. Crook, H.D.) at the Oak Ridge Associated Universities (0RAU) studying the heart uptake of copper-64 for PET studies. As you know, the tungsten-188 is igortant for our work with the W-188/Re-188 generator for therapeutic applications. Although platinum-195m is used for synthesis of an anitumor agent distributed by the ORNL Isotope Distribution Office on a cost-recovery basis, there is a critical need by investigators in this country for both pharmacokinetic, biological and clinical studies. Below are sunnarized our production experience with these radionuclides in the HFIR, the expected irradiation periods required at 4-5 x 101" n/ce2 .sec and the frequency of irradiations that we would like.
4. Robert Brugger 2 December 19, 1986 l l HFIR Univ. Mo. l Radionuclide days yield days frequency (sci /mg) Osmium-191 3 250-300 10-14 bi-monthly Copper-64 1 1,200 5-6 monthly Tungsten-188 21 3.6 1 cycle bi-monthly Platinum-195m 1.5 1 5-6 bi-monthly Thank you for your willingness to discuss with us the possibility of irradiations in the University of Missouri Reactor during the HFIR shut-down and I will look forward to talking with you again so we can plan to send you the targets after you have determined what irradiation schedule will be possible. 4 and to discuss what charges we will incur for these irradiations so we can establish a purchase order for these services. I- Sincerely yours, F. F. (Russ) Knapp, Jr., PhtD. ' Group Leader Nuclear Medicine Group Health and Safety Research Division I (615) 574-6225 FFK:la , cc: P. Cho - OHER/ DOE h . Crook, M.D. - ORAU p..J. Ehrhardt' - Univ. M0. , J. Maddox - OHER/ DOE i
1 ENCLOSURE K REFERENCES FOR RESPONSE T0 QUESTION 1
N PURDUE DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS October 11, 1982 Dr. Robert M. Brugger Research Reactor University of Missouri Columbia, Missouri 65211
Dear Dr. Brugger,
I am writing this letter to document my feelings about the importance of the Research Reactor to the Scientific Community in the U.S. Let me say at the outset that as a solid state spectroscopist with special interests in impurities and defects in semiconductors, I have had unique opportunities to use your Reactor. One of my former graduate students, Dr. C. J. Jagannath, and my colleague, Professor Z. W. Grabowski, collaborated with me on the excitation spectra of neutron transmutation doped silicon (NTD-Si). This work was entirely based on the neutron irradiations carried out at the Research Reactor and Dr. Jon Meese provided us with all the scientific and technical expertise. Two publications (C. Jagannath, Z. W. Grabowski, and A. K. Ramdas, Solid State Commun. 29, 355 (1979) and Phys. Rev. B23, 2082 (1981)) were based on this work which has, I am very pleased to state, attracted considerable attention. I gave an Invited Talk on this work at " International Conference on Neutron irradiation Effects in Solids", Argonne National Laboratory, 9-12 Nov.1981. Jagannath and Grabowski attended a very significant conference on Neutron Transmutation Doping held at Columbia, Missouri during the Spring of 1978. Jagannath's Ph.D. thesis is to a substantial degree devoted to neutron transmutation doped silicon. Based on these personal experiences, I consioer your institution to be a valuable asset to the solid state community and universities engaged in solid state research. Many of my colleagues at Purdue can vouch for the importance of your institution, also based on similar personal experiences. When I visited your university in the Fall of 1979 to give a Physics Colloquium I had the pleasure of seeing the operation of the Reactor; I came away deeply impressed with its unique combination of technical qualities and organization for basic research. I wish your Research Reactor a very prosperous future. With my best wishes WC
/ co e,\
b
- A. K. Ramdas j' ""' E Physics Building Professor of Physics 8"didn' 47907 AKR:jgs $[ We l'te"'
O'
^
j s ENCLOSURE L REFERENCES FOR RESPONSE TO QUESTION 1 L
5 -
-s ,:
ji . - '
' UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY
^
* %Ah4 Saps 4RA
- SANTA C#4'E f, f mEasts.EY
- DAV:s
- IRVINE
- LOS ANGER.ES
- DIVER $1DE
- SAN DIEGO
- SAN FR4NCI9CO DEPARTMENT OF M ATERIAL5 SCIENCE I.EARST MINING Bt'lLDING AND MINERAI, ENGINEERING ,
BER KELEY. CA1.lFORNI A 94720' i4IU 642-3401 October 15,19M , e, 4 8 c i Dr. R. M. Brugger , t Research Reactor ' 1 University of Misicurl ~ Columbia, Msouri' 65211
/ .
Dear Dr. Situggers 1 am writing to you to point olLt how Empor. tant and Valuable the strv$Ces of the University of %so uti Research Reactor facilitiu ane for hur ptogram. We are involved in both basic and applied restatch of ncLikon ' LAansmnLtation doped germanium single crystals. We sbidy de electrical conduction mechanibms.down .to 0.3 K and are planning in u.se thue ruutts in the development of far-infn.vted rueatch botometeAA (i.e., 1R detectou). Such detectors are of great importance to far infrared _ asttonomy, a field which is rapidty expanding, thanks to spact born I instAumentation. The quantLlative. understanding of low temperatune
- conduction and de propeA functioning af the bolome.ters is critically '
dependent on the precise and reptoducible iAradiation of smitt geAntanium - single crystal specimens, The' e.xpertise of your staff and tite excc11ent monitoring eqtLipment make it pdssible dat .tnese. stringent reglLirtJRen!.s can be me.t. Le.t me express my appteciation for the excettent and cAucial seAvice akich has been provided by be Ruearcit Reactor for ova expeAlmental ,; ruearch program. 1, sLacerely, hope that we will be able to obtain your he.tp in future monb;s 'and years. With my best regatds. , Sincerely yours,
~
t.L
,,,T s ,.1
, (. ._ - ;
l'rof. C. E. Ual.teh Associate Profusor EEH/aso , i i i 5 L____._ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
N M-f.8 .,
.c ts
)
/ g,
?
o . t ENCLOSURE N 1 f, ' ?
'.'r,*
t
' c' REFERENCES FOR RESPONSE TO QUESTION 1 h
t 0 1 1
/
4 4 /j '
/
i o i, e 1
'. i Professor John . King
Nuclear Engineering Department University of Pfichigan Ann Arbor, Michigan 48104 4
g 9
\
9 l
\ 'I p
i i l
~
. i . .
, . A.. Ovnroll Management of the MURR Fncility -
It is evident to all of us, I am-sure, that Bob Brugger is . a leader of unusual-strength and shrewdness. MURR was a well engineered facility to begin with, for which Missouri should recognize the contribution of Ardath Emmons. Under Bob Brugger's hand the scientific potential of MURR is coming to fruition, and certainly in some areas already operates at a "world class" level, capable of competing with the best 7 or 8 neutron centers in the world. Bob is foremost a recognized neutron scientist but i- his aggressive leadership adds a dimension that sets him apart . and above - all other scientific program directors . I have known. TQ1e University of Missouri *, I bel'ieve, was very fortunate to bring Bob to this project. Specific comments on the overall effectiveness of the MURR
' management I would make are:
(1) the organization is program-oriented and the lines of authority are strongly delineated. This is not easy to do in an academic community which traditionally has an aversion to regimentation. This is Bob Brugger's particular operating prin-ciple. It sometimes causes temporary personal anguish but there is J32 question of each person's responsibilities. (2) the rapid growth in technical staff over the last 5 years has been deliberate on Bob Brugger's part, I believe, to prepare for the surge in research instrumentation coming now. The recent MURR staff acquisitions have included several very wise choices in Jon Meese, Ron Berliner, and Fred Ross. The hiring or pro-motion of operational and service personnel such as C. McKibben
~
(reactor manager) , O. Olson (health physics) , Chester Edwards (plant engineer) S. Gunn (service engineer) have been particularly shrewd, . in my opinion. Especially is this so since it had to be done within a well entrenched staff. , It is worth' noting that the present staff arrangement seems to have evoked a very positive response from "old
~
hands", particularly Associate Director Don Alger. a y - ____ , ----p , __,m. - _ . ,. - - - , . -
~.
~2-(3) " keeping ahead of the competition" is a central theme
, for each of the several technical program groups in MURR. 'This is done through regular staff meetings in which critical questions are. deliberately put. National' and international meeting attendance and presentation are strongly encouraged. National topical meetings
-at MURR have been pushed. It may well be, as Bob Brugger himself suggested, too much traveling for a staff already short-handed has occurred in the last two years. I believe for the next several years " beating the competition" means first of all perfecting and -
exploiting the instruments now in~ place. . % (4) the operating spirit of MURR today is to maintain a ) robust mixture of basic research, academic service, and commercial enterprise. This is a unique combination, quite different from
.that of national laboratories and any academic institution to my
\
knowledge. In my opinion it is basic to the present success of the MURR program. There is a somewhat subtle philosophy present )- tio keep this mix going with vigor and strong morale. It is not ., apparent to the staff or to University users that the exciting basic research projects take precedence over the other functions of MURR. Rather, it appears that the service base load takes highest priority followed by commercial efforts, because this g serves the broadest community and provides outside income to MURR. Established, sponsored research programs are expected to provide their own shop services, equipment, and (I think) reactor use charges insofar as possible. This has occasioned at least one criticism from research users. In fact, it has not diminished the excitement or extent of the basic research effort at all. Rather, it guarantees as strongly as possible three results; (a) high morale among operating personnel doing relatively boresome jobs, (b) a vital margin of funding to explore new experiments (the initiation of the SANS spectrometer is a case in point), and (c) the heaviest exploitation of the reactor source possible.
(5) the quality of the professional staff' at this point is in the main excellent, 'but despite the build-up of the last few years it is'still short-handed. This seems to me to be-true in two areas particularly. (a) A broad program in electronic micro , i- mini- computerization has been undertaken, which is in addition to the constant needs for other instrumentation. This has been carried, so far as I can see, by one man (R. Berliner) , 'with part time assistance from the computing center and from the research people themselves. A second, junior man is needed. (b) The general area of engineering materials research, which encompasses both radiation effects (J. Meese) and neutron spectro-
. scopy (W. Yelon), has strong potential for growth. There is need for one or two " additional solid state professionals.
(6). MURR's Service to the Academic Community MURR's management performance here has been, in my opinion, outstanding, and well beyond the call of duty to its charter. It should be realized first that MURR's ties with the Physics Department at Columbia are'very unusual in academia and constitute a primary source of technical strength for both physics and MURR. For many years the Chemistry Departnent has been encouraged and ' supported at E Port in the study of complex molecular crystal structures. Nuclear Engineering has been supported continuously l by a series of experiments at F Port and in the development'of' . j neutron radiographic techniques. More recently there has begun i s (a) a healthy relation with Rolla in the area of metals structure
.and magnetic materials; (b) an embryonic effort with Mechanical Engineering (A. Krawitz) .in neutron characterization of the en-gineering properties of materials; (c) the extensive involvement of the Department of Archaeology in " neutron archaeology". The extent of MURR's isotope production service to the Columbia Medical Center, to thq, Columbia Department of Physiology, as well as other Missouri institutions was impressively reviewed for the committee.
The development by MURR staff, in collaboration with a number of Medical Center staff, of new activation techniques for medical pro-blems was also impressive.
,. , 4 Thera ware questions raised by come committee members es to the lack of involvement of Bio-Chemistry, Chemistry', and other possible non-Columbia users. I find it impossible to agree with these questions in view of this extensive review of services and collaborative efforts, not only provided but constantiy encouraged. Departments either in Columbia or elsewhere in Ehe University who are not significantly involved and wish to be, I must conclude, are in that position only because of their own inertia.
(7) In summary I believe the University should view with great satisfaction the present MURR management. The mix of basic
.research, service, and commercial venture is handled in a shrewd, aggressive, and highly effective manner.
B. Neutron Sdectroscony Program
' The' quality of this program ranks with the best in the world.
It is clearly ahead of any academic reactor program in the world, i and competes with the best national laboratories in the U.S. and ) Europe in -quality if not in size. I would judge its program on a level with, or better than, the NBS neutron scattering program. This is true for all its spectroscopic programs, among which I take particular note of (a) inelastic lattice scattering (Yelon, Tompson, Werner) (b) powder and single crystal' diffraction (Yelon), (c) basic physics of the neutron (Werner), (d) suyface molecular dynamics- (Taub) . There is now a sufficient critical mass in the Columbia cam. pus of highly knowledgeable spectroscopists (including Bob Brugger himself) to undertake not only difficult conventional 1 problems, but sophisticated new projects as well. In the latter category are the new MUGS and MURR-SANS spectrometers which open up many exciting research possibilities in polymers, metallurgy,
-- engineering materials, and chemical structural analysis. These programs are ideal for users such as myself - the quality of, people and instrumentation is superior yet the atmosphere is
. informal. These programs, with the present personnel involved, l
- are as fundable now and for the immediate future as any I know of.
I
, - S-The only limitation MURR hus in this arca is its flux intensity, which is, for example, about x10 lower than Grenoble or ORNL, Except for the sparcity of its staff, this program could easily qualify as a national " users facility".
I would describe the spectroscopy group as dedicated and tempermental - typical of highly motivated scientists. Keeping the peace is sometimes a problem for Bob Brugger - in part because the funding and instrumentation involved are not MURR's property alone. I note with particular satisfaction the increase over the last two years in the numbsr of grad 6 ate students actively work-ing on the beam hole floor. I can offer few guidelines on the future direction of the scattering program. Exciting, demanding new research will come naturally from this collection of talented people and their new instrumentation. Perhaps particularly promising are the possibil-ities for studies on a variety of new materials and for new methods to study materials of engineering inportance. One final remark I wish to make; the neutron program is
. strengthened substantially by the concurrent use of other spec-troscopic techniques. Some of these (IR, ESR) are being under-taken by Physics staff. Two techniques for which I would urge greater consideration are x-ray small angle and wide angle dif-fraction, and electron transmission microscopy.
C. Radiation Effects Program This is by. comparison with the previous program a small, new ef fort. As I view it, this group was started to provide solid-state back up expertise for the extensive effort in neutron transmutation doping (. N TD) of bulk single crystal silicon. This it has done but the quality of effort and output of the group
'~~~
has developed far beyond a service effort. Basic physics questions have been attacked both regarding the NTD product today and also l regarding new applications. Radiation effects experiments tend to reveal our ignorance about unirradiated systems. In the field of semi-conductor research and development this group (J. Meese)
'~
. . . . 6-
'io o "world class" effort with a fundable future. ,
'It in, I think, d
un'crstaffed. It probably could use help from transmission and o
' scanning electron microscopic instrumentation, were that available elsewhere in the University.
This group'has recently undertaken some radiation e5fects experiments in metals / metal alloys. The committee raised questions about the appropriateness of this effort in view of the limitation od fasti neutron flux available, and also because of entrenched metallurgical programs existing elsewhere. I disagree with such questions. MURR should acquire expertise in this important area (quite different from semi-conductors) and there is sufficient fast flux to make many interesting studies at MURR. 'The level will necessarily be a learning one for today, but I believe this group has potential to make contributions .of significance tomorrow. i Closer cooperation with ROLLA metallurgy is indicated - especially for funding, but for background knowledge as well. D. Neutron Activation Analysis Program This program was described as starting as recently as 1978. I believe there has been an inherited personnel problem here,
.since actually the program is not new. It functions as a straight service, as a scientific collaborator, and as an educational center ,
for the production and use of radioactive isotopes. Heaviest uses are in medicine and more recently in archaeology. This is a large group and has apparently suffered in the past from lack of " state of the art" instrumentation. Certainly some good research papers
.have been produced. To my knowledge its very broad service to the '
Missouri community has been good. It. is not a "world class" program, i although its new leader (J. Vogt) predicted some forward jumps in instrumentation and in additional techniques (such as prompt analysis? The emergence of a high quality research program here remains to be seen. I have some reservations that it can " keep ahead of the competition". . I l l
l _ y_ Perhaps its role should be judged on its large service I was -impressed by the broad spectrum of Missouri, program alone. educators served (among others, Troutner, Ives, and especially the excellent relation with H. Anderson of Stevens College) . E. Isotope Applications Program This program is in search of new or improved radio isotope uses. It is closely allied with neutron activation analysis, and seems to me to be the research-oriented arm of the activation
~
prog ram. The group is small, (G . Ehrhardt) and acts in a collabor-ative role with other disciplines -in the development of new radioisotope applications. It is almost exclusively devoted to bio-medical problems and applications (Volkert, Holmes, A. Jones) . The success of this program depends on the initiative and ingen-uity of .outside bio-medical staff, but it appears to me to provide excellent in-house encouragement, appropriate expertise, and prc>-
~
bably a . good part of the ingenuity' for new projects. The idea of such a group I applaud as a quality service with an excellent chance of promoting future fund'ing and research efforts by a number of Missouri medical and physiology research staff. F. Nuclear Engineering Program This program is the most difficult for me to evaluate. It is a mixed bag and I think the committee will judge it unfairly because its presentation was somewhat obtuse. I will try to summarize my reactions briefly as follows: (1) neutron radiography (Alger) ,
- This is a "world class" area of expertise at MURR in terms of technique development. It is not clear to me how active or fundable this program will be down the road. If there is commercial or other interest in this technique by any group, it seems to me MURR is the U. S . leader.
(2) fast' heutron spectral measurements (Meyer, Miller) This is a worthwhile engineering venture which provides benchmark data on fast' neutron penetration spectra in shielding materials.. Some worthy papers have been published in the immediate __ past. It probably does not have a bright future experimentally.
I, (3) nuclear ~ cross-section measurements with filtered beams (Bruggel Some good experiments have been accomplished which reveal some surprisingiy strong effects of material properties on nuclear re-sonahce cross-sections and on Doppler effects. The use of filtered, semi-monochromatic neutron beams at several energies is a unique advantage of the MURR program. However, the nuclear cross-section measurements that can be made at fission reactors has been heavily exploited, and there are excellent accelerator techniques that are also heavily used. I would not expect funding for cross'-section work at any reactor to have a strong future. . (4) reactor operation and performance evaluation (Schlapper, Loyol This is not a research program. It is, ra ther , a good training opp' o rtunity for M.S . level engineers over the next several years. It can provide excellent support data for the operation and safety questions of MURR itself. In this age of increasing NRC demands, such an opportunity to kill two birds with one stone seems worth-while to me. It probably has reasonable funding possibilities. (5) In summarv I think it fair to say, that there are not many good Ph.D. research problems left in the conventional areas of nuclear engineering that 'the MURR . facility can provide. There are training opportunities of value. , J l l l 4
+ ~-+m., ,c- >,-m+--- -
,--.w, .--n-------- --- -, r- * - . rm- m----r ,--+-v---w~-m,m, - + - ~ ~ - - - - - ~ ~ -
. 9 Dr. Robert S. Carter Chief, Reactor Radiation Division National Bureau of Standards Washington, D.C. 20234 O
N O
? c, -; 4 ENCLOSURE N REFERENCES FOR RESPONSE TO QUESTION 1 l
i i I f l I l
i
.i>.. ..
Dr. David L. Price Director, IPNS Program Argonne National Laboratory 9700 South Cass Avenue Argonne, Illinois 60439
" mpa,wHnwy
*3 ~
%RCONNE NATIONAL LABORATORY -
9700 Soutli CAss Avmt. A*/m,llocais 60439 .Tdgliore 312/972-May 19,1980 Dr. M. George Vice President for Acadenic Affairs 309 University Hall . Col unbia , MO 65211
Dear Mr. George:
This letter summarizes my impression of the fiURR program following the review of May 6-8. In response what I believe you requested of the reviewers, I will address the quality.and direction of the research programs being carried out and planned at the facility. Let me start with some general, perhaps rather obvious observations. Clearly the quality of research depends on tw things:
. good facilities and good science. For the former, the MURR staff is responsible for selecting, planning, building, advertising the facilities to the scientific community and optimizing their utilization; the priorities for both the original decisions on providing facilities, and the decisions on their subsequent use, have to take into account the current scientific frontiers and the anticipated interest of the user community. For the science, the scientific community (mostly outside MURR) is responsible for planning, proposing, carrying out and reporting good scientific programs; these decisions must depend on current scientific interest '
and on the unique features of the facilities available. Thus from the University's
. point of view, the responsibility for good research is shared between the RIRR staff and the facilities of the acadenic departments, and on good conmunications between the two.
In terms of providing the facilities, Dr. Brugger and the MURR staff are doing an excellent job. The choice of instrunentation is sensible, current with recent developnents'in the field (position-sensitive detectors, small-angle scattering) and in places (the gamma-ray spectrometer) genuinely innovative. The scienti fic l staff is taking reasonable steps to advertise the facilities around the University l and beyond, and both scientific and operations staffs are sensitive to the needs l of the outside users. As demand increases, the scheduling of experiments may l have to been done more systematically, but that can be easily handled. In terns of the scientific programs, there is clearly a spread in the
- extent and quality of the involvenent of different academic. departments. The l
excellent collaborations with the Colunbia Physics Department shows what a strong and interested Chairman, supporting good facul ty manbers, can do. I also like the archaeology which capitalizes on a unique center of excellence at Colunbia. The radiation effects work is first rate, and there is an excellent start on a ceramics structure ' program.
)
Ilt thiWRsily Of ClsWp NM/N Usinsis s Awx h6 n
~~
./ ,
~ p..e >.
r
/
Dr. M. George May 19,1980
/
The involvenent of the other Missouri Campuses is less evident. Also, there is a great opportunity in the use of neutron diffraction for chemical and' ~ biological applications which are not being exploited by any of the campuses. The addition of Dr. Ross to the MURR is an excellent start on the chemistry; perhaps . a biologist should be appointed also. As we discussed, the University administration might help by encouraging the departments to look more carefully at these oppor-tunities and perhaps by "swetening" some special appointments. On the negative side, the aims of the nuclear engineering program, as engineering research, did not come across at the review. At the same time the use of engineering sttdents in the operational aspects of the reactor is cost-effectiv'e and appropriate. I suggest that the university give additional thought as to how the two nuclear engineering departments might,best interact with MURR. While the University of Missouri, from the point of view of MURR, is a source to be capitalized on, it is also very important to maintain strong ties with
, the national and international scientific community. The program at MURR has the
./ potential for being front-rank in this community (it is already in some areas) and N visibility to, and awareness of, the larger community is essential. As one x example, there should be a strong complementary relationship with the IPNS
' Program at Argonne and I will try to develop further the ties which already -
exist (it would also help to get the direct flight to Chicago restored!) The Instrinent Developaent wrk under Dr. Berif ner is first-rate but needs more support at the staff, and perhaps technician, level . . I have not addressed the service aspect of the facility, although these are important both in their own right and as a source of revenue for the research activities. To my knowledge, they are competently performed -- certainly our M5ssbauer group is very happy with the isotope radiation service. I came out at the meeting against a resident theorist within MURR, but on reflection there is a case for a computer simulation (Monte Carlo / molecular dynamics) expert. The interpretation of inelastic scattering experiments is greatly enhanced by availabi.11ty of computer simulation data, and close association is needed so that the c6mputer simulation uses potentials which realistically simulate the system measured. It is now possible to do good work of this kind with mini-computers so if and when MURR upgrades its computer capabilities this wrk could be done time-sharing with the experimental facilities. .l Argonne uses local high school teachers for tour guides. Might a similar arrangenent alleviate the burden on the MURR staff? We all agreed the power increase to 18 MW is a cost-effective move, if the MURR staff believe it is timely to proceed with it. Finally, for what they're worth, I make specific reconmendations for strengthening the program. In priority order: . 9
- , - , - . . . - . _ , , . . . , _ , _,-,,.,c_, _ , . , , - , . , - . -- - , . - - , , , , - - - - - , _ . - . - - , , - , , , . . - - _ _ , , - - , .
, _ - , . - , _--___-m
('a f s3 . .-
)
3- May 19,1980 Dr. M. George - W
- 1. A person to help in the instrunent developnent group. ,
- 2. A diffraction biok ogist in KlRR.
The above steps I would reconmend, if necessary, at the e'xpense of other programs, the following if and when funds can be made available:
- 3. Some appointments of structural. scientists in the Chemistry and Biology Departments of the University. .
4 An upgrading of the visiting scientist position to full salary.
- 5. A computer simulation scientist in MURR.
- 6. Some funds for overseas travel on a sel'ective basis.
In general, I believe the reactor program is a great asset to the University, developing with high scientific quality and good staff morale, and showing potential for a front-rank international reputation. The resulting scientific . enrichnent of the University far outweighs the University's financial investment. I appreciate the invitation to review the program and learnt a lot in the days at Colunbia. With best wishes and thanks to you and Dr. Collins for the hospitality, Sincerely,
'60 l
David L. Price , Director, IPNS Program l DLP:mk CC: File 5.14 RF i
%e e
a ___ __
F 'g e ENCLOSURE 0 REFERENCES FOR RESPONSE TO QUESTION 1
,-- - - - ._-__a
* .r 9
NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL COh!N11SSION ON ENGINEERING AND TECHNICAL SYSTEMS 2101Const;tuhon Avenue hashinpun D C.2Nlb twaact t Ncis tis 1%c soasts October 30, 1986 MEMORANDUM TO: Committee on University Reactors w / FROM: Frederic March ] p/ / ,
,,t 1 Enclosed are responses to a questionnaire sent out by Harry Young to various reactor operators. It would seem to be a partial response to Anthony Turkevich's request for a list of publications making use of the reactors.
DOE's briefing to the committee on November 13, 1986 will include the following people: Dr. James F. Decker Deputy Director, Office of Energy Research (Program Context) Antoinette G. Joseph Director, Office of Field Management Operations (Program Context) Richard E. Stephens Director of University and Industry Programs (Expectations of Committee's work) Harry Young University Reactor Programs (Background of DOE's university reactor programs) Norman Seltrer Manpower Assessment Programs (Frogram Description) Robert J. Neuhold Advanced Reactor Programs (Criteria for DOE's support) Otto Harling M.I.T. (Value of Research) Tne Wrnes' Researck (cued e. the annc ra' crrranng aerncu ei het Narn:na.' Acsarms c* Sarnces and the %nona: Acair~u c' E npnerness tc sert e gn ecnment and ethr* c* gam:anons
~-___
QUESTIONNAIRE Date Prepared Anril 15,1985 Preparer Robert M. Bruacer Reactor Name and Address University of Missouri Research Reactor liniversity of Missouri, Colurbia, t!0 65211, 10 W Power Level teaching and training output The following statistics refer to the research, July 1979 to nresent, except as of this reactor for the following time period: noted
- 1. Number of research publications resulting from work supported by the research reactor, summary by discipline:
Other Major Full- Short Papers L A Fully Refereed Major - Sized Reports and And Papers Abstracts Discipline _ Journal Publications SEE APPENDIX 1 SEE APPENDIX 2 11 Neutron Physics 14 Nuclear Physics 16 2 Neutron Scattering 117 109 Radiochemistry and Trace Analysis Earth Sciences and 23 1 Life Science and 76 Medicine 86 Physical Sciences 3 o 19 22 Other Nuclear Engineering 25 38 l 6 7 Radiography 23 Medical Applications 10 Nuclear Materials t 'and Irradiation 26 14 Effects f Isotope Research and 24 Development 12 Reactor Operator 4 0 Training Other (specify) 13 Garra Pay Scatterinn 12 30 aa Condensed "ar.ter Physics 25 Instrurent Oeveloorent 79
_2..
- 2. Number of these carried out with the assistance of the reactor:
Doctoral Masters Bachelors 43 44 5 see APPENDIX 3
- 3. Highlights of technical accomplishments:
,, e The MURR staff have developed a raoid neutron activation analysis rethodolony
/ for selenf un in biomedical sarnles, raking MURR a national center for N
prospective, case control, sera selenium studies nertaining to chronic selenf un deficiency and cancer risk. From these studies it has become anparent that interactions of trace elements creatly affect their utilization. In the case of selenium, MURR staff have demonstrated that the rat testicle can be used as an in vivo monitor by which these interactions can be studied using radiotracers. For selenium and other essential trace elements, SEE ATTACH"ENT A
- 4. Educational uses of the reactor:
(a) Number of students enrolled in courses which made use of the reactor:
- 1. Lecture or tour of reactor 15,416 see APPENDIX 4
- 2. Demonstrations (e.g., startups or radioisotope production) 'g
- 3. Lab courses or special projects (implies written reports) 2'155 (b) Number of students and trainees in special procrams making extended use of reactor (e.g., reactor 219 operator trainees)
- 5. Additional information on accomplishments:
e MURR is the only major research reactor west of the Mississipni that orovides an conortunity for significant neutron scatterinn research and research usinn short-lived, hinh-specific-activity radioisotopes. i e 15,000 visitors have toured the reactor since July 1979, receivinn a direct and positive introduction to reactor based researcn and to reactor ocerations, e The operatinq experience of MURR is a rodel for the "cormunity." The reactor operates at 10Ml, 92". of all available tire. The reactor reached 37,675 M10 of enerny produced and 104,519 hours (nearly 12 years) of operation at full power on February 20, 1985. In October 1981, the permanent beryllium reflector was changed out in 8% days; other reactors have taken fecn three weeks to 18 :tonths to channe out the beryllium. MURR was the first non-00E facility to adopt uranium aluminide fule technolooy to increase fuel perforrance and decrease the fuel cost. SEE ATTACHMENT B _ - . - . . , - . . .,-w, y
g., 9. ATTACHMENT A April 15,1985 J3. Highlights and Major Technical Accomplishment at MURR 1974 to Present - a high resolution, small animal, whole body detection system has been developed and is being applied to trace element health studies. In addition, the practicality of human fingernails and toenails as dietary
~
trace element monitors has been established. These and parallel. developments of neutron activation analysis methods have established the MURR program as a leader in health and nutrition studies. Neutron interferometry has been perfected as one of the newest techniques in thermal neutron scattering research. _The neutron interferometer spectrometer at MURR is one of only four in the world. Experiments carried ; out at MURR during the last few years encompass: observation of 4r rotations of Fermions; observation of gravitationally induced quantum interference; observation of the effect-of the rotation of the earth on the phase of the neutron (the Sagnac effect); a search for quaternions in
'1uantum mechanics; and measurement of the null-Fizeau effect of thermal
{ neutrons in moving matter. The first major irradiation program to produce neutron transmutation doped silicon in the USA was established at MURR. In addition to providing material for power rectifiers, neutron transmutation doping produces compensation of silicon and germanium crystals to achieve near intrinsic resi s tivi ty . These crystals ire used is intrinsic radiation detectors. % - ,w - - - -- _,,,-re y-, ,- .- y. ,
,, - . . - .- - - - - . , - , - , ~
l' ' ..: > The scientific staff at.MURR' working with silicon.were the first to develop
- deep Ievel: transient spectroscopy (DLTS)'with uniaxial stress to identify
~ ~
defects associated with energy levels 'in- the band gap. in semiconductors. Staff from MURR"are 'now helping the SANDIA ' laboratory and AT&T to set up similar OLTS systems.
. The staff at MURR have developed the only gamma-ray scattering laboratory in the USA ~using intense radioactive sources produced by neutron cap ture. One gamma scattering instrument measures highly- accurate structure factors for the determination of electron densities in small inorganic and- elemental systems. A second. instrument for Compton scattering;provides -informa tion about electron iaomen ta- in the same . syste:ns.
Together these instruments give an. accurate description of the electronic dave functions in these systems. A third instrument,-' a high intensi ty gamma scattering spectrometer' that uses the Mossbauer effect to determine
~
.the inelastic scattering from solids and liquids, has been developed.
These three unique scattering instruments are opening new areas of research in condensed matter science and are attracting international-cooperation. 1 MURR has been a leader in the development of position sensitive neutron ! ~ detectors based on multiple linear position sensitive proportional counters j and modern microprocessor technology. One large system for.ns tne heart of l the small-angle neutron scattering spectrometer (MURR-SANS). Another recently fabricated system, used for powder diffraction, ranks MURR's ] l powder-sample diffractometer as one of the most powerful in the nation. < i i The crystal structure of the new super magnet Nd 2 Fil43 was first identified , j- by MURR staff using this diffractometer. The instrument is critical to the [ dark of a large group of academic and industrial users. t I
7
- =. .
i : Staff at MURR have developed and 'are using a prompt gamma-ray neutron activation analysis facility with the world's highest neutron flux and best sensitivities. Important applications include the detection of boron in geological and archaeological samples. In addi tion, 'an epi thermal neutron activation analysis technique for short-lived radionuclides has been developed. This technique, unique to MURR, is being used to identify aluminum in geological and biological samples, particularly aluminum in brain tissue in relation to Alzheimer's disease. For a number of years MURR was the major producer of (n,y) Mo-99 for nuclear aedicine diagnostics. This production of Mo-99 has led to facul ty interest and the development of new radiopharmaceuticals, including tne first Tc-99 tagged agent able to pass the blood brain barrier to evaluate brain function. MURR staff and faculty from the Rolla campus were the first to develop neutron irradiated glass microspheres for use in liver cancer therapy. These are now in the Investigative New Orug stage of trials. The staff at MURR have developed and used farensic neutron activation analysis in approximately 5000 criminal cases. MURR possesses the most extensive collection in the world of samples of obsidian from Mesoamerican quarry sites. Neutron activation analysis of the samples provides extensive documentation of their trace element composi tion. The collection is instrumental in identifying sources of rid materials used in making prehistoric Indian artifacts. With tne se da ta, the tride routes of prehistoric Indiins can ce triced.
-MURR was the first in the USA to construct and put into operation a dedicated small-angle neutron scattering (SANS) instrument. The instrument was used to make the first SANS neasurements of polymer systems in the country. Other applications include the study of radiation induced voids and their annealing behavior; demonstration of the elongation of titanium precipitates along the draw axis in niobium based alloy superconductors;
.neasurement of the pare size distribution and anisotropy of shaly (argillaceous) rocks of different geological composition; and determination of the different dimensionalities within fractal pore interfaces in shaly rocks.
MURR neutron scattering facilities have been used heavily for the study of the structure of submonolayer to bilayer molecules adsorbed onto surfaces of graphi te. Profile analysis techniques have been developed for determining the orientation of adsorbed molecules by elastic neutron di f frac tion. The first measurements of the surface vibratory modes of adsorbed hydrocarbons were measured by faculty from the physics department. These studies provide insight into the interaction between aolecules and between .nolecules and substrates. The findings increase understanding of the phenomenon of inelting in 2-dimensions in which an ordered structure transforms, as the temperature is raised, to a disordered liquid-like layer above the substrate. Staf f at MURR have developed tooth irradiation techniques for toothpaste abrasivity testing that have been the national standard for the last 15 years.
' *h J
L
- MURR is the major neutron irradiation facility in .the USA for coloring
. gems tones.
MURR is one of the major developers of position sensitive detectors for neutron scattering. These devices have improved the data collection rates of some . instruments 'by one or more orders of -magnitude, and new applications of this technology are under investigation. MURR staff have
^
also been innovative in the development of. ancillary equipment (collimators, cryostats, beam filters, diffractometer control systems, etc.) to use the neutrons available from the source more' effectively. The l first. major use of single crystal silicon filters to fashion beams for
- thermal neutron scattering instruments das. at MURR. itost of the beams -at MURR are now filtered to remove fast neutrons and gamma contamination.
MURR is the major irradiator of plastic film to produce filtering material by ~ the track etch method. Such filters are used in the semiconductor industry, rnedical diagnostics and environmental sampling. In cooperation with faculty from the. geology departments at the Kansas City and Columbia campuses, more than 50 different elements are detected routinely by instrumental neutron activation analysis procedures. This has led to intensive petrogenetic studies of the oldest rocks in the earth's crust (Archean period) by neutron activation analysis. MURR has been the principal irradiation facility for moon rock over
._ the last dozen years.
MURR has taken a lead in developing robots for handling radioactive ma terial s.
I4URR supplies many' radioisotopes-' for users across trie country, including several' centers using radiotherapeutic-tagged antibodies.- For over ten years ;4URR has supplied snort-lived K-42 and Na-24 radioisotopes on a weekly basis for a major research group studying hypertension. .i4URR also supplies snort-lived K-42. to university of :41ssouri researchers for the study of cystic fibrosis.
')
liURR has an active program for analyzing textura distributions in materials, for deter:aining texture gradients through formed materials, and F for measuring stress gradients with crossed-beam neutron diffraction ' techniques. Only a few programs of ' this type exist outside Europe. -{-
- i-4' ..
ATTACHMENT B-April 15,1985
- 5. . Additional Information about MURR Upgrades and cost' savings continue to be made at MURR. The reactor was upgraded from 5 MW to 10 MW power level in 1974 and from 100 hrs /wk to greater than 150 hrs /wk in 1977 to meet the demand for increased neutron flux and fluence. Since the demand for even more flux and fluence continues, a program is now underway to upgrade .the power level of the reactor from 10 MW to 24-27 MW in the next few years. This power upgrade would place MURR as the second highest flux research reactor in the USA.
Additional improvements under evaluation include moderator redesign to enhance the usable beam flux, a cold source plus neutron guides to increase usable cold neutron flux, and more effective instruments. The fuel will also be upgraded to cut costs. Funds to support these upgrades are being sought, and the University plans to support additional office and laboratory space. MURR has been the model for demonstrating the interrelation of research, education and service for industry and the synergistic rewards of such in terac tions. MURR has been a major participant in 00E's Reactor Sharing Program. MURR's support has extended beyond that covered by DOE funds, providing free irradiations af ter the DOE funds were depleted for users sno could not pay. Typically this has resulted in twice as much reactor sharing at MURR as has been funded oy J0E.
; ;'~ - -
?~ ,
a f % 3
- y
'l /
* ' MURR houses a cobalt irradiation facility, liddnsad for the '
.i
; ~
highest amount of Co-60 ~ acitivi ty sin: Missouri ,
. - This gamma f eradiation -
~
- facfIt ty )has'been utilized by induscry and University of Misscur1 researchers in such areas as gamma damageSto mterials; thermoluminesceliti and electron spin resonance.. dating of archaeological artifacts, i plant add '\
virus cell mutations; food f eradiation; and tw.eurulogy stu'ies. d 4
- s
' 9 w
i *e 4
/
e 0 4 h4 lA
-p u i
J s s
~
\
^ 1 5 f I i P
+
g - - - - - . . - . - - , , -- . . , , .y -i-,,,~,-. ., r.-----,,,.-,ma ,,y -,w,- , , ~ , . w4,-w,_w .-.---,,-,e---, ,-
r -- ', -
'e ,
, O,<
^#
f. ? s:p,;_ .L , . , ,
'- 5 3
{\)
ww; Y \m m ,; l e 1 f ENCLOSURE P i k
- REFERENCES FOR RESPONSE TO QUESTION 1
/
/
)
V I
'F a
y
El m __ _. c m e a r v
,C U C)
J
'i
; A new magnetic alloy will revolutionize electric motors.
very' good for making truly permanent magnets.Thati because iron atoms ar-P hyncasts: 12boratones in Warren,chemists gtsti at General Motors Research ! Michigan, and metallur Irange themselves in a cubic lattice, with each atom pointing along one of the l { have discovered a new metal that could cube's mutually perpendicular edges. The revolutionize industry. Called MAGNE- atoms can be made to point in the same i QUENCH. it is an alloy of iron, boron and directi'. but a shock to the metal-heat-neodymium that retains magnetism bener ing or a physical blow-tends to demag-than any other metal it can be made into ' 7 netize it. Each atom need only swing 90 the most cornpact, powerful, permanent l degre-s to find another allowed direction magnets in existence The imphcations are enormous for any Keeping iron in Line machine thatincorporates an electnc mo- "In a MAGNEQUENCH crysta!,on the oth-tor, from apphances to automobiles, be- er hand," says Yelon,"the neodymium cause magnets, mounted on drive shafts and iron atoms, because of their place-and spinning in an electric field, are the ment in relaton to one another, have only central component of most electric mo- ! two possible orientations: straight up or ! tors. And a magnet that's smaller, lighter straight down It's a lot harder to get an l and cheaper to make will confer the same atom to swing one hundred eighty than benehcial properties on any motor-driven ninety degrees. And since the magnetic product. fields of the neodymium and iron atoms "We think we can cut the weight of mo- interact with and reinforce each other, the l tors in ha!!," says William Miller, sescarch iron atoms can't swing away either. If one g engineer and program manager for MAG- tries, the rest force it back into hne." NEQUENCH. "We've already had inqui- The individual crystals in a block of ries from major appliance and motor man- MAGNEQUENCH are only a 10-millionth uf acturers." GM plans to use it in the of an inch across, oriented at random with C starter of one of its 1986 models. respect to one another. Their magnetic l I MAGNEQUENCH's remarkable ability fields would ordinarily tend to cancel ead l l to retain magnetism-its magnetic hard- other. According to Jan Herbst, leader of i
' ness, or high coercivity, to use the proper GM's solid-state physics group, there are $
term-results' from its crystalline micro- Repeatsr>g cetts that contain 56 fron two ways to get around the problem You E structure, but scientists didn't know in ad- (pflowb 8 neodymium (blackl and 4 boron can melt the alloy at about I A00 degrees [ atmm Wdj make up Nf 9UENCH. vance what that structure would be. *In A me.emmmmmmmmum Celsius. then deposit it on a spinning disk, 5 metallurgy,you often work by trial and er. where it cools in a fraction of a second. f his process yields small ribbons of metal ! The granules idJW, c FW JEOUENCH l ror," says Miller. "We knew that iron can oystaucen"
- s ch o n mkroepe I' be magnetized, and that neodymium has W" <:7;4" _
that are then mechanically compacted. l relatively high coercivity. When we mixed which aligns their crystals he other solu- 3 j the two, the results weren't all that god *, Ja-tion is to powder the alloy at room temper- j But when we av fed boron, the crystal lat- ,
,N ature, align the crystals with a large mag- 3
'. , *,- [
{ tice fel:lato place." ~ netic field then heat them so that they l
; -- 'i .
Lining Up the Lattice
- A fuse.
}
_GM sent the new metal to,Wilham Yelon. b . b y [ - Neodymium in Abundance e at the Unisersity of M:ssoun Research Re-
- g) "Perhaps the best thing about MAGNE- ) ,
(- r ac_t'o'rl He}d.rieutron d:firaction studies, 4* - QUENCH," says Miller,"is that it's made j obsersing the way neutrons were scat- . from abundant, inexpensive raw materi-l
% P- 4 ( ;
~
g I tered bithe cWstds7nd that show ed how - '(, s als-neodymium is in the class of ele-the atoms-14 of iron to 2 of neodymium ments called rare earth metals, but it's ac-
- ; ~
to one of boioniare arranged. , g ' ;,g i^ tually not rare at all." g l ; --
' Magnetism alsays results from the tions, they cancel each other out).
Motors aside, the new magnets will j movement of charged particles On a mac- have other uses, says Miller. " Rey'll have ; roscopic scale, electrons moving through A substance made of such atoms can applications in hi-fi speakers and nuclear- 5 ' a wire create an electromagnet On the be permanently magnetized if an extemal I magnetic resonance machines in medi- $ atomic scale, electrons orbiting the nucle- magnetic field can trake the atoms line up cine.His is probably the most significant E us of an atom make the atom itself into a so that their fields are pointing in the same II direction Their helds combine, and the and certainly the most exciting project I've tiny magnet (but only in some elements; been involved with." a j nonmagnetic atoms have esen numbers entire mass becomes a magnet. -MichaelD. Lemon /ck ; Iron is such an element, but it's not . of electrons spinning in opposite direc-j y , 18 SCENCE DGEST--5EPTEMBER 1995 -
~
C ENCLOSURE Q REFERENCES FOR RESPONSE TO QUESTION 1
/
f ' """"
-------__m - --- -- --~ ~ ~
Current CommetttS 44 P.ib.ua P . umEn glis CT12 TEsn f at.82.en n,OGr an s.,
.as.
S
,0.S
. t. SOY, so. EttCI uO,0Cna.t AOCauGLM ras issGt T2,2,,2,(3)
,a.n Isam. .
s30 POSves PeeOTOCngts 7 t's ,' c 633 PAtCan.easam sta 33 44 36 547 tt et Sune sss14 A7 ACE amat 4 til OCT 7e 10HACf SCa ele p 2s OCI e #% b.uGENE GARFIELD 133 PetCaesG46a3 Ai$ 33 (41 OCf t 929 1812aniDEOs 1815 2 7 Je))
- 60 PAOG muCt asaGas At&Oas EriCrA05 IS (I$87)Pl 80 IntOCatM J MO6 5thuCT 32 t146 ste
/- ans 2 sot titu esanatt t*i un SCitaOt 17 Pnst h tt Puta
*8 'CPa**80"*8*0"e' 13se 442 Putt asTAOas 50C PAC Se teOtt Jut de int On meatse Pnts (461 is 88 (Ji MAA Pu $%
.eo4 2 e .es ASTnoassoc
. as,POa. 10CPac pac. $$. 4604g 4.Ori sap auG >> in.as
>ni= sOuO $OuD
,=-s8etMs s u o, le OCr312
. OCT t.
148 Quaat aret rsaf a n 44 434 OCT 33 maOeAl env& Catas4auf J AaC ar.2s g33 134 visOaOMOt 50t p.4 se n a s5sa 28 giDe s'
'The Most-Cited 1984 Physical Sciences Articles-es a stav sPtCf nom is se, 0C y %.
38 age PalOGa ruv140 (Os Juh 33 SCet apC4 334 44Ilan seOV le 112 2 CatW 20 tea auG ,~ Hi@-Energy Phpics Dosminates ito 2 Main loges GaunOs at,eas asain 32 5 4> >I se8 540.aff ef GiOs 481344OCi 11% 2 malum 8DA5Cn stCI B 4 I(IQt OCT 400 54 PaA SCe 18CamOs 2 5 tot i s.a.a a 79 2 Pn d
,0 50..O ar.CO...A.at i.n O. .O.
t., =0. .. 2 Pn sOa v5 Cut Oos uO.L,4 sPleG.u Je 7 (Sii,n s O aroa s ou C us rtas.n., November 24,1986 7s SouO 6f ari COasaduce 60(F4 seQv 904 2n h4Omt,ansM sssa311806 OCT Ciusit.s Numbet 47 Every > car we emanune the Sorna Caa- merous new research fronts that have been non Inda* (SCl* ) for papen m the hfe asal idenufied through combmed SC//Svout So-4 physical sciences that became highly cited emes Cuarion lada* (SSCl*) data. A unrnediately aher pubhcanon. We iMn cate- research front is formed when pairs of car-
'"*'-'". gome mese papen into the phyucal and hfe lict, core documents are cited together fre-
- o. .om.o ,oo, .Nn. .$ *,fuo'ame O w* *o o.o o*n"m**.n"o""a'r*m*s., . %. ,o, 50*sciences,
- based on the SCI's subject desig- quendy by current papers, hus, the citing nauons for thejournals in which the articles authors categorue exating work imo sut>-
have been pubinhed. If an article's classi- ject related clugen of research. Table I hsts 4
'~~~~. dh M d ?M 'h j.
f cauon is ambiguous, we consult the Source lades of the SCI for the authon' departmen-the t ties of the 2i froms that include at least two of the papers from the Bibliography as j 4 4gk g g - tal alfihauons. If the clanificauon still re. mains in doubt, we examine the anicle core documents. . l I closely aM, if necenary, seek the advice of Superconductivity experts. In this study, ws discun the 1984 The 1985 front entit!cd "Propenies of O phyucal-sciences articles that were most heavy fermion superconductors and Kondo cued m 1984 and 1985 Future easys wdl lauan systenn" W4 has me largen enamme the highly cited 1984 hfe-sciences number of papen from the Bibh.ography in and 1983 chemistry articles. Our most recent report on fut track phys-n> cm--la De fnw ceins d a total d O M C"'t P' Pen and 382 citing documents that scal-sciences papers appeared in 1985.8 As concem the supercoohng d the elementary we remind readers every year, these enays .
'"'~~'""""""*"""~~
the perfect CC'suppIement.I a-"'+",",'
,5 ma .*,*.
in a g. u""an, en c n16 cant Papers accumulate citations more
,ig. -, -a t-- i-virtually all resistance to the flow of elec-Custom Contents brings you laser ponted f hngs of the contents og incny aspercon-l gradually, achieving Citation Clarssca ***dn shon, mey becane senect plus the author addresses you need toOet repnnts And ik Contents". Custom Contents is supported by ISI s document delivery se stanas over ume. However, me immediacy *@N*W M*
cern anomalous increases in electncal resis-The Genuene Article'-so you can get copies of just about every article listed iri of the Papen in tha study shows that they your wooWy Custom Contents report. are putative cinues. l'a'* (" temPenuure decreanes) em are n-Penenced by Kondo tamce synems, which ne 108 papen Inted m the Bibbography y are composed d censin magneuc aHoys scsiphon to Custom Contents is customged you select the titles you at the end of thn enay received an average
""I"" '""*8"' ""*I m w einto e ays hi o he ddress b to ung is quick and easyi For of 49 caanons in the two-> car uudy peri- ' ' ' " ' ), '
(P-od-8 m 1984 and 41 in 1985. Even the One of the core documents in research
- arut.tase for least-cited papen in the Bibbography re- front #854530 was authored by Philip W.
{ Scdarashe h80rmauon* t,,,,,,, ceived 33 citations, the threshold for mclu-su)n in this study. Since cach of thcae papers Andenst. AM ScH Watones, Mun pg6*ygg'.a. 3soi u . so . P s
..,... Pa isio. u s a cc. 3 3, has been highly cited, the Int has been ar-ray Hdt, and Pnnecton Umvenity, buth in
' e.-n= New Jersey. Entitled " Heavy-electron su-
'"'*'""""***"***-='o'u~~m.a,- i.. - A4 en suoi i , vn.,j un ,s. ranged alphabeucally by first author. 1 perconducton, spm fluctunuons, and tnplet !
1984 and 1985 Itenesech Fronts pasnng " it discusses the mierneuons of var-Another indication of the impact of these ious metals that become superconducung papers is that most are already core to nu- between 1.0 and 0.1 degrees Kelvin. To- l COMENT CONTENT $e 01986 Dy 1516 3 2 um or is curatNt CourtNrs .,
called gr:vitons cad their speculated Tanae b ne 1934 and eveHCNCF dWNN '" a - '-
$"ng"'
,y]P,'" ** ""',",,g"""' """,h'""'gY aahrt with John H. Van Vleck. Harvard '
g con and
- insvernay.Camhndge adasaad== and superpennen, called gravanti.3 ,,
Sir Nevdl F. Mou. Univerury of Cam- A r2 view enicle that is core to rnearch 1984 or 19ss c ims sapen for on year designated try ou pnh in cadiuna A-bndge. UK. Anderson won the 1977 Nobel front s85-0698 wts wntt:a by H.P. Ndles E O A D Pnas a physes for work on compuser mem- of the multmauonal European Orgaruzanon l
- ory and electronics. Andenon also coau- for Nuclear Research(CERN) Geneva and s44x122 west t=a prudia6twa. cimw=cak inurmuuas. asas H sse ausses
{ , Q' thored a paper on "Models of hierarchical- the Umwenity of Geneva. Switzerland. En- # tuled "Supersymmetry, supergravay and ,. ",'" ",' $,*" I'$""#*s "' *"* ' s oa ) m to ly coaurained dynamics for glassy relas-parucle physics." the paper explores the s4 3sso Masaruc propertes of manrphous Nisfc..B and .nser nruann iransane ariai anon" with R G. Palmer. Duke Umweni- , ter** *ad h idade' ty. Durham. Nonh Carolma; D 1.. Stem, condinons under which supersymmetry is I l Pnam; and E. Abrahams Rutgen Uni- broken. A paper by John Ellis. CERN and - 85 " 9 UP" ""**'* ' """'"."m a opu'*l inaspun Pnspenas paraa M seauanahaw de eh epannun 2 meus now2 iron atuauan and + terury. Pucataway. New Jency. De au- H. Kowalsks. the German Electron-Accel- l , ) 36 485 j erator (DESY), Hamburg. Federal Repub- s54212 Earrgy tends in pannun well hewnnaructures an1 heteroguannes m j than suggest models for the dynamics of in- ae'asva8u'sar* teracting glauy materials. Another paper hc of Germany (FRG). n also core to this 482
"'**'**"dh*''"*""""'"""" '
I '3 jf>3 I that is core to front #85-0530 as the second front. Enutled "Glumo u8 natures at the PP "ss ou*t 3Dyannaa Chd"8 e **8 *"n'w"""s a"s"a*8 snu'd t=ha sur ia **rna's 3 naean (=8d as* 303" most cited anicle in tha study, by G R. colhder,. it describes the production of g343o3 p,,,,n,, , ,,,,i.oon a,,,v,u or d.rrescas durwauuns and frutal n=*ts 2 22'164 Siewan. Z. Fuk, J O. Wdhs, and J 1. pain of glumo panicles at CERN s Pro- isosot tow.h=tras order .no senarity propen.es d sens.cryuais and cryuaa 0 ton-Antiproton Supercolhder. In addition. asem propen.cs of heny Imnwa supenumsucws and Kcnasa tanne syncan 1 Smah. Los Alamos Nanonal Laboratory, as m s scaiuta Kisia cosaaksi and an*is d hisherdancasaa=8 *F'srpe , 3333, New Menaco h desenbes new ducovenes Eths and Kowalska wrote a r on "Su- 534lbvs Mudeis el wprrarave and wpenyrnmeirw panais prudatsoa se coilaJets 3 52ais , niaiua a' pan =les 'a he*'t '"a coi a.as "I"'8 the buperconductmg propettaes of spe- penymmettlC particles at the CERN pp col- umia t>issip u e ec.aaruen n.ar=lias aa8 c'r wrimunmal phenuaras of du Isas anal 4 2e hder"; it was cited a total of 52 times, all as4742 woais Carso snowd for un sa 3, o 2 23/274 I cific metals and received a total of 120 ci- sS4709 Quark cleauen aad EMC <""" 'a d'aPinelasuc lepam scamenng I 2 tauons in 1984 and 1985. m 1985. and n also core to research front
- as.1163 Production of Higgs hveums and saniels of ecah CF w=dm=
#85 4698 as.2079 Theoreu6at amt empenawanal saadies of lung and usher spin-stasses 2 10/183 Synnaaetry and Supergravity Eths. with un papen m the Bibhography- as-23o cefam oa. supenunrneir>. and anuenalies is d= superunas ma*l sur uw appean more ohen than any other author in uwory of wpergrave 2 Eaght papers from the Bibbography are as.29ai2 Darunwa l.nnied awesmes, fra,id strucmsn. ami JWy snr=di sam 8els ,
this study and, m fact, more than any other
~
j core to "Models of supergravity and super- 85 # M*sacus pnspenses d raruanh based s= nam == amps . j symmeanc particle productaon m colhders" author in our studies for the past three _ (s85-Ots98), which has a total of 25 core pa- years IS 6 h unusually large number of the 1983 phyucal.scierwes papert we kned closely related, highly cited anicles led me Sohtons are notated, ungle waves (as op-pers caed by 354 arucles pubinhed m 1985. un fronts that specifically mentioned these
' Aca>rdmg to Steven Wemberg. Univeruty to wonder about the powible effects of self. pwed to a crest or a trough in a wave. elements of cosmology in their titles.8 in of Teams, Austm, supergravity n one of citation on the number of articles Elbs has in>nti,2 (p.1053) and "chira!" relen to the this study, only three research front titles in in ihn study. Of the total of 273 citations direction of a particle's spin; in chiral sym-se rcral hypushesca, known coucctively as Table I include these terrm. One of these Ellis > un papers receised from 139 umque metry, the number of particles spinning in is the front on models of supergravity
, quanmm thcones of gravity, that try to com- one direcuon is balanced by the number of bane Einstein's theory of general relativity, articles in 1984 and 1985,40-or appromi- and supersymmetnc particle production wtuc*s desenbes gravity m terms of the geo- mately 15 percent-were self-caanons. This parucles spmmng m the opposite direction.2 (r854698), mennoned curber; the other two j meanc cursmg of four dimenuonal space, is only shghtly more than the typical rate (p. 1139) are "Kaluza Klein cosmology and models j of 13 percent and, at first glance, would One of the core articles for ihn front is
- with quantum mechanics.3 Weinberg of higher dimensional supergravity shared the 1979 Nobel Prue in physics with seem to have little beanng on the number by Luis Alvarez-Gaumd, Harvard, and Ed- (#85-0691) and "Compacuficanon Super-j ward Witten, Pnnecton. It dncunes the the-i hih L. Glashow Harvard, and Abdus of Elhs*> papers mduded in the Bibhogra- symmetry, and anomahes m the supentnni}
phy. But the self-citations were not evenly oreucal implications of the breakdown of model for the theory of supergravity, j Salam. Ingenal Couege, Umverury of Ion-dninbuted. For instance, there were only chiral symnctry on vanous thcones of graw-don, UK, ami the Internauonal Centre for (#85-2347). l seven self-cnations to the paper on "Glu- ity. He arucle is the third most<sted paper neoretical Phyuca Tncate Italy, for the i nree of the 26 core papers in #85-0691 mo ugnatures at the pp colhder," coau- in thn study, receiving 23 citations in 1984 arc included in the Bibhography. Among ocey-a of the clearowcak theory. An and 86 in 1985. Incidentally, Wmen coau-thored wnh Kowalska; the paper received a theory unates the dcacnpuon of electromag- them is an article by Phdip Candelas, Uru- ) total of 63 references-a self catauon rate of thored four papen m the Bibhography, sec-j netam wuh the desenpuon of the weak *cf58ty of Teaas, Ausun, and Wemberg that
- force, respunuble fo" e iraramuta about 11 percent. But an article on " Super- ond only to Elbs.
refines aral catends the work of German the-j tsus of *~ parucles. ,>upergravity symmetnc rehes from the big bang" and oretical mathemaucun neodor F.E. Kaluza another enutled "l> supenymmetry foun#" Cosmology and String Theory (1885-1954) and Swednh Physicist Oscar ) is a spectfic versaan of quanrum gravity that had self-cited rates of 20 percent or more. Costnology is a field that encompasses su- Klem (1895-1977). Their thmnet fini pub
- seeks to incorporaic gravity mio supersym- l The iescarch front on " Chiral and solaon pergravity, supenymmetry, Kaluza-Klein lished sbout 60 years ago, were an attempt
} metry theory, which is a way of clasufy mg theories, and grand urufted thwnes (GUTS)
- partacles nio famdies by the rate at wluch models for nucleons and other elementary to add electromagnetism to Einstein s geo-particles and anomahes" (#854243) has 6 m an anempt to desenbe the formation and cach parucle spias. In supergravity, the metrical descnpuon of gravity by propos-l of its 32 core papers m the Bibbography. i evolution of the umverse. In our study of form of graway u tranammed by parucles l 5 l
! m or tse cuum cosws, cuum conws , e198o oy isa { i 4
~' ~ ~ ' ~ " " " *
- I'**' ami n., ,, ,, ,,, ,,,,, ,,, ,,, ,,,
surute of Technology (Cahech), Pasadens ography of 1984 papers, CERN e again tv---- -
" Mad =* suma came in as sae, uted enough thought and work to warrant
. Q - and John H. Schwarz, also of Cahech. Ac. cording to Minberg, superstnns theory a authorsh p. And whenlarge numbers of au-resented the greatest number of times-15. As intercatmg development th 5 year i3
% ,, "'"*",, thors are listed, it is impossible to dacern
'mw the center of attenuon of theorcucal t hat more papers w;re produced by corpo-4.m % '* which are the leadmg members of the team.
per reper . re,,,, , , ' , , " , 8' , ucists who work in high-energy rations than m previous uudies. For in-for instance, we had to call one of the au- stance, AT&T Bc!! laboratones, Murray m ry.. . It s become a dncipime to itself e s2 thors of the paper by A. Chen ard coucagues Hill and Holmdel, New Jency, had 10 an , it,s jus esploded in the last couple of os a y 2
) cars.
In an arucle bued on a talk he to learn that B. Gittelman, Cornell Univer-papers, while IBM's research facihties in 18 a y uty, Ithaca, New York; R. Kns, Oh30 State Yorktown Heights. New York, and 8 8've at the Amencan Phyued Society Di-Uruvenity, Columbus; and E.H. Thorndike Ruschhkon, Switzerland, tota!cd 6. The y 8 8 5 4 30 to vamn af Particles and Fields, Wemberg at-and R. Pohng, Unisenity of Rochester, General Motors Research Laboratones, 3 , 3 is anbutes the upsurge an the populanty of New York, played Icadmg roles in the re. 23 3 23 st'Pentring theory panly to physicists
- frus. Warren, Michigan, appeared for the first search. Clearly, the scienufic community ume m these annual studies, with two ss .t ,,
tranon with oect theoreticd approaches.9 is a must come to gnp> with the ethgal usue of papert Alw new to the 1984 list, although g m , he celudes, were juu "too authonhap, an asue I discussed in a recent mg an extra, umeen fifth dimenuon (m ad- auta to ignore. not a corporunon, is the Darmstadt insutute essay.Il un applies m chrucal research as of Technology, FRG, wnh three papers dataan to the famdiar four o(length, walth we i as to phyuct Table 4 Ints the national affihatsons of the depth, and tune).7 (p 150-l) Indeed, sj In addinon to the papen by Nobelats ensutursons m Table 3 Japan, absent from anempu contmue to thu day, a evdenced Rubbia, Anderson, and Weir. berg, papers the 1983 study,' resurf aced m thn uudy's by a paper in the Biblaosraphy by Deshd The UAl Collaboration by Salam and by Kenneth G. Wilson, Cor- Bibbography with three papen. The Peo-Sahdev, Utuversity of Pennsylvarua* Ph nell Univenity, the 1952 wmner in phys-adelgWua, that solvea a clus of E in b The 1984 phyucal-sciences anicle that ple's Repubhc of Cluna and the USSR were ics.t2 also appear in the 1984 Bibbography. also absent from the 1983 study but appear equatacus an terms of KalwKis
- n cu d m 1984 and 1985 is entitled Wilson's artgle was pubhshed with G S.
Modern adapaanons of the theo ( Perunemal observatiori of escrus wim '"#' ' "*" "I
**'*#** our 1981 study,6 a represented by one Kaluza and Klem propone an addsu ! 8 * #"# ""*'8I 'C'"* Edmburgh, Scotland, and R.H. Swendsen, paper in this study as well. nc USSR had or seven dunennons that are " rolled uP Pamed by a jet or a photon (s) m pp corg,'. IBM h rich Research Laboratory, S
" h we coauthored two papers in the 1982 study and made the mio esccedingly unall (l(y20 & Ruschhkon, Switzerland. It concerns the Int wnh three in this one, atoaue nucleus), loopw stan s 7 (P- by G. Amam and 134 others m CERN's lyPc of renormahzation-group calculations 15MI) These estradirnens Stn Haborauon, which meludes Carlo ubbia, CERN and Hanard, who shared on crusc4 behavior for which Wilson was Soviet Articles masufest themselves as the van of p -
awarded the Nobel. Salam coauthored ha One of the Soviet amcles, by E.B. Yagub-
.- 6,~ me Nobel en phyucs wah Simon van attacle w nh S. Rardjbar-Daemi, Internauon-cnca czarressly skii and colleagues, institute of Chemical verse.a They for =hn the baus of su g der Mccr also of CERN.80 le repons the al Centre for Theorcueal Phyuct, Tneste, h Phyucs, Academy of Sciences of the USSR, theory, wluch unstes the electrow " "E 'U " " live Panscle Italy, and the Instuute for Dcorcucal Phys- Moscow, was onginally pubhshed in Rus-colhuons that cach relencd a large amount sc>, Bern Uruversity Switzerland, and J.
r? *uh quantum chromodynanucs thge decaergy that is unaccounted for by current uan, a translata,n appeared in JE7P (four-senpuun of the g im d
- Strathdce, also of the Internanonal Centre nalofEsperswualand DimenmInysia) asonuc nucles wgether. Supe %O th nes. The authors suggest that one posu. for neoretwal Phyues it presents ct{uauosu Lencrs, pubbshed by the Amencan Insutute also ho&ds the most proause W "#****1'0"" Adam! par. suPPonmg the KaluwKlem theory of cos- of Physics. De ongmal amcle and us grstwy, the weakest of the tradiuond f *
- he A dumveO pmmacs to mology. Incidentally , the Intemanonal Cen-funca and the must troubicaome to G!Il '*' h H8"8fnN impact on current cosmo- tie for Theoretical Phyucs,. headed by tramlation received 17 citauons in 1984 72 in 1985, malung it the fifth most-cited and nearchers, m a model h % f us 9 umes in 1984 and Salam, serves as a tr'aining center for phys-'
force as one facca of a smgle, md 107 umes m 1985, the paper we core to the paper in the present study. It discusses the sents from around the world, it is also the synthesu of a new organic metal that can g research front on supergravity and super. headquanen for the Bird World Academy be cmled to the superwnduding unte umler Indeed, accordmg to Wember
- h PC- symanctnc pamcle produchon (#85-0698), of Sciences, where I gave a tan at a sym- wM am@nc pun h h nod covered m thu survey saw b be nh 51 carhe Pouum m mW m h aMcWn inege %
ning of a new core arca-that is u orydia wtuch there was] a tre " N a am e m wn of the num-ec Bibbogra. Gm M Mahum nu @ k thcones of musless, two dimensional, m-the most cited article m this year's study, terucung fields by A.A. Belavin and col-w ve of papers" m 1985 and 1986) Wein phy The UAl's most-cited amcie, men. but it also produced the most-cited paper m berg smgico out as tenund a r b W 8- ti rica above, n one of three Papen wnh leagues, L.D. Landau Institute for i the uudy of the 1983 most cited phyu. Theorenc4 Physic >, Academy of Sciences ten C Some pmpm M more than 130 authors, the other two are
} per- cd sciences papert l In addition CERN of the USSR, Moscow, and a dacussion of unngs")m NW h D l nc - I o by the UAl Collaboration Two papers wn lated as an author's affiliation more the evolutaon of the umvene by A.D. Luale, an, Zongan Qu, and Sic @ca r, - had between 50 ard 75 authon, and eight often than any other instnution appeanng m P.N. Lebedev PhysicalInuitute, Academy renay of Chacag 111 and another by othen had between 10 ard 35 authors. There the uudy of the 1983 papert As shown by- of Sciences of the USSR, Moscow-werc Michael 8. Gree h8 'y C ge, n Intle jushficahon for hstmg scores of g ,,ngg -
In- authon, smce it n doubtful that 4!! coninb. Table 3, which hsts the i17 insututeond
, pubbshed in Enghsh,affihations as were all the gnen other by W80 Ov (5+ Cuor4NT CONilNf 5<*, CURRENT CONTENT 5e WA986 t y 154+
Tatde 3: Immamammt athemann imens El pasmse a as Subispphy a % asder by p I Uno. $smeare Cahissess, tas Aagstes, CA 8 Unst Cincamasu OH Uan. Dele *ast, Newark. Dli i Umv. hran=h Seedom i una. Sedaarined 15 Uan Aruums. Tuchun. AZ 2 i Unn. Tiams, Aussin, TX l . CEA88. Unes. Genevs. 5=euerland ATAT as G's L.ahs , NJ 80 Unn Colorm6>. CO 2 Unn Glasgow, UK I Unre. Washington, Samate, UA 8 N'd"8'8 2 ihn.ader g i Usar wusamnis. Med sea. WI I U.,w peiung,, p nland l Mwrey Hal 3 o,,,,, , 1 . Vanessteh Umv.. Nashedic, TN Unn. luusm. Ustinas.11. Vaasamen Sco Ras last., C4suses, I a Une Cahierne. CA 10 Una ht*gh. UK 2 Unn. luonnens, Gese6e i antaar) 5 van gun,ue,, gy U"" Ka'ha*h8 FRG I Y'"*8' ens l*8 i Amhen lan: inhaut , t NG I 1 VWgnas Polyuch. Imma Sense Umv . I Unn !Anda. UK I's Aagsass 3 A*aJ ka . Scusag. Chuu 8 I Stakaansrg. VA Univ. Masnahuseus. Amherst. MA i Samma Restart 2 A"ter Uns' Washeauton. DC I Unn. Mmhagan. Ann Artur. M1 i Wayne Seane Uan . Demons, Mi Sesma Cena a Argunne Mad Lb . E I I Xerna Palo Alto Rea Ctr., CA 8 Umv. Misma.ri. Columbia. MO C*eamb. Pennisme. CA 7 herne Un.. , 5..ueslana Unn. Muna6h, PNG i Pr**** U** . NJ 7 huna Une, , ING g Marward Uan . Camerunge. MA 6 pro.n so*eri En Car Daden. 5. uerland i Table 4: Nanunallusanons of the insinutaunal afrahahuns laued by annehurt an Ihr beblaugraphy assesdaag to mand 3888 6 Colombia Una .. NY : i appearames Iculuma Al B=numbes vi papers cumuihured math romanschers aMdiated enh eamisammens na enh 8"*6h'*h'* S*maarlana I Dunment Uan . tNG g canetnes C= nauonal lauuons of snuatuhuns lineed t y simuihurs I*h*8** M84ema. NY 5 Duke Uan , IA. sham. NC Cwee's Uan . lenn6a. NY 5 Flus de Sease Una , Tallahauer, FL 1 C Caussey A B C Caimmary A B I'm Alamma Mann lah , NM 5 Pdher B V. khiphol (kas. I CNR5 Fraa6e 4 The Pecthesiends Spin 4 ) Commen. Fisdend. Frankha and Munhall l'.,Il . 3,msues, PA US 74 28 Canada. Denmark. tkG.Aapan. b"***' l e t aland, treme. l D #7 8 bremete Nmt kn (as . t eame g t itG. brosse. Sweden. he.'ampela.6, 2 c,unengca State Uns. . the Naheria Js I S=sasviasul. UK, issnel, haly Japan. Maa Plea 6h Sem Adv SC6.FRG 4 Hahaus Tuptur kes labs , I The Nethestands, US lama Hydrudyanan kan . r....Fa I Lyngby. Denmaark spmn, 5.aten. Japan 3 2 Cainds. Fiasant. j FitG, Spasa. i lan Phys Aamurhys , bemasch 2 Heavy Isun Rn Lab , Darm6samh. tRG I Sosuerlam1. UK, i H.gher Nurmal S h Pata. haly l Sweden. I"" 5"h*5aam aan 5assigen Veneruela NASA 4 INFN, Roser, luly i 2u ll Canada, halaml. Seevestand. UK. in6a Amarue . Canebr6dge UK g 5esuestaml US C"'adnad Spass thgan Cu . 2 F RG. Grume, haly, inu Struct Mas , Matr4. Spa.a 3 The Netherlamh ) J titG. haly. OK, US Gsummhets. MD Japan. S pan. Heirs . Washegum. DC 2 las! Cu Theur Phys . Tracus, haly l S* eden. UK US US5R 3 0 Uan landam. UK 4 8.,.c3 lana Tminnot . Ha la. lueel l I4 5 Cahada. halaml. Greme 2 2 Sedaertasal. US hhata Cuu , NY g FMG 4 1 tealand. EllG. fapan. Asad ka U15A. Manus =, USSR 3 haats. haly, Canada Janucion See tag , Palo Ahu CA g 5pm.m. 5= eden. Desmanme less Tacamme tkG } Japan. Ihr Farm heal A ast 144, Bassee, IL 3 Jul.6h Nml Rn Cu , ING I Netherlamh. Spain. 5=amerland. UK. 3 Kapneyn Aurun la : , c,on agen, g Senten US MrT. Camendes. MA Uhme Samme Um, ra-a". OH 3 Tis Netterians. s..uerland. UK. China 1 I franse Pena Um, . Frente ) Men U.,,yogy. 3,p. , Denmark i i US 05 I Cammis. f RG. Japan. benemsdUan.CA 3 Napan Una , haly 3 9 9 Canada. hniand. F mland i i UK spaan. 5=ades Une Chshape.EL 3 Nad Car Asamopher kes Duidder, ct) t RG. luly Japan. Ned inas Nul Phyt . Nap 6es. haly I 5=euerten! UK. Uan Pennsylenens. ." '"W PA 3 The Netherlands. Ned tab tramau. haly i US A m Oan .The Nasharlames 2 Spma.5. eden. taneen Peani Lan . Opaun. NY 2 Neth Fad Radeu Ancun . Doingenuo' l S iuesland. UIL. Israel i i tsaats. U5 E'".sY. Dt hmmansg. PaQ 2 The Nether 6med. US %= eden i i Canada. halami. NIH Dn Cusnp Res Tak . 3 4 Chena. t ItG. Israel, iNG. Japan. son a. hamn han has Co . " . NJ 2 Frame a 2 Brunsade. MD haly. US 5=auerland. UK. I6 Um* . l'RG 2 Nurdma. Caprahagen. Denmash I US 6"'888 M8' art Ras lata . Wanen. MI luly 5 ) tran6c. F kG. The I'" Ad* 5esd. Primum =. NJ 2 NRC. Onewa, Canada e Nethes tands. Ventruela i i US Kas Fann hans Ohnerv , Tu6mm. AZ 2 Nu68 Larrgy Cognate . Mesnd. Spam e Seeuerland, t K. g Landen Ohmsw . The h 2 Peuut lab . Marsednes. trame US Madnd A.r= - Ums . Somen 2 atOA tabs , fnnteson NJ g r MNea 5- Dan . Easa Lamung. Mt 2 megen.nu,g Una FRG l articles. the Physical Review terrers pub. 2 mesionai meu operaung con . Hotmari. NJ l papers m the Bibbography. I would hke to h>hed the greatest number of papers in (fic Ned ans 5s==d
- h. (1) I meun van . team 1 encoura8e our Sosset colleagues to continue i Bibbography lover 24 percent), while Gee"8hW5. MD L
$aclay Nml knFran Cir 's pubhshing in Engh>h and to participate more Med tab Fema 6aan, holy 2 G.( ow.y ear, Physics terrrrs 8 had 22 papers lover 20 hady m the international scholarly communa.
name Uan ,heay 2 5away Una . Anamy le-Vaua. Framc I percenil, and Nuclear Physics B accounted 5,nl nc,ger Duu an . mas sehekt. CT i ly. Enghsh has become the undisputed soms t for 12 Papers (over Il percent). The four var verg'" 8 """ 5 "*8 PM*85 Ca 0*aka. Jarea i hnxua franca of science. papers from the Acwcw of Modern Physscs
* "" Table 5 hsis the 29 journals that pubhshed NN 5 br g 8 g **'"n.g'e" y
the 108 papers hsted m the Bibbography. include a cimtribution by C G. Wohl and 22 Pisan=sy I syrmia Uan . NY I colleagues. Herkeley Partgle Data Group. A majority of the anicles were pubbshed by am Aepe== tah . Ch.hu . IcK 2 Tesaa A a M Una . Con sisi.u.. Tx 5 Umversity of Cahtorma, thel was pubhshed SUNL Semy ased. NY 2 Taniau Una scada.. Jap a i the same three surnaluhat have dormnated 2 Unn Athses. Geeste i our studies for the last three years. With 26 m a special supplement to the journal. It up-3*** Fed Imus Tethems. Zasua. s=ameramed 9 CUu m comtms- 1986 oy ist - a m c,, se cum corm
ocpermimg C en0 CBetNm uvo the resuha of one of these expenments wnh by special pcnods of high strm, mter- The paper by Begelman and colleagues at-
. pg.,, ha,,,, ,, ,, gg dg DJ. Bishop. B. Batlogg, and E. Bucher, spersed with long penods of vinually no plains how to use observations of these is** 8 tas us ,. , AT&T Bell laboratones, and Fisk aM stress. Howevtr, they based their conclu- galactse centers to make assumpoons about "9'58 ha"* 8= ** smrws (Th: 19e4.mpma r.c. uons on limited data and did no stati>tical the pressures, demanes, and velocities of the
$msch. Enutled "Ultrasoruc artenuation b tests. Raup and Sepkoski trsted the
,,, Q"*'"***
'"' *' "'** '"'"" 'assaes
*'8 my** UPt3," it was cited 49 times m 1984 aM 4 matenals wmposing them. The manhors base a , Fncher- Arthur rnodel by sampimg the rec- their theory of the ongms and development 1985 and thus appean in this study's Bibi -
=== perme a thee aces ama sium e.xs. yg, ord of manne eatinctens of venebrates, of these galactic nucici on the jets of plasma ography. A paper on heavy fermions that 8+as * *= asti -*~ es m.sess erpsycri tro, mvenebrates, and protozoans from the late the nuclei spew out for vast digances.
*"* m'=na sans .,, , = w has Varma wrote in 1985 alw grew out of the Penman era to the llolocene, or Racnt, era. The earth sciences are represented by ideas mentioned in his abstract.83 Their results suppon the view that extmc- several papers in addition to those on pen-tions occur m a cycle of 26 million years, odic extmetions arul nuclear winter. These Yp.,,,,
include a uudy of the structure and evolu-J=mrurs Astronomy and the Earth Sciences tion of Tibet armi the northern Himalaya huclear Winter and Estlache a nountains, by C.J. Allegre, Institute of rm,. an to .. w n A controverwl topic dneuned m a paper W B%gg of ec 19H moMoted Earth Phyucs, Pans Unrvenity, and col-l [ sas etr. an a o o.
'* *le's m the 1983 study n also the subject of a pa-Per m the 1984 study. Thn topic, the con.
phyucal-sciences papers a heavily slanted ioward high-energy phyucs, theoretical leagues, and a desenption of the structure aid behavmr of pen of the earth's magnet-l 1 Aam,. . s se 24, 3 a cept of nuclear wmter," was maroduced gg ,g mm.ac. Rese are WI ic field, by E.W. Hones, l.os Alamos Na-an thre si6133 in the now famous ITAPS paper, wluch de- relatively large, fast-nioving areas whose tioul laboratory, ard colleagues. A sepe-
,,,,,,, g, g ves its acrunym trum the fint leuers of the is dnppmue when custon data rate sudy of highly cited papen in the carth s Apps es,. o . 2 sumames of its cumuthors (R P. Arm O B' are not adjusted for the uze of a given field. sciences is being planned.
- w. asa, y sPty.-a-na Toon, T.P. Ackerman, J.B Pollack, and Articles n. certain smalict fields, includmg r map -an seu rhys ten ,,,,,,ggy, .he canh sciences, ard botany ,
2 i Sagan). It presented one4 mensional . Conclusion
,,,, ,, 3 g , calculations of the atmosphenc effects of a often do rot achieve the citation threshold It is worth reiteratmg how frustratmg it o % , INAb53%C nuc! Car CRChange.00 in thC 19g4 of our annual gudiCs. And CvCn larger dn-4 ,a,. , so,,i 3,,
as to hmit these hstings to a few hundred g anas Ams Phyn sa p ) ciphnes, such as chemntry, do not reach biash Phy. 273 g gud , Curt CovCy, StephCn H. $chneider* tarley L Thompson, Natmnal Center
) these thresholds for several yean. For that papen each year. Out of the hundreds of thousands of papen published in 1984, sure-s a
,m a g for Atmosphenc Research, Boulder, Col- ruson, our uudies of highly cited chemn- ly even one-fourth of one percent deserve a c w . ps,. o uun i orado, experd on the amphcations of the try articles, for example, are based on threernentmn. Whde we have latic difficulty akn-s m r.n an a m ,
ITAPS paper and report three dimenuon- #un of data rather than two. tifyang the prehminary list of the top I,000 s haasa *-- d evi e al calculations of regional and global cluna- Let rne call anention to some papen (com or so, checkmg the accuracy of our data is s em a s2s
, tic cilech I smoke generated by a large. 4 few of the smaller fields. In autonomy, not a inviAl consideration. Lack of space is M 76p A 0 un i scale nuclear wat. Ihn is an eattemely im- the gructure and propemes of g4 lanes were another problem. However, the advent of
.Pi.e.za u., w, a n g , the subjects of intense research activity. For The Scientist *-ISl* *s newspaper for
, portant area of mtercht for 4tamsphenc sci-s.. Osa is vs, P= w a6= entists ard might well appear m our most- example, M whett C. Begelman, Jomt in- science profesuonalsm2L makes it posu-th a i cued lists for wmc tmie to cume statute for Lhuratory Astrophyucs, Umver- ble to contemplate biweekly, abbreviated ggg , A Controverual theory presented m a q W Colorado, arel the National Bureau hstmgs taken directly from our computer i ran s-cu., . 34.ae, o e P*per m tha uudy atten. pts to caplam why of Sundards, Boulder, .md colleagues au- tages. Your reacton to tfus pusubday would so macy ammal and plant speacs have died thured a paper on radio waves emanatmg be of mtercu.
**=== ,.strPtm -tas T, o aus out over the past 250 smilma ye4n m a mene* trom distant galaxies with extremely com-te * * * **
of datmct, penodic episodes or " events *
- das** a 1952 te* sew of the propenses of lep- The theory was fitst pn> posed m the late ""d* ##" '""" "
tons. mens, amt baryonsl* 1970s by A G twher nd M " h } " #" #* 11 n also noteworthy that the BJerm of Department of Geologic and ' " '
- help m she preporurwn of this essav.
4Ae Amencun Phyncol Soocry, an abstract Suences, Pnnceton' atis and has recened c4Hed tjuasan, Segen galaues, rA gdan' support from a paper m the 1984 Bibhu - '#\ # ** sournal, hw one document in the Biblog-raphy It n remarkable th : an abstra6t re- rephy by D M. IGup and J J Sepkosk re nams ceircal enough cuations (421 to be mcluded Unnetuty of Chicago,librain Fncher and "'"* **~a'm" ap. m
'"#"""' waas a8 aa a this study. Wruten by C M Vanna, Arthur *s theory shallenged the sharactena 6 '"***OD",,,'"'**"*':*"."..r".a+==,-m<=
a s.u,,, nas ,,, . e AT&T Bell Laboratonc>, Murtay Hill, at emn of entirwton as a gradual, contmuous
****a"r""'
Prumaaca a diamusun of several empenments pnwen caused by relatively nuld irwresses m envirorunental uten and replaced it with
# "" * * " ' ~
E 8a a 4 ** ****'"""" " "" that can be used to dntmgunh a inplet irum >= - the idea of a rel,tively abrupt event caused e m ,,_ ,wi m . , o a unglet supercorductor. Vanna pubinhed ~ CU4t4NI CONTINTS4 v d986 by ISi *
*M60 Dy 68 9 CufMNI CONilNTS%
I
v N tes2 an.ns. ,, "81 h 3 p tal en 12 S4 tub Arused Rahhme ACA.G.P~~ Back 5 E. h $4R A F. h' Z M, bedsk A. Cssharts W *g, ' M~~~
* '., ) ****
8 *'d hr 848 an=== meu ..'8 .e . **
, 84',982 asis2 son \ umu e s A o tamhere a M. we.a.rrinrau er ihe Univ 4 ., *P-a- or ensemei ac aa8 ave 2 -
6e ut at g,,,,, ' *** $*** O I' **" 8'" 28 3P CA. 83 om y'O
. ,,,,j O 7"'3a 8-- inasisinso.in.
electrum c.anenag fresa nuclei Phys Kn. hur $2.7270.1994 ; me= v a a.a %
,,,'"# [* , "
"' aun a Dal 1 & Lavbn a o . . , m ,,,,, ,4"'"'"
hunn Unav.. FRG. Salay Nucl. Res C::!., Gif-sur.vveer. Frann:e 1M789
'e 4.areasE. N swa. mie a.am. S'**a* um du heae. ah..,,,,,,,, W Aansann W. Henmens M. Reestedente U. Regee lS.ran unta C. Mar C. Herm 5.
,,,,,,[,
c ,7g
,g , g 10 N "'*ee G. hieshch F A Career G. Supercondinimry w Ceco,$e, s nete cryssa s Techad . fans
**=eme a .m
-~g -~ ~ .
,3 p,,,
,, , .. ,m._,o ,,, ,,,,2.'* # "# ' ' '
+ ~ . . . . %
he her 52 409 72. l944 Frankfurt Unse . Phys ! sus . Densissa.h tas a, a . r.n. .a a r * #' ' " ** '*"*ree evne Sul.d wie Phys and E Zed Inns . FRG 434S30
,,I" "**'"
* " **** 5c8 p==r>
i, Engaman F et al.10A2 Celtaheressant. Obesrtatum of sis 61ruum prodmad ta enm s2 Yg ' ** * ****" af a a&= ion. ., 20 41 63 wash assJ sets anJ large meanng trnasterne murnrea.m as pCEllN. Geness. Smauerlan 48 tw ,a as , , ,,,g j,* ## ***4P'**'**"r. 4 apwn nea .pm a p.,,,,,,,, ,,, ,,, ,'"'d Hvs hit # I N 80314.1954 w A A /usdse 5. Conmient amt soveriant amannlies sa gauge amJ srsenas a==asm, .s s ..,,, r,,,,,,,[, ,, **' h*"" '** L *9 tim.= .n h .. .. S , a % g ""' t, 34 64 Bardsee Feruu Ned Aust (46. Instares. IL. lfma ha*r
- p mounes Al Pht. # 244 424 3). 1964
,,, s<can,,, ,or ** "" *'tPtnam hanet "I C he rm.
p as.... p.n.,,
.y.,, ,,,,,,, ,,, ,,,,, ,,
se.e a Pho (s g8H 45a2 244 p awei 4 Cahtornia.14=reme herkcity bb and Deps Phys . best " 8 8 et **".e**e P. I.mo O s. Ang.nmas T P reemes g g a g g-'(8"" DJt t , T= ---."- - --..r ,,,
"" I'#W"8 "d*'"
.. E'E '"h'.3 '1954 Umv Winconsan. Deps Phys.. Mal. sus. W1. Benuthaven Ned Lab .
- ,,f;.g--- -y[: on,:
T on g,
' 8"'*8 * '***** ti ed H & 4 t a.* P .s. 6 l
)f '" "#****'"s*** *m8 he ase g.w ag n , n [b
**'"*"*'"' 33 641 Den n,s . Upor NY Sobva Seer U. trar-h H & teammmer H. Cumpu6ne acak h"= and Scn dwar
. raJaso=e doonys 88 rksa= a 4., (ws.. ,,,, ,,, , "*"a t ** H ao a , . n . ,. .a,,, s ,, ,,,. ,,,
il 23 42 Uan. Munech. Phys sat ; Maa Plan 64 Sus Adv a .a , ,,,,, ,,,, , m , ,,' G
- h. . v
'*"** - '*eTh'L==..i...,,,,,,,,,,,,,'"P"88'*=*e' Pan her 8139 it) 8. 3954Asu ige . . Misnah. Amhen inne Tahnut . Phys Inns ,1til. PRrmses e nn : Phys
(**'* h===. e m t o is u, we. 3""*"" "'" * *" er sea G=e= G ,.. , i s, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , g 31 34 Segetunes Mod Pbs M C. Basedford M D A keus M CO,J. Theory of entregnamsa6 Caliah, Aasts@p . Plancs anit Asnauscher Scs . Nad Isur. Stand , buuider. r., A, ,.,s . P Cus A 'I"*'"I '" '**'
%. Tier avs4 gni, g ,,,,,, '""8 "h' n . C M i.e. Uouo.A
**"I""I E I8I'"d' 4
.=dre by f rns W The % g,
- h" - - C" . C. Ivb41955 se An=6n
. ,_ a. are ,,. s ,,,4w3.,,g%, ,,;
I 35 33 E**I" A A' P*II'"*' A M A & 8 241 33) 80. l964 Acad. 56s U558t. mC.~ ,c .h ,r .,,, ,,,,.r, ,u, ,,,, ,,,ne are sure p*P ^
- 8984
- eums b - 194% 5 %' dur.ns.unal ic.sanan facAJ threry Al Phys 85 0742 C =mmet D= n.as.,grapn, a ,, L D tandau lau Theur Phys Mimsum. USSR
)) 36 ter annen G. weah smaluaamm sa th.a fann hws bp 4tv h N M W M8.
)
19 54 Juld Nimi kes Car . FRG 4M102 O (. g o 32 34 thavneou R J. Cowney k A, $6arame G A vauhtamwe Phrs le 58745. H. Phsae traamas 40 A Aans G h A anapps C 3. The sa e" ""Ad * *" P"* m.ssen A t Peu a magnets sninal t.hs=#ur. pertuisuun, and sandum furids / 3 asasak.linburgh. Deps hys .
** 23 216 tw it, avse p. .
g,'- [**'Pl* Henry 14tn . Ins:Ad* Se J Prim n . w 6954 MIT. Deps Phys . CanebnJge. MA. Univ 814324) bruukhaven Ned tab . Upton. NY 51 4308 anemes-I N I' 4Aaun G S A Nappe C gg. butid.m a w "'*'*'"#*' #*" hd 8 3 de 49 54nhop D J. % anna C M. Battues S. Businer E. Hmk 1 & SenAh J L. Ulirasuna6A 8II 238 6 tvs4 t sanal.a an.3 Mo.h.n C'm ' kE' Ph)
- Id8h d=6ce. PA Pr.n= etun saunm UN Mn hw has 3) tulWil.1964 I)iv . NM 83<l)S30 e in.. hacph Henry gw , y p gy , Al*.i n N.d l h . Mae he Tesksmit I I'#8
I*"'" E " # "*** M B ' **'"'" "# 8" **"' *'"t a k
*'*'^~$8" #"" 9 41 ' t .' 8 4 % 'S *8 N "' # "" #' M
- Unie Caleloonas.
".'a"s'e"s'"trusture wanA"'I cued darkC*h'"'"**sauer here ill 36 e # ' N 48 Nannhen g i,e , y , g ,,,,, ,,,,,, ,,, , 2
C8' U""-
- 8"
Oa.. Penestl*ea.a Phde4 p s S'**fd'd I*"'*' 82 Il II A&wgre C J. Canartdess b T'8P'*"' I* De 4. Marrauer M. C us r, J.,,,, j j' Ot acr* . $*ma C'b'. S'*a80'd U"*'
- -,,D.. Rechter sam-.. C A h
% J, g% y "**** I* Arms = N t.oriep., r,
'O c*G - - u su,. L.J..c. u .c. DsAls A. Steffen W. Derportak A E L, la Nh ladesi N. Paammmho Garet C. Tandens L. hur h"*'"'" S' I '**taas C. t hou J 38 )$ 46 R Nem magnetn' d pule estualme amaJe samlun!i as .1methe 4.
Windefunnd enh
..G C. T . ,,. m,a , * "" / > > a,*s hengrues Q. l'embrug 3 *** l & Eu N. knniuse and eimin. s..nen., no Um.
.ws,.
u,. ,. N- onni. N iiam mei > iva. nU.nn u Phys aN.,r h,.
. Naples. Ned. be nG. G.-.a.c.
troissia. ha asus un, n,, . n ,, a.e ud ihr H*;*n,",u y*a ~ ice' a u,,u a unu. . Om
, iur o'"n
. s.,
, U, ,
Uno . Drps Thci,s Phys . Nad lau NutiC,au.n,. u. . us u . Mi is.mo M..an 5 a.e U . . N.d su,_mi.n, 4 haas of M*'*8ks kcams Un** . Geut u , g ,y u.,_ g, g,, M_.,,g }g aa ', y Breda C D, Horn 5. Ssestich F. Luths B A Marten R M. k w spes m s >-, Ch- .~ , ., om 2 4: 4) and CeA), tuhHeme eHata 6m bm&J ! anne syNema pp NMM n *"Amaansi amanshes A t P4* 8 8 244 2bv $ tu tvu CCCur i's
.. A,, a, n,,yng g g
, t , ,
M A I"'898 Dan . 3.istph Henrg 32 (vs? 1. IVW DurntsaaJr late Technul , Lau Suled Semic Phys . Frank P ' C*"*JI' f fh raanhan-Lhm . M sm Insa . ( NG. Brutansna R A4crua Aeppu Palo Alus kesnnaeum G. Inielfme Ctr . CAami 554S30 nunnes.hbnura pregertara o t e l 3 s2 ao A,g,,.,,, p g * ""**P"A"*'*'* SP* llustu.a *s. ee I u. pace p... { gg[ ! 7 to 17 (.clJ Jung naalet Phu he his 32 6347 30.1964 g, g jo g34 g I"U L'" M*er s, H.n prin,,,, p,,, y,
'**d 'as""" 5"a e 19 14 A g,,,,
p,=.au.e g g, gg.m, g',
"d ****8 ek+ 8hase Jindmem s se shr I'whauen Heig%. M. AT AT M W . Munny N~~==' P4ys H.R N U No E
- 5 ***
penue==& j "4 M** Pl*Ht h %s AJs %,' il 2n 4i suil...,s J k. *a.su,,~2n-
^<'arr C .e Dn A la# H p Je*=;3 aesa kes
**r Chem ta,. Dn.u Lei',,Jg ui s
'"'"'"a"<- ia . i , s. .no r
9 30 lv Cah4bbe N. Masami L A Srteestava V. Anumakass I desays assised
- G .< ,u, C a, Phslus s== uf an Maica g ,,e l inv 4Sv of.1984 Nurra Unn o .9 .9 *"""' 4** ***"8 u .,,, ,,,,,,,,, , 3"'#'"'IINN PP **4eder (Nf N Munar. Mi bLb tran6au. Italy t).116$$4uge unaphngs CsI4ulalMm uI 1984 Una Teaas.
and unnp.cs cutwnler f#u Dss 8 54) evt ius a a g b'" %* **' lead (medflab P A NORhefR
' $$ 47 $$ Inun scH sunsmens deuwsseunal redm1mm Al P8tes # 237 591441, 29 897 I so Ashese G q d d At Chg "" **' '#"' ***"a HI e n c hts a dh 1.e ,, ,,g
. g4o C. ih.s h,s - Drr Mr.A.,..a. n s -
*g saansees.e ears,y m.wspa,,g #
- aN G-- N""." 's"= ~*e.P P
- u *"Heta'ns
- ,s _,sa g s Card, J L. kner so est,sur (Cani "" snW
"' " " 'sewaname
' sait ' *unsursataq en 6asar 684 f4
- a bee 3 3jv g g y3 g,g eq and ha.1,m 'Ldtes as the 2 32 34 # ^"
- 2. n 41 - G e, . ,u , C a.,,, ,,,_, s, -
CERN m. pre psunua symluussun sud.drs M U I'N 6t 88t$ a CA 554J742 5..ucs6aml 6Wu22. si liti CU5MNT CONTENTSw (31980 Dy LSl? 12
- 5% ov isa Cu484M COMtM5 I
s 3 M 48 harty 8 0 %ssa A j. Dyanma og m, y.,,,,,, ,,,,,, ,,3 ,,p ,,, ten tab . Darmosaik, tRG. Unis Ca'afurnia.14=sente Scrte' y tab . Bert 57. CA
#4M St* len 32 S 8.1994 Curnau Da.* . t.at Asumac Sul.J Staic Php .ml M,4 g, 434716 la 34 50 Helprein 0 8. Suusans of treas.Panales sad the beranLy of frmtamal waamisaf Hall
~
Ces . lahata. NY 834784 ' 0*""*3 D*** ' U'P' II I'
- C'**'"I 8 M 4 27 33 Chuta D 5. Mdier O & 5. hassa P W. Gammard A C & Wesemaan %. kinam
,a GaAse ALaAs niuk. pac 9.ao blatt* Ph u A I488 52 ISII O 39'4 88898888*88 N86im8C 8"'*8"** abeurpi.m as regimi 8440W. 43 0302
**" *cle esstn1 ursa JLil J Qiuanaum LJr tron Qt 20 265 73. IVs4 AT&T llett Labs '
41 29 40 Ha.lan S & Neunal R. Tupolossas pruirrurs of priwiauon chienen 1 rays +Mm4 Regamma acu Operaung Ces . Osas serve 088. Hutankl. ATAT bell t.atts . Mueny Gee 47 L427 32.1984 NIH, Div Teth . Br$tida. MD 834905 S. actatamshes breween cryssal
#8dA "I 83W9 Ii 61 72 Hertse J 6. Croat J J. Pinkerten E & VetagPhrs Ary 8 29 4176 8. 1984 General 42 2a il Cham A. Goedhers M. Herwtsa h Jawahary 4, tapers P. Muse,4 G C.1rnawra C G. binnsure and magartas properters .
was Harte H. Annan M h. Caurma S L. Garrum L. Massayer M D. Paa. ins R h. T4 X M non Res Latn . Drpt Phys . Warren, Mf. Unsw. Miseauri. Res Rams 1er. Cuiumena. Atary P. Smtsh C. Sarhahman K. Cammet D G, DeWt e J W, PAgt,gn R. Ierguese T. MO 841s30. 53 4447 Gesah s. Caschatear M G D. Ghtaeman B. Hansas M. Hanus D L. Hutaaev 3. les M. O. 34 14 Herrere M J. th-ans L t. Impra C & Yadurain f J. 59. ark truswwn ans sisaris as sht Madnd Ausonuen Uma . Dep Thar Phys . kamenswamp J. Essenkh D L. huhusa V. Masary N B. Marrow F. Nordawr3 E. Ogg ' pp soin=les h,s les 8143 4 h2. l944 M. SHwma A. hseen P C. Samme b. Weber D. W naske R. A.Ast 4 J, Gas,. R, SPo*a Hammard J. Hemapsg8ad M. ""* k. Mas Amy W W. Plpun i M. Malaus R. Haan iv IS 34 Heines t. W. Baker D N. Basse 5 J. Ich W C. G=8y J T. Mammes D J. Zwkta P. Jemman T. ILagma H. Kaas R. Schreads b. Chadekk ik. Chau* eau J. Genaue T k D. bla*6e J A. hmah E J & Tsurnames a T. 5ausmere of the msgnriosa.: as 220 R. H $4 Ws4 Los Alanna Games J M. Ganda J A, Maemmanus A C. Chem b L. Parkbersa G. Petersee D. Pudeng ums as respun=c so gangnetn a,.=wy. GnpAvs Ars lesr 84-8789 R. Ramaniste C. Tharuneske k H. Tapsen P samu. D. Gr,,a J. Haka R G. Nesnjunha Ned Lab . NM. Calimb. Jet Prupulsion Lab . Psamarns. CA R. Saane P. Maher P. heyder A & hasme R. Lmus on the 6-*= souphng trum senutep ausha 8 daay hos Ke* lem 32 4054 8.1954 Syrao.ar Case 8thma Con . Corrut 7 27 14 lbaars L L & tepez C. N . I supergrawwy. the =can scaat ami Ehe km<nergy pensk CERN, Genrva. Sedacriand. Madrma sprstsum hmi h ws 8 2)ISGI 44.1954 La.* . Isha6a. Ua.w RAhrsies. NV. %emarrbek Um * . Nasheille IN Harvard Une, , Ainurmai Un . . Drps Thaw Phys.Speaa d C**D' mage. MA. Oh.o Simec Um. . Cosumtma. OH. Reagers Unse . Nc= Briens.mt. N; 3 ao 43 J gye R t . Cimer F t. Roberta R G & Rams G G. On the malsas .kpewM aPhys and Deps SS1863 eicsuuprushat ua f4,s ten # lle 449 54. 1964 MTT. Cis Theur 834769 28 27 44 Ce*ey C. hchmonder b H & Thumassen h t bantaa namespherm etsmi os na soe we .gc Phys . Cambrm3 e. M A. kushrrfurd Appectum tab . Galtua. UK P W 8t*rr**d *"h
- A.u.,, 5
*sm1=** l' usa a musicas was rem.hs frusa scarsal sessulasum am=wl senwei.uns 305 28 S. 4964 had Ces Asamapsus Res tkm& der. CO to 4542, 35 373 F 10 23 33 Jamma C & terunam W. T1.s suinturc of clussen ofliarsand sous- Or Asarupeys.. Caanb 4 prop 4,s 1 276 35 SS.1964 les
' 35 *4 Ceues J J. Hartse J D. Las R W & Ptaharten F L. Ps h ans Nd te taans m.awr.ag a 7 31 40 Kamser Y & Wetmas I. Llasts prupertaes of rmham perwaanag sys ar* 'l*** ud hash pertonnan6e pern a- mageru / Appd rnu SS 207s a2, sys4 $218914.1954 (darul Meansrs kas Labs . Phy Drpi . Warren. MI 854a47 A B. Namepsutus D V & Quares M. too energy behavaner of
) 31 $4 Kouanas C. I =ha=== 3 2)6 438 46. 1964
' 43 S4 De8 D W & Oween J D. Q4rpennaras pasamruum .uas of panon J.=uibut .e gunwim.m realisas lu6 ally-supersymmruh Srami unafssd ahmears Al Phys Ph u Ae* D to av 34. 3,s4 taur.Ja km.e Une. . Php prpe . Taiiana=we &L a3 lien CERN Genres. %=isacriant inst Scru61 Mat . MairsJ. Spam 834)e95 Art 0 43 45 tahsem E. Henchhfle I, tJae k & Otues C. hpretuu.Jer phpas Ae** Ed hu S6179 7U7. sys4 p,'"# Nela A**el LD . Be a=*a. IL. Une. Cahfornia. L.rense 0 69 69 Latine D & haetaharik P J. Q.asnrystals a new class of anarreil saluses N:
Pennsylvanaa Deps Phys . Phdadelphaa. PA. IBM Thunus krs 33 2477 80,1954 Univ herhaary Lab . Scaksisy. CA. Uh.o kass Um.= . Cuium bus. OH Si 36 y 3 Wat*on Mrs L4b . Y.whiowa Heights. NY E34307 8 27 35 kJets J. Hagetta J S. amanopuenten D V. OM*e k & bredaarki M. hpenymncum rein 0 41 45 tiede A D. Thr ianaisunary Univerw Kip rycs, Mrs 47 923% N Asad ks Uhsk, P N tabedrw Phys inte . Mouow. U11R 8S44)3 launn uw big baas Naad thu 8 2 88 43176. 49s4 kansord Un.. , hanud t.mran A*6et Cas . CA. CLRN. Genrea. 5=.sacrLams 9 16 45 Maard M. Portal G. beurtas N. Teudeuse G & Ykamer. M. Nanne of she speslaas 0 II II kJh* J. k& C&.' ,
- D V. Pham remaasgal 504 f.ls wPr's'**dy A *t pha c Pays Ar. km $2 88%9 lH54 Paes 8 248 40b28 tw&4 C1ItN. Gent =a. 5=sucream! Meaard M. Pariss G. beurtas N. Teemasume G & Virussre M. septma symmuy bnakas 3 30 35 and ihr nature of the spia glass phase / P4vs -r.aru 43 843-54. 1964 Pans Um .
3 38 8I kJh* J & howeenki H. bau.sme s.gnatures as the g soumars pn s lju $ 442 444 S.1954 CEkN bearsa S=44sr6 sad. Dt5Y. Hamburg. ING sS4)ess NorH*al Coll . Fran6e. Unsw No1E tl. Tor Vergata, leary 53-2079 O S2 32 kJan J & keenenka H. heresyanmrus pannies as the CERN pp 6ou.Jrs A t Phu $ 6 42 44 Mater R C besnard A C. Ideemanas D A & Massamme O. Parahuin .paassum wella enh thf O*AS AI.Ga, .As system f4ws 8tw 8 29 3744 3. 1954 AT&T Bril 1. abs . Mustsy 246 isy 202.1v84 CLkN. Ornrea. he.uestand. DLSY. Hamtmeg. F kG sS 4sh93 47 39 % kJhs J.Imh 4 3, y . - g y & lamb *akas SL. Nes6 ale wgers)aurwtrec stamaand HI N3 83 4'2II phaari few har 8114 42913.1944 CLNN. Gearva. 5.auestami. Una luaan.na ~ 4 50 84 Mater R C. Elvemanas D A & Gemmard A C. Earrgy gap dusculasmatus ami eflame 8 29 7053'7.I994 AIAI E8II Greme n sues for GaAs Al.Ga, .As speannant wells #4*s Arv 0 ba 34 kJain J & hher M is s persymawary suusm!' feu ku 8648kN86 1984 Cl RN. tabs . Murray Hal. NJ 8143212 (nnres. 5.aussiana Ua., Cat.ausn.a. In.nr. C A u et 45 tedemos L D. Operahm ammisay for ihr Gauss L.. rau kN 8 44% 514 NH H4her 24 23 32 he4Getourt G. Habeas H J. Van Duense R. Aasmans H Nurmal kh . P a. hady C. Harvin b. Heisms, M G. Heesh J R, Jammengs R E tew F J. Maredum P t Mrf w 19 as toes b & hee P Pi Penuta eta.s on.ons nr. ,.ponen, .ms tourshota rau G. Olaen F M. P n- h S R. Fammond E. Reeme-Rahemaso M. husfer a T. Wuhar R Ae= De S2 2169.4954 kmh snerrges thea Nes . N.Jgef.eiJ C1 si ou r S 54 39 triaden D. Qi.e Z & Shraher b Consornma a.asiame i a.6.e g . anJ .snm.: c apo enn in i
' G. W esortsee P R & Yamag E. The la 'artJ <tser.marmM Sant 4 "'"P"'8 8** J. mens.m. Pau a,. Du 12 4375 a 19s4 Un.. Chm aad I n8ma f rime **8 jem.tsun 5se lag . Palo Alle CA. Amsstadam Ums, . Asutm. la8E . Kaperya Astrum Jasres f easak laeas anJ Deps Php , it aS ()F42 lase . Usuningen, teatra Otnerv . Haygens I ob 14Najte, . Fokkes hafeB Mas') (EMB V. kNphol 4kas. Neth Fad asE$
* )# 43 be* erd D. LJ H h & Merene J M M.gnen, pe.. pen.c. ,na ,w usua.sc og Na_ c,js k.Jeas Assete . Dw.sigekso. The Nethrelarmis. Usis' Aruusu.
WhJ hwe C. m.= Su 497 w lvs4 CNks o..s her6 le . beca.4 c %. o, t 1846 Ph 8' as, a j il 7s 43 Ou H R. Reaper M. Rare T M. Lede A. Dinh 2 & sensen J L p .s.c spresumsmtpay 29 2491 502. 19s4 Tuhuhu Umv . Res lass l'un. S**rl Other Mei semana. Japaa.
j as Our,, Phys Ar* ies 3219815. twee 5.a. tai lau inhaua . Sun.J we Php Arguans had Lab . Mar ha Tahaut Div . R BSM
{ Le ami Thsan Phys Sem . l.r6h. S .ucrians. L. Atanam Nas Lb . Nu e5 us ks , 33 42 % asuia C M. Hu. so J..a.ngw.sh betware o trytes ami a ungles suprnimuhams M Amr' i 0 CS 43 Padmur R G. hasan D L. Abrahaman L & Aaderase P w. Mairin ut beamshmally rh b 29 400.1954 AI AT listi Labs . Murray H.ll. N3 SS OS)0 sisanssa.asd dynaam* #8 L S s y setsamuum fois As. leu S n 93sel.19s4 ta.ke Uan .
Drys Phys . Durham. NC. Primrium Oa., . Drys Phys . II.ugres One . Scre Php 3 25 u Veeanas M. Ikaams usan ad *miar bunons Mes les 8 W M W b WW Dep Phys . Ana Artms. MI Lab. Pimaiseap. NJ 43-2079 g y 42 Vdanas J. Nonsed bnum "crumal" capuntana na the ramhan (wlJ lams ansert Mn Af' j 44 28 35 Peaspanum A D. Carten M w. tem H. brust D A & %ssensen P J. Lapennwaaal eviden6e g,n 3215444, 3934 Gerrueste Nml Res Ctr . Newarum Diftract Lab . France IWI
! 8m a impas 68* Phase armand.ua a am6sar syucus. rm,s As, L,n 32 4wb y sws4 g 34 31 wang w I. Meads: L L & !aere 9. Hash ambilary twee gas ami valsese teams ohe m , Mahasna knee Oa. . Naal Supersosnama Cyskasua Lab . t . taan.ag. Mt. Um.. a a,.immm,k,al p AsGaAn;GaAs : : ,-1="' #Pl Mys les 45 639 48. 1954 Ashras. Deps Phys . Geests. Tsaas A & M Onew . Depe Phys . (uh Mmm.m M IBM Thunm j Waa.m Res Cu . Turito*e Heights. NY. E34212 83 # 38 35 wether R R. A QCD maniel for pri fragmensassant inciales a)ft Bl uun emerienms. E-l 4 33 i Il 27 40 Passarama J. The e v6us.sa ci saaminsn ; and 19. man a say kames 4ur.pa.: 1 L,,Pl rnis a 21s 492 328.19s4 CERN Genres. Seiuertami 854kSi j lar 34 443-vl. avH C.m. ib.a On.. . Drps Awson . Nc. turn. M. HassasJ g3 29 40 %esu D A & Otnevin M. Frmtal urwtwres formal by harm aggregatam of ampsuus pidd "h--
i Cas Aisrupsiys . Cmatwmigt. M A 35 8434 gog, pm,, A,, 1,a 32 1433 4. 4964 E ason Res Eag Co . A-**- **. NI 852982 6 34 37 Powery G h. Seemduma R H. Madare D J & %dnue A G. Musuc Casio semmuuna.s"* 6 43 St %6 der G. Marwa S. Kommar A. tsuun a R & Wenartet K. H"-lear 8*tHluumamal gna.p samadas.ama enf snamat behe=aus se the n.sapico ba; Is.ag nemici fass As. # 'H NMR ad pruicias Laperunraial protoneses J &gn Kas.mem % .WM.1984 29 40MG.1964 On.. Lt.ah..gh. Deps Php . Del. IhM lurmh kes Lb - $wan feel law Tahrd . Inna Mole 6 S.ul is.uyhys and Lab Phys Oirin . Zenoh. R a.ha.kum. 5=daertans. Cornra Uno . Lab N nl baml . Ishma. NY 334)?42 $wauerland al-144
; 27 33 40 Pumsus R D. Rad.au.e Z' ds6ayn-a tuunposee a6caatio f4*a lsN A I 4 424 3. 4W54 3 3g g wgg,e (,, C..nm nepasatam vi phaars thus As D 30 272-83,19e4 lama AJ, Seal . ) Maa Flamh Sa AJo b . lad Php A uophp . Mwank F MG e4 4JU22. 518 801 pr.metua. NJ 83-3375 I 1*J )# Puennyt J. Wyld H w. kages J R. v. J & hamrlew D A. tenac waves.eure ph* Es4 Mn W 4M12.
10 67 77 WNt's L. N'* abel.na bus.maaiam na r=o dunrmune C.=e==a , usanname am SUels lamme gauge shrur) ouh elynammal. 8.ghs Icrauun. P4ie Ar. isu 3954 Primetum Ums, . J.meph Henry B.aba . NJ 5$4253 l Sitea 7 1964 On.. Bu.mm Orbana Chem pa.5s. Drp Php . Urbana. IL Oh e hee 0 47 47 WNien L Sune prusertan of OL12) nuperissags rh s ten 8 149 351 4. 1984 Prennema Oan . Drps Php . Cuhembus. Onse Cem ma-.s Dep Php , OH 53 462s Oan loncph Henry Latn . N1 53-2147 83 34 44 Ram @mr-Dum h helem A & harashese J. On Kalma kle.n ..mmm.k.g, n.. fin a 3 % 40 %shi C G. Cahn It N. Rassemburg A. Tatype T G. Yass G P. Ports' P C. M 3 j IIS 388 #2. Swee less Cu Timur Php . Irwur. haly. larrar Onn . lage I hrus Php . J, Mamaaert L. Hendrtch R 1. Creerford R l Reus M.1erungeta M A. Mathe G. { h..ucstand. Oam banham. Imper e4 Cuh b Tah.Ok R$ 4Jbol Agustar-Reemes M. 4dha-man T. busy M J. Geral G P. #'kt LL *" " E' I of nu 47 Ramap D M & Sephaha J J. Pesmomm3 et eu. mime. .a ihr gnaoga p.a en. %s tr aart it. Napre B. D. Tr***r
- P & A6 E PmA* 3' N ' A" 3'"w* ufCan.s==.a. la==m. nasnity L.h . mat < irs . "Cde**.
I 4.s 1. 144 si noi S. ave On Ch .g Dre t . pap b u a4uno u.a n.. S siv.ivu Uaa garps Phys . Panmarna. CA. CERN. Leup Lab Past Phys . Ocarva. S**** lama Neal a1cav2 v S4 61 Raast - ^ ^y H. temaer P & keener J On ihr inc.e, ud .uswe..ma.n.a, .a A. ms. pe, val.gra. S..uerlaml. Omn Cubambe. Med Ces . Drawn. 00. Oan GL**8"". 6ais.e .p.ca t re.a A - ( ..msena Suar 34 al4 Ju. Ivs4 Mas Pl.sma %m AJ. larp hamsal Pbkn . Nuourrt.aJ Applet m lah . Chmm. UK. Unn Hets.aka. Drys i b lana had haar Nes . houngert. ktgransmag i ma . Drp Php .1 NG nWilu H.gh Larsgy Phyt . Fenlasmi. One karlesult. ESC 8. Nml WSy Oms . hd I le he 40 Redhrt A h. Gauge m.m.m as.amt anni pasay mim6untenetum uf threr J.nwasam.1 Sge.a. Mr p Unn . Tukyo. Japan. Netc. Div 19sys . Qua a. Commaa. Oas. 5 sin k2=6m. I sernwum. In.a As. Isa $2 &a 28. sys4 MtI . Cat these Php aml Drp Php , Orps Phys . Socorn. SUNY. Dry Phys . Skay SnaA. NY. %w5tasa PWyesth lass. } Cambsage. M A esc 241 bic Umv . Depe Fhp . Bl.6kahurg. VA j su 2s 33 Remarie F M. lancapseimm.m. ue Z er, e.cas. .mJ haammat ww. peo Isa a 6 27 33 wand T H. Barrus C A. Maler D A 5. Chemin D S. Om T C. (neuerd A C & siv 44,54. Sep CNR$. On.. ks Tah Laguana. Waipru.cs. Isame s51101 %seganaam W. Highrspeed opinal namhdamm oah GaAS C,aA1As iguasman eens na a e a , 2 41 47 Reys k & Ray D P. ksamhwe sus gl au peaa=6 sam .s ihr pp cou dre No isu 8 dmair uua ru appi Phu Isrr 44 ll> 8. Ive4 AT&T hctl Labs . Hu'atkl *ad M"tr*F ! 448 442 e 4,64 Dunan=ad Om. . Bass Php . I8tG anewu Hau. hl ES41UWW l 49 18 87 hasses M. Dejsenera b. Tasses N. iasiaamsse H & Main.n rs ). Ne. nietes ! sur 3 3 34 wesemums J H & Daarwenski A M. Mappias she *9Ps8 "'3' whewasammi l , prestances n**6ar** un a hang of MJ .sml te / @pi f4ta SS JU$l 7. Ivh4 ksmut.. nap omdel.ag ul urth sinhRde by enterseum Of trunneC #e'eIurWE l b#'9'A'I 3 l l Semuel Mesas. C . Osnaa J.p.a 641sio. 414a47 av 595) pe.1964 Henard Dan . Drps Grue So . Cambrmtge. M A 35-10'F. J e 44 47 sas , D. T,,..,J. ,c.g..a= Kaluu kle.a sunneuip5) M.s leer A I 47 413 9 sus 4 39 % aguhaus t. B. Schaselr* I D'. laukham V N kaammsekt P A. IGarunnsvush M V. 37 75 O m. P.am.,i. PA .nem - I Orp Ph,. . P,a.w,.i ,,a,,uma A v & ,..a. t i. ~ ~rmi r o.ur..i wrema - , = = -s-< 80 la 48 handen D S. bd -== P M & $6 dar N Z. G as amac.wm it.a.J. .a inw ga.ap i lhe aht Di T1h,I Ib stethy6 car daheoloncerasbuNisaicas er maidel JiTP jsW edam [r an.apawrsum J.we.ni .un f H, 4.my 4 4 127a as? 2ut, avs4 st M A ge.m gv 42 6.19s4 41ranstanaJ ls.mn Pssma lA 1A8# l'u' ha 1912-1.1954 8 A'88 u P ugsm n seus., Ise.m4 h) . On.= M. we huica. Drp A wson . Aa in tw. M 4 si4mA4 U$$k. lane Clum Phyt . Msn6ue. U3SM b4218).SS2Ubu i 6 au 84 hhashasaan D. Simst 8. Grasnan D & Came J W. Menelam ph. e ..sh n. , s*ar ' a 46 $4 %aus J. Turme M h. heepian C, h D N & N A A. NmM l wweasam.1 usJrs .ad sm; usamlasm.a.1 wausewy Ph.a As. isu 54 Ivil L Ivn4 Iw.cl matem.mhrm 4 tramel (unquanium ut theury and uhncostam Asan1.A'8 / la.s f as hma . Drp Maa k ag . H4.1.. Iw.cl CNMS. Cu kuJ Chem. Mes . % ar) 2nl 494 Sil.1964 Caliah. Die Ges.1 Plant 56s . Panadras CA. Ung Nagt , teasme. hma ts.s kaad . Css Mm M . G.arwestmeg. MD sicSu7 A gr.m Aunghym Car , terais Ned Auel Lb . Fernulah Assmph F s brP B*ines. IL 81 24 IS beefer 5 T. Re=en Rahema e M. Hank J R. Dajang T. %euse6auer G. Ausmann H ls. Unn Det..are. u.noa ne Ida . Nc. art. Dt. as.lS27 Smartman C A. Smasses M. tless P L. Esarn.se J P. GaNets & C. Hetmas H J. Hamne' lu
'b 3e Zaen A & Grumer G. Phase eauhereme in War curresssarrying charssensay. eave man' ar-M G. La= F J. Melry G & t m.as L. lais.ecJ sd**.es *a dw M*5 a anut*e, .A on pa.ag rapennwain in Nbhr, 74.s Are # 29 73M7. 4964 Uan Calaksuma. Dupe
, 4w.9 a.a J 27s L7:4 avs4 Cdann Du.ac La .= les Pr gn.isme Lh P.s.Jem. Php . Im Angeles. CA I CA. NAS A li.hges . %.gbegtua. DC. h ASA CanklarJ 5pme II.gtu Cu Geccabels. MD 6 61 71 Zusaama 5. he )-S & Zae A. Chwal ampneles, h85h re dismensmus, amil d.W l Oa.. 8m Qwcra Mary Con . t A. kas Pe.k k.in then . On.s Aeu..n. kc.arJ grunwary .%.i F4is # 239 477407.1964 Uan Cahforn.a. Lustme terrte6cy Lab ! D.wp . Tam a Az. Cm-u Om. C. aad.u Php sp e n,. . ian . s y t a,, am, D,, Ph,s . 3,a,w, CA. can wh. aces. Dre Ph,s . s a= w A sm4) l ta t im Dy ase cuor4m coNums = curant con 4NTSt tM980 Dy l$l ? " l i
\
4" ENCLOSURE R REFERENCES FOR RESPONSE T0 QUESTION 1
e 4 6 G,sk k es Nb y *essss O k Op 3gte iu'R'*9, the ne-ters of the Missouri senate take great netde in apolauitn1 historic achievemeqEi'UETdh reflect nonor, glory and distinctioi uoan the entire State of Missourir and U333, on Sa tur t sy, Oc tober 11, 1996, the University of Missourt will proudly observe the !*entteth Anniversa ry of the operation of its highly acclaimed Rese se:S Heactor eht:h is centrally locatet at the =ain ca* pus in Columbias and fi5%, the lar;est and most powerful university research reactor tn the Unitad States, the University of itssouri Research Peactor (MURR) began operation twenty years ago at 6:14 p.m. on October 13, 1966 and
#f' PEAS, during the past two decades, the University of Missouri Research Reactor has experliELiT t'emarkable success in a wide variety of endeavors in the general areas of education, research and services and gB'ZIAj, MURR f unctions twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week and operates at full power (currently 13 egawatts) more than ninety percent of the timor and wurPE%j, MURR is kiown all across this great land and around the Q1obe for the invaluable contributions it has made to improve the quality of life for the current popu-tation of the world and f or gener ations to comes and w'i'P'A4, a valuable tool for industry, MURR has uttitzed Lts aimma-ray diffractometer, the only one in the United States, to measure imperfections in a mercuric todine crystal grown aboard the Space Shuttle Challengert and i" ' %1 fthe University of MLssouri Research Reactor also enjoys distinction as the princtFir"Teradiation f acility for moon rock over the last twelve years and has gained further recognition for its schtevements in the tracing and treatment of diseaser NOW. 79ERFroof. 3! f r *EsotVE7 that se, the members of the Missouri 3 enate, E t ;hty-third Gener a l Xasemaly , join unanimously in acknowledging the Tw'ntleth Anniversary of the University of Miss73ri Research Reactor and in extendinq hoth e Jurs3ement and best wishes f ar even greater accomplishments in the ch 11engl91 years that tie ahe s jt and
f f F"RTu'R e'?"tV!7 that the Secretary of the Senate be instructed to orepare a properly inscr ibed copy at this resolution f or the University of Missourt Research Reactor, Dr. Robert M. Brugger, Dit ector.
Offered by 9ansent Roqar 9. 'd i l M 91 N O
/
STATE OF MISSOURIs CITY OF JEFFERSON: et SENATE CHAMRER
- f. 16hn F. Sq qti, President Pro Tes of the Senate, do hereby certify the above and f oregofE] 15~be a t ut t, true and complete copy of the Senate Resolution offered by Senator WLison and adopted on October 9, 1986, as fully as the same appears of recorf.
IM T'9T!*0MY W"^P, the I hsve hereunto set 9y hand and .stfixed the seat af Senate of the St ate of Miss yJrt this 9th lay of Octobe r, A.D. 1146. J ac3 / 1 d w GIRD GENERAL AS3FM9LT w
g& @ ENCLOSURE S REFERENCES FOR RESPONSE TO QUESTION 1
i , . I f
~
I 1
) \ . .
_ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ . - - . .- - / . I i ( } , 6 the University d Misa)uri Researd Reactor (WRR) is the highest power, highest flux researd reactor at any United States miversity; and Mmms, the NRR offers a mique means for e&catica d students in a broad range d disciplines, including agriculture, ardaeology, delstry, engineering, geology, and hman and veterinary medicine and nutritimp and N the NRR suppets researd d faculty and staff fra all i four campuses of the University and more than 130 other miversities,
) federal and state agencies and inistries in the four general areas of j
materials acimoe, basic life scieces, natural scierres and engineering i and tedrnlo2y; and WEmms, the NRR povides service for worl&ide researders and inistrial users in a variety d areas, including silican traruunutatim
& ping and radioisotop go&ctims and WImans, the mRR oprates at 10 n:1111m watts of pwer greater than 914 of all hours in the year, po&cing neuttma for its e&catim, researd and servim gograns; and Weemas.
the mRR cxmtritutes to the welfare d the University, the City of Olunbia, the Oxmty of Bome, and the State d Missouri; and Westas, the WRR, having tegm operating at 6:14 p.m., Octoter 13, 1966, will reach 20 years of operatim this October 13,1986; and Wu mmaa, the mRR is enhancing further its high internatimal 'I standing with a planned upgrade d its reactor power and tullding facilities. s i MN, Mm250as, I, ROEWEr D. IERITE, Mayor of the City of mlunbla, Missouri, & hereby poclaim Octoter 5 through 11,1986, as ( Tus osIvansrTY or arssosRI assaARCE REACTOR (NORE) WERE 4 in Glunbia and urge all citizes to prticipate in the WRR's opn house ' Saturday, Octoter 11 (9:00 to 11:30 a.m.), and tectane better acquainted with the services and tenefits offered ty this mique researd facility. IN WINEEs WEEREOF, I have heremto set my hard and caused to te affind hereto the seal of the Ci ty of 9g, i Blunbia, this 6th &y d Octoter, 1 986 . e
, Ro&ey D. Snith, Ptryor
! ATrm T: h Lama H. Ihniel, City Clerk
p--- r ?) s 4 ENCLOSURE T REFERENCES FOR RESPONSE TO QUESTION 1
, Ut?VERSITY OF MISSOURI- COLUM!lA mER-DEPARTMENT CORRESPONDENCE February 13. 1987 i
TO: Jay Barton FROM: Robert Brugger . j suexcT: Workshop on University Reactors 4 On February 2-4 I was at the Lawrence Berkeley Lab as a member of the National Research Council consnittee to evaluate the need for university reactors. The workshop was one of the more effective presentations of pertinent information that I have attended. Many of the university reactors were represented and the presenters made a real i effort to present information pertinent to the subject. No person, who i is opposed to these reactors, made themselves known at the meeting. The presentations stressed the research, educational and service uses of the reactors. Also, there were two panels addressing " Operations . 1 Problems", such as LEU /HEU, and " Support and Survival". The UM staff who attended ((Don Alger, Steve Morris, Gary Ehrhardt, Bill Yelon, Jay 4 Kunze, and Sam Werner) added much to the discussions. The MURR stood , out as the premier facility. i I carried away several general impressions from the meeting. First, in the climate that the university reactors have had to operate, we have done many things right. We are way out ahead of the other i facilities. Second, we have selected and are supporting the important 4 areas of research and we have diminished support to the areas that are not importantly related to our facility and its capabilities. However, one area that we need to strengthen is the one we call " Nuclear ' Engineering". We have a good interaction with our NE department but we are suffering from not having replaced the leader of the NE area. ! Staff, such as Don, Charlie and me, can't focus enough attention toward i this area to make it as effective as it can be. Another observation
- about the meeting, while interferometry was well presented by Sam and Cliff Shull of MIT, other parts of neutron scattering did not get the attention they deserve. Also, while Gary gave a good report on the
! uses of radioisotopes, the committee members did not pick up on the importance of what is being done. I'll have to try to correct these ! two oversights when I get a chance to edit the report. Fred March, the NAS representative, told the committee that when i the report is finished, the NAS calls a meeting of policy makers from the agencies that should react. At the meeting the recommendations of ! the committee are presented. It appears that we can get a hearing that can precipitate action. I l I
-n.-r-. ,.,,. -.,_ _,_. . _ . , , , _ _ ,_ _ _ _
At the working session that followed the open workshop. I was
. pleased to see that several of the committee members that have been hanging back are coming around to the position that I would like to see them take.
The intended shut down of the reactor at UC-Berkeley was discussed at the workshop. Also the Vice Chancellor was invited to the closed session to explain why UCB is taking such action. It appears that the action was of the administration under pressure from activists and the desires of the department were not given strong weight. It will be interesting to see how the NE department at UCB fares in the future without a reactor. l l l l l
. UNIVERSITY OF M2SOURI . COLUMBIA SWTER DEPARTMENT CORRESPONoENCE February 16, 1987 s TO: Robert Brugger FROM: Don Alger y suexcT: Trip Report; National Research Council Workshop on Research Reactors On February 2-3 I attended the workshop to represent the research reactors in this country and the value provided by the service work they perform. Of course, I also represented MURR. My talk of the first day seemed to be well received but more importantly it served as a basis for the second day of the meeting when the workshop committee on service met to determine the user community, the services used, and the value of the services provided by university reactors. Since you were at the meeting, I will only summarize a few of my observations. MURR had a very strong presence with the number of people representing us and the significant contribution we are making to the total research, education, and service provided by the university reactor community. Several people said that they now agree with MURR philosophy on service and that they are trying to stimulate industry associations. Of the approximately 4.1 million dollars that will be generated this year by the university / industry associations, MURR will generate about 2.6 million. I was very pleased with the many suggestions made by presenters that the federal agencies should contribute significantly to the cost of upgrading the MURR. I believe the National Research Council will identify the university reactors as a valuable national resource and recommend that at least a set of the strongest be supported with a base of funding for operations and a smaller set be upgraded when possible. The level of support provided by the owning university will be a major element of the formula to decide which reactors to support and at what level. Research, education and service productivity will also be a major determining factor. It was very useful to have Dr. Glaser, Director of the ILL research reactor, discuss European research reactor support to contrast the commitment made by European federal agencies in support of neutron research and the very limited support in the U.S., It is clear why we have lost ground and in some areas of research the lead has changed hands. I am pleased with the accomplishnents at MURR and the recognition that the facility is of world class.
Many of the decisions that the university and we have made concerning the mission and philosophy of operation have served us well. In no way should we be complacent but rather be encouraged by our opportunities. The seeting reinforced g conviction of the importance ' of the upgrade of the facility. A copy of g paper on service is attached. J 4 t i
. - . . , , , , . . - . - - - . - - - - . . . . , , - - .nn--,.-.--
o ~ NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL l WORKSHOP ON UNIVERSITY RESEARCH REACTORS I l l LAWRENCE BERKELEY LABORATORY February 2.1987
- REACTOR SERVICES AND OPERATION by l Don M. Alger University of Missouri Columbia, Missouri l
a
) .
REACTOR SERVICES AND OPERATION A perspective on, Research Reactors in the United States Applied research and service activities at research reactors involve primarily the business of producing and effectively using neutrons. In the United States last year, the total applications of neutrons comprised a very large business. Figure 1 illustrates the order of magnitude of dollars spent in each of several technical areas. Because of the difficulty in defining what activities should be included in each area and the problem of collecting complete, accurate information, the actual dollar amounts in each area should only by considered as approximate values. Clearly, the greatest commerce in neutrons in the U.S. is the power producing industries, followed in second place by nuclear defense. The remaining five categories sunenarize the use at U.S. research reactors. The university reactors contribute to each of these areas. Radioisotope production in research reactors stimulates the next largest dollar volume business, and in the eyes of some people, particularly those generally opposed to anything called nuclear, it provides the strongest and sometimes only justification for operation of research reactors. Neutron processing alters the material being treated, and involves such activities as neutron transmutation doping of silicon, radiation damage studies, coloring of gem stones and production of membrane filters. The utilizatfor of research reactors for processing has increased markedly the last ten years because of the development of technology for using transmutation doped silicon. Neutron scattering studies have in the past been primarily basic
- research. But more recently, applied research and service utilization have i been increasing. Several examples will be presented later in this paper.
! Neutron interrogation covers those non-destructive applications such as l neutron radiography, gauging, calibrations, etc. not included in one of the j other areas. l There have been about 260 non-power reactors built in the United States I since Enrico Fermi and a team of scientists built the first reactor under the l athletic stadium at the University of Chicago on December 2,1942. About 137 ! of these reactors have been shut down, leaving 124 still operational. Figure
- 2 shows the power level distibution of these operating facilities. The power levels range from less than 1 watt to 4,000 megawatts.
i A large number of these reactors were built and are still operated to serve a single, dedicated function and therefore the funding is assured as
) long as the original objectives are required. These facilities would likely i be shut down if the present purpose should end rather than be converted to general utilization facilities. As examples, all of the facilities operated i above 1,000 HJ are used for material production; seven of the 10 to 100 MW l
reactors are used for training naval reactor operators and testing reactor l ! 1
materials, components and operating concepts. Two of the 10 to 100 MW reactors (Loss-of Fluid Test Facility and power Burst Facility) are used to test power reactor system and fuel performance during accidents. There are about 40 general purpose reactors like HURR owned and operated by the federal government, industries, or universities that are involved in varying degrees in providing applied research and service to cover partially or totally the operating costs. Figure 3 Provides a list of university reactors with a peak steady-state power level of 1 MW and greater. The Rhode Island Nuclear Science Center reactor, even though owned and operated by the State of Rhode Island Atomic Energy comission, is included in the list because of its close affiliation with the University of Rhode Island. Figure 4 lists those university reactors operated ,at a maximum steady-state power level of 100 to 250 KW. Definition of, Service The meaning of the word service as applied' to utilization of reactors is no more clearly understood than are the terms, research and education. All three words are frequently used together to describe the mission or purpose of a university and cannot easily be separated. Webster states that service is
- a. " contribution to the welfare of others". In this context, all utilization of a reactor including those functions which might be called research or education is a service.
To facilitate discussion at this meeting I will distinguish service by emphasis of the " contribution to others" part of the definition. Therefore, all services provided to people not directly affiliated with the owner / operator will be considered a service utilization. This will include all use by other educational institutions, state and federal agencies, and industry. To a reactor facility providing activation analysis of a sample, the effort would be considered service while the results might support research being conducted by faculty, government or industry personnel. This definition avoids the ruch too narrow view that service reens doing something for industry for which the university sells some of its soul for cash. User Community The user community includes a wide spectrum of disciplines including engineering, physical sciences, agriculture, medicine, etc. and many different sectors of society: education, business, government, etc. Users in the various sectors will be identified in more detail in the following outline. Educational _1nsitutions_ Essentially all university research reactors are involved at least to some degree in providing services to outside educational institutions from elementary schools through universities. 2
., l I
Providing these services is stimulated by the Department of Energy l through its University Reactor Sharing Program. The purpose of the program is to increase the availabilty of the university nuclear reactor facilites to j non-reactor owning colleges and universities (user institutions). This is accomplished by grants with reactor-owning universities. The grants provide funds against which reactor operating costs may be charged when the facilities ' are utilized by regionally affiliated user institutions for student instruction i or for student or faculty research. Under this program, allowable reactor operating costs are restricted. The objectives of the program are to strengthed nuclear science and engineering instruction in the curricula of the non-reactor; owning colleges and universities, as well as research opportunities and applications of nuclear analytical techniques for faculty and students in the sciences. University reactors are extremely versatile neutron sources and l research facilities; thus the availability of a nuclear reactor contributes ! particularly and significantly to educational and research opportunities at both the undergraduate and graduate levels. Any educational institution which operates a research or training reactor is eligible to submit a proposal to participate in the University Reactor Sharing program. In evaluating proposals, preference is given to institutions , that can show an affiliation with a substantial number of regional educational 1 institutions that have indicated interest in using the proposer's reactor facility, or that have used the facilities during the past granting period. User institutions eligible for participation in.the program are limited ; to educational institutions such as universities and colleges, junior ' colleges, technical schools and high schools. User groups or individuals affiliated with the host institution are not eligible for assistance under this program. Figure 5 lists the universities that are presently participating in the ; program. One measure of the effectiveness of the program can be obtained by determining the number of people served. Also shown on Figure 5 are the ! i number of universities, faculty and students that were supported by the funding in FY 1985. There may be some duplication in the numbers where faculty from one university used more than one reactor facility. I am very confident, however, that the totals would be appreciably higher were it easier ' for reactor personnel to determine the number of faculty and students involved ' The average user institution received about $3500 in services paid for by DOE. i This supported two faculty and nine students. ! The University of Missouri each year provides such more support to other j educational institutions than is provided for by DOE. This is also the case 1 for many other reactor owners. In 1986. MURR provided service to 4 other . educational institutions within Missouri and 44 outside of Missouri. A tremendous amount of research and education tilleage is obtained from a relatively small amount of money. A five to ten-fold increase in DOE funding ' is needed to accomplish the objective of making the university nuclear reactor facilities available to all those non-reactor owning colleges and universities that presently need their services. 3
9~ e Frequently supporting faculty that do not have funding for a particular project results in seeding proposals. Mike Lipschutz, Purdue University, '
- received support from Reactor Sharing in 1981-82 to determine trace elements i i in meteorites and has since been continuously funded by the National Science j Foundation to continue the research.
State and Federal Agencies State and federal agencies frequently call on university research reactors i and personnel for a wide range of programs. Law enforcement agencies use NAA , ', for evidence analysis, departments of Natural Resources use radiochemical l analysis for environmental monitoring Emergency Preparedness offices use ! trained university personnel for emergency teams, and the list goes on and on. ; Also, federal agencies make continual use of university facilities because of l } their unique capabilities, because of the expertise of particular faculty, and ' 3 because of the cost effectiveness. Figure 6 shows the state and federal j agencies supported by MURR last year. As another example, the HURR is irradiating various isotopes for ORNL i because of the shutdown of the HFIR. It is very important that several high flux reactors are maintained in this country to support those critical programs i that are dependent upon thermal neutron fluxes in excess of 10M n/cm2/sec. : Industry j In September,1985 a week long meeting titled " Seminar on Applied Research and Service Activities for Research Reactor Operations" was held in Copenhagen under the sponsorship of the International Atomic Energy Agency. !. The main purpose was to bring together reactor managers, operators and users ! to promote the exchange of ideas and information on their ongoing activities ! in applied research and services with the expectation of increasing utilization.; The following statement was made by the IAEA representative: "In increasing i' nunbers, reactor owners / operators are being asked to share the burden of the annual operating cost of their reactor and in some cases to justify its continued operation. Service activities and applied research have a direct economic and social impact on the country and can provide valuable income , and justification for continued support of the reactor operation". The 130 ! delegates from 43 nations supported this statement. ' l Figure 7 lists the major technologies which were identified by the '
- meeting participants as having industrial application. These technologies are the same as are now being applied by universities in service to industry. ;
Figure 8 lists the types of industry using research reactors. ' 4 Some general statements can be made about this reactor / industry interaction- '
- 1. Foreign reactor owner / operators much more aggressively seek association with industries than do U.S. university reactor personnel.
i 2. The greater the power level, the greater the level of industry service. l The dependence is much more than linear. There appears to be a threshold I 4 ;
9
- p.
- of about 1/4 to 1 MW. below which very little industry service work is performed.
- 3. The greater the power level, the larger the geographical area served.
About 5 MW appears to be a threshold for international associations.
- 4. Nearly all facilities engaged in service work for industries are allowed by management to utilize the funds to support operations and research.
These dollars have high leverage in supporting research and new ventures.
- 5. Those university reactors providing service to industry are generally the facilities with the most active overall programs.
There is a potential that a service application will develop that will require more reactor time and space than can be provided by all the presently available facilites. Some possibilities that come to mind are:
- 1. The development of some routine test or analysis for human health that required a strong neutron source. This could be NAA of some tissue or fluid that indicated a general health condition similar to routine blood and urine testing. Many facilities would be needed for local comunity or state support.
- 2. Development of a routine application of a short lived radioisotope in human or animal health where national distribution systems would not be effective.
- 3. Development of a need for neutron transnatation doping of Czochralski silicon.
- 4. Radiation hardness testing and treating of electronic components in large demand.
- 5. An application in envircnmental monitoring.
The applied research and service programs provide strong motivation for university / industry association in addition to the income generated. These associations support the mission of the reactor by: (1) providing faculty and
- students with real world problems to solve and with the excitement that comes from seeing their efforts being utilized; (2) bringing new ideas to the facility. keeping the research current and competitive, and providing some focus to the education of students; (3) providing contact between students and industries that want to hire them, and giving students confidence about their future success on the job; (4) meeting the needs of industry both locally and nationally; and (5) supporting the local and national economy. Last year MURR provided service to 5 Missouri industries and 78 out-of-state industries.
5
- .. .. ._ _ _ - - . - _=_ _ _
APPUCATIONS of NEUTRONS in the U.S. YEARLY RATE Dollars (Millions) . 1 10 100 1000 10,000 4 l Nuclear Power m - ~ -- -- s m urma assumme m l l Nuclear Defense usamar mlimassa memonsas azzmusa l Radioisotopes - m Production & Use
- Neutron Processing - - - -
Neutron Scattering M . Neutron Interrogation m ; 1 Trace Eleme.nt is i Detection . i Fig. 1 ;
- t I
l i
/ s 1000 - <10,000 MW ]4 TOTAL NUMBER: 124 100 - <1000 MW ]3 10 - <100 MW l15 1 - <10 MW l25 1
0.1 - <1 MW ,
.. I24 10 - <100 KW _.11 0 1 - <10 KW l7 '
<1 KW L I 34 4
0 5 10 16 20 25 30 35 40 NUMBER OF REACTOR 8 POWER LEVEL DISTRIBUTION OF UNITED STATES NON-POWER NUCLEAR REACTORS ; j Fig. 2 ' l l l i l l l l
UNIVERSITY RESEARCH REACTORS Owner Designation Power Missouri, University of MURR 10 MW Georgia Tech. Research Reactor GTRR 5 MW 4 Massachusetts Institute of Technology' HITR - II 5 MW Michigan, University of FNR 2 MW i . (Ford Nuclear Reactor) Rhode Island Nuclear Science Center RINSC 2 MW State University of New York SUNY 2 MW (Buffalo Materials Research Reactor) I Virginia, University of UVAR 2 MW Illinois, University of UI - TRIGA 1.5 MW California, Berkeley, University of BRR 1 MW 1 Lowel). University of ULR 1 MW Worth Carolina State University PULSTAR 1 MW Cregon State University OSTR 1 MW i Penn State TRIGA Reactor PSBR 1 MW (Pennsylvania State University) Texas ASM University NSCR 1 MW (Nuclear Science Center Reactor) Texas at Austin, University of UT - TRIGA 1 MW Washington State University WSUR 1 MW Wisconsin, University of URNR 1 MW 1 a I i i FIGURE 3
, 9, . UNIVERSITY RESEARCH REACTORS Owner _ Designation Power
\ 's l/ California Irvine, University of- UCI - TRIGA HK - I 250 kW Kansas State University KSU - TRIGA - HK II 250 kW Haryland, University of HUTR 250 kW Hichigan State University HISU - TRIGA - HK I 250 kW-Reed College RRF , 250 kW Hissouri at Rolla, University of UMR - R 200 kW Arizona, University of UA - TRIGA 100 kW Cornell University Cor U - TRIGA 100 kW Florida, University of UFTR < 100 kW Utah, University of Utah TRIGA 250 kW Washington, University of UWNR 100 kW
\
FIGURE 4
DOE REACTOR SHARING - 1985 University Universities Faculty Students Served involved involved Florida, University of 6 12 91 Georgia Tech 8 30 120 Illinois, University of Kansas State 5 9 7 HIT 16 36 82 Maryland, University of 8 8 199 Michigan, University of 10 11 92 Hissourt University of 25 79 38 Hissouri-Rolla. University of 5 6 70 New York, State University N. C. State University 2 3 0 Ohio State University 9 14 96 Oregon State 11 15 125 Penn State University 9 14 80 Reed College 8 10 116 Texas A8M University 9 12 189 Utah, University of Virginia, University of 11 15 153 Washington State 3 7 26 Wisconsin, University of 9 9 79 TOTALS 105 223 920 TOTAL SUh80RT in 1985 - $370,700 ) i FIGURE 5
STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES SUPPORTED BY MURR ARGONNE NATIONAL LABORATORY COLUMBI A NATIONAL FISHERY RESEARCH LABORATORY FRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CENTER HARRY S. TRUMAN VETERANS ADMINISTRATION HOSPITAL IDAHO NATIONAL ENGINEERING LABORATORY LAWRENCE BERKELEY LABORATORY LOS ALAMOS NATIONAL LABORATORY MISSOURI DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS NATIONAL HEART LUNG AND BLOOD INSTITUTE NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH SANDIA NATIONAL LABORATORIES US ARMY US DEPARTHENT OF AGRICULTURE US DEPARTMENT OF C0filiERCE US DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY US DEPARTHENT OF INTERIOR l US ENVIRON!! ENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
~
US NAVY WRIGHT PATERSON AIR FORCE LABORATORY FIGURE 6
t. TECHNOLOGIES USED IN REACTOR SERVICES RADI0 ISOTOPE PRODUCTION AND APPLICATION NEUTRON ACTIVATION ANALYSIS NEUTRON RADIOGRAPHY NEUTRON GAUGING HEUTRON SCATTERING GAMMA RAY SCATTERING STANDARDIZATION ASSAYS RADIATION SHIELDING PERSONNEL TRAINING RADIATION CHEMISTRY SAFETY ANALYSIS 4 6 FIGURE 7
- y. .
4 0 INDUSTRIES SERVED BY UNIVERSITY REACTORS
- AGRICULTURE MINING CONSTRUCTION MAUFACTURING TRANSPORTATION WHOLESALE TRADE SERVICES FIGURE 8
rebruary 15,1987 Tp - Dr. Robert M. Brugger, Director, MURR Frca Dr. Gary J. Ehrhardt, Group Leader, Radioisotope Applicatpon
Subject:
Trip Report of presentation before committee of C. - National Research Council on university research reactors, Berkeley, California, Feb. 1-4, 1987 My function at this meeting was to present the medical rsdioisotope research and service work supported by MURR at tha University of Missouri and elsewhere and to make a case for the great value of university research reactors before a
- national audience. My observations were:
. 1. There is more exciting research going on at and through MURR in all areas except nuclear engineering than at tha next 3 or 4 university reactors just below us in power coabined. In particular I was surprised at how hard Dr.
Otto Harling (MIT) had to scrape to dig up enough projects to justify his facility. I had always assumed that the other high-power university reactors were more or less oquivalent in the scope of their activities to MURR; this is dafinitely not the case.
- 2. Medical uses of reactors in this group primarily maant neutron capture therapy and neutron beam therapy, with coaa discussion of arthritis treatments (Dy-165 from Sledge's work with MIT). There was apparently little or no appreciation of the kind of work we are pursuing with bone agants, liver cancer microspheres, antibody radiotherapeutic radionuclides, etc. Mine was the only talk which focussed en this area and, unfortunately, was essentially lef t out of l Dr. Turkevich's summary at the end of the meeting. It is l cignificant that in the introductory talk by Dr. Bertram Brill '
(ENL), MURR was the only reactor mentioned by name for supply of isotopes: once for Mo-99 and once for Pt-195m which we have been supplying to UCLA for radiodiagnostic purposes. 1 Other reactor personnel found our current expansion 3. and lack of space and facilities surprising; Dr. Ratib Karam of Gaorgia Tech (whose reactor is not now being run at all) said they had plenty of space if we would care to transfer our operations there. He also tried to make the best of the MURR-Theragenics Corp. connection (Y-90 microsphere liver , cancer agent) by reflection, saying it was a possible future use of the Georgia Tech. Reactor.
- 4. The decision long ago to develop a significant amount of the funding of the MURR from relevant service work when 4
nacossary was a sound one. Without that, the MURR would probably ba in as bad a shape as the rest of the university research roactor community, instead of being the undisputed leader. At tha conclusion of the workshop on Research, Dr. Clifford Shull (MIT) asked each person in the room to make a summary comment on the day. Dr. Thomas Williamson, of the Dept. of Nuclear Engineering
ct _ thi Univarcity of Virginio, sold that ha had h2ard 2 hcure of proesntotiena f reo th3 MURR cnd hspsd that tha ccccittee w:uld ploocor 'kosp in eind that not oil tha univorcity reactore chculd ba exp2ctcd to hzva os lorgs o progrca os ths MURR. That was ce fina a back-handed compliment as MURR could ever get.
- 5. My final pitch to the committee emphasized the cross-
' fortilization that has occurred between the various university rooctors, citing the arthritis work we are doing which was incpired by sledge's work at MIT and the Y-90 work which came , originally from Grady at Georgia. This is now being passed back
~in cuch forms as the Re-188 generator recently supplied by MURR to sledge and the work Cadema is starting at MIT which I b211ove was inspired by the sm-153 bone agent work at MURR. I pointained that university facilities have the greatest potential for creativity and that numerous, active facilities are needed to provant the inbreeding that can occur at one large facility. The l curront anti-everything-nuclear sentiment will eventually subside cnd the nation will realize that this set of university reactors constitutes a . national treasure which cannot be quickly replaced if it is allowed to deteriorate. For a fraction of the cost of ona jet fighter per year (2-3 million dollars), the health of U.S. university research reactors could be maintained. I hope the committee will endorse that conclusion and be listened to.
1 l l I l i i 1
UNNERSfiY OF WISSOURI RESEARCH REACTOR RAD 10lS0 TOPE APPUCATION Cory J. Ehrhardi DdGNOSDC NUCLEAR MEDICINE: 20-30 milRon, scans per year with Tc-99m, Xe-133,1-131,1-123, TI-201, in-111, Go-67, C-11, F.:-18, etc. PRINCIPAL USES: diagnose phy:1 ology .
-blood flow (cardiac, cerebral)
-kidney function
-ventilation-perfusion studies
-cardiac function
-metabellem (cardiac, cerebral)
-hopatobiliary function, etc.
CHAURGE CF RJ1URE: RADIOTHERAPY OF CANCER AND ARTHRmS Mecul isotopes:
-beta minus emitters (reactor-produced)
-1mageable gammas
-available In quantity generalor-produced if possible
-half-Hves of 0.5-5 days tW Tumor-specific ogents Labeled entibodies Microsphers: and particulates O
M _w,ww-c,--w-wvw-ywm,#
\
*l (
. WURR RESEARCH IN RADIOTHERAPY
- 1) Sm-153 EDTMP bone cancer agent, UM Prof. Troutner, Volkert a) Extensive student invotament,1 Ph.D. thesis b) Funded by Unlarsity, State, and Indushy j c) Successfully tested in sp6ntoneous canine tumors at UW l Veterinary School !
a) Beginning Phase I cuncial trials
- 2) Re-186 HEOP bons concer agent; Prof. Deutsch, Univ. of Cinn.
c) Isotope supp!!sd by WURR via DOE Reactor Sharing program b) Beginning Phase I cunical trials
- 3) Y-90 TheraSpheres for intraarlertal therapy of linr tumors a) Produced 2 Wasfers' theses in engineering at UW-Rolla b) Funded by Uninrsity seed money and ~new company c) Used on 10+ patients in Canada
- 4) New W-188/Re-188 Generator, a ' Therapeutic Technetium" a) Started with WURR funding only; now has industrial support b) Shown to label antibodies as effectively as Tc-99m; labeled antibodies potentially a general answer to cancer c) Applicability to bone cancer (Deutsch) and rheumatoid orthritis (Sledge) d) Double-capture production of W-188 very sensitin to neutron flux; will be greally enhanced by upgrade of WURR OTHER MMOR RAD 10lS0 TOPE ACTIVITIES Physiology and Phannacology research groups at UWC Wedical School highly dependent on WURR for supply of short-!!ved
~ ~
~
No-24 and K-42 for hypertension and cancer research. .
~ -
IMPORTANCE OF UNIVERSITY react 0RS : Interaction with academic departments, hosp 11als 1)
- 2) Flexibility and Independence for creative reseach
- 3) Training of nuclear chemists, health physicists NEEDS:
MURR Reactor Facility molntained and enhanced 1} 2} Base of support to permit consistent policies and pursuit of long-term goals 3} Upgrade power level and flux of MURR Non-adversarial role of Nuclear Regulatory 4) l Commission toward university research reacion l 6 , m
UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI . COLUMZIA t/ ten.oceARTwEwr CORRESPONDENCE February 12, 1987 To: Bob Brugger FROM: Bill Yelon W WECE Trip Report: National Research Council Workshop of University Research Reactors, February 2-4, 1987 Berkeley, California I attended only the first day's meeting, as I had meetings in Livermore Tuesday and Wednesday (they paid my way). I did not participate in Workshop; discussions. however the general talks and panels were very revealing. My impressions:
- 1. The small reactors are in trouble. They. have no funding base, and the .
nuclear engineering education programs are weakening. On the other hand, small infusions of funding (~ $20,000/ year) would allow most to survive since their overheads are very small (no fuel, no regular operators, etc.). Their contributions in research, except perhaps in NAA, will be minor. i 2. Of the seven big reactors (2-10 MW) only two are healthy: MURR, the
- class of the group, and Rhode Island Atomic Energy Commission Reactor.
MURR survives by growing and by increasing service use along with ' , research. The ratio of internal to external funding is of order 1:3. The Rhode Island reactor does little or no service because of its charter from a state agency. The other five are charged with improving. their funding ratios but are typically 2:1 to 3:1. University support ' L overwhelms the outside support (The equations are presented differently: by different people.). These reactors need of order $5M per year to 4 thrive. On the other hand, several of these facilities are high quality and 4 could support major progra'ms as does MURR if a base were established. There is enough justification to support large programs at several of these. MURR is unique, its support from the University is the same magnitude as at MIT, yet the usage is perhaps ten times larger. MURR is the only facility (other than the Rhode Island Reactor, which is a~ line item in the state budget) which expects to grow. MURR is the mdel of which the other facilities are very jealous. WBY/mbs
UNIVER2 TTY OF MISSOURI . COLUMllA Nuc1;ar Engin:ering
. eNYCC oCPAtiTMCNT CORRCCPONoCNCC February 6, 1987 TO: Cy Harbourt, Dean FROM: Jay Kunze
SUBJECT:
Trip Re ort
- National Research Council meeting at Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, on UNIVERSITY RESEARCH REACTORS February 2,3, 1987 At the request of RM Brugger. I received an invitation from the Nat. Research Council to attend the University Reactors Workshop I a t- LBL, c.alled specifically to rece'ive comments for the report b e'i n g 'p re p a re d by Nat. Academy of Science and Nat. Academy to the need ofof Engineering (National Research Council) pertaining .
f e de ra.1 support for university research reactors. to attend, for most I was glad that Bob Brugger " twisted my arm" - of the .presenta tions were excellent summaries of the research
~
app'lications and funding / budget aspects of the university reac-tors. The discussions with. colleagues were very helpful. Several summary ob s e rva ti o.n s :
. 1. The European nations, support their university reactors with about '$50 miT11on per yea:r. Ours recei.ve.onJy some from the fuel charge waivers, worth perhaps $5 million, federal governme.nt.
- 2. HURR i s obviously the preme1'r. universi ty react,or, not only in capability, but i n- ope'rati ng time, b'udget, and income. ^
- 3. It became obvious that at MURR we have a practical teaching resource that we have never used as effec-tively as we should, and' that this is even more impor-tant now that the nuclear industry has matured 1.nto a specialized technology, with need for experienced per-sonnel mor,e so than theoretical personnel.
On the latter matter, it appears that the UMC approach to nuclear engineering education is even more pertinent in these days nuclear engineers should have a thorough foundation in one of the t r'a d i ti o n a l physical science fields (CE, ChE. EE, ME, or Phy-sics), and.then have to receive.d give the specialized MS student education the at the appropriate .gra-practi-duate level. But, l cal education, we need to add a practicum course (similar to what l I we ha.ve had f or years in the. HP and HP emphasis areas). Br.ugger , and I, discussed this, and we will probably propose initiala imple-topics cour.se), mentation of such a course this summer Such(as education can only be usi ng the MURR a s the."l abora tory." provided at a handful of universities (those with the large research reactors). cc: RM Brugger 1
i i February 9, 1987 TO: Dr. Brugger RE: National Research Council Review of University Reactors February 2-4, 1987 As you know, I attended the above referenced meeting as a part of the MURR team. I felt that I both learned from and ! contributed to the discussions. After the opening session, I spent most of my time in the Workshop on Research. The following is a discussion of my impressions of the review and some suggestions concerning our role in the university reactor community. Impressions: (1) There is a hugh gap between the MURR and the remaining university reactors. This gap can be observed in all comparison- criteria from operation of the reactor to its utilization. In many ways the MURR is more comparable to a national laboratory than the other university reactors; however, there are some important differences such as teaching and some programing. (2) The gap appears to exist for two reasons; the design of the facility, and the philosophy for funding which includes service as its most significant component. (3) At the very beginning of the review, we heard from the Director of ILL who described the university reactor community in Western Europe. Dr. Glaser discussed the symbionic relationship between these reactors and the ILL which is comparable to a national laboratory in the U.S. This description was probably the most useful presentation we heard in that it provided a basis by which the U.S. situation could be compared. Glaser's remarks were specific for neutron beam research; nevertheless, much of what he had to say would apply to such areas as nuclear analysis and radioisotope application as well. The glaring conclusion from this comparison was what we all already knew. That is, in Western Europe the university reactor / national laboratory (ILL) relationship is directed. In the U.S. it is not. This is true I for all 3 of the critical support functions; i.e., operations, applications and reactor enhancement. (4) Otto Harling(MIT) described the university reactor situation in the U.S. as being irrational. The logic is simple. Why have these facilities and not support them? We are not simply talking about transferring a few trivial duties. In fact, the Nation cannot function in neutron research, at a competitive level with the rest of the world, without its university reactors. To duplicate even part of what the U.S. university reactors are now doing at the national laboratories would have an enormous cost and would l inevitably omit some important programs. (5) I thought the perception held by the NAS Select Committee, concerning what was going on at university reactors, was narrow. Hopefully the presentations made in the non-scattering areas established a broader view. For the most part the Committee was receptive of the reports. I felt as if the scope of university reactor
.t research and service was lucidly presented. (6) The university reactor community and the national laboratory community agree that the regulatory function, especially in.the area of security, is out of control. In spending hugh sums of money to " secure" certain facilities; we may have instead, targeted them. LEU programs are neither safe nor sane and are expensive.
Suggestions: (1) The MURR should continue to actively support the " Rational Program Concept". Our interests would be best served by matching funds using State dollars. The Reactor Sharing Program should be advanced as the mechanism to support applications; however it must be expanded 10 fold and include support of programs at the host institution. (2) The MURR should develop a site visit strategy in the event that select visiting teams are established. (3) The MURR should be prepared to act in the event of a positive ripple effect which might result from a favorable report. For example ancillary programs may be initiated at NSF and NIH. (4) We must continue to promote our teaching and training Programs. This was one area in , which the Select Committee's viewpoint was to narrow and seemed to be restricted to nuclear engineering. Thid may be true for some university reactors but not the MURR. In retrospect, we should have taken Dave Troutner just for his input in the , Education Workshop. His teaching and research program should be incorporated if there is a site visit at the MURR. (5) I think we should focus on the national interests, rather than the individual facility interests, with respect to the regulatory function. Who cares if a few university reactors are shut down? We must instead promote the fact that in so doing, a whole area of science and technology will be lost. (7) We must also prepare for the possibility that the NAS Report to DOE will be unfavorable--or more likely, unheeded. In that case we must j continue to look for service opportunities to broaden our base of critical support. The one unescapable conclusion from this meeting was that; as things now stand there is no U.S. university ! reactor that is making their way on research alone. (0 l l i .
,w?iu J
U\llVFRSI l Y O= M SSOUR R=S-ARCl- RFAC l 09 MURR Nuc ear Ana ysis Drogram l presentation to Nationa Acacemy o" Sciences Fecruary 1987
4 MURR ~; Nuclear Analysis Program
- Collaborations 1981-1986 l
l I l 528 Projects i j 40 Research Institutes or Societies i i j 49 Colleges and Universities l including 33 Departments or Schools 52 Different industries ! 12 Non-research Government Agencies l 1 l 10 Foreign Countries i,
. UNIVEA511Y OF MISSOURI RISIAkCN REAtlE KJCLEAk ANALYSIS PRO 6 RAM 1981-1984 ACADERIC FEDERAL and FOREISK RESEARCH AGEElES COLLEGES and I UNIVER$lilES DEPARIMENTS INDUSTRt STATE ASENCIES COUNTRIES INSilIUlES & SK.
0508888 8 88 8 8 tt88 83 8 3 48 388388 3 83138 8 3 t 8 318 8 3 8 3 8 3 3 8253 533382888883333333338333333888 3318 384138348 E 8 t t t t t t t ABC LASS ALASLA DNR AUSTRIA ACS AR110NA STATE U AS EIP STA110K CANADA ANS ARKANSAS TECH U AGRICUilURAL ENG AMER BUC PROD ART and ARCH ASRDORY ANHEUSER-SUSCH CA DF6 FINKLAG ARIS-CANADA BALL $1 Aft AT&T CA WATER RES JAPAN BA11ELLE WN BOSTON WlV ANIMAL SCIENCE DELL LAIS FBI MEIIC0 CAkNEGIE INSI BRIGHAM YOUNG U ANTHROPOLO6Y BEND 11 MISSOURI SC NETHERLANDS COLORADO ARCH SOC CMSU AT C S SCIENCE CI C INNAi! Kil MISSOURI OKR WEN IEALAND BANA FASER Cl COLunilA COLLEGE 310 CHEMISTRY 910LO6Y CONTINENTAL SHELT HISSOURI CPH Wl6ERIA EVANS COUNTY CEU COLUMBIA UWlV DEtt0 RISSOURI SPS P R OF CHINA FHCRC BAkiMOUTH UNIV CHEMISTRY DOMIAR MISSOURI SEMA RUSSIA GREAT LAKES C6LS SUKE WlV CIVIL ENS DON CHER US ARMY
$$-CANADA FRANKLIN RARSHALL SAIRY SCIEEE DEWilSTRY DUPONT NRIGHT FAT AFB HPS HARVARD UNIV INDIANA STATE U EARTH SCIEEES EIHYL CORP 1AEA IONA STATE UNIV ELECTRICAL ENG EEARHARI ILL 10NA UNIV EFIDEMIOLO6Y GENERAL ELECTRIC RAS MIIR JOHNS HOPKINS F000 SCIENCE &NUIR SENERAL MTORS FORESIRY SRON COMPANY MRI LIEOLN UNIV EEOLOGY SULF WATL SE06RAPHIC Mli EMSU HISTORY HARRIS SEMICON USAML USBLR NYCU-Mi SINAL KJMAN NUlR1110W NERLOCK SER!CGW PENN STATE UNIV LAN HENLE 11 PACKARD USDA USDDE PORILAG STATE LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFMAN-LaROCHE PURDUE UWlV RATERIALS RES ENEYNELL USD01-BM SEMSU KEDICIE IBM USD01-tWFL
$10 KJC REDICIE INTEL USEPA INTERNATL hlERALS essa sessanSunnARYeassisease USGS STEPHENS COLLEGE KJCLEAR EN6 SNMSU OCEANOGRAPHY Lill USNBS CFETHALMDLOGY EACDONALD DOU6LAS Over the last 5 years the llSNIH-BCtDP IEIAS A&M UNIV MALLIEKRODI Nuclear Analysis Progras at USNIN-CH@ IEIAS TECH UNIV PHARMACOLOGY PdYSICS futIERIAL RES CORP the RURR has had significant USNIH-CSHG IDFIS UNIV WC PUE HEALTH & HYG MBAY CHEM collaborations eith 40 research USNIH-HDTP institutes or societies,49 colleges W lV 0F ALASTA RAI10 LOGY MNSANTO USNIH-MLl! and universities (involving 33 UNIV 0F CALIF VEI EDICINE EN USNIM-JHCS KJCLEAR MED INC dif ferent departments 1, and 52 USWIH-LRC UNIV 0F CHICASD
( UNIV 0F CIEINNAll WCLEFORE dif f erent indestries. In addition USWlH-MRFIT l OLIN to the U.S., it foreign countries USWlH-N 1 UNIV 0F EAYTON i PETROLliE have teen involved. USNIX-WHS UNIV 0F ENAll UNIV 0F IBADIAN PHILLIPS USNSF RAYTHEON alltstetillitenestillelsell USN-ESC UNIV 0F ILLINDIS UNIV 0F KANSAS ROCKNELL INTERNATL USVA UNIV 0F KENTUCKY R0tKNELL-COLLINS l UNIV 0F M RYLA W sal UNIV 0F MINN SES UNIV 0F MISSOURI SHAKLEE UNIV 0F PENN SILTEC UNIV 0F PIIISBURGH TEIAS INSTR UNIV 0F IEIAS 10KUYAMA SDDA UNIV 0F NASHINSTON UNION CARE!DE NASHIN510K UNIV UNION ELECTRIC US EDEAI ELDON LAES Nil LAES
e MURR Nuclear Analysis Program Focilities 2 Counting Roome 4 P-tube /Rodlotion Laboratories 1 Health Physics (Reactor Chemistry) Laboratory 3 Sompte Preparation Laborotories 5 Offices 1 Animal Room Major Equ1pment 1 Ten Mogowatt Reactor 2 ND6700/MicroVox MCA System 3 ND66 MCA's . 13 High Resolution Detectore 4 Automated Sompte Changers 1 PGNAA Instrument 1 TDPAC Instrument (under development) 1 x,y-energy Spectrometer (under development) Personnel 2 PhD Chemists 1 PhD Physicist 1 PhD Nuclear Engineer (on leave) 1 DVM and MS Chemist 1 MS Animal Science 1 BS Biologist 1 MS Health Physicist (1987) 1 Reactor Chemist (experienced) l 1 Secretary 7 Graduate Students 1 Undergraduate _
MURR Nuclear Analysis Program Education Annual Teaching Activities . Course Title # Students Level Chem 1 Introduction to Chemistry 300 UG Biochem 10 Introduction to Biochemistry 50 UG i Chem 150 Undergraduate Research 5 UG Physics 150 Experimento! Physics 25 UG NE 305 Radiation Detection 20 UG/ GRAD Blochem 310 Trace Element Analysis 10 GRAD i Chem 312 Instrumental Analysis 40 UG/ GRAD Chem 361 Introduction to Radiochemistry 25 UG/ GRAD , NE 400 Health Physics Program Internship 5 GRAD Graduate Nutrition Area Seminor 30 GRAD Nutr 400 Chem 461 Advanced Radiochemistry '10 GRAD Chem 490 Graduate Research 5 GRAD Misc Depts 400 Level Graduate Research 20 GRAD
- In-service High School Teachers Summer Institute 25 GRAD Missouri Scholars Institute 25 HS
] .l
l
' ~
- MURR Nuclear Analysis Program ,
4 Collaborative Res'earch with other Universities An Example ' Trace # HARVNO Elements Omnning Lalmratory d Nuclear Analysis we han Health Program Il QUESTION ; Does dietary seleniurn protect against cancer?
~
~
REQUIREMEN I S r , r , Stable Cohort mtn se t Prospective Approach I o of co-variants Defined Sites i D of TE interactions Dev. of Dietary Monitors g;gogg ( J ( )
- - _ _ . . - _ . - -. - - - - - - - - - - - - - . - , . - - - . _ . _ . . , _,,-,,,,,,..,_,n.ne,.,r.,- -
,,,,-.--,,v, e nr----
Nuclear Analysis Program MURR . Collaborative Research at Ute an Example Eminence Programs Food for the Vo ecu ar Bio ogy e ourna' ism 21st Century l Administrative Objectives - Increased Funding and Recruitment v v v V l PL # rr BIOCHEMS iMY NUCLEAR METHODS E E - REPRODUCTION i NEUTRON GAMMA-RAY I NU- RF-'ON
^
AN S [ ^ 8 CORREL TION ( userene Runeven
/
, l i \ ! ca utensen in-vivo \ (TISSUE - l _ _- ; - ,, i set,usution
} -
l M.BR Molear Analysis Program l Conclusions
- 1. Education The MURR has a critical role in the education of of students in the area of radoanalytical science.
This function would be entirely lost without university . reactors. We have recently concluded a search for an entry level person with training in NAA. There were 15 qualified candidates. None of these people had trained at a national laboratory. Five (5) had trained at the MURR Conclusions continued
- 2. Research The MURR has a critical role in research. Radio-analytical methods are sadly underapplied. Most professors of analytical chemistry regard nuclear ,
analysis techniques as being unavailable and ere therefore ignored. Where nuclear methods are available in quality programs; they often are the methods of choice in areas such as nutrition, trace-element epidemiology, geology, atmospheric science and archaeology. l l
. Conclusions continued.
- 3. Service The MJRR has a critical role in service. A service program,- balanced with education and research, is a great asset to both the MURR and its industrial coliaborators. It provides funding, addtional experiences, opportmities, and a different prospective for students, and positive contacts for the University. In return, industry is provided a means to obtain information unavailable by what is considered "conventiar techniques.
Conclusions continued
- 4. Stsnmary Finally, I would like to come back to the way in which nuclear methods are regarded in the U.S. Pick up any document where analytical methods are discussed and i
you wil find that techniques such as neutron activation l analysis, radiotracer assay and perturbed angular l correlation are referred to as " unconventional" or "not in
- general use". It should be the combined objective of the NAS and the DOE, along with the NSF and the NIH to make these methods " conventional". This cannot be accomplished at the national laboratories. It rnust be done where the students are first exposed to chemistry, biology, physics, nutrition, atmospheric science, or whatever it is that launches a scientific career.
5 9 t i Neu.,% Seam h searck.
,S. A. Wernee physics h perf wew t Uvtvers;+y ed Missouri bolu~Lia.
l l t l l
a , e. m a -- .,- ww - -- s j e - I le PmTONS 1g g7 tEUTRONS Ns
.h
'\ f.+5-/
/
_r -
~
k ' H BIG - SCIENTIST
.c (
StSLL Y k SCIENilST
. . ~
p ,'l( Q * ? i
, %T ,
s .' .
. s . " ['l , ,,j' O ,
~
" GEE, THlW, OF THE VAST SCIENTIFIC OPPORTUNITIES THAT ARE PROVIDED BY THESE ACCELERA10RS, AND REAC10RS!"
l l I*
-, w-, - ,ww-----
~
L . . Pleufrom Seaf+ering
- l. us 99. E uro pe.
2.. Program af Missouri
- 3. NeudTom 1*H4 60[4r0 in CYry
- 4. d +4e beauly of Ewwp+le Me.u ros sea % erlng.
\ 4
-w.------------m,,--, n-,,,.-,-----,,,
.e,-,-,.,.,-,.-- . , - _ , , . _ , _ _ . , m,_ . , , , _ ,_ _ _ _ . . . . - - . - _ _ _ _ _ - , ,,___,__.,,___-__.,_______,___.m
1 I PRINCIPAL U.S. EUTRON SCATTERING FACILITIES OPERATIN l' COMISSIONING THERMAL Flux POWER YEAR (10 I4 N/CM SEC) . FACILITY AND LOCAT10N
^
1966 10 - i 100 m ' ! O HIGH FLUX ISOTOPE REACTOR (W IR) l OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY 1965 10 i ! O HIGH FLUX BEAM REACTOR (WBR) ' 60 W BROOKHAVEN NAT10NAL LA80RATORY 1 ! O iOT-10NAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS REACTOR 10 m (10) 1969 j (NBSR) - GAITHERSBURG, MO . 1 10 W 1968 . l P MISSOURI UNIVERSITi (MURR) - COLUMBIA, M0 RESEARCH REACTOR , , j
) 500 MEV,14 1981 .- ' 4 (30 H,.) '
' A '
8 INTENSE PULSED NEUTRON SOURCE (IPNS) ; PEA 0.5 (120 Hz ) p THE 0 WEAPONS NEUTRON RESEARCH W 800 MEV,5 A 1978 FLt 1 (100 A) (1986) (100) (12 H2 I l 9 LOS ALAMOS NATIONAL LABORATORY W /PSR j . l1 OTER U.S. RESEARCH REACT 0ftS -
.=
I~ , l 1962 2 j 0 OAK RIDGE RESEARCH REACTOR (ORR) 30 W i Sm 1963 .8 0 MIT. REACTOR i ,'
~,
r %,
- =
^-
+ . t l @JM.G USER.COM4UN11Y (1983) IREND ('77 '83) 35% +33%
, CONDENSED MATTER PHYSICS 24% +100%
CHEMISTRY 15% - MATERIALS SCIENCE 13% +150%
. POLYMER SCIENCE
~
13% BIOLOGY TOTAL USERS 510 , 'A *
'/
30% FEDERAL LABORATORIES AND AGENCIES 60% UNIVERSITIES 10% INDUSTRY
\%
l
.. )
. SUWARY COMPARl50h 0F MAJDR U.S. AND EUROPEAN FACILillES WE **MERDit~fffffEI U.S. WESTERN EUROPE TOTAL INSTRUMENTS 53 114 UNDER DEVELOPMENT 16 (10 PULSED SOURCE) ~50 (10 PULSED SOURCE)
COLD NEUTRON l INSTRUMENTS 2 30 (+20 UNDER CONSTRUC1! COLD SOURCES 1(+l UNDER CONSTRUCTION) 8 hot SOURCES 0 , 2 GUIDE HALLS 0 5 MdMEMT5 U.S. M STERN EUROPE 1 EQUIPMENT & FACILITIES =325M ~2505M (+50$M APPROVE @ (1975-83)
=275M - @ SM (FRANCE, GERMANYc SCIENCE a OPERATION (1983)
~
U.S. NEUTRON SCATTERING RESEARCH
*~
Users and Publicotions 500 - 400 - Users E E E 300 - s 200 - Publicolions 10 0 I I I I ' I t 0 1977 B78 1979 S80 19 81 f982 1983 l YEAR WE S1EAD Elcm , uSye,-11. go ( , $ , ,, ggg n 0$$& fd6LICATIoDS -5'15 U(913} Ay)L/C I
o U.S. NFU1RON SCA11ERING USER COM4UN11Y (1983) IREND (*77 '83) CONDENSED MATTER PHYSICS 35% +33% CHEMISTRY 24% +100% MATERIALS SCIENCE 15% - POLYMER SClENCE 13% +150%
~
BloLOGY 13% TOTAL USERS =510 a FEDERAL LABORATORIES AND AGENCIES 30% UNIVERSITIES 60% 1 INDUSTRY 10% SPONSORING INSTITUTIONS (1963)
- 94 U.S.
- 37 FOREIGN
TAM 2 8 Sommary of Blestrea Seatterias Isotrumente AvalleSle to the tatted States A. BassAacs taAcToss
- 1. Diffraeteesters Tse-Asle Fest- ,
Twe- (Boltisester Fest- C6 tele
- l Amis er PM) finale (PS )
- 94. -
1 3 18 WIT 3 - - - IERS - 18 8 3" etzt. 1 1 3 - IKER - 3 2 -
- 2. Spo s trees te rs Inter- Three- Time-of- Peterised ferometer RAM 5 inte Fliaht Be am gg, .
3D gs . . gry 3 . - - - Its - 3 48 1 - Mst. - 3 4 1 2 MRE S S 1 - - S. PEARD BEIT!RON NR
- 1. Siffrastometers (Elastle) -
Slns1e Foodae Crwaaat Saats Be em AIE. 2* 1 1 1 RAM. I 1 - -
- 3. Time-of-Falght Spostresators Choppe r Crystat Filter i A- tuner A== l en e r A=.twner AAE. 2 3 -
IASL - - 1 "Dodiested high-reseleties peeder dif fraetees tors.
., %se instransats seafissted priestily for hielegical streetste reDearSh.
8 0me of these three-asts lastrements is seeetimes seed ,er pelertsed
.t.n e . .
p,i-rn, F ne, .tr..t.,e of noeuo s i.ss...
=x yR *
%_ _...n k s 4she V, N e n l o S * ^ ~ --
4U5" N. A. S. (19F 4) I_ ._ , _ _ _ _ _ _ , . _ _ , _ _ _ _ . _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . - . _ . . . _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . . _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
= .
MALDR INS 1RINEN1A' ION AND 1ECHN100E ADVANTS (LAS1 10 YEARS)
/s HIGH INTENSITY PULSED NEU1RON SOURCES y e GulDE TUBES / COLD SOURCES KeHOTSOURCE e LARGE POSIT IVE SENSIT IVE DETECTORS / DATA ACQUISIT SYSTEMS e NEUTRON INTERFEROMETRY K e BACKSCATTER SPECTROMETERS KeSPINECHOSPECTROMETER e LARGE, FOCUSSING MONOCHROMATORS, PG, ETC.
s EXTREME ENVIRONMENT EQUIPMENT e HIGH ENERGY, AND CORRELATJON CHOPPERS
/s BEAM FILTERS, PG,' SILICON, SAPPHIRE e TIME FOCUSSING e RIETVELD ANALYSIS e POLARIZED BEAM TECHNIQUES, DC SPIN FE, FLIPPERS, 5 HEUSLER ALLOY e MULTILAYERS, SUPERMIRRORS e STRETCHED MILAR COLLIMATORS e HIGH INTENSITY, LONG WAVELENGTH, MULTIDETECTOR SANS e PERFECT St CRYSTALS l
_,-_.-__1___ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ . , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - . _ _ _ _ _ . _
' g
$ 1, 000>o ** lp .
l tom fragram t : i 800 K salaries. 1000x eptpM . N## # fHe facully , f professimJ setemlads(of Ch'cuSY pLysics, [3 PW% t biolery,I IweMQ eke L visiIty setuks4s. (p ystes) I passdeeiplystes) 2 (p lysses) ! I pos4- d oc ToAl = /r
- 15 Gradult shak+s i
Gra_s}s_ _ag cadrae}s : $f 2O K. DOE, N5 F, G swan , Army, E & ( G , Dow ekomte.4, PAF, L He D&I-%iss , WesIing ause, 6eners! He Ars W;versi4y tellnbedms: im, Q, , y,y,y;jj( MI n. idesti sa t y Yor Y *'5" > V C L A , UCSD p floht.DAsa e > Geole Phl teAnigue , isnore, ung , xews$4estj AkisilifulJerbsier. testt yg4eg.Sh4<,ilstver.riyofHelic* L rut, 1 Jusheld tollabenkms : l E.K*n , Gesual Mohrs , E C / 6 , Me n,,a!!-Doug < ws4h*gbusc. colla bers+iess ysliud Ls.lses4.rIcs 8*s NE5 f ML, L A sl > DK"' s e 30 publica+icms/ year
~ '
Resencel Progregs
'Thic toIIs.r R ~
McLem e. , viem . . Wenk m N 'N **ch)' u,u. z., Aw Ar. Asr *,,,3 7,rsue. N. L s. , Parda s oska cDW's l S Dw's , Alkk "'I'4-Art Mqu sh @<. , Te,, B) g, n , y n,z, g,c ,,, yg Ca In itSIS em, poc ek. , Me kell-po blymerCa.jarssHn uurr e , Army ; Ligut A sfrue.kre , ) Et f G. Hg 1 1 Mts> L=us 4'-^ q se -Hatn.
%rsu-U M p.
Ms.sguaeus kiselles Ary as e , sk.
@toltsgred Mem besmes UHffC, 8 NL ,
Sur-[m.n < ~ dA serEcd b'ks. 9 I
..,--+-,.--y-- .,-_-.-r----.w-w,,.. .mU-.,,m- ,m.,,,mw .--v-,-m_m,w..m-,--www,.----.- , . . . , - - . _ . - - _
M OM* NEUTRON RADtOGRAPHY g ' d gama 2=0 f.s.U sa yg; u' & w y> 4 , 6%.n. ,
-.g
[ . t. SW \ \l. y.] *
- D' 7 ~ s', .l l I s% >
11-] - i.in R$G 1I ,
- 'o - ,
SAN /
,s 'N "
-q -
= __ . ..
Q
%* a -
E v i '
#' REACTOR k
i mammenal CORE ! INf tRFEROME TER l 8 /
,- A p s 3*C I - s l
's FILTEREPs BEAM N s
' PROMPT CAMMA I
NEUfRON ACilVATION ANALY5I5
; i -
v.
- /
k i i i
~
POWER / HEAT N. .l - REJECTION ! '/ , SYSTEM
's, B '.j ' y ;, ' -
i j r;. - s, - , ... A 7 f' . ..; -(i> < ,,
' ,s -
i REACTOR 5 s [d - " -
' l. i i '
i ., ON R S s, ' [',- ' .
/N.s ,~s FUEL & '
EFLECTOR . , 1 '.. A . I '
/ \,
.: ' N, g:- s- . .
N COLD / ,[. '"' s. , N. / g,
'N ,',P' '
c 1
, N
! .X : BUILDING P.. /D -.
's
.5 ,
' s. . .N *
. ~ , s' i
,.g eg/T- 11 >. %y L,*,
t0 ' - 7 ~,
' s, "f_L MURR .. 3,
's, ; -
UPGRADES ResEARCH ' r g,c g3egMRU N coce. -, well { 3 pp
@C*[Iq . l,L. ., Iq)) Lon9 % .diff- @)N%"yTe'ldiR f($ @
- ff
, R$GEARCH REACTOR FACILITY UPGRADE UNIVERSITY of MISSOURI s (MURR)
BE AMPORT FLOOR PL AN (Elevation 902*-0*) 4 LD :. 11 sel . l - -
- ] a't ; 988llj -
I lA I '
.c w ' c ::i 1 :
F;T.- . : j i.
! . .f Mg
- ti 1.
5
. 3 : , .
. gIi I ; I I 4*. i! I .
**rt jl.l,. ;
[*s Lt't e
- y. -
.ge .I... :=gl .* . . . . .s . .
- I P t i t r, =
- 5. s. %. ..j i, 6..,r.
.:1
. !.i!: i.
a t
.:n .o i .3 a4 I ,
5.Lt_1
- ; E. D ll. ,g g 5
! ::s - .
8 u JEi . - .;;.$ di *, Mc~_'* M....l.:ii
- i,.iaf_=Ibl*f:p:!u.: lI
,,. e :. ..
s eg g .
. - ,.e A. .=
.= ..
. g . v . .g g
.. s
... . ..i .:
. i. .
Y. lIIE l_ ~!_lg s_i [ !! // !5 5 I i U f j
$*}.
. . , , s.d
&' ii! .' Z. ' ' _'.//
I *. %* . . f
. r I.
s ' l 5*. 3 '
! jsi 9 , N : : 'q- ~.
--s 1
g
.zt
- g s..
l- ;.
=
g !4 .. i:..s
.s . , .
g.
.= p
> .- 1
- y. . .
_-+ -c ,.
. w I, .i f . - - - - gr - (
- d 5_
O"y. j,
- e rurm- : -
E-g.-- . I',,_ g .1
. . r_ _
_ j. .
. :. .o . y=.D=-J w
t-- r e i e l l l
- ' 'j 5.' . . .
^
h!.:
~
I :- Ul
,! "(
~
.~ :
i j, t I I l' l
- 1
~
\
el . , E J' - 1 '; .
.i
.]
R6 -- ~
. It hh
, q
. .. m
, ., .s i . l l hsa- Hart (t964) ' /: perfect si eryski c, l in terfe.tamette . P l I LLL c,f
. c,
. ,i
- 4. w -
/
/ ----
1 N o , J=
,f.. . t Y N- _
20 b
,u- , ,
' d a d a a
34eSew. d. Firs + demonsfafed 4e work ' O Meufeons I K Y leMM A (IT7Y) - - - - - - _ -___
. . M
..- :r I
- .. f 1
. .t . .
b g B.
.. . ..: .: :. . . .cer.[.
t e
* .;. .;.: .: : ;* as
- t. < *. -y: e , ;.}. g,,,
.** \~'.**
4%
*I -
- @. .WJW:MWE .. i I A.:$..
?
2.:: ? p r- s g
&%.hh?g.3.
p, . p.1g4- .
.j
. eu i ::.
n g. W
- it .:. <
MY:1 ,i .s'$:,'<:i - 4d?. [ f:< . .". .'.1 3 .::- : L. , - : 2p.:'.:", 4.4 . .S.:.:v ::<*: ..
=
s.e . 's. g ,. : y.vig., . ,
,~
; 9 .. ; w,
":l'I)y I,.'.; , e.an apse.=
.**Y**
.a.:.. # _
4,,- ,, g ..g
.'1:.
q rdl62.#!::j =A - ;
>.H'.
)*:;e4'.,-
i:.' -:9.;;.t.te: 4 .'* k ' l y r:.i .*?3.8'.*1%l;T.:al
.1
.y,.: . .; .
g
-9 ' . .. = .*:":*:, 4 a f7 V %. b ..h ,[,<,
< {.:
{ ,,r:. ., .~ sl1t
? :se s.., .
-V.1.v:.;* . .f .
- .,g <
.: .$ .I :: ,
F&,.......u v.' :.:.p'. ,
.g. .+x.; . . f . ' :.3.- 9 MW. s r'
y,;%k ~ .. ,:. H,hy :.wA,4%;
. : .% 1 Q
y$ Ni..
$$'&:. ::I3[TY.:N.*M.a:.2.:..::w:y::$Nhk v 4 -
.f h 4.. ;-a .
"" m:..:&.~.n.
~.w:1 nlla. :. . a 93Ly.:.:.:..:w;?:.
. :. :. . . . . >.8
^:ii::.6 n &.g::::v5:o.:2..H,i.y.!C%.s. i
. c.. . n . . . . ,, ..
n .. . .. v.
. . .. ... .. ,. . . .... . . . . . . . .a.
3 .
.,:. :..-2. . . . ;.::.. . . ..,a - . .r.p.
. . . ..:. , .ynp., ;. '.c... .M.-, g.... ; \g :- . . :*. :': -
- c. .. . . s., vs .,. .r. ...
. . . .:. . .(
. . 1... .. . .. ...m..,...
- e. ... .4.. .,..
.:,..r.... ... . . . . . .
. . . v .
,s.
. . . .. . ,1.......
. c. ..........n.
. . ..e..
.~ .
. . . . . .. .:. ?,.
.. :.,. .s,.
s su .
. .y. ... .. .
... ,;:p,,..,.;. u ...: . . . .. . .
- ..u:
. :. s...c .v w . . . ... .. ... ... .
.: : . r :,
s..-.r s? - o
.... .-._:. ...: :..s:
.. ... .:... s..
se.: .;. :.'... ,..> . ..:: .. .: . ..-l
. .... . . ......:.i ..
n,. s.. r, ,
. . .,. ......c......... ....
. :.7 . .,; . . <. ,. . .:.2
} N. . %.:.. .... W . ... ..:.. ....,. ... c. . %: :
.?-;
. . . . H,z :h*:.
. .:.;.*R,
. * ;...'.. i:).l':-G.lc?/.
. Y 2.9. :%.; : '.G.:'
.,,.. .. ........... ... e. . ... .. .: , .. ... ...
y.r.a .:.::: . .
. . %. . .-:... e* : .
7..:e. : r Ew. -(.I.:??S 9 P::'. '. . ... .!.:. r . .. x . . ;, .,,. :4. .::-Q,.9.
,. i, .
a: cn :.i.:.::.L..* i'
, . . .:.. :,:. . ~...
= ...... . , ;,,
*f .W ... .
- g. .s.* * ***
.3 .t
.%..;.e.s.
*.,.* ' 4' p- ,
E. 8 . i r, ' .L
. ,4
.[ s. . ,.
j
~
~
Neutcom .Inf erlero=+ry(8574- 8585)
.I ll h First test of Si- crystal islerferemefer.
] Viena. (sew)
; h Sr$w chanje of Ferwim y during 2rr precession.
.! ILL '
, M u t st. (89 75,8976). I e
l Q Gravitali sety Inducea sau+um 1,4ecfere ,ee . ; i Aww Arbor , Must (1975,1980,19#5).
@ Neu+ran Sagnac Effeci. l Li . Earn's refa+iow . Hvar. (aS7,).
L e Tatenlable , MIT ( 8914).
& Neu4ren Fineau, Ef.jee.t.
e Movitj boundaries , .ILL (liti,1935) l l, . Sfationary boundaries , Mutt, (,sitt), ; f g Searck for now f3= car ferms in fhe Sekridiga er Eg
. LL- 2-crysfal imierferomefer Hrr ( # 9 ts).
l ,.
. Lews - 2 Fres nel diffrac+irn ILL (19 ti).
seerek Joe an Aharapov- Sokm elleet Joe matr.us. Q Mn (#9f t). . h b h of a neutres beow.
. MuRE (l9 83).
i w,w w - ~ - - - -
l . Neu+ row Ixfer/c.rewelry Om- 8'rs) G CAerest superposas.s of sp skies i
; (vif.er pe.. .w.-) zu <een).
i 3.= Ges=few Mecluaics l i
, @ 6earch for Gualerniens -
l t<ust.R (19t</). .. l l
& Qumlue Isler}< renes tw sceelerslet fren ILL (1913). l I
Q Searck for new guaje licll3 ~ "hI'*3 "'" MrT (:ft3). e.1 scallering l en3 % s Q
%ecisem Measuremm4 3 % , Igg ,3y . . . .
I I L L , M u st a. (1915- 1975). l l Q foung's DouMe- $ lit esperimetui. wiu neu4rens. L LL {l911). Focussisj of ticufrens wHh a me,we plafe.
@ xto (,19 7 9). -e r- c - ------,--------,._---_.n _ - - - - _ _ - - - _ - - - -
I f..- (' I 700 -
/
i g / NGN / TEMPERATURE / g utTAi. l 600 - IN l y . I- "
/ l
/
IV8-8C3 '82 3
- 500 -
/
l
$ ', /
x healing l g3 " .,I e cooling L. 3 l Zo400 c) 5 INSULATOR (4) g3 t .
?& -
C AL (M) {- 200 - I w . .- . . . . . . . . . . g. . ~ ANTIFERROMAGETIC INSULATOR *(AFI)
, f . 1 . t L O O.010 0.020 0.030
[ Composition X s Figure 1.8 A phase diagram for the Cr-V indicate hyster sis. 20 3 system. Shaded areas L 29
ENCLOSURE U REFERENCES FOR RESPONSE TO QUESTION 1
REVIEW OF PHYSICS DEPARTMENT October 12, 1985 William F. Brinkman Vice President, Research Sandia National Laboratories Albuquerque, New Mexico George H. Vineyard Senior Physicist Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, New York Robert L. Wild
. Professor of Physics University of California-Riverside Riverside, California
'l
, - - . - -- - . , _ _ _ _ _ . __ _ . _ . _ _ . _ , _ c,, .
r--e+-+--vt'tm-v-- * - ' - * " ='---- - - - "----v -ew - - * '* * ~ - - - '- --'v*'*-*-*-*-*'- "
y . . r The review of the physics department was conducted on October 12, 1985. It consisted of a series of presentations by faculty and graduate students of the ongoing research in the department. At the.end of the day, the review committee met with the department chairman and discussed various personnel and administrative in.ues. ! Overall our impression of P.e research of the department l 4 i is that is of high quality. The presence of a first class research reactor allows the department to create a central activity of first-rate research that represents its core strength. This facility naturally leads to a strong empha-sis on condensed matter physics. The work on structural studies of Li, magnetically hard materials, and absorbed ' ~ films is all excellent work involving the use of this facility or of others like it at the national laboratories. The reactor on the campus may soon become the only operating reactor on a university campus where graduate students are regularly trained and as such is a unique national ,- resource. For this reason, we encourage the efforts to upgrade the reactor and to increase the variety and types of experimental capabilities available on it. The hot Mossbauer source development and the cold source are both steps in this direction. The department has also hired a few new faculty members that are starting new programs in high-pressure physics and in optical properties of matter that should enhance the
3 condensed matter physics effort. One of our major concerns is the lack of a theoretical condensed matter physics effort that'is closely coupled to the experimental program. There is a glaring need for one or two good faculty in this area. Another major concern regarding the entire department is that it is relatively thin in total manpower to cover the undergraduate course load,to add several badly needed graduate courses and to perform research that can create the type of national reputation that is desirable. An overall increase of the total faculty is clearly indicated. We note that the department has developed a set of analysis equipment for condensed matter physics and that it might possibly attempt to find a staff member who is qualified in the synthesis of materials. The type of
-materials anythesized would have to be carefully chosen so that it matched with the neutron and other analysis equip-ment available in the department and the associated research reactor facility.
In order to have a department with sufficient breadth it is necessary to have other subfields of physics represented as well as condensed matter physics. The addition of B. Mashhoon in astrophysics is a strong move in broadening the scope of the department. P. Plummer represents a move into chemical physics. At this stage it is difficult to
_4 predict whether she would be better in the physics depart-ment or the chemistry department. This should be determined by the evolution of her interest as a function of time. In conclusion, we strongly urge that the department be built up to a level more consistent with departments in the schools that are of comparable size, that this be done by building on the tremendous advantage the reactor facility represents and that the best quality faculity be sought. In order to do this the university will need to be flexible in its salary offers and be prepared to arrange start-up funds for new young faculty. We wish to thank the department for putting together the excellent review and the kind hospitality they showed during our visit. l l l i i
G 3 ENCLOSURE V REFERENCES FOR RESPONSE TO QUESTION 1 4
** Atomi on the surface of a crystd of S+-Ga alloy. This vscuum-tunneling microscope image shows the (111) surfice; it wts mid a by J. A. Golovchenko. R. 8:ck:r t.nd B. S. Swirtzentruber at AT&T Bell Laboratones.
A celebration of physics l j A new survey of contemporary physics finds the field brimming with excitement and activity but laments the lack of young researchers and modern instruments. The first National Research Council reports begin on page 28.) In itself, the are the electroweak theory, quantum . survey of physics, completed in 1966 by expansion of the physics survey is chromodynamics, renormalization-a committee headed by George E. Pake telling. Physics is flourishing-intel- group theory and the idea of the , of Xerox, consisted of two thin volumes. lectually and experimentally. Brink- inflationary universe. Experimental i The second survey was produced in man proclaims this in his preface: advances range from the tunneling 1972 by another NRC panel, this time . "These volumes document a physics microscope to a transcontinental radio-under the chairmanship of D. Allan enterprise that is vital, creative and telescope system. What's more, phys-Bromley of Yale University. It filled productive." ics is credited with providing ideas and ' four books. This month another Re- While the dynamism of the field is technologies that are central to the i. , search Council committee, under the portrayed in all three surveys,it is the nation's economic strength, social prog- ) leadership of William F. Brinkman of latest that explains in compelling ways ress and military security. . Sandia National Laboratory, issues its why physics really matters in our i survey, Physics Through the 19%, in society. If the Brinkman report can be improving the human condition i eight volumes: an overview and seven said to convey a single message, it is Out of physics have come remarkable } panel reports covering subfields of that physics, possibly more than any of developments to improve the human i physics. (Ilighlights from the seven the other natural sciences, bears a condition. One such achievement is
. special relationship with most other magnetic-resonance imaging, a tech- { .
disciplines, with many industries and nique that many in the medical profes- _ with the nation's defense system. sion believe is likely to be as significant (; Physics Survey Physics bears a symbiotic connection in diagnostic procedures as x rays. The - with other fields-notably with bio- development of MRI depended on mi-Committee logy, chemistry, materials science, crocomputers, which had their origin
; Wilham F. Bnnkman, Sandia Nabonal
'" ""d planetary sciences, medicine in the invention of the transistor, and
~
Laboratories, chairman and engm.eermg. Physics is so promi- on superconducting magnets, which Joseph Cemy, Unhersity of Califomia at nent and pervasive in fact that some came about through research m, low. Berkeley and Lawrence Berkeley Labo- disciplines may even be in danger of temperature physics. The basic princi- ) ratory losing their traditional identities as pies of MRI did not result directly from
. Ronald C. Davidson, Massachusetts Insti- they rely upon physics for techniques those discoveries, but from the pioneer-tute of Technology and theories. At the same time, wholly ing research of Edward Purcell and John M. Dawson, University of Calrfomia new scientific disciplines have arisen at Felix Bloch, who, the Brinkman report at Los Angeles the interfaces of physics with one or informs us,"were simply curious about ; MJdred S. Dresselhaus, Massachusetts more sciences. Geophysics, biological how nuclei magnetically interact with Vai tch Pn ce o L nversity physics and microelectronics, for in- matter."
Paul A. Fleury, AT&T Bell Laboratones stance, are sustamed by the endow- It is understandable of course that _ William A. Fowler, W. K. Kellogg Radi. ment of physics. Thus physics appears the Brinkman committee expresses its ation Laboratory, Califomia institute of to be a field where the sum of the parts pride in the advances and contributions Technology accounts for more than the total. of the field. Scientists in other disci. Theodor W. Hansch, Stanford University The center of physics shifted from plines are almost as enthusiastic about Vincent Jaccanno, University of Califomia Europe to the US around World War 11. physics. In the recently released Re-at Santa Barbara Damel Kle ner, Massachusetts institute Once the US learned the value of the search Council report Opportunities an science carried by the European exiles, Chemistry (see page 51), for instance, a Alexes A. Ma udin, University of Califor- physics in America advanced by leaps committee ofleadir g US chemista hails nas at Innne and bounds. Some of the discoveries in the arsenal of sophisticated tools that Peter D. MacD. Parker, Yale UnNersity the postwar period stand among the enables their community to solve pre-Martn L Perl, Stanford UnNersity highest intellectual achievements-in viously intractable problems and ex-Watt W. Webb, Comell UnNersity particular, quantum electrodynamics, plore heretofore unapproachable re-David T. Willonson, Pnneeton Unrversity superconductivity theory, detection of gions. The chemistry report provides remnanta of the primordial Big Bang, an honor roll of physics. based instru-o L R emer s't and creation of the transistor and laser. ments that are prized by chemists, Charles K. Reed, consultant Since the Bromley report appeared 14 including high. resolution magnetic-years ago, the pace of physics has resonance and mass spect rometers, quickened. Among the new concepts tunable lasers, synchrotron radiation 22 PHYSICS TODAY / APRIL 1986 oop.orze , se , c400 ai- oo / sai oc r tone am.nw in.m o, p,.n.a
'I e i
i )[
~g
- W, l
i 4 sources and, of course, computers. charged particles, quantum me- .< The Brinkman report confirms the chanics provided an extraordinary l old axiom that physics is fundamental new framework for portraying - to all the natural sciences. Physics is physical reality. Quantum me- / .c.- characterized by its enormous diversity chanics revolutionized our most ,' ', fundamental concepts of measure-
~
and its intricate connections to many - other sciences. Whether it is the mag- ment and paved the way to under-6 nificent complexity of proteins and standing the structure of atoms, ' i nucleic acids or the grandeur of the molecules and solids. It is now universe, physics provides the princi- recognized that quantum mechan-i ples and models to do the necessary ics is basic not only to physics but
! studies. to chemistry, biology and many of l The report also reminds its readers the other sciences. Beyond this, that physics has both its bright and quantum mechanics has led to the l' dark sides. " Physics has given man- creation of new industries, such as , . kind the power to make life better or to semiconductors and optical com-destroy it," the report says, and the munications, and has opened new control of nuclear weapons is man- paths of technology through the kind's "most urgent challenge." To creation of exotic materials and meet this challenge, the Brinkman devices like the laser.
committee exhorts the physics commu- Another more recent example is the nity to inform both the general public 1947 discovery of the transistor, which and political leadership about the sci- contributed to the omnipresent com-entific issues and technical options. puter. "Nobody can know how society
" Physicists must play an essential role will ultimately be transformed by this sRINKMAN in advising and counseling," the report revolution," the Brinkman report declares. The physics community, even states,"but the advances have been so thought."
before Iliroshima, took a moral stand rapid that the image of a savings bank Since the 1972 survey, US physicists on nuclear arms, and later sought to with clerks patiently entering transae. have won 20 Nobel Prizes, for discover-inform the public and its political tions by hand, without benefit of auto. ies that reach from elementary parti-leaders about the technical implica- matic data processing, seems almost as cles to cosmology. Three of the laur-tions and consequences of nuclear war. remote as a candlelit counting house in eates were recognized for new theories But it is in advancing knowledge and a novel by Dickens." about the fundamental nature of ener-providing technologies that physics has gy and matter and their transforma-
" helped to transform our daily lives," Understanding the natural order tions. One current objective in particle the report says," permitting a comfort Many developments discussed in the physics is to understand the basic and freedom of action that make it Brinkman report were anticipated at properties of quarks and leptons and to difficult to comprehend that little more the time of the last survey. These develop a Grand Unification Theory than a century ago, even in the techni- include tunable lasers, molecular-lon that will embrace the three fundamen-cally advanced nations, most people spectroscopy, and computer aided tal forces-the gravitational force, the devoted most of their energy to secur- tomography and positron-emission unified electromagnetic-weak force ing food and shelter." Additional evi- tomography (the CAT and PET so and the strong nuclear force. It has dence of the success of the field can be useful to medical diagnosis). Such been a dream of physicists to explain found a few pages on in the " Overview" technical advances have been matched all the diferent manifes,tations of ener-volume of the report,in an explanation by the intellectual progress. "In deep- gy and matter in the universe, from the of quantum mechanics, originated in ening our view of nature," the overview behavior of the most elementary parti-the 1920s, as says, " physics has profoundly affected cles to that of galactie superclusters-the unpredictable path by which our view of mankind, because the or, as firmilab director Leon leder-new knowledge in physics can underlying assumption of physics- man described it to members of Con-shape society. Based on studies of that there is order in the natural world gress on 5 March, to formulate "a the properties of matter, the spec- and that the human mind can under- theoretical synthesis that . . achieves tra of atoms and the motions of stand that order-permeate > modern what is now being called a complete Pm s Os lonAv / Ar'nn 1onc M
l l i theory of everything." and answered some tough questions, These were identified in 1983 when a l Unification in physics also is unmis- including the following: What is the Presidential commission issued A No-takable in a different context: the trend US position in world physics? Is the tion at Rask: The Imperative for Educa-toward fewer but more complex, costly nation's scientific support system ade- tional Reform. That report summar-cnd centralized facilities. With this quate for the best physics,in both small ized the trouble in a chilling statement: development, however, come some in. projects and large ones? What prob. "For the first time in the history of our svitable consequences. These are dis- lems do universities face in educating country the educational skills of one cussed in the overview volume of the the next generation of physicists? Will generation will not surpass, will not
- Brinkman report along with such is- physics continue to provide the trained equal, will not even approach. those of i sues as education of the next genera- scientific and technical practitioners their parents." The Brinkman report,
- tion of physicists, choices for major new who are likely to be needed through the in its assessment of the problem, cites facilities, relations with industry and 1990s? the National Science Foundation's Federal agencies in basic research and The answers are not always pleasant. 1980 report Science and Engineering freedom of international scientific com. The problems that are most in need of for the 1980s and Beyond, and then munication and exchange. A supple- solutions mainly concern the future of asserts that "the fraction of students ment within the overview contains physics in universities and, in the end, who have any contact with physics is so sections assessing US physics and re- go largely unresolved in the report. small that we are becoming a nation of search abroad, providing supply-de. Among the problems
- the changing scientific illiterates. Our standards for mand projections for students, teachers styles of doing physics, which involve secondary education in science and and graduate researchers and examin- ever larger research facilities and ever mathematics are woefully below those ing the organization and support of smaller numbers of US-born graduate ofJann, the Soviet Union and many of physics in universities, national labora- students and postdoctoral researchers; the European countries. The majority j tories and industry. Six of the seven the present unattractiveness of univer- of high-school physics teachers are other volumes epitomize the advances sity careers in physics teaching and unuerqualified; the supply of qualified l rnd opportunities in each of the major research; the funding of more applied new teachers has essentially van-
, subfie'ds, and the seventh covers con- physics and more defense work by ished." Though the Brinkman commit-nections with other sciences and the government agencies, to the detriment tee was not asked to examine the many faces of physics applications. of pure research conducted in academe; matter, it observes that "we would be The Brinkman report is, in sum, a and the implications of tighter security negligent not to emphasize the critical celebration of contemporary physics. measures for basic research. nature..of the problem and not to The historical raradigm is probably the The important issues before physics endorse efforts to improve secondary period of Galileo Galilei and Johannes today have far resching consequences education, particularly education in Kepler, when the telescope and micro- for industry, government and the science.' It goes on to extol the Nation-scope brought forth bold new insights whole society. Thus, the concerns ex- al Scier.ce Foundation for reestablish-that revolutionized thought on many pressed in the first few pages of the ir.g its science and engineering educa-subjects, including the place of man in report are part of a far greater anxiety tion prc. gram in 1984 after it had been the universe, and raised questions that about the health of the nation's re- summarily killed a few years before tre still at the frontiers of research. search universities. This matter was (PHYstCS ToDAY, January 1985, page 55). examined recently by a panel of the Asking the right questions White llouse Science Council (Physics The education-research connection When the survey was begun, early in Toorv, March, page 65). The Brinkman report considers the 1983, it was to be completed within one According to the overview, nation'4 educational condition to be year at a total cost of about $700000. It Retirements from physics depart- grim arid getting worse each year. The has taken three years. Even so, to have ment faculties will begin to occur committee is blunt about the situation: Gtpected a comprehensive survey of the at an increasing rate starting in "Becauw it is vital to the health of antire physics enterprise in one year the early 1990s. To meet the need physics and because we find it to be in might possibly have been unreason- for faculty replacements, steps difficulty, university research is the able. One of the original purposes of should be taken to ensure the central issue of this report. Most na-the survey was to identify the promis- continued ability of universities to tions isalate forefront research from ing physics projects that ought to be attract highly qualified young phy- their educational institutions; the high on any list of priorities for Federal sicists to work in an academic United States does not. On the con. funding. But the opportunity to influ- setting. The need is particularly trary, student participation in research cnce the Federal budget in fiscal 1985 acute in fields where research is at the highest professional level is at was lost some time ago and with it carried out by small groups. Such the heart of US graduate education. possibly the last chance to have any groups make an exceptionally This tradition is widely regarded as a i meaningful effect on major physics strong contribution to educating special nource of strength in physics." programs and facilities during the rest new physicists. To enhance the It happens that more than half of the of the decade. Science budgets for attractiveness of academic re- nation's basic research is carried out fiscal 1986 and 1987 have taken their search, the difficulty in obtaining within universities, where 53G of PhD lumps from the agencies and Congress modern instrumentation in uni- physicists work, and that most basic under the budget-tr. duction scenario versity research laboratories and research in physics is done not by that would eliminate all the red ink by the difficulty in obtaining support teams at large facilities and national 1991. Still, the report sends an impres- for research groups must be ad- laboratories, but by small groups in sive mensage to science policy makers dressed. their own labs, most often in universi-on matters they ought not to ignore. The situation has cultural roots, the ties. Small-group physics, performed Accordingly, the committee asked Brinkman committee acknowledges. primarily by a principal investigator 24 PHYSICS TODAY / APRIL 1986
. .?
45 - Median age of physicists t3 increaseng in all sectors of 4,n,;. The agmg will continue C3 be pronounced in academe,where most full professors are et least a decade away from retirement. Federal . y _ policies and the economic slowdown in 1979-41 caused funding Urwersey & col.ege cutbacks or fewer hinngs at govemment and industrial labs. 43-Govemment sities needs to be augmented by $70 42-million per year in 1985 dollars for
$ each of four years.
Some of the committee's other ree-gC ~ Feders% ommendations concern the importance - g of the large research facilities that are 40- Yeenters so essential to many subfields of phys-industry ks. Discovery of the most elementary 38- - particles, such as the J/d in 1974, the Y in 1977 and the W and Zin 1983,would as _ [ not have been possible without massive accelerators. Synchrotron light p sources and atom- and ion-acattering c[ 3877 is7e issi machines make possible the develop. 1973 isis ment of advanced semiconductor de-YEAR vices and new classes of materials. In recommending large facilities, the sur-vey committee relied on the priorities and a few graduate students or post- shortages of up-todate instrumenta- set in the last two or three years by docs, " constitutes the backbone of uni- tion-particularly large, expensive such groups as the High-Energy Phys-versity research," says the report. The items such as laser systems, molecular ics Advisory Panel, the Nuclear committee claims that much of con- beam epitaxy machines and surface- Science Advisory Committee and the densed-matter physics, as well as atom- scattering apparatus-and the inordi. National Research Council's Major Ma-ic, molecular and optical physics, cer- nate amount of time spent by research- terials Facilities Committee. The tain aspects of astrophysics, nuclear ers in acquiring grants, not infrequent- Brinkman committee attempted to physics, biophysics and medical phys. ly too paltry for the group to carry out rank the various machines in impor-ics, operates in this style and that those its work to the fullest capability. In tance,but quickly gave up hope of ever subfields predominate in industrial addition, physics is confronted by an deciding which facilities would top the physics, essentially because they con. increasing reluctance of Americans to list without regard to the subfield. tribute greatly to commercial electron- pursue research careers in a society Instead, the committee simply endorses ics and optics. that values those professions with less the major recommendations of the "Most areas of small-group physics rigorous intellectual requirements and advisory groups within each subfield: usually advance by a multitude of more immediate prospacts of financial > In particle physics, construction of discoveries that fit together to reveal a rewards. the 40-TeV Superconducting Super Col-lider, extensions of the 100LGeV elec-mdor scientific advance,in contrast to Pursuing new opportunities tron-positron collider now being built research that is organized around a single conceptual theme," says the Solving such problems will not be at the Stanford Linear Accelerator report. Sometimes, though, it is hard easy. Two panels reporting to the Center and modification of the proton-to point to a single theory, experiment Brinkman committee concluded that antiproton collider at the Fermilab or technique that revolutionizes a par- "to allow a reasonable number of Tevatron to operate at 2 TeV, providing ticular subfield. Surface physics is groups to pursue the new scientific the highest-energy particle collisions in such a case. The report argues that the opportunities, and to allow some young the world until an accelerator such as astounding progress in surface physics investigators to enter the field, the SSC is operating is the result of theories and experi- level of operating funds must be dou- > In nuclear physics, construction of ments of many small groups using bled [in academic research) over about the &GeV Continuous Electron Beam different techniques-some novel, oth- a four year period." The recommenda- Accelerator Facility to investigate era traditional. tion for sharply increased funding for quark-gluon aspects of nuclear matter More than 709c of the physics PhDs basic research is virtually identical to and of the Relativistic Nuclear Collider in the US are awarded for research ones from other sources-particularly with an energy of the order of tens of done in small groups, and more than in Opportunities in Chemistry and in A GeV per nucleon for beams of heavy half of all doctorates are in condensed. Rencu ed Partnership, the report of the ions with atomic numbers up to that of matter physics or in atomic, molecular White llouse Science Council panel uranium and optical physics. It may be that the mentioned above. As matters now > In condensed-matter physics, com-variety of research styles and impor- stand, a " healthy" university research pletion of the current generation of tance of individuality in these suhfields group works with a budget in the range synchrotron radiation facilities "as are just the sort of factors that attract of S200 000 to $400 000. Out of this,the soon as possible . . . to serve the short. many young scientists and nurture group must pay for its equipment. Of term needs of the next three to five their need for initiative and innova. course, some groups may obtain as years," as well as a new generation of tion-precisely the virtues that the much as $1 million per year, but these synchrotrons taking advantage of un-report insists are needed for physics to are exceptions. The average grant for dulators and wigglers, along with new continue its rapid intellectual advance. many small academic research groups neutron scattering facilities But allis not well in academic small- is roughly $80000 a year. "To allow > In plasma physics, support of vigor-group research. The most serious prob- independent group activity in physic > ous research programs to study con-lems are the perpetual underfunding of to flourish," says the Brinkman report, finement and stability in fusion plas. academic research, which results ir. the bae support of the work in univer- mas by both magnetic and inertial PHY SCS TODAY / APRIL 1986 25
..?
* ' E. 2 of Arst. year paduate physics swents of (JS ong.n have '
- e. decrossed since 1971, whde IW of fore.gn nationats have 3500 consnued *J increase. Foreign studenbently nurnbee owe 1000
' about two-Afths of the total Arst-year graduate phyus student " ,
puutation.
.1 2500-q' a - conAnement techniques and to investi ' Foregn I
gate the properties of ignited plasmas,. the next mWor frontier in magnetic '
-i at am-I
-A l fusion, by building a facility for the R, Burning Core Emperiment . usotr nen,
> In gravitational physics, strong sup. - f port for NSF's program in 'gravita-tional-radiation research and construe. .
tooos 'I tion of the lang Baseline Gravitational ' Wave Facility 500 - s
> In cosmology and cosmic-roy phys-Ica, endorsement of NASA's, science ( .
program as " sound and forward look- , , ing," with such instruments as tha 1971 ts73 is75 1977 1979 ,1,se t isaa test Hubble Telescope, Cosmic Background "** Emplorer, Gamma Ray Observatory cad Advanced X-Ray Astronomy Fa-cility, and support for an upg ade for - the Utah Fly's Eye ground-based facili- number from Asia and the Middle hiustrial and government institu-ty to conduct air-shcwer studies of . East-b'urred anciter treml: The de-tions. . . . cosmic rays. ' cline of US students in gradrate phys- liloot... however, do not re-In addition to advancing the sub- ics continued unt 11964-85, when their main in the US permanently and Aelds, a complete range of computers, enrollments began to rise, for that reason one might question from microcomputers to supercom- "If there had previously been con- the signiAcant expenditures we puters, need to be provided and up- cern about the availability of highly make on thelr education and train-graded from time to time, with ada- trained physics manpower in the US, ing. By any measure, our nation ; quate access for researchers who han these data only heightened it," says a remains one of the most advanced ' ' come to depend on them to contto) . section of the overview supplement on in physics education and trainini;. cpparatus, run experiments and gather' the education and supply of physicists. Unquestionably, then, we share end analyse data.- In this connection, "What liy behind the continued da- the responsibility with the other the report applauds the Department of cline in' US graduate students? Al- s developed nations to make good Energy for providing access to super- though there were few academic oppor- use of the opportunities that we computers at its fusion center at IAW. tunities, the general employment situ- ca4 r4er. .The opportunitiac are rence Livermore and the new facility at ation for new physics PhDs was s substantial: 95% of the world's Florida State University, NSF for sup- healthy. Job offcts were plentiful and new science is produwd by only porting a national center for computing starting salaries were high. Were the 25% of the countries of the world. in atmaapheric physics and its Ave new front pagt breakthrougSe in the t iosci- Unless the t.dsnta of capable indi-supercomputing centers for university ences, the new technology escitement viduals in tha unt!erdeveloped na-g- rewatchers, as well as NASA, the of computer science and ther financial tions can be efectively usert, the
- Defense Department and the National rewards of the professions drawing bases for creating technological Iureau of Standards for providing ac- bright potential physics students changes in these nations will no*.
cosa to scientiAc supercomputers. away? Such changes in student career be realised. , , While the current demand for and directicas could have a major impact So the education and trahing of supply of physicists in our society on a comparatively small area of con- scientists frorn less developed fands is h cppear to be in reasonable balshee, the centration like physics." accon.peniec Sy espectations that they Erinkman committee considers this will return home to r:Le tt e economic
' state precarious. "The supply of PhD Senetts of foreign scholars and occial conditions by their own physicista for industry and gov t rnment The committee is convinced that: bootstraps. This, says the Brinkman has been sustained only becauce of the .. .the US benents both directly comrMitw,.is "cor: effective by any decline in the number of academic and in/.irectly from the flus - mesure. If we wier to elect to d.wate positions and the increase in foreign throu@ its institutions of foreign the money that it costa to educate graduate students," says the report. studerits and postdoctorates. foreign physicists here, it is unlikely i In the 1970s, about one-Afth of the ?tany of the young scientists from that we could And any other way in physica grad students were foreign abroad are among the intellectual which it could be used quickly and citiseno-e. total of some 600 each year. elite of their countries; these scien- ef5ciently to raise the scientlAc rind Then as the number of Arst. year gradu- tists provide strength and diversity cte students plungad to its nadir in technological level in the recipient's to our programs through their home country."
1900 and began to rise again, a mgjor mutual interactions with our phy-change in the citisenship rolls of these Changing patterns of employment - sicists. During periods in which also appear .to worry the Brinkman students became apparent.: Two fifths of the Arst year physics grad stu- too few et our studenta enter phys- committee. "'Ite steady growth of les as a profession, foreign gradu. Industrial etcpley.nent of physicists denta-more than 1000 in all-were ate students and postdoctoral asso. foreign nationale. This inAus of for- renected the favortble climate in that ciates <fran elect to remain here cign students-a disproportionate wetor as wn! as the closing of academic and fitt the needs of educational, doors," says the re wrt. Yew industrial 6 26 PHYSICS TOOAY / april 1966 4
p y, b ., g - i physicists were engaged in basic re- among all science faculties, open exchange of scienti6c information .l "By the middle of the 1990s the across borders. "For science to Aour-search, howeser; rather,they could be ], found in engineering or related applied retirement rate [of physics faculty)is ish, scientists must be fr6e to communi-l[ scienose. By contrast, jobs for physi- expected to increase significantly as a cate freely and to move freely. Any r} - cists at the national laboratories, which result of the large number of entries in interfrrence with these basic principles had remained virtually unchanged dur- the 1960s. The supply of entrants into is a loss (or science, a loss for the q ing the otherwise " Soaring Sixties," ' the physics labor force could decline at ofending nation and a loss for the i increened standily through the 1970s, the very time that retirements will be dignity of mankind." Such strong providing a congenial home for some most numerous," the report states in a statements seem aimed at both the US aspects of basic physics research that supplement to the overview volume. and USSR-at the current obsession in had normally been carried out in uni- "Although pleas for a return to the the White House and Defense Depart-versitie1. But during the 1980s a shift high production level of graduates dur- ment with restricting the outAow of l, in emphasis took place as the national ing the late 1960s would be inappro- scientific information and data, even
- 4. labs turned to more applied research to priate, concern over the efects of a when unclassified and of only remote deal with a diversity of missions. potentially diminishing labor force is military potential, and at the obdurate warranted." unwillingness of the Kremlin to allow
, ~ i Waying of physics' Therefore, the Brinkman committee certain scientists to emigrate or travel The picture is complicated further by recommends: in the West. the " graying of physics"-the fact that > Doubling the number of predoctoral A supplement to the overview states: physicista everywhere in the US repre- fellowships, now totaling 45 to 50 each In recent times, there has been sent an aging population. The graying year, to help reverse the decline in US- an increasing tendency to regard factor is most prevalent at universities born grad studenta certain scientific and technical in-where physicists were recruited for > Attracting the best and brightest to formation as ' privileged.' At-tanured faculty positions immediately academic careers by enlarging such tempts have been made to restrict after the Soviet Un!on launched its programs as the Presidential Young or prevent its flow to our political Arst Sputnika in 1967 and sent the US Investigators Awards and the Depart- adversaries by means that fa!! education system into orbit in rapid ment of Energy's Outstanding Junior short of actual classification. The response. The nation's military and Investigator Program; at the same ultimate objective of such mes-space build-ups were paralleled by time, Federal funding agencies and sures is to slow down the acquisi-build-ups of scientists and engineers, business corporations need to help at- tion of our technology by those NASA's foundingin 1958 was accompa- tract and support young scientists at with whom we are currently at nied by the National Defense Educa- universities political odds. However, attempts tion Act, dedicated to training more > Simplifying the nation's immigra- to impede the dissemination of tachnical people. Job openings in aca- tion laws for foreign-born physicists scientific information will inevita-dome during the 1960s were matched who want to pursue permanent re- bly impede our own progress Sci-entific secrets are act state secrets; by increased Federal grants for univer- search careers in the US sity reneerch. In the period 1968-73, > Encouraging more women and stu- they are held by nature. Our when the number of PhDs in physics dents from minority groups that are adversaries are as free to try to topped 1400 each year, Federal support underrepresented in science to become learn them as we are.... It is the of academic research had already physicista. Judgment of those who have stud-peaked, but science students always in a short section at the end of the led this complex matter that na. seem to lag behind the marketplace in overview, the physics survey commit- tional security is best served by a the choice of careers. In the years tee calls on DOD to " restore its invest. policy that stresses scientific and since, as statistics compiled by the ment in long-range fundamental re- technical accomplishment rather
. American Institute of Physics (and search and strengthen its connections than curbs on the free flow of
' used in the Brinkman survey) show, with the research community for the information.
physics graduates and PhDs moved out mutual benefit of science and national In a previous section, the report of mondeme into such rapidly expand. security." The new University Re- speaks of physics as "an international ing disciplines as systems engineering, search Initiative, proposed in DOD's enterprise because physical principles electronics and computer science. Out fiscal 1987 budget, may help do this. So know no national boundaries. Physi-of 27 000 holders of physics PhDs in may remov!ng much of the applied cists everywhere are eager to share in the US in 1981,10 400 were doing non- research disguised as basic research in the stimulatingncF-a at N . . ." physics work. That physics PhDs often DOD's 6.1 budget category. In addition [ble from the National Acade abandon their chosen discipline for the committee argues that "only a j a other fields is a continuing trend. small section of American industry has l 2101 Constitution Avenue NW, Wash-according to studies conducted by AIP corporately supported research" and ! Ington, DC 20418, or from the Ameri-researchers. urges the Fovernment and industry to can Institute of Physics,335 East 45th The declining number of physics " create an environment, perhaps Street, New York, New York 10017, at PhDs and their exit to other professions through tax incentives, that encour- 8160 for the set of eight volames. Each a j has left the community aging, most ages industrial participation in basic i volume may be purchased separately mrkedly in academe, in the early research." i from the same organizations. The over-1970s the median age of physics fa. The Brinkman committee reserves I viem volume, for instance, sells for culty members was 38. By 1981 the s.ome of its most forceful and ehw;uent $14.95 paperbound and $24.95 cloth- /
~
median age was 44-the oldest group language for its remarks defending the bound. -InwN GooDwiN C /
- PrWSICS TODAY / APRIL 1986 27
'Y 4, . !
. 1 1 C p ENCLOSURE W t f I REFERENCES FOR RESPONSE TO QUESTION 1 0 l r
1 i i "the research is priceless erid the risks are mhrhrre/"
- Dixy Lee Ray. The Croft Lecture Feb ru a ry 19, 1987. University of Missouri
- In res p o n se to the question--Con the resea rch done j at the University of Missouri Research Rea ctor
- justify the risks of using highly enriched uranium fuel? .,
I 3 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ ____ __ _ ___ _ _ _ . _ _}}