%NEprop033050; ]> Proposal Of A Nuclear Reactor At North Carolina State College [a machine-readable transcription] Beck, Clifford K. Creation of machine-readable version: Russell S. Koonts Creation of digital images: Russell S. Koonts Conversion to TEI.2-conformant markup: NCSU Science and Technology Electronic Text Center. ca. 65 kilobytes NCSU Libraries. Raleigh, NC. Modern English, BecProp

Available from: NC State University Archives

Publicly-accessible

URL: http://www.lib.ncsu.edu/archives/etext/engineering.htm

 2000

Nuclear Reactor Digitization Project

 Illustrations have been included from the print version. Scanned by Russell Koonts with OmniPage Limited OCR software. Proposal Of A Nuclear Reactor At North Carolina State College <author>Clifford K. Beck</author> <respStmt> <resp/> <name/> </respStmt> </titleStmt> <editionStmt> <p>Revison.</p> </editionStmt> <extent>24 pp.</extent> <publicationStmt> <publisher></publisher> <pubPlace></pubPlace> <date></date> <idno>Manuscript copy consulted: NCSU Libraries call number UA105.16</idno> </publicationStmt> <seriesStmt> <p/> </seriesStmt> <notesStmt> <note>Proposal written July 5, 1949, Revised March 30, 1950</note> </notesStmt> </biblFull> </sourceDesc> </fileDesc> <encodingDesc> <projectDesc> <p>Prepared for the NCSU Libraries Science and Technology Electronic Text Center.</p> </projectDesc> <editorialDecl> <p>Spell-check and verification made against printed text using Microsoft Word spell checker.</p> <p>The lineation of the manuscript has been maintained and all end-of-line hyphens have been preserved.</p> <p>The images exist as archived TIFF images, one or more JPEG versions for general use, and thumbnails.</p> <p id="ETC">Keywords in the header are a local Electronic Text Center scheme to aid in establishing analytical groupings.</p> </editorialDecl> <refsDecl> <p>ID elements are given for each page element and are composed of the text's unique cryptogram and the given page number, as in BecPropa for the title page of Clifford Beck's Propsal.</p> </refsDecl> <classDecl> <taxonomy id="LCSH"> <bibl> <title>Library of Congress Subject Headings 1949, July 5 1950, March 30 English non-fiction; prose LCSH 24-bit color; 400 dpi Proposal of a Nuclear Reactor at North Carolina State College Typescript 24 pp. March 30, 1950 NEprop033050

Dr. Clifford Beck proposes the building of a joint North Carolina State College-Atomic Energy Commission 5 KW nuclear reactor of the uranium "water-boiler" type. To be used as the core of an instructional and research program in Nuclear Engineering, Dr. Beck reasons that Duke University, the University of North Carolina, several medical schools and a number of other institutions in the vicinity of Raleigh, North Carolina, would benefit from the proposed reactor program. Enclosing a tentative schematic design of the reactor, and identifying key faculty and research members associated with the project, Dr. Beck estimates that detailed design and construction can be accomplished in from eight to ten months and would be completed at a total cost of $150,000.

PROPOSAL OF A NUCLEAR REACTOR<lb/> At<lb/> NORTH CAROLINA STATE COLLEGE Clifford K. Beck Professor and Head, Physics Department

Written: July 5, 1949 Revised: March 30, 1950 SCHOOL OF ENGINEERINGNORTH CAROLINA STATE COLLEGE

PROPOSAL OF A NUCLEAR REACTOR<lb/> At<lb/> NORTH CAROLINA STATE COLLEGE ABSTRACT

The North Carolina State College of Agriculture and Engi- neering proposes to build a 5 KW nuclear reactor of the uranium "water-boiler" type to be used as the core of an instructional and research program in Nuclear Engineering. In addition to State's Nuclear Engineering program, it is anticipated that Duke University, the University of North Carolina, several medical schools and a number of other institutions in the vicinity of Raleigh, North Carolina, would benefit from the proposed reac- tor program.

Facilities of State College relative to the proposed reactor are briefly described, as well as the types of unclassified re- search which might be done with the machine.

A tentative schematic design of the reactor, with emphasis on the physical security of the fissionable material and the safety of operating personnel, is presented. It is estimated that detailed design and construction can be accomplished in from eight to ten months, at a total cost of $150,000. North Carolina State College would undertake to defray the major portion of this cost with funds from sources other than the Atomic Energy Commission.

Request is made of the Atomic Energy Commission for ap- proval of the overall proposal, for loan of the requisite fissionable material, and for assistance and advice in design and construction of the reactor.

TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . 1 PURPOSE OF THE REACTOR . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Instruction . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Research . . . . . . . . . . . 2 BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE REACTOR . . . . . . . . . . . 4 The Fuel System . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Reflector . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Shielding . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Thermal Column . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Control and Safety Features . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Cooling System . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Fuel Required; Power Level . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Instrumentation, Control Panel . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Buildings for Reactor Housing . . . . . . . . . . . 7 FACILITIES AT NORTH CAROLINA STATE COLLEGE . . . . . . . . . .. 9 General . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Coordination Between Departments . . . . . . . . . . .10 Interests in Radioactivity . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Buildings . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Personnel . . . . . . . . . . . 11 MAJOR CONSIDERATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Physical Security of Fissionable Material . . . . . . . . . . .15 Safety of Personnel . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Classified Information . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Safe Operation . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Finances . . . . . . . . . . . 16 TIME SCHEDULE; COST . . . . . . . . . . . 17

PROPOSAL OF A NUCLEAR REACTOR<lb/> At<lb/> NORTH CAROLINA STATE COLLEGE<lb/> <name type="person">Clifford K. Beck</name> INTRODUCTION

In recognition of a growing demand for the instruction and training of rising engineers and scientists in various aspects of atomic engineer- ing, and in anticipation of an even greater need in this field as new peacetime and military applications of nuclear processes are developed, the North Carolina State College of Agriculture and Engineering has em- barked on an expansion program in the Physics Department, and in re- lated engineering departments, designed to provide training at the grad- uate level in Nuclear Engineering. This program is in keeping with the philosophy, often expressed by leaders of the Atomic Energy Commis- sion, that, for America to maintain her preeminence in the field of atomic energy development, the people of the country, industry, and the estab- lished educational institutions must carry their full share of the respon- sibility.

The schools and colleges, especially the technical schools, have a responsibility to their students and to the country as a whole to provide opportunities for training in the new fields of technical development in- volved in potential applications and by-products of nuclear processes. Hence, the decision of State College to enter the field of instruction in Nuclear Engineering.

In order to provide training of maximum practicality and usefulness in this field, it is proposed that a small nuclear reactor, of the water- boiler type, be built on the State College campus. North Carolina State College is in position to provide experienced personnel and to defray the major cost of the program, except for the cost of the fissionable material, which, it is hoped, the Atomic Energy Commission will agree to provide.

PURPOSE OF THE REACTOR

Two chief uses of the nuclear reactor are anticipated:

1. Instruction.

The reactor will provide the heart around which the instructional program for senior undergraduate and graduate level students in Nuclear Engineering will be organized. All instructional and laboratory activities will be related in a very practical and realistic way to the actual opera- tion of a working reactor. When, for example the students in a certain class study the problems of shielding, or remote operation of control rods, an observation of these components of a functioning unit will pro- vide extremely valuable experience.

Professors and instructors, many of whom have not had the oppor- tunity to work on atomic energy developments, will be greatly aided in their instruction of students by opportunities to gain first-hand experience with the reactor.

The initial design, construction and operation of the reactor and the auxiliary instruments and facilities, and the changes in design and opera- tion from time to time, will provide ideal research problems and indi- vidual activities for practical training of faculty and graduate students.

2. Research.

In Nuclear Engineering, the nuclear reactor will constitute an ideal core around which a major portion of research in the departments con- cerned can be built. A large field of investigation in every component part of Nuclear Engineering as well as numerous individual problems involving use of the radiations from the reactor, will provide continuous challenges to faculty and students.

The research fields which can be entered with the reactor are num- erous and varied, and in most fields the number of individual problems is very large. A few types of research problems are listed:

1. Shielding; materials, theories of attenuation, etc. 2. Effects of radiations on materials of construction. 3. Effects of radiation on chemicals and chemical reactions. 4. Fission products; identity, chemical and physical characteristics, uses in other research problems.

5. Heat transfer, problems of power generation. 6. Instrumentation; detectors, controllers, recorders. 7. Production of short-lived isotopes for tracer work. 8. Irradiation of biological specimens and materials. 9. Remote mechanical manipulation of chemicals. 10. Physics of radiations; diffraction in crystals; nuclear reactions, threshold energies, cross-sections.

It is recognized, of course, that adequate attack on many problems in these fields can only be made with reactors providing much higher levels of radiation. It is equally true, however, that there are many problems in each of these categories which can be investigated with the radiation available from the modest reactor proposed. Every effort will be made to restrict the investigations and operation of the reactor to unclassified problems. But despite the limitations to unclassified problems and the relatively low radiation level available, the quantity and potential importance, both academically and practically, of researches available for investigation with the proposed reactor should not be under estimated.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE REACTOR

The proposed reactor consists of a few essential parts and a small number of auxiliary systems. A diagrammatic sketch is rendn in figure 1.

The bulk of the reactor assembly will consist of a single massive block of concrete, cylindrical in shape, 30 feet high and 25 or 30 feet in diameter, (depending on results of detailed shielding calculations). A vertical, coaxial cylindrical hole, 4 feet in diameter, will be left in the center of the concrete cylinder; and in the base of the concrete cylinder, an opening 15 or 20 feet in diameter and 8 feet high will also be left. The reactor proper, its reflector, some shielding if space permits, the control and safety rods, and other auxiliary systems will be mounted in- side the vertical cylindrical opening at the center of the concrete block. The top of the cylindrical opening will be covered by slabs of concrete, which can be added or removed by an overhead crane.

For physical security of the fuel system, the reinforced concrete slabs on top will be held in position by concealed bolts extending verti- cally through the shield and terminating in the room in the base of the concrete structure. These slabs cannot be removed until the bolts are unscrewed from the room below.

The room left in the base of the structure, called the Vault Room, can be entered through only one opening. This is protected by a heavy vault door, and a massive concrete plug which can be moved aside on a motor driven track. The fuel system is built into the concrete in such fashion that any access whatever is prohibited except through the Vault Room in the base of the concrete and the 4-foot opening at the top. The latter may be entered only after bolts holding the reinforced slab are released from below. Hence, as security against theft, the fissionable material is protected on all sides either by reinforced concrete or a massive vault door behind a huge concrete plug.

1. The fuel system.

A totally enclosed solution-containing system is visualized. The solution will normally be stored, when not in use in a large, flat, inverted conical-shaped vessel of stainless steel imbedded in the concrete shielding. A pipe will extend upward from the storage vessel, through a valve, to the spherical reactor. Rub- ber balloons inside a pneumatic pressure chamber, connected to the storage vessel, will provide the mechanism for forcing the solution up into the reactor.

Figure One: Schematic Diagram of the Reactor Shield is cylinder of concrete, 30 feet in diameter, 30 feet high, with vertical 4 foot coaxial hole and hollowed out base. Reactor, Reflector, control mechanism, and auxiliary systems are housed in the central coaxial cylindri- cal cavity. Base cavity, closed by heavy vault door, provides only access to Reactor System; room used for solution processing, radiation exposure, and Special experiments. Top covered by concrete slabs. Mobile (on wheels) Concrete plugs in vault door, end of thermal column, and under reactor.

The reactor will be provided with a cooling coil and a one- inch re-entrant passageway through which samples to be exposed may be passed. From the reactor, a tube will extend up into an overflow "bubble" trap and from this another tube will extend up- ward to a large balloon which will expand and contract as fuel is forced into or out of the reactor.

A short pipe, projecting from the lowest point of the flat, conical storage vessel into the Vault Room in the base of the assembly, provided with valves and connection flanges for at- taching transportation fuel cylinders, sample tubes, refill vessels, etc., will be used for addition or removal of solution.

The fuel system will be made entirely of stainless steel, with all-welded connections. All tubes or vessels of the system will be embedded in channels in the concrete shielding, except the one tube extending into the Vault Room in the base of the assembly.

2. Reflector.

Around the reactor, a reflector of 20 inches or so in thick- ness, composed of suitable neutron reflector materials will be provided. A horizontal cylindrical passage through the reflec- tor (and through the surrounding shielding), perhaps 3 inches in diameter, tangent to the surface of the reactor, through which exposure samples may be passed, will be arranged. Horizontal passage for samples to the re-entrant hole in the reactor will also be provided, as well as vertical passages near the reactor in which control and safety rods will move. The nature of the reflector material will be decided later.

3. Shielding.

The massive concrete block of the reactor assembly will provide 10 to 12 feet of concrete around the sides of the reactor. Slabs may be placed on top to any desired thickness. Underneath the reactor, if desired, layers of concrete totaling 4-5 feet, may be moved horizontally by motor-drives to close the central ver- tical shaft immediately under the reflector, to provide shielding for the room below, For certain experiments, it may be desirable to withdraw the concrete layers to provide unshielded radiation to the room below. The walls of the Vault Room will be 5 feet thick, and a slab of reinforced concrete will serve as the floor.

Various channels and passages through the concrete will be so arranged as to leave ample external shielding, and will be de- signed to minimize the amount of scattered radiation.

4. Thermal column.

Adjacent to one side of the reflector and extending hori- zontally outward for 5 or so feet, will be a column of graphite, 3 feet in diameter, for "thermalizing" neutrons. At the exterior face of this column, a 3-foot beam of slow neutrons, about 106 or 107/cm2, will be available for experimental purposes. When not in use, the column will be shielded by a 5-foot plug of concrete, arranged to move in or out on a motor driven track.

5. Control and Safety Features.

Inasmuch as this reactor will be used on a university campus, (even through at a somewhat remote point), extraordinary attention will be given to safety and control mechanisms. Unusually thick shielding will be provided. Several independent safety rods, ar- ranged to fall by gravity under predetermined conditions, will be provided. Rapid addition of solution or rapid removal of control rods, resulting in fast increases in reactivity, will be made im- possible by design of the mechanism, and will be further guarded against by meters automatically set to release safety rods if pre- set rates of increase are exceeded. Rapid automatic release of the fuel from the reflector-enclosed reactor to the unreflected, geometrically safe storage vessel, in case pre-set neutron levels are exceeded, is being incorporated in the design.

6. Cooling system.

A small copper tube, e.g., 1/2 inch, forming a water-carrying system extending from outside the concrete shielding through welded junctions into the reactor and out again, will constitute the cooling system. If further calculations rend that disposal of the cooling water will become a problem because of induced radioactivity, a recirculating system, with a small specially designed pump, may need to be included in the design.

7. Fuel required: Power level.

According to Dr. Christy's estimates in MDDC-72, about 1 kilogram of enriched U-235, more or less depending on the reflec- tor used, in water solution, as nitrate or sulfate, is needed for operation of a water boiler. The proposed reactor is intended for operation at a maximum power level of about 5 KW. This should be easily amenable to control and operation, and should provide adequate radiation levels for its anticipated use. A reactor of this size should yield an internal flux of about 1011 , and a flux of 107 thermal neutrons per cm2 per sec. at the face of the graphite column (MDDC - 72).

The fission of 1 gram of U-235 should provide 1000 Kilowatt days of power. With the reactor operating at 5 KW output, 1 gram of U-235 should provide 200 days of continuous operation. The reactor, on the average, probably will not operate at maximum level more than five out of each twenty-four hours. Therefore, fission of one gram should require several years.

This would mean that addition of fuel or re-processing of fuel for removal of fission products should have to be done very rarely. When this does become necessary, provisions are incor- porated in the design for withdrawal of the fuel into shielded con- tainers. The solution could then be shipped back to Oak Ridge and there re-processed or exchanged for a new supply.

8. Instrumentation, Control panel.

It is intended that a clear area 15 to 30 feet wide be main- tained on all sides of the reactor in order to provide maximum accessibility and flexibility in use of auxiliary equipment. The operating-control panel will be located to one side of the reactor, and so arranged that all necessary instruments for operation and control will be within easy reach of one operator. The op- erator will have no other duties than those involved in operating the control mechanism. Manipulation of auxiliary experimental equipment, etc., will be the responsibility of other persons, and controls, meters, etc., associated with experiments will be com- pletely separate and removed from the reactor control panel. The key instruments on the control panel will be equipped with indicating meters, either audible or visual or both, and with automatic recording mechanisms for providing permanent rec- ords. At the rear of the control panel, on the side fartherest from the reactor, a small demonstration classroom for 50 or so stu- dents, with elevated tiers of seats, is intended.

9. A Building for the Reactor.

There is on the State College campus a building excellently adaptable as the reactor site. (Fig. 2). This building, 52 feet wide, 102 feet long and 55 feet high, was constructed during the war by the Bureau of Mines for use in blast furnace research investigation, but was not used for this purpose. The 20 feet nearest the front of the building is arranged with four floors of offices, work rooms, and laboratories. The remaining portion of the interior at street level is in the form of a single huge (52' x 82') work area, with no partitions, at 10 feet above base- ment level. The terrain contour permits a truck driveway en- trance to the first floor level on one side of the building, and to the basement level on the other side.

Figure Two: Bureau of Mines Building, State College Campus

Figure Three: Interior of Bureau of Mines Building

Figure 2 rends a portion of the furnace area inside the building. The steel-beam roof supports (not visible) are 45 feet above the floor. Provisions are incorporated for an over- head crane in this area. Toward the right side of the floor area, through an opening in the floor, a portion of the basement may be seen.

At the rear center of the building a large stack, originally intended for furnace exhaust, is located. (Figs. [1, 2,]). This stack, extending some 40 feet above the roof of the building, would provide an excellent means for dispersal into the atmos- phere of small amounts of undesirable gases which might de- velop in the reactor work.

The Bureau of Mines Building is located on one edge of the engineering and agricultural quadrangle of the campus. The Sea- board Railroad tracks lie 100 feet to the rear of the building. Across the street on the east side of the building lies the site on which is now being erected the new Mechanical Engineering Build- ing. Next, beyond the Mechanical Engineering Building lies the Zoology Building, then the new Engineering Research Building, and the Physics Building.

In preliminary conferences, there have developed promising indications that the Bureau of Mines will be willing to permit use of their building for the reactor site. Bureau officials have, in fact, expressed an interest in arranging a program of joint par- ticipation with State College in nuclear researches in metallurgy which might involve use of the reactor as a tool. Both the possi- bilities of a joint program and use of the building as a reactor site are being explored further.

The Bureau of Mines Building, though ideally suited to house the reactor, cannot provide adequate space for the sample pre- paration rooms, counting rooms, radio-chemical synthesis and analysis laboratories, which should accompany the reactor. Some of these, of course, could be located in the building, but more space, in an added wing or in a separate, adjacent building should be provided.

FACILITIES AT NORTH CAROLINA STATE COLLEGE

1. General.

North Carolina State College is located at Raleigh, North Caro- lina, the capital of the state. The University of North Carolina, at Chapel Hill, and Duke University at Durham, are 25 and 20 miles, respectively, from Raleigh. The fast growing new University Medi- cal School is at Chapel Hill, the famous Duke Medical School is at Durham, and the widely-known medical school of Wake Forest is at Winston-Salem. All these, as well as numerous other institu- tions in the nearby area, would be expected to participate in the benefits of the proposed reactor.

Broad technical curricula in three major divisions and several smaller divisions of North Carolina State College are offered the 5000 students. The major divisions are: School of Textiles, recognized as one of the leading textile schools in the nation; School of Agriculture, one of the largest and most pro- gressive in the south; and the School of Engineering, which in the last 4 years has experienced remarkable expansion and im- provement in personnel and curriculum. The departments of chemical, civil, electrical, ceramic, metallurgical and mechan- ical engineering, which will participate directly in the Nuclear Engineering and Reactor programs, are particularly strong.

The Physics Department, until recently, has had a staff of some 18 - 20, engaged primarily in service instruction of students in other fields on undergraduate levels, with little attention being given to advanced instruction and research. The department is now committed to a policy of expansion at advanced levels and to an emphasis on research, with the double objective of (1) provid- ing sound instructional support of advanced programs in other fields and (2) offering a curriculum leading to Ph.D. training in Engineering Physics and Nuclear Engineering. A number of men with advanced training will be added to the staff as rapidly as they can be procured.

The Chemistry Department, under a new department head, is in sound condition, with staff and curriculum adequate for train- ing of men to the Ph.D. level.

The Research Engineering Department of the School of Engi- neering is a rather unique and quite successful venture into the somewhat unstandardized field of relationship between a state's technical college and the industries of the state, The department devotes its attention solely to research and development projects,

most of which are directly involved in industrial or governmen- tal activities and operations. The department is supported partly by college subsidy and partly by the industries interested in the research projects. Very close coordination and liaison is main- tained between the work of the Research Department and the re- searches of the other departments. Exchange of personnel and joint usage of equipment is encouraged.

2. Coordination between departments.

One item worthy of particular mention is the usual extent of coordination and mutual assistance between individual depart- ments of the Engineering School, in furtherance of the over-all goals of instruction and research. Whether or not the proposed reactor is built, for example, a considerable portion of instruc- tion in the Nuclear Engineering program, which will be the pri- mary responsibility of the physics department, will be obtained by the student from courses in the chemical, electrical, metal- lurgical, and mechanical engineering departments. Much of the research program to be instituted by the Physics Department will have mutual interest for other departments and a number of projects will be joint undertakings with other departments.

The combined interest, and the availability of equipment and personnel from all departments concerned constitutes a tremen- dous asset to the proposed reactor program, and greatly enhances the prospects of success for the program. The reactor program, in turn, would be expected to increase the coordination and co- operation between the various departments.

3. Interests in radioactivity.

Numerous shipments of radioactive isotopes have been ob- tained by State College research teams from the Atomic Energy Commission. A number of experiments, principally in the School of Agriculture, are now underway. Many more experiments are under consideration, but are being hampered by the lack of trained personnel. There is a large and growing demand for training facilities in radioactive tracer technology. It is intend- ed that instruction in this field be initiated as soon as possible, whether the proposed reactor program is approved at once or not.

Approval of the reactor proposal would lend enhanced in- terest to this field, would permit the curriculum content and laboratory location to crystallize in accord with requirements which will exist when reactor operation begins, and would as- sure availability for research purposes in the laboratories of

the area a variety of materials and facilities not now available.

4. Buildings.

A major expansion in physical facilities at State College is in progress. Altogether, some 18 or 20 million dollars have been allocated for new buildings. A number of departments will have entirely new quarters, and others will have considerably enlarged space. A large new building intended to house Chemi- cal Engineering, Research Engineering, and a portion of the re- search and advanced laboratory activities of other departments will be completed about April, 1950. This will be followed by a new Mechanical Engineering building and addition of two floors onto the Civil Engineering building and a 4 story wing adjacent to the Electrical Engineering building, A new library is author- ized, as well as 4 to 6 new buildings for the School of Agricul- ture.

Plans for adequate equipment for the new buildings (e.g., electron microscope, x-ray machines, etc.) are included in the construction program.

5. Personnel.

A considerable list could be given of persons on the State College staff with excellent training and ability who would be available for assistance and participation in the reactor design, construction, operation and research.

Dr. Arthur C. Menius, Jr., theoretical physicist, has had extensive experience in electron microscopy, x- ray research, and (during the war at the Applied Phys- ics Laboratory of Johns Hopkins University) on proximity fuse research. He has made significant contributions to calculations and design study of the proposed reactor, and will play an important role in the use of the reactor.

Dr. Arthur Waltner, experimental physicist, has ex- cellent training and experience in nuclear physics and design of electronic apparatus. His assistance in in- strumentation for the reactor and his participation in the subsequent nuclear research program should be quite significant.

Dr. Nathan Hall, chemist, has now in process a number of experiments involving use of isotopes from Oak Ridge, He attended the training school in Radioactive Tracer Techniques of the Oak Ridge Institute for Nuclear

Studies, and participated in research problems involv- ing active materials at Beltsville, Maryland, and at other places. Dr. Hall will be expected to participate strongly in research projects involving the reactor.

Dr. Philip Pike, chemical engineer, has made significant contributions in research on various chemical engineer- ing problems at North Carolina State College. He is now (spring and summer, 1950) at Oak Ridge, Tennessee, be- ing indoctrinated in the practices and techniques relating to radioactive materials. Upon his return he will continue his researches on chemical engineering problems, with the use of active ingredients as tools in the investigation.

Dr. J. H. Jensen, plant pathologist, is widely recognized for his researches in plant pathology. He spent one and one half years as chief of the Biology Branch of the Atomic Energy Commission's Division of Biology and Medicine, and still continues as a consultant to this division. He is also serving as chairman of the subcommittee on Waste Disposal and Decontamination in the Bureau of Standards. In the fall of 1949 he returned to full time work as profes- sor and head of the plant pathology department of State College. He is extremely interested in the proposed re- actor and will make extensive use of its radiation in his researches.

Dr. A. G. Guy, metallurgist, had 3 years experience in research with the General Electric Company, on Pre- cipitation Hardening Studies and High Temperature Alloys, before joining the mechanical engineering department of North Carolina State College. He is now studying metallic diffusion, and plans to use radioactive atoms in this study. His use of the reactor is expected to be considerable.

Dr. E. M. Schoenborn, professor and head, chemical engineering department, is keenly interested in the re- search and educational possibilities of the reactor. He is an unusually productive research scientist, with a val- uable background of collaborating and consulting exper- ience with such industrial organizations as Pratt and Whitney, Synthetic Rubber, the Koppers Company, etc., on problems of fluid flow, distillation, heat transfer and production of plastics. Dr. Schoenborn is interested in continuing his researches, with the use of radiation and radioactive materials as tools in securing information which otherwise would not be accessible.

There are numerous other members of the college staff who would participate significantly in the research program involving the reactor. The above named constitute a fair sampling from various departments of State College. No attempt can be made here to list the various individuals at other institutions who would make effective use of the reactor in their research pro- jects. Leaders in several groups have expressed unusually keen interest in the success of the effort to obtain a reactor at State College. Among these are: Dr. Paul Shearin, professor and chairman of the Physics Department of the University of North Carolina; Dr. Walter M. Nielsen, professor and chairman of the Physics Department of Duke University; Dr. Arthur Roe, direc- tor of the radiochemical laboratory at the University of North Carolina, and Dr. Van Cleave, who is the leader in the radioac- tivity research program of the medical school of the University of North Carolina.

In the final analysis, however, it is recognized that responsi- bility for the reactor program and the safety and security of the personnel (and the fissionable material) must be entrusted to per- sons who have had training and experience in the actual operation and behavior of nuclear reactors. Final approval of the design and the safety of the reactor, of course, will be given by the Com- mission experts, who it is hoped, will also be available during subsequent operation for consultation and advice. But for oper- ation and day to day decisions, there should be at least a few key men who have had first-hand experience in reactor behavior.

The experienced persons who will be available to the re- actor program at North Carolina State College are:

Dr. Clifford K. Beck, formerly Director of Research for Carbide and Carbon Chemicals Corporation at the K-25 laboratories in Oak Ridge, and currently Head of the Physics Department of State College. Dr. Beck has had wide general contacts with the various reactors on the commission, and in addition has had specific experience in two fields directly related to the proposed reactor program: (1) for 3 years he was chairman of the Special Hazards Committee of the K-25 Plant, with primary re- sponsibility for safety of the plant from inadvertent ac- cumulations of fissionable material in reactive quantities. (2) For 3 years, Dr. Beck was the leader and personally responsible director of a uranium criticality research team which brought to a chain-reacting condition more individual assemblies of uranium than any other known group. Dr. Beck and his team spent 3 months at Los

Alamos in 1946 being trained in this work, and from that time to September 1949 was continuously engaged in studies of critical accumulations of uranium under a variety of conditions.

He is now an active consultant on criticality prob- lems to the K-25 plant at Oak Ridge and to the Atomic Energy Commission at Hanford, Washington, and is also a Responsible Reviewer for the Commission, involved in information declassification activities.

Dr. Raymond L. Murray, presently completing require- ments for the Ph.D. degree in the University of Tennessee program at Oak Ridge, will join the Physics staff at State College in the summer of 1950. He has had three years of direct experience in performing critical experiments on uranium compounds, in theoretical calculations, and in responsibility for the Special Hazards program at the Electromagnetic Separation plant at Oak Ridge. His total experience of 6 years at Oak Ridge includes a large amount of theoretical and experimental research on ionization and behavior of ions, mass-spectrographs, and cyclotron de- sign.

At least one additional man with considerable experience in criticality work, of at least Master's degree training, will be em- ployed by State College to assist in the operation of the reactor.

Additional men in the vicinity of Raleigh possessing valuable background experience in theoretical and experimental association with reactor problems, who have expressed a willingness to render assistance with the reactor as needed are, Dr. Eugene T. Greuling, theoretical physicist, with experience at Los Alamos and Oak Ridge; Dr. L. Nordheim, wartime director of the theoretical physics di- vision at Oak Ridge, and Dr. Henry Newson, experimental physicist, who engaged in critical experiments at Oak Ridge and Los Alamos. These three are from Duke.

Tentative thought has been given to the possibility of organiz- ing a Steering Committee of experienced reactor men in the vicinity or Raleigh, for the purpose of periodic scrutiny and guidance of the operation of the reactor and research program.

MAJOR CONSIDERATIONS

1. Physical Security of Fissionable Material.

By using a totally closed fuel system, with all-welded stain- less steel construction, and totally enclosing the system inside of reinforced concrete, with the only access to the system being a massive vault door covered with a large plug of concrete, it is hoped that a large portion of the security requirements of the Commission can be met. Necessary alteration or supplementa- tion of the watchman policy of the college, if needed can be worked out in consultation with A. E. C. representatives.

2. Safety of Personnel

Research in the physics department of almost any modern university involves use of high voltage, x-rays, highly com- pressed gases, cyclotrons, etc. Hazards and potential hazards are encountered in every increasing numbers. To these, which have become somewhat familiar, one must now add the simul- taneously glamorous but sinister hazard of radioactivity and re- actor radiations. These hazards, however, like all others, can be avoided by adequate safety training, insistence on approved technique, and where possible, built-in, fool-proof automatic safety features in the equipment itself.

Unusual attention will be given to safety features in the re- actor design. Large margins of safety will be incorporated in the design, to the extent that even possible accidents involving uncontrolled increases in radiation, will not result in serious exposure of personnel. In addition thereto, incorporating safety consciousness in the basic techniques will be stressed as part of the general training of all participants in nuclear engineering.

3. Classified Information.

It is intended that the operation and uses of the reactor be kept entirely in the field of unclassified research. Part of the design of the machine, certain features of its operation, and in- advertent information encountered in its use, however, may fall into classified categories. It is proposed, therefore, that the staff directly concerned with the design and operation of the machine,. and such others as later appears desirable, be cleared by the Atomic Energy Commission for access to clas- sified information. Training will be given these men as to the boundaries of classified information, and those areas of know- ledge which must be safeguarded. Should restricted information of interest be encountered in reactor operation or use, such in- formation will be processed through regular Atomic Energy

Commission channels.

Dr. Beck has been for several years a Responsible Re- viewer for the Commission, with responsibility for rendering decisions according to Commission policy on information which may be released to the public, and he will continue to serve in this capacity under consultant contract. Up-to-date information, therefore, will be available at all time on Com- mission policy on unclassified areas of research.

4. Safe Operation.

The Atomic Energy Commission and, of course, the ad- ministration of State College will have vital concern that the reactor should never exceed safe operating limits at any time. On the project, numerous reactors have operated in safety for several years. Two factors are essential: (1) sound design of the equipment and (2) operation by dependable, experienced, personnel. Before final approval of the reactor design or initial operation, both the A. E. C. and State College should be satisfied that both these requirements are adequately met.

5. Finances.

If approval is given by the Atomic Energy Commission for the reactor to be constructed, it is believed that State College will be able to supply the necessary financial support. It is requested, however, that provision be made in the contract for such instrumentation relating to the reactor as may be available in Atomic Energy Commission surplus stocks, to be made available to State College. The Commission may wish to contribute a share of the cost of such projects as may be specifically performed for the benefit of the Commission. It is suggested that the Commission underwrite the cost of any guard system considered necessary for the physical security of the fissionable material, beyond that normally provided by the College watchman system and the built-in safeguards of the assembly.

TIME SCHEDULE; COST

If the overall idea, that a low-power nuclear reactor along the lines described above can be built and operated on a university campus as a tool for instruction and research in Nuclear Engineering, is compatible with the policy of the Atomic Energy Commission, and if approval is given the proposal to design and build such a reactor at North Carolina State College, a rough time schedule of operations and an approximate estimation of costs can be conjectured. The minimum time requirements are listed below. Somewhat longer time schedules may actually be realized.

April 1950 - Submission of initial proposal to the Commission, followed by conferences, discussions, etc.

May 1950 - Approval by the Commission; establishment of lines of contact between the A. E. C. and N. C. State College; initiation of F.B.I. clearance of staff.

June - August 1950 - Theoretical calculations, crystallization of re- actor design, auxiliary systems, preparation of blueprints. Close contact and coordination with A. E. C. groups, Construction or alteration of buildings.

September 1950 - Construction and assembly of the reactor; to January 1951 "dry" runs.

January 1951 - Delivery of Fissionable material from A. E. C.

February 1, 1951 - Initial operation of the Reactor.

The cost involved in constructing and equipping the reactor are difficult to estimate. The numbers quoted below are believed to be of the correct order of magnitude,

1. Alteration of building, installation of overhead crane, excavation for reactor foundation, partitions, etc.$30,000 2. Reactor construction; 700 cu. yds. concrete @ $30., including foundation, forms for holes and channels 30,000 3. Vault door and motor-driven carriages for concrete plugs15,000 4. Fuel solution system, control rods, fitting the re- flector, thermal column (4 cu. yds. graphite), etc.20,000 5. Instrumentation, control panel. detectors, ampli- fiers recorders, thermocouples, gauges, solution level indicators, (some of this may be available as surplus from A. E. C. Labs)30,000 6. Contingencies; travel, consultant fees, supervision25,000 $150,000

(Auxiliary counting rooms, tracer laboratories, sample preparation and purification facilities, etc., are not included).