English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Since the closed nuclear fuel cycle suggests that plutonium is extracted from irradiated fuel and is recycled in nuclear reactors as part of the loaded fuel, proliferation resistance of fissile materials (plutonium) is becoming a problem of a practical significance. It is important to understand to what extent the physical and technical properties of fissile materials are capable to prevent these from being diverted to nonenergy uses. This paper considers the term ”proliferation resistance” from a physical and technical point of view with no measures taken for the physical protection, accounting and control of nuclear materials. Thus, proliferation resistance of plutonium means that it is technically impossible to fabricate a nuclear explosive device (NED) of the implosion type due to the overheating of the device’s components and the resultant NED failure.The following conclusions have been made.The assessment of the plutonium proliferation resistance is not justified where it relies on the analysis of an implosion-type NED excluding the use of modern heat-resistant and heat-conducting chemical explosives (CE) which are inaccessible.    Consideration of the asymptotic temperature profile in the NED components is not justified enough for the development of plutonium proliferation resistance recommendations.    No options enabling the slowdown of the NED warm-up process have been exhausted for analyzing the physical and technical factors that determine the proliferation resistance of plutonium.General conclusion. The underlying rationale in a fundamental monograph by Dr. G. Kessler proved to be insufficiently valid, which has led to an unfounded inference as to the status of the plutonium proliferation resistance. The development of the procedures used and other factors taken into account are expected to increase the requirements to the content of the  238 Pu isotope in plutonium for ensuring its proliferation resistance.

Computational model and physical and technical factors determining the plutonium proliferation resistance