I am trying to understand this, so the nose of little boy acted as a neutron reflector as well?
-
-
A slightly later 1944 doc indicates the different levels of Co they experimented with for the gun program (3, 6, 9%). From what I can tell, John thinks it was 6% based on an experimental report, not I think, bc something said the final version was 6%. https://www.osti.gov/opennet/servlets/purl/16135456.pdf …pic.twitter.com/wLR0cdBXVy
-
Unrelated, but interesting: in a report on "tests we should do to make sure LB is safe-ish," one of the fears is that it could go critical from having lots of (water-filled) people near it. How to test the limit? Gather lots of people, see what happens! https://www.osti.gov/opennet/servlets/purl/938436.pdf …pic.twitter.com/AADzL5JM6P
-
I love the next line about “well, water immersion will give an upper limit also” -
I mean it's not like water immersion of fissile material can cause problems...pic.twitter.com/UfoQeooTOY
-
Isn't that the basis of the early "water boiler" experiments
-
The water boiler was an actual reactor design (if a simple one). This was just them putting HEU in water to make measurements — much less thought seems to have gone into the criticality dangers.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
With 6% being the best to manufacturer and safe to not have a criticality problem, I would lean to that number as well
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Thank you for tracking down and sharing! This is awesome!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.