Nuclear Reactor Physics Book by Weston M. Stacey

  • Thread starter Thread starter saifadin
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
"Nuclear Reactor Physics" by Weston M. Stacey is considered a reasonably good resource, though it may pose challenges for self-study due to its density and variable symbol usage. Readers should be cautious as symbols can change meaning throughout the text, complicating understanding. For those seeking a more comprehensive explanation, this book may not meet their needs. "Duderstadt & Hamilton" is often regarded as a key reference, but it is difficult to find and expensive. Overall, while Stacey's book has value, it may not be the best choice for all learners.
saifadin
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
Is "Nuclear reactor physics" a good book? written by Weston M. Stacey
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
saifadin said:
Is "Nuclear reactor physics" a good book? written by Weston M. Stacey
It's a reasonably good book. Another is Lamarsh. Either book may be difficult for self-study depending on one's background and mathematical capability.
 
It's decent, but watch out for changing symbols. A symbol that means one thing on one page will probably mean something completely different in the next chapter... even within the same chapter, one quantity could be given a couple of different symbols... it's also pretty info dense. If you want a lot of text explanation, this is the wrong book for you.

Duderstadt & Hamilton seems to be the bible around here, as long as you can find it... it's out of print and horribly expensive.
 
i study lamrash and stacey books but the problem is to know if your ansewr is right or not because there is no final ansewrs in these books so if anyone have or know where i can find a manual for the books pleasezzzzzzzzzzzzzz
 

Thread 'Energy Spectrum Attenuation'

Hello, I'm currently trying to compare theoretical results with an MCNP simulation. I'm using two discrete sets of data, intensity (probability) and linear attenuation coefficient, both functions of energy, to produce an attenuated energy spectrum after x-rays have passed through a thin layer of lead. I've been running through the calculations and I'm getting a higher average attenuated energy (~74 keV) than initial average energy (~33 keV). My guess is I'm doing something wrong somewhere...
View full post »

Similar threads

12 yr old Makes a Nuclear Fusion Reactor
Replies
5
Views
1K
Cylindrical and Symmetrical Nuclear Fusion Reactor
Replies
19
Views
3K
New Salt Cooled Nuclear Reactor Approved by NRC
Replies
30
Views
4K
How to Calculate Total Thermal Power in Nuclear Reactors?
Replies
6
Views
1K
Hybrid/variable spectrum reactor
Replies
4
Views
2K
Computation for nuclear reactor systems
Replies
1
Views
3K
Nuclear reactor physics by Weston Stacey
Replies
9
Views
8K
Nuclear Power Gets a Big Boost in the US
Replies
5
Views
2K
Can Small Modular Reactors Revitalize Nuclear-Powered Surface Combatants?
Replies
45
Views
6K
Size Limitation of fuel Bundle in a nuclear reactor
Replies
7
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top