Muutke küpsiste eelistusi

E-raamat: Peer Review and Design Competition in the NNSA National Security Laboratories

  • Formaat: 84 pages
  • Ilmumisaeg: 07-Dec-2015
  • Kirjastus: National Academies Press
  • Keel: eng
  • ISBN-13: 9780309378444
  • Formaat - PDF+DRM
  • Hind: 4,08 €*
  • * hind on lõplik, st. muud allahindlused enam ei rakendu
  • Lisa ostukorvi
  • Lisa soovinimekirja
  • See e-raamat on mõeldud ainult isiklikuks kasutamiseks. E-raamatuid ei saa tagastada.
  • Formaat: 84 pages
  • Ilmumisaeg: 07-Dec-2015
  • Kirjastus: National Academies Press
  • Keel: eng
  • ISBN-13: 9780309378444

DRM piirangud

  • Kopeerimine (copy/paste):

    ei ole lubatud

  • Printimine:

    ei ole lubatud

  • Kasutamine:

    Digitaalõiguste kaitse (DRM)
    Kirjastus on väljastanud selle e-raamatu krüpteeritud kujul, mis tähendab, et selle lugemiseks peate installeerima spetsiaalse tarkvara. Samuti peate looma endale  Adobe ID Rohkem infot siin. E-raamatut saab lugeda 1 kasutaja ning alla laadida kuni 6'de seadmesse (kõik autoriseeritud sama Adobe ID-ga).

    Vajalik tarkvara
    Mobiilsetes seadmetes (telefon või tahvelarvuti) lugemiseks peate installeerima selle tasuta rakenduse: PocketBook Reader (iOS / Android)

    PC või Mac seadmes lugemiseks peate installima Adobe Digital Editionsi (Seeon tasuta rakendus spetsiaalselt e-raamatute lugemiseks. Seda ei tohi segamini ajada Adober Reader'iga, mis tõenäoliselt on juba teie arvutisse installeeritud )

    Seda e-raamatut ei saa lugeda Amazon Kindle's. 

The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) is responsible for providing and maintaining the capabilities necessary to sustain a safe, secure, and reliable nuclear weapons stockpile for the nation and its allies. Major responsibility for meeting the NNSA missions falls to the three NNSA laboratories: Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), and Sandia National Laboratories (SNL). The NNSA National Security Laboratories contribute to that goal by maintaining the skills and capabilities necessary for stewardship of a reliable nuclear stockpile and also by maintaining a high level of technical credibility, which is a component of the nuclear deterrent.



Since 1992 it has been U.S. policy not to conduct explosion tests of nuclear weapons. The resulting technical challenges have been substantial. Whereas a nuclear test was in some sense the ultimate "peer review" of the performance of a particular NEP design, the cessation of nuclear testing necessitated a much greater reliance on both intralab and interlab expert peer review to identify potential problems with weapon designs and define the solution space. This report assesses the quality and effectiveness of peer review of designs, development plans, engineering and scientific activities, and priorities related to both nuclear and non-nuclear aspects of nuclear weapons, as well as incentives for effective peer review. It also explores how the evolving mission of the NNSA laboratories might impact peer review processes at the laboratories that relate to nuclear weapons.

Table of Contents



Front Matter Summary 1 Introduction and Charge 2 The Past: Before the 1992 Nuclear Explosion Testing Moratorium 3 The Present: From 1992 Until Today 4 The Future: Responding to Evolving Challenges Appendixes Appendix A: Biographical Sketches of Committee Members Appendix B: Information-Gathering Meetings of the Committee Appendix C: Authorizing Language for the Study Appendix D: Acronyms
Summary 1(6)
1 Introduction And Charge
7(10)
Committee Charge
8(1)
Historical Context
8(2)
Peer Review
10(3)
Examples of Peer Review
11(1)
Metrics
12(1)
Design Competition
13(1)
Conduct of the Study
14(1)
Outline of the Report
15(2)
2 The Past: Before The 1992 Nuclear Explosion Testing Moratorium
17(7)
Testing, Peer Review, and Design Competition in the NNSA National Security Laboratories
19(3)
Testing/Experimentation
19(1)
Peer Review
20(1)
Design Competition
21(1)
Observations
22(2)
3 The Present: From 1992 Until Today
24(15)
Testing/Experimentation
24(2)
Sandia National Laboratories
25(1)
Peer Review
26(10)
Los Alamos National Laboratory and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
27(1)
Sandia National Laboratories
28(1)
Tri-Laboratory, Formalized, or Mandated Peer Reviews of Nuclear Warhead Systems
29(4)
Other Types of Review
33(1)
Examples of Value Provided by Peer Review of Nuclear Warhead Work
34(2)
Design Competition
36(2)
Los Alamos National Laboratory and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
36(1)
Sandia National Laboratories
37(1)
Concluding Comments
38(1)
4 The Future: Responding To Evolving Challenges
39(16)
Conclusions and Recommendations
41(11)
Summary Comments
52(3)
APPENDIXES
A Biographical Sketches of Committee Members
55(6)
B Information-Gathering Meetings of the Committee
61(8)
C Authorizing Language for the Study
69(2)
D Acronyms
71