11 • im iII



(Title: Edited Unclassified) by W. J. Frank Mar-ch 1967

- ~x7-;(?~cr

._. _=0 IS f-Ry Btff:feN:::t4/rH1LD:~


""," s» ....








" -.,' "-:?[ . ..:,..,~


. ':,





. '

.. ~.. :

... ,,'"





.... ,Y'

.... ~ ~ .... ,...

_._ .........








This This

documen~ontains~ages. is copy_{J_of~Series~.

La-vrrre:n.c e






(Title: Edited Unclassified) by W. J. Frank March 1967


U€9 WliH P@lf f'h!'H

CA 1 EWR f ~I(jM* 1




xcluded from Automatic ing and Declassification .

.....~,. 1....

.. • " .:. "'.---...c_ .. ._. .... .".-. =' -...

CONTENTS Page Preface . R. Dobson and 30 Bibliography.W.. J. III. S.. _... _ _ .R. ".. . Wilkins H: Neutronics Technology . N.F. A. Appendix Appendix Appendix Appendix Appendix Appendix .. II. Selden High Explosive. S.. IV.W. VII.D. C. 1 v No. Remillard K: Weapon 54 • " . Germain Project 25 27 29 Chronology Aspects Weapon Design . Pipkorn.C. Selden 1.M. . Technology and Fabrication . J. -. The Nth' Country Basic Early and R.D... Costs . Detonator Technology and X-Unit Technology 40 Design . Grayson. W. . .R. ~.. Fission Concepts Design Design Program Weapon Rules ~ketches of the Experiment of the Experiment .. James . A. A. L.W. VI.- ... L. Henry 50 52 53 . W. Dobson. Critique Appendix A. '9 .. C. Hydrodynamics Yield Calculations Initiators Weapon Materials Facility E.. Gr-ay son 44 47 49 .. ~ ". .. Frank. D. V.. James.Appendix Appendix Appendix Appendix Appendix 4 9 9 Bomb Physics The Final Test The Continuing Conclusions of the _!::!"th Country A: B: C: D: E: F: G: I: J: L: The Operating Biographical A Brief Security A Selected Hudgins for the N~h Country 13 13 15 20 R. Eby and L._.

• 'I . ..-~ ...... - .. .. ....

J. an LRL Army Research (D.'. and the LRL support committee is published in UCRL-50248. to unfamiliar with nuclear weapons and with access only could produce a credible weapon design.. ~ .probweapon. computer wasto since the physicists who agreed to work were post-graduate They were subsequently Selden. 1966. and a series (Appendices F thru L). There was only one contact.. The second problem concerns the effort . \"1. be one year. Pipkorn) on a one-year appointment.. FRANK This report summarizes by two LRL physicists. R.:-. A. .. to provide good security control and Some security personnel familiar with weapon design. . receive such unclassified duration of the Experiment half-time on the Experiment students at the Laboratory appointed for a second year. as experienced by the de s igner s themselves.ay 'pi-'oblems-and progress . They were to The and technical support as might be required.35~· . of short articles It contains a descrip- tion of the (inal design (omitting the physics justification).>£ to design it nuclear r' . backgrounds and a brief chronology of the Experiment are given in Appendices Band C. problems face a nation wishing to acquire a small stockpile 14. A. -. D. unclassified literature the LRL Nth Country Experiment. Dobson and D. PREFACE W. Appendix D. has been published separately The first concerns the manufacture of the source material . the Nth Country designers Two major technical of nuclear weapons.ifJ ------_- ----------. All technical by W. Associate.. b)CI) f see if a few capable physicists. N. • avoid contact with Laboratory aspects of the Experiment.. ably with a plutonium production reactor. are described in questions were handled via written documents coordinated of the design were kept in The day-t6::~. and in March 1965.. required completed by the three Nth Country physicists on December (UCRL-50239). J. The designers' joined the design team. Frank.----LRL started its Nth·Country Experiment in May 1964. .-~ .. to the unclassified technology. a critique of its performance history between on the technology available in the The full physics descriptiorfand The correspondence of the Nth Country design. Hudgins. J.

had technical support. be issued later the deA report will about' their cur- I would summarize the conclusions of the Exoeriment in two statements: .--.. equally talented but differently oriented technical vital feedback process group of interested.~~.~~. rent design.-_. Experiment was formally--.::~~"'E.. .~~---~.---. classified are given in Appendix A.tf-.--". they thus lacked the of explaining and defending their work in the contex t of a larger staff members.-. . :'~ > '1 ~ "'... 1967.-.i~'~~t is now underway: signers were given the 'results of the test and asked several questions its possible extensions. Ash~.-.. they were not allowed to interact ideas with these people (except through written documents). Cb io: Appendix T considers 'the costs of building and running a small weapon laboratory I and production reactor. f 1. describing these postshot activities. These data._.~~ .n~~-.~' . (b)Cj) • '! .!'-------. three their comments can be made about the manner in which the Experiment It proceeded on a relatively low-key basis (in all.~-----. facility.:... only three - notebooks by the physicists.- . and alternative design approaches. .. Several conducted. . The ended on April 10..:::DaC. plus a typical estimate for a plutonium production give a third conclusion: .._yot. .--..----.-. The operating rules for the ~th Country Project was of man-years While the or di scus s effort were spent over the two-and-a-half designers year period of the Experiment). .

:@--. in the Experiment and not from our current results when a supercritical mass of fissile is assembled place. D. a fissi~ '.5~d.6 g/cc)a 48.5 phase 6 phase Pu239 (density Pu239 (density 1 wt acontaining 'Ie gallium . PIPKORN AND R. were significant We present explosion preliminary design considerations.~#_.5 9. A.~th~-~h.0 14. (j233 0' U 238 (6. before to take place can be estimated.8 g/ce) 15. is the mean time a neutron s~nds in a supercritical producing '. mass numbers and held together are readily long enough for the chain reaction from the literature Critical Dimensions (Paxton.~"'.-:-'-'. i C on alnlng Fissile material Bare sphere Critical mass (kg) Sphere surrounded by 4-cm-thick U reflector 26.. DOBSQN.0 8.-~~~'~ti'O~ multiplication fissile assembly time. W. 1966) (December 1..3.an d U233 . SELDEN 14. .::DoF" ~b)(_.0 U235 (93. The neutron • 0'-1.4• THE NTH COUNTRY FISSION WEAPON DESIGN D. fission the basic concepts knowledge.5Vc) 19.@ . '.:. BASIC CONCEPTS The basic our first about nuclear 1.5 6.5 15.-- . . Critical concept design of how a bomb works..2 8.i. N.. A nuclear material to take 2. 4~ rheTrmel'O-. · ta i l·235 . of Systems available Los Alamos Critical-Mass Data and Paxton. P U 239 . as we understood them and early complete stages in the evolution of our understanding explosives.

. .J The uranium example describe~ ! nere "shot" are two genera! together.. is the so-called sur roundtne t... For an..:: ' • --"C .. ~: :---".'f:. --~--- yoG"' I .'.. 0': L .-=-.. b)(~) ! It appears that the implosion method can be made to give faster assem- • '! bly times than the gun method ... tecnruque s lor assembling a supercritical above is both a neutron tamper reflector and an inertial material.' ~)l3) 5 . : -. "...' .... ---_.. .... assembly..-------:--~~~~-------:-:-:. -1JC"\ r: _yvc.. suppose that ........~ .. _e... . ----. made supercritical ~he t rs s ile hemispheres time they meet 0 become critical and-the------ .hf> fissile crtr e a s thf>v are in the This ooou la r lv mass masses mass is are " described in the literature: the gun method where subcritical method where a subcritical and the implosion by compression.:--------=.. .. implosion .....r "'I.. ..'- 0o . ~~ 0...

of the assembly times calculated in subsection to be neutron If (6) above is that they are more than 10 times the total fission chain reaction This means that it is essential for the fissile material material is neutron free.: SJY:QJjKiE::~ ====:::71'" 7.~~::-.:. .:~" .." ~:. then it is necessary free during the assembly or the reaction will take place prematurely..~. the fissile trons to initiate the chain reaction at the desired time. The most important feature time.::. .. the so-called initiator to "turn on" neuThis is the role of • -< @1WERU ~.:.. .-:-:.

u.~ '71.... .. --~ •..h shorter chain reaction time. U 235 because of the 239 and Pu cost about to manufacture. .. ..~ .·...~1. times The i m plo s ion method ogy I appeared more potential difficult greater because yields.. Considerations appeared easier to accomplish because it involved familiar tech240 . both of which lead to a 235 . plutonium with this The long assembly method. ~ ." C-I'-' .Pu 23 has the advantage of a lower critical mass and a Physics low density _9 with a greater compressibility. -. Department " that on 1 one or t he ot Ire r cou ld be produced. . EARLY DESIGN A. but we were informed by the "Nth Country Treasury 9 . Early sile material more which develop ations PRELIMINARY DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS· about a fisconsiderfeatures v in the Experiment and a method influenced it was decided This that a choice had to be made of the time and effort section outlines and describes was made...-: .~ . 239 and the Pu irnpur-Ity In Pu rule out the use of phase jV1ethod of Assembly The gun method nology. of assembly because it would take to those than one type of explosive. -. sophisticated..< .-' . our decision recognized the important as to how to proceed.1. at the time of the cxplos ive which were Fissile l\laterial the decision Considerations Considerations (thorium breeder -U 233 was eliminated ECOllomic and Political prohibitive the same cost of pro·duction reactor)." II.\ J NA =: .. 7.L·.yThe produchon of Pu 23 235 has a long range economic advantage ove~ U because it requires the development of reactor technology. • 11'. of its unfamiliar and more technoleffiof the but it seemed method to have a greater seemed for future development c iuncy hcca u sc the 19-15 impl os ion bombs to be a more gave The development I implosion pr-obl e m . U has t e advantage of a low neutron background... ( ' J .. challenging and hence appealing • §E~R!¥J. 240 239 while the Pu impurity produced in the Pu has a relatively high spontaneous fission rate. Considerations (0 phase) .

.-~ Preliminary Decisions It was decided to design a spheri- cally symmetric a spherically sive. of this drawing are: Figure 1 shows our concept of this exploThe features - -" r..) design in a variety of contexts. . \.------.. plutonium implosion by explosive which would be compressed converging detonation wave.t:)£ y::p)) -' . '...-..." I- \ • . literature . B. A number of articles THE INFLUENCE OF LITERATURE and books give some aspects of the basic concepts of bomb We refer to these publications as the "eeneral bomb Jot fb)i' v....

.• ' ~ v •. . THE EARLY DESIGN This nium section ·is an historically accurate description of our first complete 1965..•• . .C"Irp n::. The core _' was.. _... ~. _. . - . pluto- implosion Lenses design. oLa • '! .. . . . which had evolved by December Explosive Detonators Tamper The tamper was.:»:« Lb)(_?) The following neutronics calto establish thp (...-..mpfprc:' culations 1... .... ... -.r::. . were performed The c ritical mas~... . . C.......

converging calculations wave lenses.Phase I represents design considerations by Davidon. - ---_. our understanding of the basic concepts and the was achieved liThe Nth Country Problem ").. on the Final Design and Test were a result of our Phase III level of understanding. Hohenem se r . The Early Design described and explosive thickness were in Section C represents Phase III .-J . .s:-'-""C=- --- Initiator __!he i!l~tiator was designed to produc4 -.. level of understanding... Three Phases of the Experiment ASSESSMENT The evolution of our knowledge of nuclear explosives during the Experiment seems to fall naturally of the Experiment principal into three principal levels of understanding. and Kalkstein. each representing Thus the course the attainment of a is divided into three phases.-_. Phase II. Phase I .. For the tamper and core Bo(.d~<!y"b~ve:1 . This level of understanding (Dav idon .Phase III was the extension of Phase II which involved doing meaningful implosion and iterative and the Continuing Progra~ fission expansion calculations The sections on plutonium-implosion designs derived from the Early Design.=$EI.' described in Section A.Phase II was the extension of the basic concepts to a more quantitative form by making neutronics and engineering chosen. . . Quantitative values for core mass and hole size...R@fJf . compression numbe r s .::' 12.. D. The phases are not completely distinct in time. Phase II . and an initiator.-_- .. involving rudimentary detonators.....---. tamper thickness. et al..

:: -" " Assessment of Early. ::. ...' .. ' I..lJli. it might not have been exactly the Early Design. final design. .~ ..r.)(wn !JjJ. 3) I '.! _~..'..Design It is useful at this point to evaluate title t:arly De.'~'i:'~~nt that the knowledge.~'i6nin l'n~ YII~'rn 01 V'. .!'J ~~ ..s.:. It should be pointed out that if a Phase H 4G~1~n ti..<ti( :: .~ 2...i.• .cs- . • i:s~§~ . Phase III provides the understanding necessary to make this assessment.e. of our Phase II understanding. . .et. We be it eve Early Design is representative There were no sound ~E11 ~ reasons for changing any of the pararn. .• ' • ' '-.U2Q ...:..d .

BOMB PHYSICS This section of UCRL-50239 has been omitted.ti . ":". ll:ftf{ .III..lIcl"~CO @ !!iJE6M~:: :~ = i . . the expansion of the core as fission pr oce eds .. . The Final Design is a spherical DESIGN implosion design with a~ These were rricor-por-ateo in tru s report on Marcn I.. sion process. ... -~--.. but before the Experiment had formally ended and this report published. ..al Design describes a A. the neutronics J _" It discusses in detail the implo- before and after initiation. ('. IV.in.alter ine r-eport' had been written and the Final Design submitted. .F. THE FINAL DESIGN Th~. .$ ..

sketch of the Com p Jj interface then obeys the equation. 1.. .J the lens design... ~ ~e: The Cornp B.. ' .... 0\ The detonator simultaneity requirement specified so that the total timing error that can bef " up to the top of the lens where the shell is modified to accept the de~onator.. r'~:ta::PIOI' _. I.. 2.... obeys the equation. The impor-tant specifications tions are discussed below...' ))1 . 'J " I : • '::IC-- .~... and the basis for the choice of the specifica(The design drawings are contained in UCRL-50239. and lenses are those described i~ the Early There are two minor changes in -'. .. A cross-section Final Design.. -~ The bararor-- 'p)(~)2.~.) Detonators and Lenses The detonators essentially Design. . The test of the Early Design lens showed that the shock wavei Fig. and explosive tolerances have been ::1)0 ( (b)(3 • . .

.. - Core The core isl The assembled device is calculated to be This value is to be checked by measurement..... (1)(~) '- Tamper --. - •.... ..--_.... yO'.-- __ •• _ ••• . " ...._A •• _" _""'J: "........'.._ . _ _ . -...'-.J ...

.£_Y!lium initiator is .Initiator The polonium-bc...\ ! i :..J 3\ ~ .e1 i . .. • .

the diagnostics measurements and during a test of the Final VI. • idea. TEST This to be made section before of the report (UCRL-50239) describes Design. idea has been developed and in our judgment of the investigation. about Establishment feasible are: which could serve program would be influenced Four general Light. These Ideas ideas for of for both have been a continuous generated.~!~~r We have attempted General J yield ca1cul_~tion to. 2. lear High y ie ld fission Thermonuc Peaceful of the designers investigations development weapons. of the Experiment was not to establish . _the design to assess the difficulty research and importance in terms each develhydro- explosive. tives 1. 4.?)(_~ . applications low yield tactical weapons. in the NthCountry's compact. opment (The importance program. such r-ese a r-ch is . areas such as explosives. both in the extent about the importance to which a particular and difficulty . explosives. Although dynamics.?~~~~l.: . . 3. applications.~~_.) metallurgy in most cases nondirected and nuclear ~. of ideas is discussed in this section ranging from deta il ed proof a thermonuclear of pursuing • -i:« . '" . ." ~. ~~ ~~iJ. (perhaps influence a long range Nth Country Design) development a prowhich would of this future developas objec- and we have not attempted the nature to do this. . part work process. program strongly gram ments. part and new ideas work are constantly explosives An important for future of our understanding is involved in our ideas investigation.. The purpose program.V. has to be decided physics of a long range int<. A wid e range posals f~r ~~r. is not included. THE CONTINUING PROGRAM The development future affect future nuclear investigation and are affected of a nuclear by whatever explosive current is an evolutionary of the Exper-iment is being done. A real would establish they would only build five copies of the investigations of future explosive by judgments nuclear of our.Final pursued.

-< .. ~ _.... an essential part of a comprehensive of new advances research as they become available programs... and the design of thermonuclear explosives.:. e:~ .. ....-. ..3. _.. . . .' . J . '. .\... 1 use results of maintaining fr'. lDf included po~sible improvements ._-7 = .0.-.' '".:» (The remainder of this section of UCRL-50239 has been omitted ~rom this report.)HI ._.:. ..... an Nth Country could be content to to bear nearly all the expense :P0L.. long range program and allow others for a country desiring to be at the forefront as they are made. • . fission weapon designs.~ . '_ r ."''' : .~ !ifi§§§§fi~¥:l?~!~. :.1 -.

Selden . was to design a credible nuclear explosive. FACTORS AFFECTING THE PROGRESS OF THE EXPERIMENT The course of the Experiment f~lls naturally into two time periods: The Early Period was the first year and a half (May 1964-December 1965). has been spent on the Experiment. This section contains a dis- and some comments on the results which we believe are an essential part of the Experiment and should be considered in extending It is inevitable that the Experiment Alamos. Such an assessment is outside the scope of our part of the Experiment. . to a large quantity of literature nuclear physics and reactor A. Selden full time for last half year.full time. technology which has been published since 1945. The goal of the Experiment experimenters (see Appendix A). We are not in a position to make any valid comparison of the technical develThe people at Los Alamos had advantages of manpower and experience We had the advantages of knowing that a bomb on shock waves. the Final drafts of the Nth Country Report written (including the time and the state of development at which the Experiment would end was left up to the It was assumed by the experimenters would be the end of the Experiment rather than a step in the development.. but the that a test Phase III was completed. The Late Period was the last year (I966). Dobson 1/2. time. divided as follows: • " A total of three 'man-years l. will be compared with the early years at Los explosives capability.. could be built and of having access explosives. Design established. opments. and several one submitted in UCRL-50239) during this period. an Nth Country to develop a nuclear clearly cussion of some nontechnical aspects the results to an Nth Country. Pipkorn 1/2 time. CONCLUSIONS We hope that the Rth Country Experiment is useful in assessing -the difficulty for. Phases I and II were completed during this period. . (including the presence of some of the world's outstanding physicists) and the motivational climate in which they worked.VII. " Early Period: Late Period: Dobson 1/4 time. 2.

The informal when the committee resulting also, st ructu re and par-t time nature of the experiment wanted to see the notebooks.) of


in a lack

of cont inu ity during the Early Period. in some duplication

(The periods of maximum effort were put in We tended to work individually, In the Late Period continuity was provided;

we worked together. Since the Experiment was carried progress out inside a nuclear explosive design laborainformation including Aside from anyone involved in the Experiment.


it was necessary

to insure that we received no classified within the Experiment,

any hints about our technical from documents classified generated information.

we have never been exposed to any

(See Appendix D. ) requirements, all our communications were essential out experiments with the committee simuand some computais inevitably them.

In line with security have been in writing.

Such communications

since the committee

lated the support groups who would have carried tions in the Nth Country. information incomplete Written communication

provides a complete record of Expression results. A great deal of time is conresult from the fact that

exchange but has some serious disadvantages. and some degree of misunderstanding of communication groups" are actually

sumed deciding on the wording of requests Other aspects our "support 1. reluctant 2.

and answers and trying to interpret senior staff members. This resulted

peculiar to this experiment Laboratory

In the Early Period we were overly conscious of our lack of knowledge and were to appear more foolish than necessary. and the omission of others. requests which prein postponement of some requests

In the Late Period we spent a good deal of time preparing sented enough information so that a suitable reply could be obtained. The transition from Phase II to Phase II! of the Experiment

about our understanding of what was being requested

occurred during the was essen-

fall of .196~. At that time we felt that the completion of certain calculations tial,

but we did not know that this would lead us to a completely new level of under~o decision was made to embark on a new or different course of action, and a ~inal design based on our understanding at that The r e were several period: had to work since the challenge was to design a

standing ... (Recall that the phases were identified much later during the writif!g of this report.) time. none of us ever proposed submitting factors transition

influencing the course of the Experiment during the

• We felt thal the design submitted c r ed ibl e explosive.'

[rnploaion • Our confidence in our ability to understand

• We believed to attain There that we could make a final design. understanding factors satisfactory calculations in "a month or two" to take a Phase II design. be able to submit If we had known how long it would really we would have submitted the duration

our current several


which affected concerned

of the Late Period. to a close, in oroRr our-

We felt increasingly but we continued to greatly to our try selves satisfaction sooner, -.. throughout ~nd

about drawing the time

the Experiment was that.

underestimate the Late


to finish the Experiment



One consequence considerably more

to finish

we did not request: ended up spending time satisfying


tnat our e strmate s were adequate.


I J _bJ_~ I\


Preparing explosives Late arrive report Period. writing this comprehensive cannot be entirely report of our understanding during of nuclear to with has taken about four months This time Design, or half a man year subtracted the last half of the

from the time necessary explosives. Design was more of the test,

at the Final

howe v er , because our understanding

the clarification of nuclear our Final

of ideas associated

has improved is a sense

There than option wou Id receive

in which submitting a f ina l design construction on this

difficult We

it would be to prepare feedback changes of making

for a test .

in which we were participating. and have the

during based

and preparation


~·""""""""""~:!~-~.~!~i~i~;~&9~~~~~it~~l~~.~::r------:0: ;sr.... :


ABOUT THE EXPERIMENT Such a design would have been There are two

We could have designed a U235 gun explosive. main r-easons:

submitted as a final design much sooner than our implosion design;

yeC (b)lJ


A test of the U235 gun mentioned above would likely playa of the Early Des ian.

similar role to a test

It is not surprising

that China has progressed

so rapidly,

and we believe they

may test a ther-monuclea r expl os ive within about a year if the news reports about their tests

are accurate.

study of the thermonuclear so it is possible that problem would change our outlook . • . we believe that OUl' Final but we see no way to design a credible thermonuclear However. explosive without testing. our position on thermonudear design is ve r-y to our position on fission design in the Early Period.From our present understanding Design is credible without a test. similar further of nuclear explosives.

.en '\ about an early version of the Final Design . . " . S..a.' .. S.. . .. .~.-. "1 .:.. ~~ ...'.~ -._..C: ~.': ....--=.... •• goo -.:I·~ .. EBY AND L.' .~ ". (The analysis of the Nth Country weapon lens system in this section was w r-i tt...G: ... ~. '..~. ---l .. '. • CRITIQUE OF THE NTH COUNTRY WEAPON DESIGN F. GERMAIN 1.....~- .~~_..:: . .J • .

:c.. u s ing codes unavailable wi Ll discover below. numbers. the to the Nth Country physicists. The LRL calculations • 'I ."-~ .J fJAs the reader o eta n eu LKL de sign carcuiations disagree 4. on the Nth Country Weapon followed the usual sequence . with both of these ...• .

. .~OI~~ervatism in the prediction of the..J /(p)(i I I '1 hey give no e st irnate the latter do not really cite 01 the magnitude and. observe system that they . ...:DOE (J?JL-?/ . . I have very little firm information the c r-itical ity of their " 01I In light of this extreme sensitivity. it would seem that confidence in the expected yield .-5.. on final yield reasons in fact. _." Z - It was impossible on Final ------.about •. belief that alpha decreases They correctly too rapidly. ______---: .::=s 'TitB . for us to detail Design and Test the Nth Country predictions from the data given r-e nor-t in the sections of the Nth Countrv Exnprimpnt. for their of c• I I ·1 I effect.is unwarranted.... yiel~ Another of the test point which device is would appear to call for.. . . 6. ~... . .

7. ~ In ~E2~~~..-- . .~he ~-- ~~_1.:_S~~ntry<:!~2igners _~-:i_ved ( X!]~_authors I do not give any detailed i reasons for the discrepancv1 • "4 _'.._. _'.._ .. .J .

would seem that one of the reasons for undertaking the study of an implosion system is While this of challenging and hence appealing problem." with a scientifically is certainly a logical one for a scientist to make. value judgment On page 7 (of lJCRL-50239).Nth Country of the experimenters. it is doubtful that the weapon to plutonium implosion would be called upon to make decisions concerning the overall economy of the it may be that they have directed themselves for reasons which are not completely valid in the context of the study: • '\ . technology. pr-ogr-am may well it have been modified by the tastes that it is "a more sophisticated. systems Thus." While this is certainly true. There are two areas in which the direction of the. the administration the Nth Country may be less concerned appealing problem and more concer-ned with quick results.9. Also on page 7. the statement is made lithe production of Pu~39 has a long range economic advantage over U235 because it requires the development of reactor scientists nation.

request detailing the result desired.. information. The purpose of the so-called "Nth Country Experiment" nuclear explo. expected to avoid cons cientious ly any contact with classified maintain the integrity of the primary assumption. efforts quires the Atomic Ene r-gy Act and AEC Regulations require that any design This rerelated to nuclear explosives be given proper security protection. any elaboration or deduction fr~n unclassified and . 2. J. search a specific Help in computation or in other mechanics such as information In other words.. people without contact with classified is to find out if a credible by a few well trained A wor-king The goal of the participants significant yield. An informal committee has been chosen to monitor this experiment. Secretarial It is important that as much as possibie of the progress help will be available. Hudgins. the experimenters should be requested only through the committee.. J. identified. The exper-Imenter-s are expected to use any means available to obtain as much unThe experiment will have to of the information can be classified explicitly experiment 4. must state the problem and their boundary conditions for its solution. . perturb the exregarding The men doing the experiment stance of the experiment will be in writing. HUDGINS in memoran- (Editor's note: The following set of rules Was given to the experimenters dum form at the beginning of the Bth Country Experiment. conducted in such a way' that all sources of unclassified be put in writing. in fact. provide maximum assurance periment in a casual or unrecorded manner. information in order to They may request further guidance or specific information from the committee through A. information as they believe to be pertinent. do all of the routine work involved in the In each case there must be The committee It is not expected that the experimenters design themselves.) 1. have been asked to would give a small should be to design an explosive with a militarily context for the experiment might be that the participants nation a significant effect on their foreign relations. design a nuclear explosive which. 5. that the work books. h~. will see to it that the best response possible is obtained in a timely fashion. all communications In order to the subare that the committee does not. 3. .APPENDIX A THE OPERATING RULES FOR THE NTH COUNTRY PROJECT A. • Even though this experiment will be based upon the use of information from unclassified sources. with a modest effort. if built in small numbers.sive can be designed.

all Manual. such information be protected in accord with the Laboratory 6. cation and procurement problems it should be assumed explicitly that any material The purpose of this assumption from the area of the experiment. is to remove fabri- " • '! .• infol'maliol1 he classified properly Security and lhat. For the purpose's of this experiment may be fabricaled in any shape.

Wisconsin. atomic He received physics. was entitled. in 1966. The" Beta-Decay Lawrence Livermore. S~E. staff member he has continued and his thesis resear~h effect. Wisconsin.) in physics (1964) from the University Magnetic California. post-doctoral 135. (1960) and PhD. SELDEN • Robert Claremont. in physics and attended (1958) from . Rev. research experiments. Dobson Asymmetry worked in Alameda. M. In Radiaon in experimental Berkeley. Selden receivedM. in electrical engineering in physics solid state (l958) from physics. degree Pipkorn Effect to LRL. to LRL.) in 1964 on a two year to do research a regular In addition to participatingin on the Mossbauer Expo r irnent ROBERT W. his thesis California. Arizona. DOBSON David A. University Urbana. degree California. W. and attended Berkeley. and high school in Shorewood. in 1966. (See Phys. and high school and a PhD. APPENDIX B BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHES DAVID A. Dobson was born in 1937 in Oakland. there. in physics and high school S. (1960) and PhD. appointment the ~th High Pressure. Dobson has continued his work DAVID N. a post-doctoral addition on beta-decay California appointment In 1964 he came a regular to participating in the ~th Country Experiment. worked in experimental in Iron Under Very Livermore. A. S. Mossbauer He came Country and became was born in 1936 in Mflwaukee . (19'64) degrees .. and Nuclear Moment of Ne 19. Princeton from the University Wisconsin. staff member tion Laboratory. was entitled. and attended eleHe and school in Thiensville. (1964) degrees of Illinois. elementary (1959) a B. S. Selden was born in 1936 in Phoenix. He received a B. A1604 (1964). Pipkorn mentary received Illinois. (1963). a B. degree in chemistry of California. and became (See UCRL-11169. PIPKORN David N. California. elementary Pomona College.

Army Reserve in 1958 from the ROTC at Pomona College . Selden was assigned to LRL. physics with liquid helium and his thesis Various Conditions. Wisconsin. Rev. Madison. time on the Nth Country Experiment . as an Army Research Associate. • . He has worked full Corps at Aber-deen Proving Ground. .from the University of Wisconsin. tour of active duty in 1964 as a 1st Lt. Livermore. 138. where he was an Edward John low temperature Rates Under He was commisHe-II Film Transfer Noble Foundation Fellow for four years. Maryland. in the U.) sioned a 2nd Lt. S. He worked in experimental was entitled. Army Ordnance and promoted to Captain in 1965. A1363 and A1371 (1965). since March 1965. S. He began a three-year (See Phys. in the U.

Dobson and D. (hypothetically). Pipkorn The decision on the Experiment.. :.. selected as participants.n pYnlC\_~ivp _ R. is proposed. they begin working May 1964 Dec 1964 Feb Mar Jul 1965 1965 1965 D. is made to de s ian a olutonium imnlC\<:'. Selden becomes The first The first 1ne the third test experiment design participant. implosion de s izn is docurnent=d The first _J POt:='" Dec 1965 Jan Jan 1966 1966 ))~) -' i l Feb 1966 Apr 1966 Apr Jun 1966 1966 -l -! 1 he 11rs1 v~rsion outline April draft of the final design of the final report 1966 design corrections discussions of final report are are is produced..2:. . to the design completed. as final. The final preshot The tape-recorded The Nth Countr-y device is tested • . is completed.-. May 1965 Oct 1965 Nov 1965 Dec 1965 HE lens design initiator is proposed.§. and report. second HE lens is tested (hypothetically) and adopted with small changes."". -2 APPENDIX C A BRIEF CHRONOLOGY OF THE EXPERIMENT Apr 1964 The ground half-time rules are formulated are for the Experiment. The first Sep 1966 Dec 1966 Mar Apr Apr 1967 1967 1967 The second The complete is submitted made is submitted.

DD . a course physics in nuclear studying physics or hydrodynamics. I can think of only two things having a possible she worked here.. pertinent to With regard I have never to my knowledge taken or attended this experiment.whether but 1 still or kilograms. I also was aware in the periodic produced elements table and studied their . a test that they were that I learned in the night during having something above bomb debris.. since the chemists Technion the worked in Chemistry. My wife worked because series. STATE OF KNOWLEDGE BEFORE THE EXPERIMENT. I have picked up quite a bit of nuclear r-esearch. they are in milligrams of the areas regularly of physics or what they learned. I was aware produced. deliberately were of quantities the idea that sometimes from the isotopes plutonium they added materials to these but I had no idea of what isotopes that her group made large properties. I was aware that shock waves existed heard on my own with my thesis to sound waves the application but only in the areas of beta dec ay and the strucand that they were nonlinear I had of state at a but I had never of the Hugoniot equat ions . cian late Experiment I recall to tell used. in connection ture heard of light about as compared nuclei. of the documentation Physicist of__ ~th Country_Experiment the before thpir np~iO"n_ the Design I. • of shock waves to the study of equations . have DD . 1..: APPENDIX D SECURITY ASPECTS OF THE EXPERIMENT As part was tested. at LRL from 1957 to 1961 as a Laboratory influence analyzing tests First. no idea of the quantities 2..

radiation.~~g I y)(. War. bec~~_~:_~o_w __ i_!_~_=_~~:>_inte.one-hour lecture. While at Wisconsin I took a one-semester course in experimental riuclear who had been at Los Alamos during the A small part of this course was concerned with nuclear fission and a small par.pong- nucleus into a couple of fragments._I_a_m not s~~~__ ~~y. .' . -_.. 3. appearance about how abornb in "Life Magazine" showing the external J)& ~ U.year_s ago.. . balls. probably (Berkeley). physics on the superfluid properties went to Pomona College and then to the University of Wisconsin where my thesis research physics. given by Pr-of'e ssor. I was aware that both uranium not familiar first with heavy isotopes I had not seen the pictures and plutonium had been used in bombs.exhibit with a model of a chain reaction ~ .S. I had made up of mouse tr-ans and ping. basic training course. were given about the weapons themselves.. either shooting two pieces with a gun. or putting explosives enough and that there were two ways to do this: all around some and blowing it together from all sides.. seen an .how it was to be at Los Alamos and the He mentioned the gun-type assembly but not in any detailed way. on the effects of nuclear weapons (such topics as and the fact that nuclear artillery existed. - and that their effects were quite different details -.r~_s_t. presentation radioactivity. 10 or 11 . mass. • presentation t ec hnical was primarily to make Army Officers aware that nuc1ear weapons existed from those of conventional explosives. low-temperature Henry Barshall and reactors. wa~ in experimental taught by Professor of liquid helium. .~ " . Most of my time before coming to LRL was spent going to school. went on active duty in the Army to fulfill my ROTC commitment Aberdeen Proving Ground and the Ordnance Officer's course was a three-bour blast waves.). I have never at any time thought seriously :~Ui_l_t_. but I was of the !l1j.t He devoted part of one hour to some "Lansing and the requireto of this dealt with criticality Lamont" type reminiscences ment of a super-critical about Los Alamos .?/( RS .J ' I was aware that the basic idea of a fission explosive was to throw together fissile material material to have a super-critical together mass. bombs.ght and did not know which isotope numbers were relevant. After leaving Wisconsin I and was assigned Part of the This No kind of things that happened there.Jura of 'the Chem- istry Department I understood the general idea that fission involved the breaking up of a large with neutrons and gammas being given off.

with my application for in Washington.. an assignment 1 was inter-viewed by Glenn Werth.~~".)'RB back into the fissile neutrons..of . Werth was not concerned about how little I knew about nuclear physics and nuclear and I felt at the time that there was something. Perhaps the most important factor involving the knowledge that I had with the Experiment is that I believed that de'sip'ninp' a nuc le a r.p an explosronv -' -... 'D' )ll'i / DO. material. to nroour. ..exnlo aive starting \ .... here at LltL'when I learned about the Experiment. With regard to explosive design. I was aware.o. as far as I can remember.. related I 7. . '.. Tt . . THE EFFECTS OF VISITING LRl HOPEN HOUSE" EVENTS... DD. existed I s e r ious ly considered how a should add that bomb would be designed other than these considerawas that they I knew abso- tions which I have just stated. very stran(ie about the interuntil later. that I knew very little about nuclear physics.' '.2\ ~~ \'1 never all. . lutely nothing about explosives (except than that TNT was the name of an explosive). " e . of course. I was aware that nuclear weapons 1 understood the nature of the fission process and I knew that U235 and Pu239 materials.• "._ . . I had a generaltdea of criticality in terms of sustaining a in a reactor. All three of us on sever-al occasions have visited the open houses at LHL (which are not open to people who are not employees or members of employee's . That applied to me too. I could on the subject... before RS . -.. realized 5. so I tried very hard to come up with every bit of information weapons.e.~.. II.. . .. the gun-method of assem bli nz a c r it ic. 8. including the advantages of reflecting I also knew that the fission cross It wasn't RS . 1'''' I knew.:! 1 -. . C. were fissile reaction escaping neutrons section was higher for II\. HS There is an interesting story in connection as a Research Associate at LRL.. existed. .-..... that I what had been going on.' . chain thermal Dr. D.. Dave Pipkorn told me that he also had no exper-ience directly to nuclear explosive design before going into the Experiment._" -.. \.--. RS. 6. view. . ... . ". .. ' . I was not aware of the implosion method of assembly at The only thing I knew about shock-waves as everyone who has felt an earthquake or heard thunder knows..~ 4.

. 1965. the Computer Building. but not very useful to anyone interested in job do a much better our knowledge enough so that any hints to be really gener-al itself. At the 1964 Open House I v is ited buildings I also went out to Site 300 and saw a test machine. is going on. my office. 9. we all attended Haussmann. but he also didn't that was really . wave experiments in Building and the Helac x-ray as to how things This.· developed .. but from I saw the who clasbut they were didn't lasers anything austere...at could listening. They were but again pretty interesting I didn't might be done. give me hints At the 1966 Open House.0pen House I visited exhibit. would likely would be available than we d id! the family early lecture what kind of technology to the des!'. pad for shock machines. of t he "We we a rmn s svs- the weapons by Carl Haussmann. Here attended terns thing useful it carefully and capability and certainly·a kind of information Nth Country out what is going on at Livermore RS . rather specific This Building. is interesting. . get any ideas that I saw there. perhaps. background This about what kind of research is.. th. at LRL. RS . and the Plowshare was advanced to do with physics information there real By the time I went to both of these would have to be useful. sify things. i but it was interesting :-»)(j) '( . The talk itself to know sornethtn« did not give us any- to the project. 10. I went to the Site 300 Open House in May 1966 and did not see anybelieved had to be there.::DOt • . well for the people 154 and also the Labs in 174B.li pursuing of finding 11.-there was any furniture pretty in it.. series talk on . I did see the exnlos iv es m. lie Laboratory by Carl (In fact. thing shool RS... Dave Pipkorn has told me that he went to the Laboratory learn anything Open House useful and Site 300 Open House to our project. He certainly didn't say anything be he announced in his talk that he was that might gOi:lg to try not to say anything that might be useful to any Nth Country in my notebook about this lecture.. speaks 102 and 114. be used ) are some comments lecture I wrote In December weapons program on the project. and have 1966.:}C'hinp that I had not already At the September the Chemistry open houses. in 1964. . etc.

LRL BUILDINGS VISITING DURING THE EXPERIMENT. to deal with one particular I have been to Building a gaussmeter that had to do with my E Division (the mailroom sions. RS ... Once I returned trips to the Glass I have been in the Mech. Library 173A. L gotten our curiosity up problem that deserves is a challenging III. 111. Zodtner's to the Experiment. but only to Dr. . 13. Trailer Harlan where 'I 112. 161. lSI.-. or been briefly Library in Buildings 101. 151. my office is..__ ~.' .j""'arhead could be designed. 151. 112 (to the library. Ill. that I had borrowed 114A) regarding capsule. '.. 170 (to the libraries detector's and 173B. to the hydroform in Building 170. that at no time to have the lid welded on my reactor shop areas that we are talking applicable to suggested anything that even remotely the Experiment. Building Engr. (he saw more Ill... One of the questions that might naturally area? 152 at first prints be asked of us is: What this)s I but at I have 161 have you been in within the "Q" cleared The best way to answer and are now in 155.. certainly. ._.. 120._. _~_e .• -"C-'-~ ____ ----.. This has really __.. 122.Looking at the.. Trailer office)' the 170 Elec. office and 155 and Building I have walked through 105.. .. . .. was still working Harold actively part. II _. .. When Dave Pipkorn Buildings: then)._~.. I have made three apparatus. got any hints useful 14. visited metal people never RS . of some Building capsule. 120. 112.the van de Graaff and coincidence circuits). 102 to visit Stromberg Open House than he observed germanium 110 . experiments when it was set up down there.Buildings 101.. set up at the van de Graaff Accelerator or walked through and Trailer 33. 114. Hudgins' on two occasions.' . about some how such a device thought... of my apparatus. I talked die operator In Septerpber 114A about making I can say. 12." .. .. to Building the repair in 1966 Shop (Building irradiation (in these In Mar-ch or April parts 1966. 122... 162. 161. for my LPTR I went to the Sheet Me tal Shop. on the Experiment. 120.~#iliW!r~ .._. gone into..-.-. to list them. about) only). the sheet and to visit He said he he at the the following rack outside about 101. I went to Building 110 on one occasion person to see Stew or something occaEngr. 155. My offices were in Building went to Building Bloom's simply Hi9 on two occasions to pick up some no time did I see any pink paper. 112 on numerous Hudgins' office and the library..~. 152. anything did I s~e or hear Building HOB. buildings simply Op .

Yv.v -J} Ot:. .o. you are going to Iear n how nuclear "w-u. and the svmh .neutr-on for 16. ... now that you are over here. The other class of interactions It is interesting within the laboratory were conversa{which we will we know . ! on his desk.LJhg f.JJ. -~-. than that these documents were classified._. n) reactions do have such knowledge that we cons ider-e d the impliOne day I asked Later He told me that it used to conat one time using The first one occurred to me back in 1963.~ the. I paperweight ~ We still have n6' idea of what it really is because we don't want to a s k! It was probably bec au-se we found it here in the Laboratory _. that the people in the Laboratory cations of what they said..m. i I 1 17. We have been asked where-we got the word· tamper -. There is some classified material around Building 155.:: . deuteron Linac .. explosives work._. The second time was just after I got an office in Building 152 and wa s I was talking to Lou Eccles and he beginning to work on the Nth Country Experiment.b)~)1 - Marv Williamson (whose offj~~ . .. tain a high current (d.. which isn't classified but which we will record in the spirit yoe. ing everything. or were marked with red. tions with people.\l§t d9.. - place. it is usually On several occa- always locked up and we are always very careful about not seeing it.: IV. they had the word "Secret" in Building 155 in the of recordThere was an interesting discovery Summer of 1965. that we were led to speculate about it in the first -_. interesting I sions I saw that people did have classified documents but I never saw anything more In other w~rds. DD ."Well...' - multiplication conatantj. l ... Hans Mark why the Astron Building was as big as it is.. to note that none of this information describe} would be considered a possible leak if it had been obtained outside the laboraIt is because tory from somebody we knew to be ignorant of weapon design...hall. RS . .." He . DD .. !---_.Y'_~s_.s1_kent_JU')...." I tried to put-him off by saying. that maybe they tried to make fissile materials ..-~ POSSIBLE SECURITY LEAKS INSIDE THE LABORATORY.I. I guess so eventually.. -it led me to speculate turn out too well. said to me .r..i.: ) J~~j .something like maybe l'\p236 for example"":but it looks like it didn't • \ 18... 15.. which didn't mean anything to me at the time._ - r"a~.

.v 1 q. of radiation. detectors different idea an L Division gamma ray as to DD . . ...llnlU1l1 UeULl::l'lUC 'thiS didn't 1<. 22.. the most surprising thing that I have foun? about At this point... .-ct"c:pt. Know . "Well. -- . At the time was important the Laboratory. One day Floyd Stoutamore told me that they him why they had been were running electron in the van de Graaff accelerator . RS . really teu . is an a serious of fusion books like us that radiation important 19.. n .( rI . repl. us a nytmng Since we Characteristics One night. we already had been looking at a and had an idea of what kinds of higher kind of properties for fissionable le= \ \ '"~opes be u-. Charlie ~owma~ and Doris because indic~ted gave Hine Accelerator an E Divisio~ Seminar 242 .. on Am . In th~-Fall of 1965..ied...-- _ . .-2'~ ' . beams . told me that he was working for high-flux measurements. down at the LPTR. 1: •.. 20.Ler-ry Wesolowski looked into the office ~ ~"-"""'~') ... · .. and left.m"the Ma r k III Coale'illation lying a round .~< . Physicist of Nuclear Explosives). . how you might than I had before the gamma some wor-k that he had been doing at the Linear aware of it when there collecting they were was some commotion notices This clearly L...eful ~d would hav... . I cut him off very Glas stcne tell thermonuclear rapidly weapons This was the importance wasn't really part DD. We became (the department apparently Am242 distributed on secretary) t ': I '~(' r-ushed around all of these they were to us that I to before declassified. ~- ...n~l ~~ .. ever. Ubtu 111fusion weapons (UCRL-7870.. ..J • frc.. .i RS -:::> Tn 'f\1[::." leak because reactions.. would " that this ~ccurred. . when I was working on Compton to me a somewhat flux. I asked d()ing that .. '.hpn our fi.1 . .. '.~....hh u....-the-right m a te r-Ial s .some- thing that 1 have since learned not to do around here . This measure suggested ..~.( the> r.inrfc....

There were two outside sources \ of information which were not but which did influence the Experiment. discus~ and added that if he were with us. particularly how a bomb is built. Bert Pohl's RS . He readily earlier DD . document out to read (it was have any Lou Eccles He asked had kept a classified the secretary had gone home. John Anderson on. • " . I answered. in a manila that we were a nuclear.J." ·24. came intoJack some Mc Clur-e and a new problem drawing on the office (which is next door that they were and the word detonation... We did lock it up overnight. that I would appreciate from and said that if I had listened discussion 25. next door. and asked I if I was writing a new code. Also in July 1966. us to lock it up in our repository but we don't ... TWO INCIDENTS OUTSIDE THE LABORATORY. to mine) and began and decided describing (or something) blackboard Later going to be working office I heard that I had better designing get out of here. of the project without classified warnsome to his that day I stopped to classified agreed and told him about the nature that we were working any access things ing'. idea what the document V.ike to wr-ite codes.po~' b YP) saw al l of those pr int out s ... "Why not? I. after enclosed I would probably One evening envelope) have been disqualified the Experiment. by John's literature) to cooperate on (that is. classified RS .. 26. was about.explosive going to.

One evening I had with him._flOE as a bomb de s igne r !) I was certainly DO . During . He reminisced done a rather that the book was well done._' . job of relating He generally thought about his Later. California. " . and gave a lecture while I was there.. He said that he had actually been interviewed and he felt that Lamont had good. in our understanding much..'/) .~Jncident occurred in July 1966... encounters cracking) calculators) with the security and recalled .... pe r na ps Iul impostor it . Feynrn an was asked about the early days at -Los Alamos. of discussing liquid helium and my thesis experiment of this discussion I asked him about Lansing Lamont's book The Day of the spirit of what he had said. RS .: I Dr. b . It turned out that Richard at Thatcher the program Feynman visited the privilege the course Trinity. The really important result of gave me confidence that it might also be possible to be a success- \. -r not learn anything that we were not already aware of. The other out~i. at an informal gathering with several others. It was of considerably less magnitude than[ ·--·--·'and again did not involve any classified science information.: ..encouraged by the greater level of confidence of hydrodynamics that Bob brought back and passed on to me. program I was invlted to give a talk on liquid helium at a summer School.. 27... Ojai. \.9. people (giving us a short course on the theory of safe-- I -- - - the early Los Alamos computer (a room full of girls with desk- tct-. ...~ ~ . • . - .

: SlsEStRIt· :: Y I.i i i . A POSS IBLE SECURITY LEAK IN THE LITERATURE...J I ! I ! r I I • . 28 .

:::: : APPENDIX E .~ ._ . \ \ I • . ' .. -..""" '" . . _- A SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY.

. . • .. { .! . .".J i ( .

- ... .. .J f { ! I I • I I { I ! ....-.... . _. - . I j ! i " ... . -.. ... .. -.. _ -0'~' ~. _ .. fI .". ••· . t>_ . ··- .. "~' .

.- = • .r.:.

AND X-UNIT TECHNOLOGY E. _:PcJr• /J v: J (_-!?)L/ ! '( .. The Nth Country design uses.. JAMES 1 JR. for cx am ol e ) were s e Il inz advanced muni t ions ... .. ·..· i .~ -(4- APPENDIX. DETONATOR... )( . ~') J I 3 .--<..F HIGH EXPLOSIVE._ • . 5.. The technology required to produce TNT castings countries and lensing systems is well This known.. many not actually engaged directly in combat (Sweden and Switzer1and.oI·WI~Y~La~I~' .--u. k:::JioeolI·I. C'_!:.. ·I. is By the end of World still t rue i: War Il.. 1. 2....

he unclas. . r -.s. of bursting bridgewires and X-units required to activate bursfinO" detonators is also known in t.. PA~ " .ied liferatur":..-~~.ii.7 .1»~ I.- papers the subtleties of the I I I :Do~ • 8. )0) I I I Ii I In these c i rcui t parameters are discussed in detai'i-.yoE llJ)(IJ 6... fOE ..1:._ yoe I .J . The technology bridgewire .

-. .. . • '( . !. 9.

----..APPENDIX HYDRODYNAMICS G TECHNOLOGY M.. and the equations materials • '" . technology are of in_~~rest tothe. WILKINS 1._.of hydrodynamics -_. Two aspects lem: the ability -.Nth motions of state and shocks during for the various Country pr-ob- to compute the material the implosion used in and explosion the explos ive . _. " . 2 phases.. L.

• 5. The e911::lfi0n-of-state at.~.ure. l'_ data for high explosives' . '." .... ..... . have always been in the open liter- 8... " ..-F. • -< . 4...

...• .:.. .. .. .APPENDIX H NEUTRONICS TECHNOLOGY W. _9 .. GRAYSON 1 " gsmftitif..1. . C... . '...

orp_pl~x ca1. • .APPENDIX I YIELD CALCULATIONS W._W::lI::1llv <. for early j_<.of"\required 3. 6. neut r on ic s techniques with radiation transport. C. 5. 4.. GRAYSON 1.lll~Ji. The calculation most of the yield of a nuclear explo s iv e combines Such a "burn Nth Country hydrodynamics code" designs/ and iha .!.

.-J I (?.I j -.~ • • .-- .

l. REMILLARD J 1.:: :-: -i- APPENDIX lNITIATORS R. • • 't . The concept seems of mixing an alpha emitter with beryllium to form a neutron source relatively obvious 2.

4. are often considered metallurgical knowledge _.. 2. uranium. of plutonium and intermetallic in the open scene: many did of uranium studies have been known for almost and the Curies on polonium .-r- : APPENDIX K WEAPON MATERIALS TECHNOLOGY R. . .. for supervising running).". modifications Investi- structure metal and physical alloys of the various extensively compounds are allotropic also have also appeared in the literature. and polonium} standard . outside -- and engineering practice. _-_ . i j . The preparation The crystal of plutonium gations literature. • -. ---_.. A.experience or -:. A team of chemical a successful needed during the design engineers would have no trouble processes (roughly arid only a handful designing and running are the plant usin~ anyone of these 10-20 engineers and building.. . Three materials in the Nth Country to require special design {plutonium.~ . JAMES 1.. ::'\either uranium properties the basic nor polonium are newcomers to the metallurgical a century I of plutonium metal by several constants very methods has also been described.. : -Y0E' b){~ 3.

and its associated fuel processing plant were considered separately. remote site.rf' ~ l~h()r::lt()rv/offi('p hl1i1rlina tn hnll~p about yJe. (plutonium. The diagnostics bunker and HE storage magazines are located in a separate. Since the cost of all the plutonium and most of the uranium is attributable to the plutonium production facility. A minimal Since power as well as plutonium production might be the reason for building this' the actual cost and utility to an Nth Country may vary widely. R. 1. To achieve minimum cost.given as an example. this relatively . or components which to produce require can be purchased on the world market were assumed to be bought so that they do not plant investment. with no allowance for any power production return.APPENDIX L . This appendix Iu'r « an estimate of the capital and operating costs of a weapon facility designed 5-10 weapons per year. estimate .only of the time required to build the first and successive weapons. materials we have for simplicity assumed that all the special and uranium) costs are included in this estimate. Any equipment. WEAPON FACIUTY AND FABRICATION COSTS C. The Nth Country weapon designed by Dobson.b)( 5. The weapon production complex consists of about 10 buildings on 30-40 acres jurrounded by a security fence. materials. Pipkorn. The reactor facility. is . and a diagnostic bunker. HENRY . No estimate has been made of the time required to build such facilities 2•. nishes component fabrication and Selden requires labora- and a weapon product ion complex which includes explosive shops. polonium. The Wf"::loon nf'sis:rn Of'rsonnp1 rpo". 1)6. tory support facilities plants.

" . :w~ 'b) '. -_. The buildings and their arrangement have wooden glove boxes where possible. _b) (I) 7. . utility installation minimum detail. Butler-type All buildings are are in rather construction . • III . ·yoE. but do not necessarily The shielded operations than durable 400 operating per day.small complex was assumed to be within an existing ordnance facility.. S.- a staff of about Since plutonium production is expected to •• • J'. steel. costs would then include only the fenced-in area.~ (3)). ••• be the pacing process. this weapon facility would usually operate only one shift --. p' follow U... The complex requires workable and safe. and LRL safety practices but very costly stainless and technical personnel.

The major expense of the Nth Country weapon is the production of the plutonium.- ~ .* The manpower estimate was ba sed partly on the (act that. . . Nucleonics (1965-1966) quotes the following "turnkey" costs for power reactors without fuel facilities (1 MW electr ical requires about 3 MW thermal): MTR (Japan) 50 MW (thermal) $20M MZFR (Germany) 200 MW (thermal) $40M AKB (Germany) 100 MW (electrical) $55M CANDU (Pakistan) 135 MW (electrical $60M • " . A 200-megawatt in addition._._.. I • ( =:-". "~-'--. of several hundred people and fuel costs (~100 tons of uranium). 1This estimate is based on the cost of several power reactors described in Nucleonics and a Savannah River Plant document on the production of plutonium. < _ •• '. uranium and plutonium processing plants are required._____.. -... 0( l 8.. and the salaries would run on the order of SIOM... -..". The Savannah River report (1964) gives $30-45M for a 40 MW reactor and $95-135M for a 400 MW reactor. estimate reactor is needed to produce about 50 kg of plutonium a year. A typical 1 The operating costs/ year would include both for such a facility is $60M.

A. LR L Internal External Distribution 1-61 . J. Bradbury 77 Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory Los Alam. E. Atomic Energy Commission Washington. E. S. Seaborg General Manager. C. Johnson U. Distribution 62 63 64 65 '66 67 Chairman. B. Hornig Special Assistant to the President The White House Office Washington. C. F. Ramey Commissioner S. Foster Director of Defense Research and Engineering Department of Defense Washington. C. D. C. New Mexico . A. Brig. D. J. D. C. Conway Executive Director Joint Committee on Atomic Energy Washington. Atomic Energy Commission San Francisco Operations Office Berkeley. C. C. Fisher Special Assistant to the Director Arms Control and Disarmament Agency Washington. S. Giller Director 01' Military Application Atomic Energy Commission Headquarters Washington. Labowitz Special Assistant for Disarmament Office of the General Manager U. Commissioner W. California 68 69 70 71 72 73-75 76 • " N. Gen. T. E. D. Hollingsworth Commissioner J. C. Nabr it Commissioner G. S. T. T. R. D. F. D. Tape . M. S. D. D. M. Shute U. E.os. Atomic Energy Commission Washington." \ DISTRIBUTION Series A Copy No. G. E. S.

New Mexico Copy No. ' £xtcl'nal Dislt'ibulion (Cont'd) J. Atomic Energy Commission Albuquerque Operations Office Albuquerque.JW:rt .O./ i/ / i ' . Box 1663 Los Alamos. L-l 10-13-88 COpy NO 1 of 1 OFF-SITE REQUEST 8/12/93 Los Alamos National Laboratory Attn: Jack Carter. M-I Mail Station 5000 P. New Me xico L. Gise U. Hornbeck Sandia Corporation Albuquerque.E. S. BATZEL L-1 SERIES D PHILIP COYLE. 78-83 84 Se_~/e.S B L R L Iw/-tRtVAl SERIES C /)i. Gropper Technical Library 7141 MS-089 Sandia National Laboratories Albuquerque.\I/<lLiJINJI 3-10-88 COpy NO 1-4 of 4 R. New Mexico . A. Reports Library FOR: Greg Buntain. P. N~ 87545 OFF-SITE REQUEST 2/15/94 Dianne C.