Notice bibliographique
Résumé
L. V. Krishnan, who passed away peacefully on the 15th of August this year, had a highly successful career with the Department of Atomic Energy after graduating from the second batch of the AEET Training School. He joined the Health Physics Division (HPD), headed by Dr A K Ganguly, in 1959. For a while, he was asked to assist in organizing health physics operations for Canada-India Reactor (CIR), now known as CIRUS, which was just being commissioned. Having completed the task, along with his batchmate, K Santhanam, was given a more challenging assignment by Dr Ganguly in his R and D Group. D. V. Gopinath, the team leader of that group, had just started work on build-up factors in shielding problems. The three quickly coalesced into a cohesive team. That was the time Dr. Bhabha seemed to have posed the problem, calling for the initiation of work on critical mass calculations in AEET. Dr. Ganguly accepted the challenge and assigned the problem to Gopinath and his team. Krishnan along with others started understanding Sn methodology and worked on adopting of a Sn code obtained from abroad. That led them to an entirely new approach, which they named “Source-Collision Iteration Technique (SCIT)”. The CDC as computer was just then installed at TIFR, and using that, they developed an SCIT code that was found to be superior to the Sn code. L V Krishnan presented a paper on their work at an IAEA Conference. This work attracted the attention of other major groups at BARC and even drew some envy, with a few questioning the (HPD’s) involvement in such a project. However, with Dr. Ganguly’s unwavering backing, the team went ahead and developed an “Anisotropic Source-Flux Iteration Technique ASFIT” code that solved the limitation of nonisotropy in the Sn code. ASFIT seemed to be a solution to Bhabha’s call for working on criticality calculations. The ASFIT code attracted international attention and was included in the code library of ANL, where Gopinath had a 1-year assignment earlier. Sadly, the team lost the chance to bring the success of the ASFIT code to Dr. Bhabha’s full attention due to his tragic demise in 1966. V. K. Sundaram, from the first batch of the Training School, was commissioning Monte Carlo codes acquired from Germany and adapted for the CDC computer, a pioneering work for AEET. Using this, Krishnan and V. K. Sundaram undertook calculations for the criticality safety of columns in the Plutonium plant unit that was under commissioning in Trombay. The clearance was the responsibility of HPD, and Krishnan was given this assignment. It was divinely symbolic of their close collaboration that while I was preparing this note, I received the sad news of the passing away of V K Sundaram also. In 1963, Krishnan was deputed to the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, USA, to attend a 1-year course at ORSORT. After his training, he continued to assist Gopinath in refining the ASFIT code. By then, Sarabhai had taken over as chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission. Sarabhai had ambitious plans to set up a Fast Reactor Research Centre (RRC) at Kalpakkam and began working toward his goal of establishing a Fast Breeder Test Reactor (FBTR) there. Dr. Ganguly designated D. V. Gopinath and L. V. Krishnan to organize health physics operations at the upcoming RRC, later named the Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research, at Kalpakkam. L. V. Krishnan concentrated on setting up a Safety Research Laboratory at Kalpakkam, which conducted safety research and provided safety supervision at the RRC. Sarabhai formulated a collaboration program with the French to install an FBTR at Kalpakkam. L. V. Krishnan was part of the team, led by Paranjape, that Sarabhai constituted to formulate the design of the FBTR with the help of the French team at Cadarache, France. Krishnan was closely associated with the task of radiation safety for the FBTR. He had mastered the French language so well that it helped him understand the documents at the French installation. I was surprised to see Krishnan translate a French presentation extemporaneously at a conference I attended. His translation was of a similar standard to the translations at IAEA conferences in Vienna. Krishnan then set up a comprehensive emergency preparedness setup at the Kalpakkam site. He inducted novel features in the emergency control center that was set up in Kalpakkam, and also conducted a radioactivity measurement demonstration to the public at the ESL for environmental safety. This served as a model for other nuclear sites in India. Krishnan was also instrumental in the development of a comprehensive aerial gamma spectrometric (AGS) system in the Radiation Safety Systems Division (RSSD) in Trombay. He had conducted a trial using the AGS system mounted on a Dakota aircraft that the Atomic Minerals Directorate (AMD) for Exploration and Research was using for uranium prospecting. We in RSSD took it a step further to design a microprocessor-based AGS with data telemetry and the incorporation of GPS, and we conducted a trial flight by requisitioning the same Dakota aircraft from AMD. The system was later calibrated at the Defence Laboratory in Jodhpur using iridium sources deployed on the ground. This enabled the system to convert the measured dose data to contamination levels on the ground. More recently, in 2018, L. V. Krishnan helped me edit the Dr. A. K. Ganguly Centenary volume. This was followed by his assistance in editing my book, “The Saga of Atomic Energy in India,” published in 2020. He was a restraining hand, controlling my exuberance in narration and adding useful information. L. V. K. was a walking encyclopedia with ready information on not only every aspect of nuclear energy but also on any other topic! He was a very erudite and versatile person. He was a sober gentleman with polished manners, a type rare to meet. I enjoyed his association on many occasions when I sought his help with my documentation activities. I closely felt the warmth of L. V. Krishnan and his family when I was his neighbor in Kedarnath, Anushaktinagar, for a couple of years before he left for Kalpakkam in 1974. In very recent times, I was in touch with Krishnan and sought his advice for my articles. A few days before his sad demise, he seemed to be reading the discussions in the INS WhatsApp group but was discreet in expressing an opinion. His sudden passing is a great loss to the Indian nuclear community. He was a noble soul, and I understand he had instructed his family earlier to donate his body upon his death to the Madras Medical College.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».