Chicago Metallurgical Laboratory

Birthplace of the Nuclear Chain Reaction

The Chicago Metallurgical Laboratory was the Manhattan Project facility at the University of Chicago where Enrico Fermi achieved the first controlled nuclear chain reaction on December 2, 1942, ushering in the nuclear age. Known as the “Met Lab,” this secret research facility brought together the world’s leading nuclear physicists to develop the scientific foundation for nuclear weapons. The laboratory’s work on Chicago Pile-1 proved that nuclear fission could be controlled and sustained, providing the theoretical and practical basis for both nuclear reactors and nuclear weapons, fundamentally changing the course of human history.

Historical Origins

Manhattan Project Context

• 1942: Established as part of Manhattan Project
• University of Chicago: Located at University of Chicago campus
• Scientific leadership: Led by Arthur Compton
• Secret facility: Highly classified research facility

Site Selection

• Academic environment: University research environment
• Scientific talent: Access to leading physicists
• Central location: Central U.S. location
• Security considerations: Relatively secure urban location

Mission

• Nuclear research: Fundamental nuclear physics research
• Chain reaction: Achieving controlled nuclear chain reaction
• Reactor development: Nuclear reactor development
• Weapons physics: Nuclear weapons physics research

Scientific Leadership

Arthur Compton

• Laboratory director: Director of Met Lab
• Nobel laureate: Nobel Prize in Physics (1927)
• Scientific coordination: Coordinated nuclear research
• Manhattan Project: Key Manhattan Project leader

Enrico Fermi

• Scientific leader: Led reactor physics team
• Nuclear pioneer: Pioneer of nuclear physics
• Reactor design: Designed first nuclear reactor
• Chain reaction: Achieved first controlled chain reaction

International Team

• Leading physicists: World’s top nuclear physicists
• Multiple nationalities: Scientists from many countries
• Refugee scientists: European refugee scientists
• Collaborative research: Unprecedented scientific collaboration

Chicago Pile-1

First Nuclear Reactor

• December 2, 1942: First controlled nuclear chain reaction
• Stagg Field: Built under University of Chicago stadium
• Graphite moderator: Graphite-moderated reactor design
• Uranium fuel: Natural uranium fuel
• Control rods: Cadmium control rods

Technical Achievement

• Critical mass: Achieved nuclear criticality
• Sustained reaction: Sustained nuclear chain reaction
• Control demonstration: Demonstrated reactor control
• Safe shutdown: Successfully shut down reactor

Historical Significance

• Nuclear age: Marked beginning of nuclear age
• Proof of concept: Proved nuclear fission feasibility
• Weapons foundation: Provided foundation for nuclear weapons
• Nuclear power: Laid groundwork for nuclear power

Research Programs

Nuclear Physics

• Fission physics: Fundamental nuclear fission research
• Neutron physics: Neutron interaction studies
• Critical mass: Critical mass calculations
• Chain reaction: Chain reaction mechanisms

Reactor Development

• Reactor design: Nuclear reactor design principles
• Moderator studies: Nuclear moderator research
• Control systems: Reactor control system development
• Safety systems: Nuclear safety system development

Materials Research

• Uranium metallurgy: Uranium metal processing
• Graphite purification: Graphite purification methods
• Nuclear materials: Nuclear materials research
• Plutonium chemistry: Plutonium chemistry research

Plutonium Research

Element Discovery

• Transuranium elements: Research on transuranium elements
• Plutonium identification: Plutonium element identification
• Chemical properties: Plutonium chemical properties
• Nuclear properties: Plutonium nuclear properties

Weapons Implications

• Fissile material: Plutonium as fissile material
• Weapons potential: Plutonium weapons potential
• Production methods: Plutonium production methods
• Separation techniques: Plutonium separation techniques

Production Research

• Reactor production: Reactor plutonium production
• Chemical separation: Chemical separation processes
• Purification methods: Plutonium purification methods
• Quality control: Plutonium quality control

Laboratory Organization

Research Divisions

• Physics Division: Nuclear physics research
• Chemistry Division: Nuclear chemistry research
• Engineering Division: Nuclear engineering
• Health Division: Radiation health research

Security Measures

• Compartmentalization: Research compartmentalization
• Security clearances: Security clearance requirements
• Communication restrictions: Limited communication
• Cover stories: Academic cover stories

Support Operations

• Machine shop: Precision machining support
• Electronics: Electronic instrumentation
• Computing: Early computing support
• Health physics: Radiation protection

Scientific Contributions

Nuclear Physics

• Chain reaction theory: Nuclear chain reaction theory
• Critical mass theory: Critical mass theoretical foundation
• Neutron economy: Neutron economy calculations
• Reactor physics: Fundamental reactor physics

Nuclear Chemistry

• Transuranium chemistry: Transuranium element chemistry
• Separation processes: Nuclear separation processes
• Analytical methods: Nuclear analytical methods
• Material science: Nuclear material science

Engineering

• Reactor engineering: Nuclear reactor engineering
• Control systems: Nuclear control systems
• Safety systems: Nuclear safety engineering
• Instrumentation: Nuclear instrumentation

Post-War Transition

Argonne National Laboratory

• 1946: Transitioned to Argonne National Laboratory
• Civilian control: Transferred to civilian control
• Research mission: Expanded research mission
• Nuclear development: Continued nuclear development

Nuclear Power

• Civilian nuclear: Civilian nuclear power development
• Reactor designs: Advanced reactor designs
• Nuclear fuel: Nuclear fuel development
• Safety research: Nuclear safety research

International Cooperation

• Atoms for Peace: Atoms for Peace program
• Technology transfer: Nuclear technology transfer
• Scientific cooperation: International scientific cooperation
• Nuclear safety: Nuclear safety cooperation

Legacy and Impact

Nuclear Age

• Foundation: Foundation of nuclear age
• Technology development: Nuclear technology development
• Scientific breakthrough: Major scientific breakthrough
• Global impact: Global impact on technology

Nuclear Weapons

• Weapons development: Enabled nuclear weapons development
• Strategic balance: Changed strategic balance
• Deterrence: Nuclear deterrence foundation
• Arms race: Initiated nuclear arms race

Nuclear Power

• Energy production: Nuclear energy production
• Reactor development: Nuclear reactor development
• Fuel cycle: Nuclear fuel cycle development
• Environmental impact: Environmental considerations

Educational Impact

Scientific Training

• Graduate education: Graduate student training
• Research methods: Nuclear research methods
• Instrumentation: Nuclear instrumentation
• Safety procedures: Nuclear safety procedures

Knowledge Transfer

• University partnerships: University research partnerships
• Technology transfer: Technology transfer to industry
• International exchange: International scientific exchange
• Professional development: Professional development programs

Public Understanding

• Science education: Nuclear science education
• Public awareness: Public understanding of nuclear science
• Museums: Nuclear science museums
• Educational outreach: Educational outreach programs

Modern Significance

Historical Preservation

• Site preservation: Historical site preservation
• Monument: Nuclear historical monument
• Educational programs: Historical educational programs
• Public access: Public historical access

Scientific Heritage

• Research tradition: Scientific research tradition
• Innovation culture: Culture of innovation
• Scientific excellence: Scientific excellence tradition
• International cooperation: International cooperation heritage

Nuclear Policy

• Policy foundation: Nuclear policy foundation
• Regulatory framework: Nuclear regulatory framework
• Safety culture: Nuclear safety culture
• International agreements: International nuclear agreements

Current Facilities

Argonne National Laboratory

• Research programs: Advanced nuclear research programs
• Facilities: State-of-the-art research facilities
• Scientific computing: High-performance computing
• International collaboration: International research collaboration

University of Chicago

• Research programs: Nuclear physics research programs
• Educational programs: Nuclear science education
• Historical preservation: Historical site preservation
• Public outreach: Nuclear science outreach

Chicago Area

• Nuclear industry: Regional nuclear industry
• Research institutions: Nuclear research institutions
• Educational institutions: Nuclear education institutions
• Economic impact: Regional economic impact

Connection to Nuclear Weapons

The Chicago Metallurgical Laboratory’s connection to nuclear weapons is fundamental:

• Scientific foundation: Provided scientific foundation for nuclear weapons
• Nuclear chain reaction: Demonstrated feasibility of nuclear weapons
• Plutonium research: Developed plutonium weapons material
• Nuclear age: Initiated the nuclear age

The Met Lab represents the transformation of theoretical nuclear physics into practical nuclear technology that enabled both nuclear weapons and nuclear power.

Deep Dive

The Secret University Laboratory

In the heart of the University of Chicago campus, beneath the west stands of Stagg Field, a team of scientists worked in secrecy on an experiment that would change the course of human history. The Chicago Metallurgical Laboratory, known simply as the “Met Lab,” was established in early 1942 as part of the Manhattan Project’s ambitious effort to develop nuclear weapons before Nazi Germany. Under the leadership of Nobel laureate Arthur Compton and the scientific direction of Enrico Fermi, this facility would achieve what many thought impossible: the first controlled, self-sustaining nuclear chain reaction.

The laboratory’s innocuous name was carefully chosen to disguise its true purpose. To outsiders, it appeared to be engaged in mundane metallurgical research, perhaps related to the war effort but certainly nothing revolutionary. In reality, the Met Lab housed the most advanced nuclear physics research in the world, bringing together an unprecedented concentration of scientific talent from across the globe. The facility operated under extreme secrecy, with compartmentalized research programs, armed guards, and elaborate security protocols designed to prevent any information from reaching enemy hands.

From Theory to Reality

The theoretical foundation for nuclear fission had been established in 1938 when Otto Hahn and Fritz Strassmann discovered that uranium atoms could be split, releasing enormous amounts of energy. However, transforming this laboratory curiosity into a practical source of power – or a weapon – required solving numerous technical challenges that had never been attempted before. The Met Lab’s primary mission was to prove that a controlled nuclear chain reaction was possible and to develop the scientific understanding necessary for both nuclear reactors and nuclear weapons.

Enrico Fermi, who had fled Fascist Italy and arrived in the United States just four years earlier, led the reactor physics team with characteristic precision and insight. Known for his ability to simplify complex problems and his meticulous experimental technique, Fermi approached the challenge of achieving criticality with systematic determination. He assembled a team that included some of the brightest minds in physics: Leo Szilard, who had first conceived of the nuclear chain reaction; Eugene Wigner, whose theoretical work provided crucial insights into reactor physics; and Walter Zinn, who would play a key role in the construction and operation of the first reactor.

Building Chicago Pile-1

The construction of Chicago Pile-1 (CP-1) began in November 1942 in a squash court beneath the abandoned football stadium. The choice of location was both practical and somewhat alarming – the reactor was being built in the middle of a densely populated city, without containment structures or modern safety systems. Fermi’s calculations indicated that the experiment would be safe, but the consequences of an error could have been catastrophic for Chicago’s population.

The reactor itself was deceptively simple in appearance: a carefully engineered stack of graphite blocks interspersed with uranium metal and uranium oxide. Each graphite block had to be precisely machined and ultra-pure to avoid absorbing the neutrons needed to sustain the chain reaction. The uranium, some of the purest ever produced, was formed into lumps and carefully positioned throughout the graphite matrix according to Fermi’s calculations. The entire structure would eventually contain 45,000 graphite blocks weighing 360 tons and 50 tons of uranium metal and uranium oxide.

Working conditions were harsh. The construction team, composed of physicists turned laborers, worked in shifts around the clock, covered in graphite dust that turned them into “black phantoms.” The work was physically demanding – each graphite block had to be carefully positioned, and the heavy uranium lumps had to be inserted into precisely drilled holes. Despite the difficulties, the team maintained high morale, understanding that they were engaged in work of historic importance.

The Day That Changed History

On the morning of December 2, 1942, the team assembled for what they hoped would be the final experiment. The reactor had grown to nearly its full size, and Fermi’s calculations suggested that criticality was imminent. Present in the squash court were about forty scientists and technicians, including Arthur Compton, Eugene Wigner, Leo Szilard, and Crawford Greenewalt from DuPont, the company that would soon build production reactors based on this proof of concept.

The control of the reactor depended on cadmium rods that absorbed neutrons and could stop the chain reaction. As a safety measure, three sets of control rods were installed: one automatic safety rod that would drop if radiation levels became too high, one manually operated rod controlled by a technician standing ready with an axe to cut a rope if needed (earning him the nickname “SCRAM” – Safety Control Rod Axe Man), and one rod that Fermi would control personally to fine-tune the reaction.

At 9:45 AM, Fermi ordered the control rods to be withdrawn in stages. With each adjustment, neutron counters clicked faster, their staccato rhythm filling the tense silence. Fermi, slide rule in hand, calmly calculated the neutron multiplication rate after each change, plotting the results on a graph. His demeanor was remarkably composed – he even stopped the experiment for lunch when the reactor approached criticality, leaving everyone in suspense for over an hour.

Achievement of Criticality

At 2:20 PM, Fermi ordered the final control rod to be withdrawn another foot. The neutron counters began clicking rapidly, then faster, until their individual clicks merged into a steady roar. The recording pens on the chart recorders traced exponentially rising curves. For several minutes, the team watched in awe as humanity’s first controlled nuclear chain reaction sustained itself. The reactor was generating about half a watt of power – barely enough to light a flashlight bulb, but proof that the atomic nucleus could be tamed.

At 3:53 PM, after running for 28 minutes, Fermi ordered the control rods reinserted, and the chain reaction stopped. There was no celebration at first – just quiet satisfaction at a job well done. Eugene Wigner, having anticipated the moment, produced a bottle of Chianti he had been saving. Paper cups were passed around, and the scientists toasted their success with a few sips of wine. Fermi and the others signed the bottle’s straw wrapping as a memento of the occasion.

Arthur Compton immediately called James Conant at Harvard, using a prearranged code: “The Italian navigator has landed in the New World.” When Conant asked, “How were the natives?” Compton replied, “Very friendly” – indicating that the controlled chain reaction had been achieved successfully.

Beyond the First Reaction

The success of CP-1 immediately shifted the Met Lab’s focus to developing the technology for large-scale plutonium production. The reactor had demonstrated that uranium-238 could be converted to plutonium-239 through neutron bombardment, providing an alternative path to nuclear weapons that didn’t require the incredibly difficult process of enriching uranium-235. This discovery would prove crucial to the Manhattan Project’s success.

Within months, the Met Lab scientists were designing production reactors that would operate at much higher power levels. These designs incorporated lessons learned from CP-1 but required solving new challenges related to heat removal, radiation shielding, and the chemical processing of irradiated fuel to extract plutonium. The laboratory’s chemists, led by Glenn Seaborg (who had discovered plutonium), developed the complex chemical processes needed to separate microscopic amounts of plutonium from tons of radioactive uranium.

The Met Lab also became a center for understanding the biological effects of radiation. The Health Division, recognizing that they were entering uncharted territory, established some of the first standards for radiation protection. They developed monitoring instruments, studied the effects of radiation on living organisms, and established exposure limits that would form the basis for modern radiation safety practices.

The Scientists and Their Struggles

Life at the Met Lab was marked by intense work, secrecy, and moral complexity. The international team of scientists included many refugees from Nazi-occupied Europe who were deeply motivated by the fear that Germany might develop nuclear weapons first. Leo Szilard, who had fled Hungary and later Germany, was haunted by this possibility and drove himself and others relentlessly. At the same time, he was among the first to recognize the long-term implications of nuclear weapons and would later lead efforts to prevent their use against Japan.

The secrecy requirements created unusual situations. Scientists couldn’t discuss their work with their families, leading to strained relationships. Laura Fermi, Enrico’s wife, later wrote about the strange transformation in her husband’s routine and the mysterious importance of his work that she couldn’t understand. Young physicists found themselves unable to publish their research, effectively putting their careers on hold for the duration of the war.

Despite the pressures, the Met Lab developed a unique culture that combined intense scientific work with moments of levity. Fermi was known for his lunchtime physics problems, challenging colleagues with questions that seemed simple but revealed deep insights. The international character of the team led to a rich cultural exchange, with scientists sharing not just ideas but also recipes, languages, and perspectives on the war.

The Plutonium Challenge

As 1943 progressed, the Met Lab’s focus increasingly turned to plutonium. This new element, first produced in microscopic quantities at Berkeley, had never existed in weighable amounts. The Met Lab chemists faced the daunting task of developing chemical processes to separate plutonium from uranium and fission products without ever having seen the element they were trying to isolate.

Glenn Seaborg’s team performed miracles of microchemistry, developing techniques to work with invisible amounts of material. They determined plutonium’s chemical properties, discovered its multiple oxidation states, and developed the bismuth phosphate process that would be used at the Hanford production facility. This work required not just scientific brilliance but also extraordinary experimental skill – a single mistake could lose months of reactor production.

The metallurgists faced equally daunting challenges. Plutonium, they discovered, was perhaps the most complex metal ever studied. It had six different crystal structures (allotropes), each with different densities and properties. The metal would undergo phase transitions at relatively low temperatures, causing it to expand and contract in ways that confounded engineers trying to design weapons components. Understanding and controlling these properties became crucial to the success of the implosion design that would be used in the Trinity test and the Nagasaki bomb.

Ethical Awakening

As the reality of nuclear weapons became clearer, many Met Lab scientists began to grapple with the ethical implications of their work. The laboratory became a center for what would later be called the “scientists’ movement” against nuclear weapons. In June 1945, James Franck led a committee that produced the Franck Report, arguing against the military use of nuclear weapons without first demonstrating them to the world in an uninhabited area.

Leo Szilard circulated a petition signed by 70 Met Lab scientists urging President Truman not to use the bomb against Japan without warning. These efforts reflected the profound transformation in thinking among scientists who had begun the project fearing Nazi nuclear weapons but now faced the reality that their creation would be used against a nearly defeated Japan.

The debates at the Met Lab were intense and sometimes bitter. Some scientists argued that using the bomb would save lives by ending the war quickly. Others maintained that crossing the nuclear threshold would fundamentally change international relations and potentially doom humanity. These discussions, held in offices and cafeterias around the University of Chicago, represented one of the first serious attempts by scientists to grapple with their social responsibility for the technologies they create.

Transition to Peace

With the end of World War II, the Met Lab faced an uncertain future. Many scientists wanted to return to academic life, while others saw the importance of continuing nuclear research under civilian control. The laboratory’s transformation into Argonne National Laboratory in 1946 represented a new model for government-sponsored scientific research.

The post-war period also saw efforts to educate the public about nuclear energy. Met Lab scientists gave public lectures, wrote articles, and established the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists with its famous “Doomsday Clock.” They worked to demystify nuclear science while warning about the dangers of nuclear war, trying to create an informed citizenry capable of making decisions about nuclear policy.

The transition wasn’t smooth. Security restrictions continued, limiting what scientists could publish. The beginning of the Cold War brought new pressures for weapons development, disappointing those who had hoped for international control of atomic energy. Some scientists left nuclear research entirely, disillusioned by the military applications of their work.

Scientific Legacy

The Met Lab’s scientific contributions extended far beyond the first chain reaction. The laboratory pioneered reactor physics, establishing the mathematical framework for designing nuclear reactors that is still used today. The neutron physics developed at the Met Lab became the foundation for both power reactors and research reactors worldwide.

The chemistry developed at the Met Lab revolutionized the field of actinide chemistry. The techniques for handling radioactive materials, the understanding of radiation chemistry, and the separation processes developed for plutonium all became fundamental to nuclear science. The laboratory’s work on transuranium elements opened an entirely new area of the periodic table for exploration.

Perhaps most importantly, the Met Lab established the model for large-scale, interdisciplinary scientific research. The collaboration between physicists, chemists, engineers, and mathematicians demonstrated that complex technological challenges required diverse expertise. This model would be replicated in subsequent national laboratories and major research projects.

Impact on Chicago and Beyond

The presence of the Met Lab transformed the University of Chicago into a major center for nuclear research. The university’s physics department, already strong, became one of the world’s leading centers for nuclear and particle physics. The tradition of excellence established during the Manhattan Project continued to attract top scientists and students.

The broader Chicago area benefited from the nuclear expertise developed at the Met Lab. Argonne National Laboratory, located in the western suburbs, became one of the nation’s premier research facilities. Nuclear engineering programs at area universities produced generations of nuclear engineers. The region developed a concentration of nuclear-related industries and expertise that continues today.

The Met Lab also left a more subtle legacy in the culture of scientific responsibility. The debates and discussions that took place in Hyde Park helped establish the principle that scientists have an obligation to consider the social implications of their work. This principle, though often honored more in the breach than the observance, remains an important ideal in scientific ethics.

Preserving History

Today, the site of CP-1 is marked by a Henry Moore sculpture, “Nuclear Energy,” on the University of Chicago campus. The abstract bronze form, suggestive of both a mushroom cloud and a human skull, captures the dual nature of nuclear energy – its potential for both creation and destruction. The site is a National Historic Landmark, though few visitors realize they are standing where the nuclear age began.

Efforts to preserve the Met Lab’s history face challenges. Many documents remain classified, and the participants are passing away. Oral history projects have captured some personal accounts, but much detail has been lost. The physical artifacts – instruments, notebooks, even pieces of graphite from CP-1 – are scattered in museums and archives around the world.

The story of the Met Lab is taught in various ways – as scientific triumph, as the beginning of the nuclear age, as a cautionary tale about the relationship between science and war. Each generation reinterprets this history through its own lens, finding new relevance in the choices made by those scientists in the 1940s.

Modern Relevance

The Met Lab’s legacy remains highly relevant in contemporary debates about nuclear technology. As the world grapples with climate change, nuclear power – the peaceful descendant of CP-1 – is being reconsidered as a low-carbon energy source. The safety concerns and waste disposal issues that plague nuclear power can be traced back to fundamental choices made in the early days of nuclear development.

The proliferation concerns that worried Met Lab scientists have become reality. The knowledge that uranium can be enriched and plutonium can be produced in reactors has spread worldwide. The international control regime that scientists like Szilard and Franck advocated for was never fully realized, leading to our current world of nuclear weapons states and proliferation risks.

The Met Lab’s model of government-sponsored research continues to shape American science policy. The debate over the proper role of government in funding basic research, the balance between classified and open research, and the responsibility of scientists for the applications of their work all echo discussions that began in Hyde Park in the 1940s.

Conclusion: The Transformation of Science

The Chicago Metallurgical Laboratory represents a pivotal moment in the history of science – the transformation of nuclear physics from an academic pursuit to a technology with world-changing implications. In less than four years, the Met Lab took humanity from the theoretical understanding of nuclear fission to the reality of nuclear reactors and weapons. This achievement required not just scientific brilliance but also organizational innovation, interdisciplinary collaboration, and confrontation with profound ethical questions.

The scientists who worked at the Met Lab were aware they were making history. Fermi’s careful preservation of the instruments from CP-1, the signed Chianti bottle wrapper, and the numerous personal accounts all reflect this historical consciousness. They understood that December 2, 1942, marked a boundary between eras – before and after humanity could release nuclear energy.

Yet the Met Lab’s story is not simply one of scientific triumph. It is also a story of moral complexity, of brilliant minds wrestling with the implications of their creations, of refugees from fascism inadvertently creating the most destructive weapons ever devised. The laboratory’s evolution from pure research to weapons development to post-war civilian applications mirrors the broader trajectory of nuclear technology in society.

Today, as we face new technological revolutions in artificial intelligence, biotechnology, and other fields, the Met Lab’s history offers important lessons. It demonstrates both the power of focused scientific effort and the importance of considering broader implications from the beginning. The debates that echoed through the halls of Eckhart Hall about scientific responsibility, international cooperation, and the control of dangerous technologies remain as relevant today as they were in 1945.

The Chicago Metallurgical Laboratory gave humanity the power of the atom. How we choose to use that power – for weapons or reactors, for destruction or creation – remains one of the central challenges of our technological age. In that sense, we are all still living in the world that was born in a squash court beneath Stagg Field on a cold December afternoon in 1942.

---

Sources

Authoritative Sources:

• Argonne National Laboratory - Successor institution and historical archives
• University of Chicago - Historical records and documentation
• Atomic Heritage Foundation - Manhattan Project history
• National Archives - Historical documents and records
• American Physical Society - Physics history and documentation