Dreams-Visions
Member
yea from what I understand, it had to do with the design of the control rods that were tipped with graphite (increasing reactions before the rods could get in far enough to decrease reactions) and the positive effect that steam (the voids the bubbles cause) had, which added to the reactions instead of reducing them for long enough to blow the top.Hari Seldon said:In my Nuclear Physics class I had years ago they explained the reason why a Chernobyl style catastrophe could never happen anymore, and in fact was impossible to happen in western reactors at the time. I wish I remembered the science, but it had to do with the design of the fuel, the Soviets designed it for maximum power but it had like a positive feedback effect that could cause an explosion if the operators were not careful. The western fuel was designed with negative feedback, such that the fuel would burn itself out if left unattended - at the cost of less power.
But as someone who interned at American civilian plants, you guys would be amazed at how old the tech is. I'm talking like light bulbs instead of LEDs, vacuum tubes instead of ICs, that kind of thing. They need to build new ones.
but fuck man...when you turn off all the fucking safe-guards, transfer authority from computers to humans AND ignore the alarm sounds...as an untrained person...it feels like the only real lesson learned here is how a chain-reaction of stupidity can cause bigass disasters. if there hadn't been this caliber of abject incompetence in control, this shit simply would not have happened.
edit: wiki says:
- The reactor had a dangerously large positive void coefficient. The void coefficient is a measurement of how a reactor responds to increased steam formation in the water coolant. Most other reactor designs have a negative coefficient, i.e. they attempt to decrease heat output when the vapor phase in the reactor increases, because if the coolant contains steam bubbles, fewer neutrons are slowed down. Faster neutrons are less likely to split uranium atoms, so the reactor produces less power (a negative feed-back). Chernobyl's RBMK reactor, however, used solid graphite as a neutron moderator to slow down the neutrons, and the water in it, on the contrary, acts like a harmful neutron absorber. Thus neutrons are slowed down even if steam bubbles form in the water. Furthermore, because steam absorbs neutrons much less readily than water, increasing the intensity of vaporization means that more neutrons are able to split uranium atoms, increasing the reactor's power output. This makes the RBMK design very unstable at low power levels, and prone to suddenly increasing energy production to a dangerous level. This behavior is counter-intuitive, and this property of the reactor was unknown to the crew.
- A more significant flaw was in the design of the control rods that are inserted into the reactor to slow down the reaction. In the RBMK reactor design, the lower part of each control rod was made of graphite and was 1.3 meters shorter than necessary, and in the space beneath the rods were hollow channels filled with water. The upper part of the rodthe truly functional part that absorbs the neutrons and thereby halts the reactionwas made of boron carbide. With this design, when the rods are inserted into the reactor from the uppermost position, the graphite parts initially displace some coolant. This greatly increases the rate of the fission reaction, since graphite (in the RBMK) is a more potent neutron moderator (absorbs far fewer neutrons than the boiling light water). Thus for the first few seconds of control rod activation, reactor power output is increased, rather than reduced as desired. This behavior is counter-intuitive and was not known to the reactor operators.
- Other deficiencies besides these were noted in the RBMK-1000 reactor design, as were its non-compliance with accepted standards and with the requirements of nuclear reactor safety.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101213/ap_on_sc/eu_ukraine_chernobyl_tourismDarklord said:I don't understand how you can have tours of Chernobyl these days. Surely the radiation is still way too high?
I feel so sorry for the men in that video.