Welcome to the NavList Message Boards.

NavList:

A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding

Compose Your Message

Message:αβγ
Message:abc
Add Images & Files
    or...
       
    Reply
    Re: Iodide:
    From: Gary LaPook
    Date: 2011 Mar 19, 18:15 -0700
    When a reactor is shut sown it continues to release energy due to decay of radioactive products which amounts to 6.5% of the prior power output at the time of shut down.  From this 6.5% the decay heat drops off rapidly given by the formula

    P now = P at shutdown X .066 (time in seconds since shutdown) ^ -.2

    The reactors were shut down at approximatly 0500 Z March 11 and it is approximately 0000Z March 20th now. Eight days and nineteen hours have elapsed, 759,600 seconds so the decay heat now should be only 0.44%. The reactors power output are 784 mw so the decay heat now is 3.48 mw. It takes 628 watt-hours to boil a liter of water so the reactor will be able to boil 5542 liters per hour, 92 liters per minute and this is the amount of water that must me fed into the reactor core now to keep it from melting further.

    gl


    --- On Sat, 3/19/11, Alan <alan202---.net> wrote:

    From: Alan <alan202---.net>
    Subject: [NavList] Re: Iodide:
    To: NavList@fer3.com
    Date: Saturday, March 19, 2011, 4:45 PM

    Lu:

    The following excerpted from your post, "The core remains hot, though, and in both cases auxiliary cooling systems designed to cool the core failed."

    It would appear that, putting it politely, insufficient attention was given to the necessity, the importance of maintaining the availability, the flow of cooling water.

    Re TMI, from what I’ve read about it, the following seemed to have been a major contributor to problems there. Instrument failure, as follows. It seems that the situation, particular valving being open or closed, was not indicated, as it should have been, which reflected the below mentioned poor instrument design.

    The valve in question was solenoid operated. Instrument panel indicators showed the position of the solenoid, which in theory would have indicated the situation with the valve, open or closed. Unfortunately, the "push rod" or "pull rod", whichever it was, which actually operated the valve had been disconnected from the valve itself, so that while the solenoid was "pushing" or "pulling", due to it's being disconnected from the valve, nothing happened, though instrument/control panel indicators said otherwise, ergo bad instrument design. Limit switches attached to or mounted on the valve itself would have shown the position of the valve itself.

    The foregoing represents my understanding of the incident, which could be wrong.

    ----------------------------------------------------------------
    NavList message boards and member settings: www.fer3.com/NavList
    Members may optionally receive posts by email.
    To cancel email delivery, send a message to NoMail[at]fer3.com
    ----------------------------------------------------------------

    File:


       
    Reply
    Browse Files

    Drop Files

    NavList

    What is NavList?

    Join NavList

    Name:
    (please, no nicknames or handles)
    Email:
    Do you want to receive all group messages by email?
    Yes No

    You can also join by posting. Your first on-topic post automatically makes you a member.

    Posting Code

    Enter the email address associated with your NavList messages. Your posting code will be emailed to you immediately.
    Email:

    Email Settings

    Posting Code:

    Custom Index

    Subject:
    Author:
    Start date: (yyyymm dd)
    End date: (yyyymm dd)

    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site