OT - TV Mini Series HBO Chernobyl

On 23/05/2019 14:45, RJH wrote:

Then there is no waqy it could have been in the megaton range,
I would say a steam explosion might make a kiloton or two, but that's it.
And hot metal hitting water downt really explode.

You dont need a link to prove that the sky is blue.
Only one mechånism known to man does megaton level excplosins and thats an H-bomb

Someone has to do it. To keep thickos like you educated.,

--
You can get much farther with a kind word and a gun than you can with a
kind word alone.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 23/05/2019 15:23, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

A link to disprove a publicly documented account, *in context*. Thicko.

Bless :-)
--
Cheers, Rob

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Science is not a question of belief. It's about doing the sums yourself and thus seeing whether an assertion is plausible. And at this point, making an assertion is all that your "on-record nuclear physicist" has done.
--
"The EU Customs Union is a racket that defends producers in rich countries
against producers in poor countries."
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 23/05/2019 14:45, RJH wrote:

OK diy science. How much thermal energy was in the core.
We know the core temperature was in the region that would melt concrete, maybe 1500 Celsius.
We know the mass of the core, maybe 190 tons.
I'm not sure of the specific heat capacity of the Nuclear core but I think 1 J/K/g is a ball park overestimate. Water is 4 J/K/g, gold is 0.129, concrete is 0.88
So the energy of 190 tons for a 1500C change is
    1500K * 190e6 g * 1 J/K/g = 2.85e11 J
1 Ton of TNT is 4.18e9 Joules.
So core energy in Tons TNT equivalent = 2.85e11 J / 4.18e9 J = 68 Tons TNT.     
So if we transfer all the (overestimated) thermal energy in the core instantaneously into an explosion we get about 68 Tons TNT.
So in the bounds of rounding, 2-4 Megatons TNT, 68 Tons is nothing, approx 0.002% of the energy needed.
So if there was no mention of a nuclear explosion where did all the rest of the energy come from?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 23/05/2019 16:00, Pancho wrote:

I have no idea why you're doing sums - have you even seen the video?
Why do you think the scientist came to the conclusion he reached?
--
Cheers, Rob

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

To get an idea of the maximum energy that could possibly be involved.

You tell us - it's your link.
--
There's no obfuscated Perl contest because it's pointless.

- Jeff Polk
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 23/05/2019 16:58, RJH wrote:

It is the way science works. You make a claim and then explain why. So that other people can understand.

When you say scientist what do you mean?
In the video he says "Our experts studied and concluded". So he sounds like a manager, probably unqualified, rather than a scientist.
If I were to guess why he said it, some tech told him the radioactive fallout would be equivalent to a 2-4 megaton nuke and he misunderstood, but I really don't have a clue.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 23/05/2019 16:58, RJH wrote:

To demobstrate that the vodeo was utter bollocks?

Because it wasnt his field of experitise, because he wanted to be controversial, becuase he was paid to, because he lied?
--
Labour - a bunch of rich people convincing poor people to vote for rich
people
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 24/05/2019 06:40, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Because he wasn't a scientist? I'd confine use of the term to those who deserve it. The calculations provided by myself and Pancho showing five orders of magnitude discrepancy are barely A level. In fact with half an hour's googling anyone with O level maths equivalent could have duplicated them.
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Because they probably did but wanted got big it all up of course. As II say watch the horizons made at the time.
Incidentally are you aware that one of the reactors there was powering a huge over the horizon radar experiment, known to radio hams as The Woodpecker as it sounded like one on all frequencies in the shortwave bands. The powers needed were truly mind blowing, and it was all hidden in a forest not far from the reactor site. Brian
--
----- --
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thursday, 23 May 2019 16:59:47 UTC+1, Brian Gaff wrote:

That appeared on "Abandoned Engineering" on "Yesterday" about a year ago.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duga_radar
https://www.google.com/search?rlz 1AVNG_enGB731GB753&q=Woodpecker+abandoned+engineering&tbm=isch&source=univ&sa=X&ved*hUKEwi--OmFl7LiAhVUQxUIHehiAosQ7Al6BAgIEA0&biw9&bihP0#imgrc=azhLcJBSMNSBzM:
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 23/05/2019 16:59, Brian Gaff wrote:

Are you sure you aren't thinking of the American "tropospheric heater", using the atmosphere as a LF antenna.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Many of us heard the Woodpecker.
--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 23/05/2019 16:59, Brian Gaff wrote:

Hardly "mind-blowing" powers. IIRC the Light Programme / Radio 2 long wave transmitter was 1500 kW. (As well as 1500 metres).
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 23/05/2019 13:20, Pancho wrote:

It might have been if it happened over a week or ten. A very slow explosion.

Its not that difficult once you know how to make the tungsten mirrors and realise you don't use hydrogen gas.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I've not seen this series and don't intend to but this is bollocks.
There would be a "thermal" explosion because the core is very hot and the water would get turned very fast into steam. This steam would generate a high pressure, but once that dissipated that would be that.
I remember in '79 when I was in the US, a lot of ignorant twerps were wetting themselves about what the core would do at Three-Mile Island. Nothing, in the event. All these fatheads imagined it would melt its way through to the centre of the Earth. If it did, of course, then it would do no more than join all the other radioactive material in the Earth's core (which is what makes the core hot and molten).
What actually happened at Chernobyl is what anyone applying two seconds thought knew would happen. The core was molten and at critical, because it was still in its container and was constrained in shape. Then it melted through the bottom of the container, and through the floor, and started spattering onto the floor below, thus spreading out, and *ceasing* *to* *be* *critical*. Whereupon it started to cool down and solidified into the "boot" shape which is what is left in the basement under where the reactor was.
--
"What causes poverty?" Wrong question. Poverty is our primordial state. The
real question is, "What causes wealth?"
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 23/05/2019 14:48, Tim Streater wrote:

And that is exactly why the seconbdary containment is designed that shape. To do exactly that.
But I do not think 3MI was still critical when it melted....
"...heat and pressure increased in the reactor coolant system, causing the reactor to perform an emergency shutdown (SCRAM). Within eight seconds, control rods were inserted into the core to halt the nuclear chain reaction. The reactor continued to generate decay heat and, because steam was no longer being used by the turbine, heat was no longer being removed from the reactor's primary water loop."
Si te reactor SCRAMMED and went sub critical.
"Once the secondary feedwater pumps stopped, three auxiliary pumps activated automatically. However, because the valves had been closed for routine maintenance, the system was unable to pump any water. The closure of these valves was a violation of a key Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) rule, according to which the reactor must be shut down if all auxiliary feed pumps are closed for maintenance. This was later singled out by NRC officials as a key failure."
Human error compunded another problem...,
"The loss of heat removal from the primary loop and the failure of the auxiliary system to activate caused the primary loop pressure to increase, triggering the pilot-operated relief valve at the top of the pressurizer – a pressure active-regulator tank – to open automatically. The relief valve should have closed when the excess pressure had been released, and electric power to the solenoid of the pilot was automatically cut, but the relief valve stuck open because of a mechanical fault. The open valve permitted coolant water to escape from the primary system, and was the principal mechanical cause of the primary coolant system depressurization and partial core disintegration that followed."
So it was decay heat and a partial meltdown. Same as FUKU.
--
Any fool can believe in principles - and most of them do!



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Yes it did melt down most certainly, but the steam evaporated not exploded.
I think you would not need to subscribe to hbo just get hold of the various horizon programs about it. My favourite was the Russian soldier with a lead apron taking pot shots at what they called the elephants foot bit of steaming melted core in the basement from round a corner with two scientists with him. they then send in a small toy radio controlled car with a tv camera sticky taped to it.
Hi tech. Brian
--
----- --
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Pancho wrote:

Not something I know much about, but I don't think Uranium would explode in the way that something like Plutonium would, it would just melt into a non-critical configuration. There would be lots of other fission products dispersed in the steam explosion (in Chernobyl they put a huge tank of water under the reactor, which I believe is a bad idea), like isotopes of Xenon (which the body has no use for) and Iodine (which the body will take up) and Caesium (which the body might think is Calcium). Different types of reactor produce different decay products; but I don't think any reactor can produce a 'nuclear' explosion. Or maybe the ones that are designed to produce Plutonium can. I know there will be someone here who can explain a bit better. I'm interested in this sort of thing, but don't really have the Physics knowledge.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 24/05/2019 10:51, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:

U235 and Pu239 explode in very much the same way. Actually it's quite a bit more difficult to get a good bang out of plutonium. The Richard Rhodes book explains it quite well.
, it would just melt into

Correct (although expansion of steam may throw it around a bit). You might have seen film of the very brave fire fighters and soldiers on the roof of the Chernobyl turbine hall, wearing lead aprons and shovelling bits of fuel element over the edge.
There would be lots of other fission

No they didn't, although there are "steam suppression systems" in some boiling water reactors that are a bit like this; but not directly under the reactors.
, which I believe is a bad idea), like

The body might confuse caesium with sodium. It's strontium that it confuses with calcium.
.

Well it does rather depend on how you define this. Some reactors can go "prompt critical".
Or maybe the ones

The usual ones as used in the UK and US can't.
I know there will be

Agreed
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.