- #9,521
Joe Neubarth
- 238
- 1
Bioengineer01 said:
Looks to me like a thick fog bank rolled in.
Japan Earthquake: Nuclear Plants at Fukushima Daiichi
- Thread starter gmax137
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Earthquake Japan Nuclear Plants
In summary: RCIC consists of a series of pumps, valves, and manifolds that allow coolant to be circulated around the reactor pressure vessel in the event of a loss of the main feedwater supply.In summary, the earthquake and tsunami may have caused a loss of coolant at the Fukushima Daiichi NPP, which could lead to a meltdown. The system for cooling the reactor core is designed to kick in in the event of a loss of feedwater, and fortunately this appears not to have happened yet.
Looks to me like a thick fog bank rolled in.
- #9,522
Bioengineer01
- 123
- 0
Last temperature readings we got yesterday from SFP unit 4 were close to 90 C... That is darn too close to boiling...elektrownik said:
- #9,523
etudiant
Gold Member
- 1,239
- 128
causeceleb said:
Even if you disbelieve anything TEPCO says, it makes no sense to leave fuel in a dry reactor vessel, particularly if the fuel has been run for 6 months. It would be at best a messy workaround for the people maintaining the facility., for no plausible gain.
- #9,524
Bioengineer01
- 123
- 0
This means that the suspicion that there was fuel in RPV 4 was correct. We have speculated till hell froze over in other forums about this topic...causeceleb said:
- #9,525
Pu239
- 20
- 0
causeceleb said:
Exactly. The steam observed this morning was an unusual event (a larger than normal release) from Unit 4 (mainly) - and clearly distinguishable from fog. Also clearly different than the usual slow vapour release.
- #9,526
etudiant
Gold Member
- 1,239
- 128
Bioengineer01 said:
The closed circuit cooling system is supposed to be installed in July..
Meanwhile, my guess is that they will let the pool boil, because they cannot shore up the pool while it is overflowing radioactive water because new water is getting injected. Once they have that work done, it is likely that they will flush the pool with colder water.
- #9,527
SteveElbows
- 637
- 9
Thanks very much to everyone who posted about the issue of total radiation estimates and the water. It was very helpful and I shall digest this information over the weekend.
Im surprised it took this long for visible steam on the camera to create a fresh mini hysteria on the internet, given how long that particular camera has now been up and running, and that this is not the first time that impressive quantities have been visible. I shall go and review footage from earlier today but I don't expect to see anything too interesting.
One thing the webcam is actually good for is observing at least some of the earthquakes that can be felt on site. On several occasions I have been able to link the time of slight camera shaking with an earthquake that is reported online.
For example, the 19:39 point according to the TEPCO top banner timestamp of this video, which corresponds to roughly the 9 mins 44 point of actual youtube time of this video, seems like a good fit for the earthquake I am linking to below.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eac5zIZNwtc&feature=channel_video_title
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/recenteqsww/Quakes/usc00043ab.php
Im surprised it took this long for visible steam on the camera to create a fresh mini hysteria on the internet, given how long that particular camera has now been up and running, and that this is not the first time that impressive quantities have been visible. I shall go and review footage from earlier today but I don't expect to see anything too interesting.
One thing the webcam is actually good for is observing at least some of the earthquakes that can be felt on site. On several occasions I have been able to link the time of slight camera shaking with an earthquake that is reported online.
For example, the 19:39 point according to the TEPCO top banner timestamp of this video, which corresponds to roughly the 9 mins 44 point of actual youtube time of this video, seems like a good fit for the earthquake I am linking to below.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eac5zIZNwtc&feature=channel_video_title
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/recenteqsww/Quakes/usc00043ab.php
Last edited by a moderator:
- #9,528
Bioengineer01
- 123
- 0
Makes sense as a heat extraction mechanism, what about contamination of the site, will all that vapor carry out any more contaminants or "radioactive flies"?etudiant said:
Last edited:
- #9,529
clancy688
- 546
- 1
Ex-skf posted a building plan and a photo with explosion damage of Unit 3:
http://ex-skf.blogspot.com/2011/06/fukushima-i-nuke-plant-reactor-3-bldg_10.html
Looks burned...
http://ex-skf.blogspot.com/2011/06/fukushima-i-nuke-plant-reactor-3-bldg_10.html
Looks burned...
- #9,530
Joe Neubarth
- 238
- 1
clancy688 said:
If I remember right, they had a fire in Unit Three back in March.
- #9,531
etudiant
Gold Member
- 1,239
- 128
SteveElbows said:
Very clever!
While the closed circuit shot says "Live", there is no way to prove that it is not put through an edit loop, to censor undesirable images before they get broadcast. An earthquake is hard to plan for, however, so it should show whether the video is real time or not.
Unfortunately, I could not reconcile the time lines in your videos, so the status is till up in the air, whether it is real time or not. Have you come to a conclusion on this issue?
Last edited by a moderator:
- #9,532
etudiant
Gold Member
- 1,239
- 128
Bioengineer01 said:
Good question!
We must defer to those on this site with real nuclear expertise to estimate what the emissions from a full load of 6 month old fuel aged three months would be. Way above my pay grade.
- #9,533
htf
- 56
- 0
Why are you thinking that there was fuel in RPV 4? Would this explain something?Bioengineer01 said:
- #9,534
clancy688
- 546
- 1
Regarding the live feed:
I just realized that the west side of Unit 1 has been sprayed or painted with a yellow or brown substance. Is that probably the glue they're using to keep particles from being carried away by winds? But why are they only treating the east side of Unit 1 and nothing else?
I searched for the process, it can be seen on this video:
It starts at minute 1. 2006-06-09, 10:00.
I just realized that the west side of Unit 1 has been sprayed or painted with a yellow or brown substance. Is that probably the glue they're using to keep particles from being carried away by winds? But why are they only treating the east side of Unit 1 and nothing else?
I searched for the process, it can be seen on this video:
It starts at minute 1. 2006-06-09, 10:00.
Last edited by a moderator:
- #9,535
clancy688
- 546
- 1
etudiant said:
NUCENG posted some documents regarding the fission products in spent fuel. I think it was back in April. He also calculated the I131 inventory of a six month old core. You should find it with the search function.
https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=3255998&postcount=4302
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=493058 And maybe you get a few ideas out of this thread.
Last edited:
- #9,536
elektrownik
- 299
- 1
htf said:
This ? If (as we seen on underwater sfp 4 video) gate is undamaged, there is no other explanation...
[PLAIN]http://img535.imageshack.us/img535/3165/gggss.png
Last edited by a moderator:
- #9,537
Joe Neubarth
- 238
- 1
clancy688 said:
We were getting so much faulty data from TEPCO, I do not blame anybody for venting a little about it. After the massive explosion in Reactor Three TEPCO was still saying that they had pressure inside the reactor and finally on March Sixteenth told us that the reactor was at atmospheric pressure.
Reactor One was listed for weeks as having increasing pressure and temperature. Now, we know that was fiction as the Japanese have finally admitted that they had a melt down and a holy reactor vessel two to three days after the tsunami.
If we believed TEPCO they were going to get a firm Cold Shutdown in Six months at Fukushima. Ha!
They had to have known that they had three melted cores and damaged reactor vessels 72 hours after they were douched. Talking about cold shutdown was just for public consumption.
I don't know one reactor operator that I had contact with who believed that the cores were still intact one day after the accident. Total heat generated at five percent power as opposed to total heat dissipated said meltdown. Not just meltdown, but rapid meltdown.
- #9,538
Bodge
- 144
- 0
Watch the youtube video from 02:30 JST:
http://news.lucaswhitefieldhixson.com/2011/06/tepco-cam-blocked-out-by-vapor-event.html
Lots of smoke and steam, then fog?
EDIT: where is the best place to find up to date rad readings for the NPP?
http://news.lucaswhitefieldhixson.com/2011/06/tepco-cam-blocked-out-by-vapor-event.html
Lots of smoke and steam, then fog?
EDIT: where is the best place to find up to date rad readings for the NPP?
Last edited by a moderator:
- #9,539
ManuBZH
- 11
- 0
clancy688 said:
Actually, this has already been reported by SteveElbows on post #9406. With a more interesting fact that the previous video which holds an "action scene" showing some workers wandering in front of the camera.
Last edited by a moderator:
- #9,540
clancy688
- 546
- 1
ManuBZH said:
Oh, I guess I missed that post. So, any idea what it is?
- #9,541
Pu239
- 20
- 0
clancy688 said:
I think you mean the west side. Dust inhibitor.
Here's a map of the entire compound, with many labels:
http://bravenewclimate.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/fukushima_daiichi_map_plan.jpg
Last edited by a moderator:
- #9,542
clancy688
- 546
- 1
Pu239 said:
Uh, yeah. I'll edit my previous post. Thanks for the hint.
- #9,543
Pu239
- 20
- 0
Last edited by a moderator:
- #9,544
Bodge
- 144
- 0
Bioengineer01 said:
Why have these CTBTO guys stopped reporting?
There has never been a gap in the data like this:
http://www.bfs.de/de/ion/imis/spurenmessungen.html/#2
Nothing for the past 10 days...
Does anyone have academic contacts with bfs? Can any german speakers here contact them?
Last edited by a moderator:
- #9,545
elektrownik
- 299
- 1
Unit 3:
- #9,546
Pu239
- 20
- 0
If you draw a line from Unit 1 to Unit 4 you're basically walking due South. The camera is facing towards south-east.Pu239 said:
Looking at the camera, you're sort of looking south-ish, with east towards left, and west pointing right.
http://www.tepco.co.jp/nu/f1-np/camera/index-j.html
And, you will see a racoon if you stare long enough (near Unit 1), and a black crow [not a UFO]. The odd worker will show up, spraying dust inhibitor on bushes and other things. A robotic arm might be seen spraying walls - very adroitly I might add, impressive to watch.
Last edited by a moderator:
- #9,547
triumph61
- 68
- 0
elektrownik said:
The Gate was closed at 11.3-
But it could be demaged by Erthquake or Explosion. So the water get fromthe SFP to Reactor.
- #9,548
thehammer2
- 16
- 0
elektrownik said:
Last edited by a moderator:
- #9,549
clancy688
- 546
- 1
Bodge said:
That's what they write under the I131 and C137 graphs:
Since the beginning of may, activity concentrations of I131/C137 lie mostly under the verification limit of the respective measuring stations. The chart will be updated weekly.
Last edited by a moderator:
- #9,550
etudiant
Gold Member
- 1,239
- 128
Bodge said:
If I'm reading the document correctly, it is because they state that they have reached such a low level that it disappears into the background.
They speak of a 'minimal level for demonstrable presence', whichg the measurements have sunk into.
Last edited by a moderator:
- #9,551
clancy688
- 546
- 1
thehammer2 said:
The horizontal portion of the "L-shape" you're talking about is integrated into the long turbine building which's between the reactors and the sea. It is at the bottom of the picture. That can be easily verified since the reactor's wall has a giant "dent" on the right side. The dent is facing Unit 3, so the turbine building and the horizontal portion of the L-shape is below.
- #9,552
SteveElbows
- 637
- 9
ManuBZH said:
What I did not realize at the time was that less-sped up versions of these videos existed, so its possible to get a bit more detail once you use the faster version to spot hours where something visible happens.
I also did not realize that in the video after the one showing reactor 1 wall spraying, a similar activity being carried out at reactor 3 is just about visible, if memory serves me correctly this operation is in full flow by 11:30 of that day.
I had also missed another spraying event at reactor 1, they sprayed the 'roof' of the building in the video below, which makes for an interesting visual compared to the usually dull webcam.
http://www.youtube.com/user/fuku1long#p/u/62/ntjOm7x-KaY
- #9,553
clancy688
- 546
- 1
Joe Neubarth said:
Single threads for every Unit (such as the explosion thread for Unit 3) would be a very effective measure to organize this information monster.
But we somehow have to make sure that users won't use this thread for Unit specific discussions which could be outsourced into those threads... it's a pain in the *** to find informations or discussions in this megathread.
- #9,554
Quim
- 84
- 0
Joe Neubarth said:
I haven't kept up with Gunderson's analysis(s) although I have held a similar view that the added boost apparent in the #3 explosion footage came from a steam explosion created when a momentary criticality injected a burst of joules of heat into the pond.
Originally, I assumed that most of the contents of the FP were disgorged into the rising cloud, but after becoming more familiar with the quantity of material around the site (despite Tepco's unwillingness to actually disclose with any clarity what is there) I can see that there probably isn't enough hot material around the site to account for the entire contents of the FP.
But it isn't necessary for a criticality to have happened at the bottom of the pool, it could have occurred at any level of the rods. That something provided an added boost to the #3 explosion is seen beyond a doubt in the video, to my eyes.
That "the boost" came from the fuel pond is obvious from the video of the later wreckage. The pattern of wreckage of the roof joists makes that clear. And with the equipment crane lying directly over the containment vessel we know the blast could not have come from the reactor containment.
When I view the few seconds of the video you indicated which shows the round objects that could possibly be the tops of fuel rods in the pond, I do have to pause and look again to what happened to provide the source of energy for that boost - while the video doesn't actually confirm that there are fuel rods remaining in the position they were originally stored, it does suggest that possibility.
The salient event in the #3 explosion is the very directional blast seen rising up from the #3 building which I can have no doubt was a vectored blast.
In fact, there seems little doubt that it was a vectored steam explosion, as opposed to a more violent detonation. A steam explosion would be expected to cause the "slower" release of energy than what a chemical explosion or a fast criticality would provide and that is what we see in the video.
Thus, the basic premise remains unchanged.
The source of energy for that vertical blast originated in or just above the fuel pond, to say otherwise is akin to saying that there was no 500 meter vertical blast and that the chunks of heavy material seen coming off the column at about the 300 meter level were just some kind of illusion.
But that's not so.
So, how can I justify the criticality theory with the (possible) evidence of intact fuel rods (2) in the pond becomes the question of the day.
Obviously, the first theory would be that those round shapes are not what they appear to be, and that is quite possible.
Another way to approach the problem is to look closer at what a criticality event might have looked like. Would it be possible that a localized criticality created a steam pocket which ejected only some material?
The reason I struggle with these theories is simply because something beyond an explosion of hydrogen/oxygen gasses in open air sent that column of steam and debris skyward.
The original hydrogen blast can be seen to have been vectored southward (and upward) in the first few milliseconds of the event. This was followed by a less visible excursion to the north which was obscurred by smoke. Thus, the original blast was vectored in a south/north direction by the "cattle chute", it also sent some of its energy upward, that is visible in the stop action videos of the explosion.
But I can see no possible way that original blast could have been vectored straight up.
There was a second application of energy which was vectored skyward, that could only have come from the pond.
I am also in a discussion with Jorge Stolfi. Let's see how that develops.
- #9,555
SteveElbows
- 637
- 9
etudiant said:
I don't spend much time pondering sophisticated censorship by TEPCO in terms of editing, rather I expect that if any circumstances arise that they do not want to show, they will just switch the feed off completely. The time delay of some 30 seconds is freely acknowledged by TEPCO, and apart from possible technical reasons for this, that would give them a buffer to pull the feed before we saw the start of the unexpected event taking place, but I'll cross that bridge if we ever come to it.
I haven't tried too hard to line the TEPCO timestamp up with reality, there are differences between the time my devices tell me is now, the TEPCO timestamp, and the time that earthquakes are reported to happen, but they seem to be well within a minute of each other so I don't fret it. Plus I have no idea how long it can take earthquakes to be felt in locations a bit away from the epicentre, (any takers on this?), nor whether the webcam is only visibly affected by certain kinds of earthquake motion and not others.