It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Japan declares 'nuclear emergency' after quake

page: 223.htm
513
<< 220  221  222    224  225  226 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 04:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Imperium Americana



I made it to page three, then checked the publication date: February 1988!!!!!!

My God! First we find out that Zircaloy has a problem with liberating hydrogen from the steam then becoming flammable in an accident and now we find out it tends to balloon and burst under the same conditions?

Forget whether I have seen the document (I hadn't), has anyone in the nuclear industry seen it? I am starting to think all the supposed 'tests' run on the equipment used are just smoke and mirrors...

Experiments on Ballooning in Pressurized and Transiently Heated Zircaloy-4 Tubes

TheRedneck




posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 04:09 PM
link   
reply to post by 00nunya00

I don't now for sure, but from the reports I would think there is no graphite in these reactors. There are several reactor designs, and that one may have been form the company that made the Chernobyl reactors.

TheRedneck



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 04:11 PM
link   
reply to post by EnhancedInterrogator

That is the theory... never been actually tested in a meltdown. We can only hope.

TheRedneck



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 04:17 PM
link   
What do you guys make of this?

They say all six reactor Contain plutonium.

www.foxnews.com...



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 04:18 PM
link   
reply to post by TheRedneck
 


that is right, feb 1988. Those are not the same zircaloy tubes as those in the test, these tubes are made with zircaloy but have been hardened on the exterior with zirconium dioxide.

en.wikipedia.org...
edit on 18-3-2011 by TheLastStand because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 04:20 PM
link   
reply to post by MoonandStar
 


please refer back a few pages, redneck posted about the production of plutonium in any nuclear plant that uses uranium. So yes it is correct, however, the concentrations of plutonium in the mox fuel rods is much higher than that which can be found in a spent uranium rod.



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 04:22 PM
link   
reply to post by MoonandStar
 


They do, as do all uranium rods----it's a byproduct of the fission process. It is not, however, in the same concentrations of the "more dangerous" type of plutonium that is a risk with the MOX rods and their spent rods as well. There are different types of plutonium created from the process, and only one type, I believe, is useful for further reactions and whatnot. The rest is kind of useless waste material, still radioactive but not in the same alarming way.



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 04:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheLastStand
reply to post by MoonandStar
 


please refer back a few pages, redneck posted about the production of plutonium in any nuclear plant that uses uranium. So yes it is correct, however, the concentrations of plutonium in the mox fuel rods is much higher than that which can be found in a spent uranium rod.


Thanx.



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 04:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheLastStand
reply to post by Imperium Americana
 


The guy from IAEA that I was talking to suggested the zircaloy tubes undergo a hardening process where a layer of zirconium dioxide is created. How does this change the equation, seeing as we are going there once again?


Not much all Zirconium and Zirconium alloys react to oxygen and produce a passivation layer, like titanium or aluminum. So even these test samples would have the passivation layer as well. Besides that layer is really more for corrosion resistance. Not for thermal or mechanical properties.



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 04:30 PM
link   
I have to stop and say, I am impressed by how quickly some of the posters that have been in this thread have come up to speed on nuclear reaction technology.


Good show, folks!


TheRedneck



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 04:31 PM
link   
Well the gentleman specifically said that it was a treatment, not some passive oxidization but a treatment designed to penetrate and convert a nice thick layer for the purposes of transformation toughening and to reduce the development of hydrides. And yes indeed it is for corrosion resistance but I would challenge that statement regarding that it is only for that. I doubt any engineer would overlook the transformation toughening properties of the substance. There are too many bonuses involved not to wish to make that layer as thick as possible; I think this material in a specific phase would be more ideal than zircaloy any day of the week.
edit on 18-3-2011 by TheLastStand because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 04:32 PM
link   
Getting really quiet out there. Aside from connecting the power line that they won't use until tomorrow, have there been any developments today?



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 04:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheRedneck
I have to stop and say, I am impressed by how quickly some of the posters that have been in this thread have come up to speed on nuclear reaction technology.


Good show, folks!


TheRedneck


Yes! I'm one of them.

In fact I reckon I know so much about the process now that I'm finding myself thinking about how to make one.



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 04:34 PM
link   
reply to post by TheRedneck
 


Never wanted to learn. This technology should not be used, it's like giving gallon of gasoline and a pack of matches to a 3 year old and saying "don't make a mess".



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 04:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheRedneck
I have to stop and say, I am impressed by how quickly some of the posters that have been in this thread have come up to speed on nuclear reaction technology.


Good show, folks!


TheRedneck


Yes thanks to people like you. Also new generation youth are much brighter and smarter now. Take my 4 year old sun for example, things he talks about, he does...amazes me. We used to wonder around like idiots while we were at his age. The coming generations will be brighter and more concerned about the world we live in for sure.



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 04:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheLastStand
reply to post by TheRedneck
 


that is right, feb 1988. Those are not the same zircaloy tubes as those in the test, these tubes are made with zircaloy but have been hardened on the exterior with zirconium dioxide.

en.wikipedia.org...
edit on 18-3-2011 by TheLastStand because: (no reason given)



Might want to check the wiki page on passivation while you at it.

Besides nothing in that white paper even touches on the hydrogen hydrogen embrittlement issues these tubes faced.



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 04:38 PM
link   
reply to post by TheRedneck
 



From what you are telling me, it seems therefore reasonable to just dump huge amounts of a coolant, like liquid nitrogen, onto it, and then while everything is slowed down, build a huge concrete-lead coffin around it and let hell itself swallow it up. More or less, box and ship to space.



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 04:38 PM
link   
reply to post by TheRedneck
 


Yes, thank you for sharing your wisdom ... it's much appreciated.



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 04:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Unity_99
 


Sir, if you are too impatient to read the truth and find things out, then what you speak is not the truth, but in fact the result of panicked lies from the media that feeds you.

TL;DR: You're not denying ignorance. You are putting it out.



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 04:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheLastStand
Well the gentleman specifically said that it was a treatment, not some passive oxidization but a treatment designed to penetrate and convert a nice thick layer for the purposes of transformation toughening and to reduce the development of hydrides. And yes indeed it is for corrosion resistance but I would challenge that statement regarding that it is only for that. I doubt any engineer would overlook the transformation toughening properties of the substance. There are too many bonuses involved not to wish to make that layer as thick as possible; I think this material in a specific phase would be more ideal than zircaloy any day of the week.
edit on 18-3-2011 by TheLastStand because: (no reason given)


You do understand that zirconium oxide is rust...right. Ok rust is iron oxide, but you know what I am saying. This guy said that they put an extra thick layer of rust to increase the mechs.? Really.

Now it may reduce the hydrides...in fact that would make a certain amount of sence, but the white paper does nto deal with the hydrides nor the potential for embrittlement.




top topics



 
513
<< 220  221  222    224  225  226 >>

log in

join