RBMK also has flaws because its large positive void coefficient. thankfully other, newer reactors do this better, by not using graphite, and having a negative void coefficient. The Chernobyl reactor was an RBMK.
I think we learned that the RBMK reactor was NOT the future of nuclear energy. Granted, Chernobyl was more criminal negligence than faulty design, but there are still much better designs.
the pressure could no longer be held back, 1:23:45, explosion in an instant the reactor lid is blown off oxygen rushes in, combining with hydrogen and superheated graphite, the chain to disaster is complete
But if graphite only slows down the reaction, wouldn’t that mean they absorb some of the neutrons. So if say the reactor once peaked, with Xenon which is unstable, the graphite can act as a spike.
no because graphite has a high scattering cross section, but a low capture one, whereas something like water is both a moderator and an absorber and Cadmium (which makes the control rods) is basically a pure absorber.
@@filipporiva1864 So what happens when a Xenon poisoned reactor, filled with an absorber like water condenses; it creates a potentially rapid reaction like gasoline to a dying fire?
@@darkpaw1522 depends, I’m not sure wether it would increase or decrease reactivity, but I’d bet decrease. Water should moderate the reaction (graphite is a better moderator though), but also absorb and give an up scattering contribution, that’s why RBKM are positive void coefficient, without water the reactivity goes up. If the control rods are down I would guess condensing water should slow it down even more, but that’s already done by the rods, so its only contribution would be heat removal so the holes don’t deform from the heat and trap the rods, which happened in Chernobyl. Xenon is not playing a big role here, if anything it keeps the reaction at bay, the problem comes when it starts disappearing and you have to manage the increase reactivity transient
@@filipporiva1864 So what happened at Chernobyl was the reactor was Xenon poisoned because it’s been running on normal all that time. The test was done to put reactor at low power, but the Xenon lowered it too much and nearly killed the reactor. In turn, nearly all the rods were pulled to jump start the reactor. Problem is, the Xenon was still there and now with the rods down water was around the graphite tipped rods. When the rods thus nearly all pulled the reactor accelerated rapidly. The Xenon was a false negative coefficient. The reactor was boiling the water far too fast. The steam only accelerated the reaction, and the water surrounding the graphite itself too. To stop the reactor AZ-5 was pushed, which would lower the control rods again to shut the reactor Problems is the water around the graphite was steamy, filled with particles, and pressurized. There was no water. The reactor no was now out of control. The stack thus blew open. The water by this point was split between oxygen and hydrogen, air meets a fuel source, and second explosion happened. Did I get that correct? What I don’t understand is when would the graphite rides break? Why is graphite bad to use in this case, is it because it’s weak and breaks easily? How exactly did Cenon poisoning play a role here? Why is the rods getting jammed a problem, when scramming the reactor like a pressurized soup can is what caused it to explode; I mean, it was going to explode either way, a jammed rod here seems more of a good thing, right?
Fundamental lack of understanding of nuclear power. It’s not just a fancy way to move a turbine. It’s essentially unlimited energy without having to constantly add in new fuel line when burning coal. Stupid
My questiobis; if future space missiobs to interstellar space can be powered by water fron the ice off the moon. Why cant we use that technology on earth to convert H2o into power to supply our needs?!
The moon missions will break down water from h2o into just h and o (hydrogen and oxygen) then you can reconnect them later by burning the hydrogen in the oxygen, and turning it back into water. It takes a lot of electricity to do this, so they will be using solar panels, or more likely, nuclear batteries to make electricity. They don't use the converted water for power, they use it as fuel for rockets. Rockets can't run on electricity, they have to burn fuel, and carrying fuel is heavy, so it's much cheaper to make it there. If you use electricity to split water, and then burn the hydrogen and turn it back into water, you actually lose a lot of electricity, so you can't make a power plant like that. Look up entropy and the laws of thermodynamics if you want to learn more.
So now I understand that graphite is used to slow the flying neutrons down. But can someone explain why nuclear reactors *need* to slow the neutrons down? in the first place? Can it not otherwise?
During fission, neutrons are emitted with high energy, but U-235 nuclei don't easily absorb them. To make the reactor work, the neutrons must be slowed down by colliding with nuclei in a substance called a moderator. The moderator can't absorb any neutrons itself. For example, reactors that use natural uranium fuel, which only contains 0.7% of fissile uranium 235, need efficient moderators that absorb very few neutrons. Heavy water and pure graphite are good moderators for these reactors. some ai
My guess would be probably because for this type of application it would be suitable You slightly different properties of the element are slightly different. That’s just something we have to factor in.. my guess
all wrong . the water does'nt turn to steam instantly it just heats up and then is shifted to another water chamber that water turns to steam that turns the generators. the water that comes in contact is radio active and hence cannot be allowed to leave the closed circut. from stopping the water to turn into steam it is pumped at high pressure into reactor.
So this is the solution to fosil fuels but aren't we worried about the evaporating water that is water good clean water that we smoking into the ongoing heating planet problem that we live in so it's stupit
![Felix "Unfair" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Oswujxm2Ag0/mqdefault.jpg)
![BLACK BAG - Official Trailer [HD] - Only in Theaters March 14](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Du0Xp8WX_7I/mqdefault.jpg)
3.6 roentgen
not great, not terrible
😢😢😢😢
💥💥
its not 3 roentgen its 15000
Why do i get this?
@@miltonekThat was the joke
RBMK also has flaws because its large positive void coefficient. thankfully other, newer reactors do this better, by not using graphite, and having a negative void coefficient. The Chernobyl reactor was an RBMK.
He's in shock, get him outta here
The lid is off, the stack is burning I saw it!
What a great tv show
It’s both informative and easy to understand! Great job!
Glad you enjoyed it!
I think we learned that the RBMK reactor was NOT the future of nuclear energy. Granted, Chernobyl was more criminal negligence than faulty design, but there are still much better designs.
As long as we have arrived, 1:23:45, explosion.
the pressure could no longer be held back, 1:23:45, explosion in an instant the reactor lid is blown off oxygen rushes in, combining with hydrogen and superheated graphite, the chain to disaster is complete
But if graphite only slows down the reaction, wouldn’t that mean they absorb some of the neutrons. So if say the reactor once peaked, with Xenon which is unstable, the graphite can act as a spike.
no because graphite has a high scattering cross section, but a low capture one, whereas something like water is both a moderator and an absorber and Cadmium (which makes the control rods) is basically a pure absorber.
@@filipporiva1864 So what happens when a Xenon poisoned reactor, filled with an absorber like water condenses; it creates a potentially rapid reaction like gasoline to a dying fire?
@@darkpaw1522 depends, I’m not sure wether it would increase or decrease reactivity, but I’d bet decrease. Water should moderate the reaction (graphite is a better moderator though), but also absorb and give an up scattering contribution, that’s why RBKM are positive void coefficient, without water the reactivity goes up. If the control rods are down I would guess condensing water should slow it down even more, but that’s already done by the rods, so its only contribution would be heat removal so the holes don’t deform from the heat and trap the rods, which happened in Chernobyl. Xenon is not playing a big role here, if anything it keeps the reaction at bay, the problem comes when it starts disappearing and you have to manage the increase reactivity transient
@@filipporiva1864 So what happened at Chernobyl was the reactor was Xenon poisoned because it’s been running on normal all that time. The test was done to put reactor at low power, but the Xenon lowered it too much and nearly killed the reactor. In turn, nearly all the rods were pulled to jump start the reactor. Problem is, the Xenon was still there and now with the rods down water was around the graphite tipped rods.
When the rods thus nearly all pulled the reactor accelerated rapidly. The Xenon was a false negative coefficient. The reactor was boiling the water far too fast. The steam only accelerated the reaction, and the water surrounding the graphite itself too. To stop the reactor AZ-5 was pushed, which would lower the control rods again to shut the reactor Problems is the water around the graphite was steamy, filled with particles, and pressurized. There was no water. The reactor no was now out of control. The stack thus blew open. The water by this point was split between oxygen and hydrogen, air meets a fuel source, and second explosion happened. Did I get that correct?
What I don’t understand is when would the graphite rides break? Why is graphite bad to use in this case, is it because it’s weak and breaks easily? How exactly did Cenon poisoning play a role here? Why is the rods getting jammed a problem, when scramming the reactor like a pressurized soup can is what caused it to explode; I mean, it was going to explode either way, a jammed rod here seems more of a good thing, right?
Did you know Chernobyl it exploded in the graphite rods and jumping and exploded.
Good 👍😅😊😊😊
So, a fancy water wheel.
MOST electricity is generated by such "water wheels". (Steam turbines) Nuclear, Gas, Oil or Coal are the means of generating heat.
Fundamental lack of understanding of nuclear power. It’s not just a fancy way to move a turbine. It’s essentially unlimited energy without having to constantly add in new fuel line when burning coal. Stupid
Good sir
So what powers the pumps?
Nuclear fission is kinda hot🥵
Nuke
My questiobis; if future space missiobs to interstellar space can be powered by water fron the ice off the moon. Why cant we use that technology on earth to convert H2o into power to supply our needs?!
The moon missions will break down water from h2o into just h and o (hydrogen and oxygen) then you can reconnect them later by burning the hydrogen in the oxygen, and turning it back into water.
It takes a lot of electricity to do this, so they will be using solar panels, or more likely, nuclear batteries to make electricity. They don't use the converted water for power, they use it as fuel for rockets.
Rockets can't run on electricity, they have to burn fuel, and carrying fuel is heavy, so it's much cheaper to make it there.
If you use electricity to split water, and then burn the hydrogen and turn it back into water, you actually lose a lot of electricity, so you can't make a power plant like that.
Look up entropy and the laws of thermodynamics if you want to learn more.
So now I understand that graphite is used to slow the flying neutrons down. But can someone explain why nuclear reactors *need* to slow the neutrons down? in the first place? Can it not otherwise?
During fission, neutrons are emitted with high energy, but U-235 nuclei don't easily absorb them. To make the reactor work, the neutrons must be slowed down by colliding with nuclei in a substance called a moderator. The moderator can't absorb any neutrons itself.
For example, reactors that use natural uranium fuel, which only contains 0.7% of fissile uranium 235, need efficient moderators that absorb very few neutrons. Heavy water and pure graphite are good moderators for these reactors.
some ai
"It's not 3 Roentgen, It's 15 thousand"
Wait where circilation pumps?
Why isn't plutonium there in the periodic table
My guess would be probably because for this type of application it would be suitable You slightly different properties of the element are slightly different. That’s just something we have to factor in.. my guess
RBMK sounds familiar definitely not me thinking of reactor 4 in Chernobyl
Hey this was the reactor that are used in Chernobyl
A RBMK is for adults
But a child (me) enjoys watching it generate 1000 MWh.
3.6 roentgen? Not great not terrible
all wrong . the water does'nt turn to steam instantly it just heats up and then is shifted to another water chamber that water turns to steam that turns the generators. the water that comes in contact is radio active and hence cannot be allowed to leave the closed circut. from stopping the water to turn into steam it is pumped at high pressure into reactor.
'PromoSM' 👀
You didn't see graphite BECAUSE ITS NOT THERE
But also this RMK design is not great because you’ve already heard about what happened in Ukraine
Aand bad news, it exploded 😹
RBMK or RIDICULOUSLY BADLY MADE KETTLE
So this is the solution to fosil fuels but aren't we worried about the evaporating water that is water good clean water that we smoking into the ongoing heating planet problem that we live in so it's stupit
Чиво бл??