Видео

Ah it was a mistake we all drank a little more then usual because it was November 29th my Birthday so we all let off some steam but guess we can all say it was the wrong steam that was let out comrade. We don't know if it was Sasha's fault or Vladimir we all drank some of Vladies home brew a fresh batch of that Gud Gud and the next thing we all knew AZ-5 explodes. Anyways we are all good even with all the radiation I'm still great I have a 3rd eye and 4 more fingers now whats wrong with that? My wife has No problem with it I tell you 😁

The reactor 4 disaster is actually a series of disasters - thanks for adding to our knowledge of what happened post explosion, even days later when electrical fires could have made it exponentially worse. The lack of a safety culture in the design of the power station is further evidenced by not building in manual or automatic systems to electrically isolate each reactor/turbine combination from each other in the event of an emergency.

Yes, there were several cases when fire or something else happened with no obvious reason. I mean, no one could trace the fire source. I was on the academic side to study a fire vs a reactor development-engineering team of the RBMK reactor. Legasov learned from such cases to request all experimental setups of Kurchatov IAE would be study against any potential not necessary realistic, but any potential disaster. I ran experiments that time to study flames and explosions, means that was an order for me to create a math model of my experimental setup for maximal possible disaster. I made it with conclusion I need to set several projects to study construction materials behavior. For instance, construction stainless steel rods set vertically changed their physical properties in fire differently vs same stainless-steel rods loaded horizontally. It is just one of the examples I pointed out in my math model of a disaster accident. Certainly, I pointed out a weather situation in Moscow to what direction hazard materials would be distributed by wind. Legasov said my model was good enough and the state doesn't have $$$$$ to run all safety projects I had proposed. Chernobyl lesson with magic fire wasn't learned. Society wasn't ready to deploy technologies safely.

Comrade Dyatlov would be proud of you! But he would order you out of the room anyway..

Anatoly Dyatlov and the Soviet Union government is didn't learned about this warning shot who did came from the reactor.

Just when you thought you knew about every one of Chernobyl's almost comically-numerous serious incidents, along comes That Chernobyl guy to tell you that in fact no, there was _another_ one!

B) Counduct the experiment at 700 MW Now I see it - the most crucial choice. This way the reactor doesnt drop to 30 MW. It doesnt have to be mitigated by withdrawing control rods. Xenon if it builds up at all is in totally neglible quantities. By the time experiment starts there is certainly safe amount of control rods inserted. Only thing that occurs is temperature spike, which in this case decreases reactivity. Even after test concludes there is no need to press AZ-5 button - operation as normal

wow . very luckily it didn't happen again.

Fukushima reactor leaking 500 tons highly radioactive water a week since 2011into all oceans & food chains , that is actual causing a slow extinction event of life on Earth . . was a US General Electric design & it's building overseen by GE & built right on the coast in an known Tsunami area with all it's backup generators in the basements where failure due to the expected Tsunami flooding guaranteed to occur & subsequent meltdown unavoidable . . nice , or am I missing something ?

Russia never bothered to scrub radioactivity from surrounds in any way shape or form early reactors . . majority reactor workers were gulag slaves & surrounds , well . . just settlements of future thought crime enemies of the people aka enemies of the paranoid mongol superman Stalin (look at its Asiatic eyes the mongrel Georgian)

Dyatlov was in charge during that night. He was supervising the test procedure. Decisions he made maximized the design flaws like Graphite displacers or the positive void coefficient. Finally, by starting the test sequence, he reduced the water flown through an Xenon-Poisened Reactor which nearly none of the control rods inserted - which immediately set the void coefficient in action. There is no chernobyl desaster without Dyatlov. Not great, pretty terrible.

Cool vid, keep it up

you misspelled soldier.

This is the best channel regarding these events. Thanks!

Lol control rods not to scale

This level of graphicsl complexity would have prevented the disaster had the soviets possesed such technology.

"It's burning in there. Nobody knowns exept me" (1 Second later) "Tourism in the EU is changin-" It's aways the weirdest ads that pop up saying "Tourism in the EU is changing" when you're watching a video about a hidden tale of the long ( and seemingly infinite) list of disasters and accidents at Chernobyl.

Always a great day when he uploads. I used to think that your videos were in a foreign language, but now I perfectly understand!

Btw I watched the video again and here is a bit of money it is not that much but I hope it helps:)

everyone is expendable in the end

Why was Leonid Telyadninov counted as a direct victim if he died in 2004?

Does the IAEA believe that Iran is ready kind of an off-the-cuff question but it's lurking in all of our minds. 😳

This is one time that I'm thankful for my dyscalculia, because it means that there's no way I'd have been allowed near that control room in the first place! The wise leaders of the Soviet Union would have instead have seen the propaganda value in my skill as a painter, and I'd have been safe(r) off in Moscow or Leningrad, teaching art in a respectable state sponsored school for young patriots who also had shown potential with a paintbrush. I'd probably be working on a masterpiece showing the glowing benefits of life in an atomgrad, all thanks to the Friendly Atom, comrades!

w video!!!! btw i was iodine-129 in vc yesterday :3 i find it funny how many accident's chernobyl has had

How did an incident like this escape attention so easily? And why had the electricity to Unit 4 not been cut immediately after the explosion? What an incredible oversight!

Just watched it it was very good :3

why would Dyatlov be telling the truth though? he was the scape goat, he was trying to absolve himself. it would be in the best interest of him and the other accused to lie... just saying 😀 He says that only AFTER the accident was it recognized that the RBMK operation is unstable at low power levels. is that true? did _nobody_ know this, or did only Dyatlov not know this? Has he never observed it himself? was he never told by other operators? was it officially known? or at least unofficially? i'd like to hear from somebody else than Dyatlov and Legasov - like an operator of another RBMK NPS. 🤔i read on an online forum that in his own paper from 1980 (about possible control rod improvements) Dyatlov himself talks about difficulties in controlling the reactor at low power. but i can't seem to be able to find any further mentions of that paper, so maybe that is a lie too 🤷‍♂

Love your channel. Very excited for a new video

Love your vids gonna watch this one rn

Brilliant! An Official Report that lies properly. It LIES WITH STYLE! Hint: When you blow up a nuclear reactor during a SAFTY TEST, then all of you F-ed up. Bigger Hint: DON'T RUN A SAFTY TEST on a fully fueled and functioning Nuclear Reactor!

I'm a noob here but could graphite just burn?

"2:25" - which is below insertion level - what level. Dyatlov in his book claimed there were 2.

The level of detail in your videos is amazing

Yeah, hindsight is 20/20. It is now universally recognized that operating ANY reactor with a poisoned core is a very very bad idea. Different reactors have their own Achilles heel. Just like RMBK's won't go full China Syndrome if they lose offsite power like G.E BWR's. (aka Fukushima daiichi).

So I know there would have been no reason to do this for the operators, but could pumping additional feedwater into the reactor shortly before finally pressing AZ-5 conceivably have prevented the accident? Or, instead of inserting the rods via AZ-5, having the operators insert them sequentially?

How much water the core would have needed for a 60 second black out? wouldn't a gravity fed water reservoir been the easiest fix?

Not in the least an expert. But every way you see it it was operators fault. You can't say a design defect is the culprit. When you disable all the automatic safety features and manually operate beyond regulated margins you can't possibly blame the design. Take a Lathe the most dangerous and obiquitous machine. Its inherently dangerous by design, but the design can't possibly be different otherwise it wouldn't work. If you utilize correctly it is mostly safe. But if you disregard safety procedures it becomes deadly. Those safety procedures are there for a reason, when you start to push the envelope you can't blame the design for utilizing it incorrectly.

I was waiting for this video now my chernobyl brain is complete

I’m 8 days late on 2 videos ain’t no way

subscribed just a few mins in; one can tell when there is substantial knowledge to be gained ;) just one thing tho: please consider investing in a better mic. can't really put my finger on it, but the audio is kinda flat/noisy. either way, great content!

C'mon, You have to have a void for a positive void coefficient to matter! My synopsis 2 minutes into the video. In Canada beating the Xenon poison is called 'beating the poison outage' Hard to do without boosters (no longer allowed) or adjuster rods. Did the Russians actually try to beat the poison outage by purposely creating voids in the core? If so, crazy.

I believe it was created to push more fuel to the hate of Russia that is already there at the moment with the war. I did like the series and personally bought it but it seems to be very misleading.

I had always wondered, a little different scenario - if the rods were brought back in one at time vs all at once if it would have made any difference. I've also seen quite a few comments that the lower rods did not have the same positive void coefficient issues due to the lack of the graphite tips? So if they had been brought back in or been triggered by the AZ-5 (which I believe I saw was a later change) it could have also helped or prevented the incident?

"the graphite displacers of the control rods were longer in 1975 at Leningrad unit 1 versus the graphite displaces of the control rods in 1986 at Chernobyl unit 4" (18:29) Тут стоило бы спросить: "Почему вытеснители стали короче?". И на этот вопрос есть конкретный ответ, хотя и малоизвестный. "О причинах и развитии аварии на 4м блоке ЧАЭС" (Федуленко, 2011): "Однажды в середине 70-х годов в институте Курчатова обсуждался проект строительных конструкций Чернобыльской АЭС. Речь зашла о бетонных конструкциях подреакторного помещения: уж слишком оно показалось глубоким. В результате обсуждения было принято предложение сэкономить бетон и уменьшить глубину подреакторного пространства почти на 2 метра. В результате пришлось уменьшить длину вытеснителей стержней СУЗ до 4,5 м, так как полная их длина (7 м) уже не помещалась в подреакторном пространстве, если поглощающие нейтроны стержни СУЗ введены в активную зону на всю их длину. Решение было обоснованным: вытеснители стержней СУЗ были введены в проект для экономии нейтронов, а эффективность их оптимальна, если вытеснители (в случае вывода поглощающих стержней полностью из активной зоны) располагаются в центральной её части. Верхние и нижние края вытеснителей, располагаясь на периферии, неэффективны, так как там мало тепловых нейтронов (В скобках поясним, что вытеснители выполнены из графита в оболочке из сплава алюминия. Графит значительно меньше поглощает тепловые нейтроны, чем вода, поэтому вытеснители призваны вытеснять воду из каналов СУЗ, когда поглощающие стержни выведены в верхнее положение и не участвуют в регулировании мощности реактора. Их задача - экономить тепловые нейтроны. О безопасности не вспомнили)." Эта бредовая экономия на бетоне за счёт безопасности и есть главная причина аварии. Другой полезный вопрос, который напрашивается по этой истории: "Зачем в каналах СУЗ требовалась вода, которую потом требовалось вытеснять графитовыми вытеснителями?". Дело в том, что корпус стержней с поглотителем сделан из сплава алюминия, который нужно охлаждать (тем же "холодным" контуром охлаждаются датчики контроля энерговыделения в зоне реакции, которых, однако, всего 12, а каналов СУЗ - 179 по первому поколению реакторов РБМК, для Чернобыльского - другие значения). Как получается из "К истории промышленных энергетических уран-графитовых реакторов" (Федуленко, 2014) , алюминиевый сплав использовался по историческим причинам: на ранних поколениях реакторов (до использования циркония) даже твэлы (тепловыделяющие элементы) были из него, так как это упрощало извлечения плутония. И из-за повышенной температуры была сильная коррозия. При переходе к реакторам с цирконием от использования алюминиевого сплава логично было бы отказаться совсем в пользу жаропрочной стали для поглотителя. К примеру, канал ДП (Дополнительного Поглотителя) охлаждается главным, "горячим" контуром. С учётом всего этого, подозреваю, что даже сейчас сложно найти объективное мнение про реактор РБМК с исправленной системой безопасности. Кстати, imho, с паровым эффектом принципиально другая история: контроль над ним входит в обычное управление реактором. Пример путаницы: лекция MIT=26. Chernobyl - How It Happened

Chornobyl*

2:06 Those two sad guys can tell how serious it is!

You might want to consider improving your audio. It sounds like you were talking through a blanket.