Japan Earthquake

Japan Earthquake | Page 722

@madrat i agree, and the columm lines are marked different (but i can't read the drawing ) but it should be close to a typical...
by fitter 4/15/2011 10:58:25 PM

Press Release (Mar 15,2011)
Damage to the Unit 4 Nuclear Reactor Building at Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear Power Station

At approximately 6:00am, a loud explosion was heard from within the
power station. Afterwards, it was confirmed that the 4th floor rooftop
area of the Unit 4 Nuclear Reactor Building had sustained damage.

After usage, fuel is stored in a pool designated for spent fuel.

Plant conditions as well as potential outside radiation effects are
currently under investigation.

TEPCO, along with other involved organizations, is doing its best to
contain the situation. Simultaneously, the surrounding environment is
being kept under constant surveillance.
by marie rich 4/15/2011 11:00:48 PM

@fitter It supports what I have always believed which is that the reactor is off-centre in the containment building. Curiously I have spent all evening updating the wiki page with other evidence to support this: fukushimafaq.wikispaces.com
by madrat 4/15/2011 11:01:09 PM

@madrat it also looks to show the laydown areas for the caps/plugs apperntly some wedges or maybe gates???? still good info
by fitter 4/15/2011 11:02:53 PM

Link to explosion press release: www.tepco.co.jp
by marie rich 4/15/2011 11:03:51 PM

@fitter you can set them straight. I emailed this to myself on that day
by marie rich 4/15/2011 11:04:39 PM

@madrat nice job on the drawing
by fitter 4/15/2011 11:06:25 PM

@fitter It shows two locations marked "Shield Plug Laydown" which are semi-circular which supports various discussions about the makeup of the shield plugs. I reckon this and the other cross section posted by xxx are the missing link in me finishing a good 3D model for our use, however that will have to wait for another day!
by madrat 4/15/2011 11:06:26 PM

@madrat did xxx post two "real drawings" or just the plan elev. or is the original elevatoin drawing what you are refereng to
by fitter 4/15/2011 11:08:46 PM

@madrat @dean it looks like they have a stripe color code on the pipe... and some markings any one know what they say....
by fitter 4/15/2011 11:10:45 PM

@fitter Just one 'Real' drawing, but I liked the pretty colours in the other one...! I'll have a stab at the 3D model tomorrow night, I've been up for 18 hours now!
by madrat 4/15/2011 11:11:44 PM

@dean no these were some outside shots showing the damage from the Isuma, but could tell the striping and lettering on the Insulation....
by fitter 4/15/2011 11:14:47 PM

@UKVal I think from what I read #3 blew before #4 from what I read. Making the piece of whatever on the roof of #4 even more confusing.
by Nancy 4/15/2011 11:21:53 PM

@all. That blueprint below. Any idea where it came from and what model the reactor in the plan is? Is it Daini
by Nancy 4/15/2011 11:22:30 PM

@Nancy Its marked in feet rather than mm/metres so I reckon its a US plant? Still very useful...
by madrat 4/15/2011 11:23:55 PM

Arnie Gundersen LIVE on Deepak Chopra this Friday @ 6:30pm EST LIVE NOW www.fairewinds.com
by Mexico_lurker 4/15/2011 11:26:33 PM

@madrat Not 100% so. Some of the things on the Reactor 1 are in english. I know someone who specializes in translation for the nuke industry due to language issues on plans and documents. So there is obviously cross over and language issues. If a US firm like GE did the plan it would be in English and could be in standard rather than metric. So who originally posted it, do we know where it came from and do we have any history about it at all? Any idea what model reactor it is? Is there a larger one out there?
by Nancy 4/15/2011 11:27:38 PM

@Edano I think everyone is entitled to their opinion. reactors 2/3/4 are certainly larger but in my opinion it wouldn't make any sense to re-design the mk1 containment from scratch, it would make far more sense to scale things up a bit. If you look at the thermal images it backs up the fact that the reactors are off-centre as per my markups. Stick to your guns and respect everyone elses oppinion!
by madrat 4/15/2011 11:27:40 PM

@madrat off center they are not against the outer wall as many people have been contending. There is a pinned link up top with what I have so far for documentation. I found some more data today but still have to do through it and make sense out of it. I think it will she some light on things a bit more. Take a look at the link up top when you have a chance.
by Nancy 4/15/2011 11:29:23 PM

@Nancy Thats a good observation, I'd like it to be from Japan as it fits what I've been doing. It came from xxx and if you follow the photobucket link and mess about with the URL you can see some other material although I'm not sure if this is xxx's photo's or not.
by madrat 4/15/2011 11:30:03 PM

@Nancy Do you reckon the reactors are centred in buildings 2/3/4? I looked at your new page earlier, my opinion is that the reactors in all buildings are off centre which I have explained in more detail in the wiki page: fukushimafaq.wikispaces.com
by madrat 4/15/2011 11:33:20 PM

@dean were you looking for a maintenance plan for unit 4?
by Canadian 4/15/2011 11:37:05 PM

@madrat I think they are offset, the more info we find in photos and such. The wells are round, I am pretty sure of that. There was some speculation they were square and smallish by a few people not just on here. There has also been lots of speculation they are right against and outer wall. We have just too much to the contrary on that. I initially thought they were purely centered both directions. After looking at some newer images and going back over the heat images with reactor & containment cap dimensions I think they are centered one direction and offset the other. I am also wondering if the storage placement for things like the caps. I have some inside images I still need to go through but I think they will help sort much of this out. They are also verified as being of certain reactor insides by Tepco.
by Nancy 4/15/2011 11:39:28 PM

Trying to make sure I have everything that was put out. The colored elevation and that reactor blueprint are the two new documents?
by Nancy 4/15/2011 11:40:56 PM

@Canadian if you have anything about what kind of work they were doing or what was being done at the time of the earthquake it might help figure out a few things Dean and Fitter were doing. It would also be of use to me trying to sort out image data.
by Nancy 4/15/2011 11:42:09 PM

@Nancy I'm with you 100% on that, centred in the longer building dimension and slightly offset in the other direction. The images that xxx posted were stored here:
by madrat 4/15/2011 11:42:17 PM

s306.photobucket.com
by madrat 4/15/2011 11:42:25 PM

@Nancy ok I don't think I'm quiiiite there yet but found these two links:
www.tepco.co.jp
www.jsm.or.jp
by Canadian 4/15/2011 11:45:49 PM

@madrat : i would say it like this: they are centered relative to the floor of the building, but not to the roof. the main roof is smaller than the floor, because a part of the building is smaller (the part towards the turbine hall).
by Edano 4/15/2011 11:47:50 PM

by madrat via I1211.photobucket 4/15/2011 11:47:51 PM

@madrat do you know what reactor that is from or source for the image?
by Nancy 4/15/2011 11:48:29 PM

@Nancy the full list of releases is here www.tepco.co.jp
by elainekirk 4/15/2011 11:49:16 PM

@nancy Let me hunt for the source... @Edano I agree totally, the upper part of the containment building is off centre and some of the taurus is in the basement in the building between the reactor and turbine hall.
by madrat 4/15/2011 11:52:43 PM

@madrat : yes, but not everybody here believes this. i would like to understand on what point arises the controversy about that.
by Edano 4/15/2011 11:56:49 PM

@Nancy I have been thinking about this paper and it may be a useful means of showing that there must be many differences the paper is for BWR venting to prevent hydrogen explosions and it was found that units 1, 4, 6, needed the changes to the pipework so there are probably as many differences as similarities which I am assuming is what you are saying
cnic.jp
quote NISA announced a plan devised by all 20 electric companies to obviate the risk of a hydrogen explosion accident at 20 BWRs: Hamaoka 1 and 2; Onagawa 1, 2, and 3; Fukushima I 1, 4, and 6; Fukushima II 1, 2, 3, and 4; Kashiwazaki-Kariwa 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, and 7; Shimane 1; and Tsuruga 1. This measure was implemented in accordance with NISA's call for the additional investigation of the pipes other than steam condensing pipes. The plan includes the installation of bent pipes (exhaust pipes) and the modification of the pipe layout during the periodical investigation (some of the modifications are currently being introduced)
by elainekirk 4/15/2011 11:58:53 PM

@Nancy @madrat also can you check and see if the same company built all four, i think they were different (some) but i think they buy the licience to build them from GE, also #1 was probably built first and like anything you would know what you want to change, the building might of just been to small to manauver the fuel etc......
by fitter 4/15/2011 11:59:33 PM

@Edano I think the issues have been largely around that reactor 1 blueprint and misinterpretations due to the narrower building and the lack of having the other 2 elevations with it. Like I mentioned to madrat I originally thought the reactor well was fully centered. I still do not think it is all to one side of the centerline based on what I have found so far but instead part of the circle of the reactor well is over the center line. We have had people argue some versions drastically outside of madrat's and mine.
by Nancy 4/16/2011 12:02:25 AM

@fitter It was a mixture of contractors from what I read before, all to a GE design. @nancy this is the original source with another picture for you, taken in 2002 of reactor 4 www.syracuse.com
by madrat 4/16/2011 12:03:44 AM

@elainekirk the reactors at fukushima also were built by different design teams. This can result in some differences in certain things based on that.
by Nancy 4/16/2011 12:04:24 AM

@madrat that is a different picture than the one posted below.
by Nancy 4/16/2011 12:05:37 AM

@madrat this is for your hands. my elaboration of the blueprint. maybe you find some use of it. www.freeimagehosting.net
by Edano via Freeimagehosting.net 4/16/2011 12:05:40 AM

1 was ge prime, 2&3 I believe were joint ge/tosh, 4 may have been tosh. Tepco lists it on their english site somewhere.
by Markfm 4/16/2011 12:06:34 AM

@NHK Listener I grabbed a larger version of that image you posted below, when I was looking this morning but had not looked at it yet. LOTS of info in that image. #4 is intact and on a larger image I am finding damage landmarks like holes in the roofs etc. so we can tag certain things as not being out of #4's explosion.
by Nancy 4/16/2011 12:08:31 AM

Here's the link www.tepco.co.jp
by Deirdre 4/16/2011 12:09:48 AM

In this 2002 photo, workers examine equipments inside of the the No. 4 unit of the Fukushima Dai-Ichi nuclear power plant in Okumamachi, in northeastern Japan. The outer housing of the containment vessel at the No. 4 unit at the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear complex erupted in flames early Wednesday, said Hajimi Motujuku, a spokesman for the plant'pics\9389568-large.jpg[/IMG]
by madrat via I1211.photobucket 4/16/2011 12:10:54 AM