Failure analysis report on the chernobyl power plant

Failure analysis describe on the chernobyl originator plant1. innovationThis memo is a failure analysis report on the Chernobyl nuclear authority Plant located near the city of Pripyat, Ukraine. On April 26, 1986, a nuclear reactor at the power plant exploded, releasing a sinewy stream of radioactive vapour. Immediately, the explosion killed 54 peck. Later on, effects repayable to radiation claimed the lives of at least an additional 2500 people (International Atomic efficacy Agency, 2006). This report impart excuse the events leading up to the failure, the failure itself, the reasons for the failure, and the lessons to be intimate from this failure.2. Description of reactor and failurei) In this section, I will explain the mechanism of the reactor. I will also placethe reactors components in bold.The Chernobyl Power Plant was fuelled using uranium mined from the earth the uranium was unbroken in fuel bundles. The main objective of the power plant was to substitute heat p roduced by the slightly-enriched uranium into electricity (World atomic Association, 2009). In modulate to do this, control rods first s embarrasseded down the steps of reactions by absorb stray neutrons from the fission reactions (World thermonuclear Association, 2009). After the fission reactions began producing heat, this heat was and then transferred to stored water which eventually converted to steamer at a temperature of 580C (The Chernobyl Nuclear Disaster, 2008). The pressure of the steam moved a turbine which then power a generator. The final process was the condensation of the steam back into lucid using a cooling lake, thus repeating the cycle (World Nuclear Association, 2009). This type of nuclear reactor is known as a dynamic channel reactor or a RBMK reactor, as referred to it by the Soviets (World Nuclear Association, 2009). The Chernobyl Power Plant had four such(prenominal) reactors each with a power rating of 1000 megawatts (World Nuclear Association, 2009) . The diagram at the end of this report illustrates this reactor along with all the bolded components. ii) In this section, I will explain the process leading up to the failure and the failure itself. Hours before the explosion, engineers deep down the plant were planning tests to see how the reactor would run on low power (International Atomic Energy Agency, 2006). The engineers added control rods to slow the reaction. They then disable the cooling system, which was a major safety violation. The reactor was then incrementally slowed to derive the lowest operating power (The Chernobyl Nuclear Disaster, 2008). Soon after, the engineers noticed that the reactor was moving towards shutdown, so they quickly lifted the control rods to increase the rate of reaction. Suddenly, the power levels of the reactors increased, uncontrollably, and caused fuel elements to rupture along with an increase in steam generation (World Nuclear Association, 2009). This led to the detachment of the react or support case which caused the control rods to jam. The channel pipes then burst, and the explosion occurred, releasing 50 oodles of radioactive particles into the atmosphere (World Nuclear Association, 2009). 3. Reasons for the failureChernobyl was most definitely a preventable disaster (Frot, 2004). Even though the RBMK design was perhaps not the safest reactor design, it still would not have exploded had the people obscure taken the appropriate precautions necessary (Medvedev, 1990, p. 73). The technical failure of Chernobyl was due to native pressure increases along with design malfunctions. However, that was not the only cause. The engineers in name of Chernobyl were also suppressed by the Soviet bureaucracy who did not conquer for time to be wasted on such things as safety, snap much more time on advancement and cutting be (Frot, 2004). Hence, the engineers and workers at the power plant were not rigorously trained in safety nor did they regard safety as paramount (M edvedev, 1990, p. 70).4. Lessons to be learnedThe Chernobyl Disaster left a devastating impact on the people and the surrounding environment. Improper technique, untrained personnel, and lack of oversight all contributed to this disaster. As engineers or aspiring engineers, it is our duty to understand the potential impacts of our design decisions. non the least of which is the attention to safety. If a culture of safety is not civilised then disasters such as Chernobyl will become possible realities. On the other hand, if a culture of safety is cultivated then disasters such as Chernobyl will become easily preventable.ReferencesFrot, Jacques. The Causes of the Chernobyl Event. (2004). Retrieved 16 February, 2010, fromhttp//74.125.155.132/search?q= lay awayddH2v8pgJukJwww.ecolo.org/documents/documents_in_english/Causes.ChernobyJF.doc+causes+of+chernobylcd=2hl=enct=clnkgl=caclient=firefox-a. International Atomic Energy Agency. Frequently Asked Questions about Chernobyl. (2006). Retr ieved 16 February, 2010, from http//www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Features/Chernobyl-15/cherno-faq.shtml.Medvedev, Zhores. (1992). The legacy of Chernobyl. New York W. W. Norton Company. The Chernobyl Nuclear Disaster. (2008). Retrieved 16 February, 2010, from http//www.bentan.me/chernobyl/?page.World Nuclear Association. Chernobyl Accident. (2009). Retrieved 16 February, 2010, from http//www.world-nuclear.org/ data/chernobyl/inf07.html.