What not use a proportional relief valve?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the effectiveness of venting valves in nuclear systems, particularly in light of the Fukushima disaster. Experts, including Douglas E. True, suggest that while rupture disks can be beneficial, they may pose risks if backup systems fail, leading to permanent venting. The conversation also highlights a lack of clarity regarding the use of pressure release valves, which were previously employed in older reactor test loops. Participants express curiosity about why these valves are not more commonly used today, especially given their historical application. Overall, the need for thorough investigation and expertise to understand the failures during the Fukushima incident is emphasized.
tsutsuji
Gold Member
Messages
1,219
Reaction score
15
There is this talk in the New York Times about venting valves :

But the consensus in the nuclear industry supports the existing systems. Douglas E. True, the president of ERIN Engineering and Research of Walnut Creek, Calif., said: “In some cases you can argue it might be better to have a rupture disk. In other cases, it would certainly be better to have a manually controlled system.” For example, he said, the disk is backed up by a valve that is normally in the open position. If the disk ruptured and there was no electricity, it might be impossible to close the valve, and the venting would be permanent.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/19/science/earth/19nuke.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

What not use a proportional relief valve ?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
I Found the following comment :
John Neely Ft. Collins said:
I don't know what happened to pressure release valves. They are opened by excessive pressure and close themselves when the pressure drops. You will find them on your water heater and even simpler versions on a pressure cooker. They were used on the test loops at the Idaho test reactors in the late 60's and presumably still are.
(...)
I'm curious why they aren't used.
http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2011...eatens-to-blow-its-stack/?partner=rss&emc=rss

So am I.
 
Very interesting article Tsutsuji, thanks!

All this venting subject is totally unclear in this Fukushima disaster, obviously it's not the primary cause of the disaster but it revealed that a lot of things didn't work as expected ALSO in this department... which ended up making things worse i think.

We will need time and torough expertise to clarify what really happened...
 

Thread 'MCNP6 BURN Card Issue: Zero Burnup for Material in Fuel Assembly'

Hello everyone, I am currently working on a burnup calculation for a fuel assembly with repeated geometric structures using MCNP6. I have defined two materials (Material 1 and Material 2) which are actually the same material but located in different positions. However, after running the calculation with the BURN card, I am encountering an issue where all burnup information（power fraction(Initial input is 1,but output file is 0), burnup, mass, etc.） for Material 2 is zero, while Material 1...
View full post »

Thread 'Beginner Seeking Help: MCNP6 Burnup Example (OECD-NEA Benchmark)'

Hi everyone, I'm a complete beginner with MCNP and trying to learn how to perform burnup calculations. Right now, I'm feeling a bit lost and not sure where to start. I found the OECD-NEA Burnup Credit Calculational Criticality Benchmark (Phase I-B) and was wondering if anyone has worked through this specific benchmark using MCNP6? If so, would you be willing to share your MCNP input file for it? Seeing an actual working example would be incredibly helpful for my learning. I'd be really...
View full post »

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top