| ||||
Preamble This page is dedicated to the critical analysis of only one of the theories about what caused the Chernobyl disaster - the theory of B.I.Gorbachev. To start with, let us briefly summarise the essence of Gorbachev’s numerous Internet articles. 1) All scientific and technical investigations of the causes of the Chernobyl accident which have been carried out troughout the past 20 years, are nonsensical, false or erroneous. The initial information about the accident is inaccurate, garbled, counterfeited and was partially destroyed by operational personel immediately after the emergency. And even experts themselves are not to be believed, since half of them were operational personnel, who would do anything to protect corporate interests. On the whole, this is a plot, going to the very top, involving somebody’s "hairy hands", schemes of"the family" and so forth, that at the time transferred nuclear energy from [Minsredmash] (Ministry of Atomic Industry) into the hands [Minenergo](Ministry of Power Engeenering) only to ruin the whole thing. They hid everything, deceived everybody, including the IAEA, and moreover, in order to confuse the general public, they came up with various silly "well sounding" versions of the accident, which can be easily exposed. 2) An objective analysis of all the available data on the Chernobyl accident can only be undertaken by independent scientists from the Academy of Sciences (Ukraine), who are not interested in behind-the-scenes politics, such as B.I.Gorbachev himself. As well as by certain "competent authoritys"(i.e. security bodies), that conducted their independent investigation, but were not allowed to disclose the results of these investigations. In fact, the entire truth is contained in the of witness statements produced in evidence at court, however, it is also not permitted to disclose them to the general public, so we never learn the truth. 3) After having thought over the situation and having analysed all the available information, including accounts of eye-witnesses, extracts from the scientific and technical reports and statements of different scientists, as well as fiction, B. I. Gorbachev developed his own theory of the Chernobyl disaster. According to his theory, the entire chronology of events of the Chernobyl disaster is incorrect, so he created his own chronology, in which all the events occurred earlier, with the single exception of the pushing of the RPS knob. But explosion happened 25-30 seconds earlier than it was in reality. The reactor exploded because the operational personel took the absorbing rods out of the reactor core beyond any meassure, thus provoking, an uncontrolable power acceleration with prompt neutrons So what are we supposed to make of all of this? Perhaps let us begin by looking at what B. I. Gorbachev knows about reactor physics in general, and in particular of the RBMK reactor. For instance, why does he persistently confuse two principally different concepts: of reactivity and reactivity margin. ………………………………………………..Reactivity……………………………….. This is the universal characteristic of the state of reactor, its internal physical processes and its behavior within time. The reactivity of a reactor, which works on a fixed constant power level, equal zero (i.e. critical reactor). The power of reactor in this (critical) state can be anything - 100 W or 1000 MW, but the reactivity will always equal zero. If reactivity is above zero (supercritical reactor), then the power of the reactor will grow, and it will accelerate. If reactivity is below zero (subcritical reactor), then its power will reduce, and the reactor will shut down. Therefore the reactivity determines the kinetics and the dynamics of the reactor Control of the power of reactor is accomplished through control of its reactivity. The means of control (rods containing neutron absorber) being moved in the reactor core change its reactivity. Reactivity can change also itself as a result of different processes, proceeding in the reactor: the burning out of uranium, poisoning by xenon, a change in temperatures and other parameters (steam pressure, the coolant flow rate and so on). All these effects of reactivity are added with the reactivity, introduced by the control rodes, and they give the total reactivity of reactor. This control is realized by automatic control systems ([AR] or [LAR]), which support power at the assigned level. In parallel with this also possibly manual control (by displacement of control rods [RR]). In any event even in the transient operational modes the reactivity of reactor is supported sufficiently close to zero. Furthermore all reactors compulsorily have reactor protection system from the level of power and from the speed of its increasing. On appearance of a large positive reactivity no matter why does it hapen this reactor protection system operates and introduces into the reactor large negative reactivity, sufficient in order to shut down reactor in any situation. Reactivity in the reactor theory, is the dimensionless quantity, measured in the absolute units of its eigenvalue. In the same units or in the percentages is measured most frequently the reactivity when the examination of the effects of reactivity. But in kinetics and dynamics of reactors (for describing the transient processes) as the convenient unit of measurement serves a certain threshold value of reactivity β, on reaching of which transient process becomes uncontrolled and is converted into reactor runaway with the prompt neutrons. In the work process of reactor control is more convenient the same natural but other unit of measurement. This is the value of reactivity, broght by one rod of manual control [st. RR] with its removing into the reactor (from the extreme lower to end upper position). The ratio of the different units of the measurement of one and the same value of reactivity depends on specific conditions in the reactor. For the reactor RBMK, which works in stationary mode of fuel transfer (according to the data from [E1]). 1[st. RR]=0.13β=0.063%=0,00063. ……………………………………………..Reactivity Margin……………………………... In contrast to the reactivity, which is the characteristic of the real state of reactor, the reactivity margin characterizes certain hypothetical state. What would take place, if we completely remove from the reactor core all absorbers. What in this case will be positive reactivity in the reactor. Operational reactivity margin ORM is special case, when the extracted absorbers are only rods submerged in the core, i.e., this is the reactivity, which would be inserted into the reactor, if we maximally withdraw all rods from it. Of course it can´t be realized in realty. When the reactor RBMK works in steady state mode the ORM is usually equal 2-4beta, and therefore it can be only evaluate by calculation. Reactivity margin cannot be controlled. Both operator and automatic control system control reactivity. But the reactivity is formed by this time itself with processes in the reactor. And it can change over wide limits. Any negative effect of reactivity (for example burning out, poisoning so forth) decreases ORM, while any positive (for example, an increase of the steam quality in the channels of reactor RBMK) increases it. But now a question “to fail in”, what reactivity margin is more dangerous, large or small? “Certainly small” - you will say, indeed Chernobyl emergency namely occurred because of this. “But how it may be” - I will say, indeed the more reactivity margin I have, the more reactivity can I bring in, if I begin to extract rods, after cutting off in a preliminarily some manner reactor protection system (both from the level of power and from the speed of its increasing). And thereby it is more probability to explode reactor by its runway with prompt neutrons. How that nonsense is obtained!? But nonsense is obtained because withdrawal of rod from the reactor then on the 4th ChNPP unit have no relations to reactor runaway with the prompt neutrons (which is occurred). To the decrease of ORM yes it has relation (as its consequence, but not reason), but to the bringing in a large positive reactivity and to the reactor runaway which subsequent after that no it does not have any relation. But let us listen to Gorbachev himself. How have they exploded reactor according to B.I.Gorbachev [quotations and comments] It is completely obvious that Gorbachev does not know and does not understand reactor physics, and his version of the initial event of emergency, is a complete delirium. Operational personnel could explode reactor in the manner which describes Gorbachev, only in one case: consciously committing the crime of century and having previously destroyed for that purpose the entire system for reactor control and protection. But if in the manner which speaks Gorbachev about the reactor cannot be exploded, then how they nevertheless did explode it. And why this was made by the small operational reactivity margin (ORM), although it would seem: the less is ORM, the more the reactor protected from nuclear hazard. Here we a little will be distracted from Gorbachev and will answer ourselves the chief question. Why the small ORM is dangerous? It occurs, that the small operational reactivity margin is dangerous for the reactor RBMK only by one. It reveals the sins of chief designer, and if the control rods in the reactor RBMK were designed correctly, then the small ORM would present no danger at all. So it occurs in all other reactors. And there is no need to refer here to the regulations, the regulations speaks not about the danger of small ORM, but about the impossibility (limitedness of possibilities) to operate with small ORM. But once it cannot be normally operate, then regulations requires shutting down the reactor. No Chernobyl emergencies are here expected. But let us return back to B.I.Gorbachev. And why generally was he required the new version of Chernobyl emergency and the new chronology of the events? What does not suit him in conventional version and chronology.? First there arose doubts by him. Why "three official state commissions, into composition of which entered competent people, studied in fact the same materials about emergency, and they came to diametrically opposite conclusions." Then "doubts overgrow into the suspicions" and "appears the feeling", which finally turned into the confidence: On the causes for Chernobyl accident they lay to us 15 years In order to understand, they deceive you or not, necessary as the minimum to understand the matter about which it goes the speech, what write and speak these “deceivers”, how they generally work. But if you do not know how to read, and you do not understand what they speak, then you will, of course, suspect of each collocutor to be a swindler, and behind each bush there will be it seems to enemy. Gorbachev here, for example, read the report of the institute of the radio-ecological problems of the Belorussian Academy of Sciences, and then even more work of art of G. U.Medvedev “Chernobyl notebook” and he learned a staggering news. It occurs that emergency protecting system EPS they attempted to use wether two, or three times. But the entire scientific world speaks only about one actuation, and all investigation of the reasons for Chernobyl accident twists itself around it. Fraud! Whether they had been deceived, or they does deceive himself . It means that all these investigations – are lies. Or else here. Gorbachev found some article, where was given the graph of the parameters without the reference grid, and furthermore something written about the need for the synchronization of the events, registered by different instruments, and he seems to see a nightmare. It proves to be "they palmed off not the originals of documents, but copies, on which someone erased the timing marks", to these simpletons-scientists. And if somewhere it can be that timing mark exists, then "in them there is no time synchronization". Gorbachev, apparently, sympathizes by scientist, but indeed it cannot be been reconciled"with the explicit attempt “of the family” to deceive them in the chronology of emergency". All"suggested about complete or partial falsification of documents”". And then he made up his mind. It is necessary to make its, new chronology. About the moving of the control rodes. But most nightmarish lies is "in the information about the motion of control rods into the reactor core after pushing of EPS-5 knob ". These are no longer some there timing marks or synchronization. Here these simpletons and the deceivers even cannot agree between themselves, how it is better to lie, they all lie without coordination. Some indicate that the rods moved entirely little, even did not pass halve of way. But others speaks, come to your’s senses, they moved very far, more than half of way they passed. Hi, the rods did not move at all. Prove the fact that they moved. I will not believe while you will not prove. On the adequacy of DREG printouts Gorbachev carried out their analysis, even without imagining what is it like, and he reported to us the result: "Taking into account the results of analysis carried out by the author, and also S. Yankovskiy's materials, the best that possible to make with them, is, to send it into the discharge of very doubtful data." We can only believe for the word to B.I.Gorbachev about how much S. Yankovskiy (former investigator of the Main Public Prosecutor's Office of the Ukraine) experienced in DREG. But how the Main Public Prosecutor's Office of the USSR (about the Ukraine I do not know) fulfilled its professional duties, and how this will be coordinated with stories that Yankovskiy tells (by exposition of Gorbachev), this will be in other our section (investigation of the reasons for Chernobyl emergency). Thus, verdict on DREG, the basic information source about the Chernobyl accident, is brought in. But we will not despair. We analyzed the analysis of Gorbachev (detail according to the reference) and we arrived at the completely opposite result: DREG is in the complete order, and ŕ the best that possible to make with B.I.Gorbachev - is to send him into the discharge of very doubtful scientists. Before move further in the Gorbachev’s work, it is necessary to make one additional retreat, connected with the chief designer of RBMK, and to say several words on the chronology of the emergency As his persistent unwillingness to recognize the severe truth of objective reality, chief designer placed all in the interesting position. Severe truth lies in the fact that the initial event of emergency is the pushing of the reactor protection knob, and to chief designer it is necessary that the break of the coolant supply into the reactor core would be the initial event. As a result, one of the key events of the chronology: a sharp drop in the coolant flow rate on by all eighth MCPs and turning off of the 4th of them (those running out together with TG) acquired the features of irrationality. Looking at objective data, registered by instruments, we see the mutual picture of emergency, in which collapse of coolant’s flow rates and turning off of MCP occurred in 1 h 23 min 47 s., but at the same time listening to (and reading) the chief designer, to whom we cannot but believe, we know that four MCPs were turned off at 1 h of 23 min 41 s. That matter causes for some bodies split personality, for others (as for me) skepticism with respect to the main designer, for the third (as for experts of the IAEA) complete confusion. Only Gorbachev is "on the horse", alone. He converted this irrationality into virtual reality and turned off all 8 MCPs (2 times on 4), those running out, and those having permanent power suply. He does not confused, that this it is not evident neither according to any signs nor on any data of the registration (indeed all is garbled), and he on this basis builds its new chronology, to which we will pass now . When reactor exploded. In general, with the B.I.Gorbachev all is sufficiently clear without this last page. Therefore it is worthwhile to interrupt and to listen the version of chief designer. He issued the new book “Channel Nuclear Power Reactor RBMK”, and its version of Chernobyl emergency proved to be to the surprise it was similar to the version of Gorbachev. Version of the Chief Designer*) Chief designer drove in himself to the very difficult position. From one side he cannot forego the version, which his experts in some time of 20 years ago squeesed down through the Main Public Procurator's office and the Supreme Court. But from the other side, how it is possible to defend this version publicly and not to appear in this case by idiot? In his book [Ĺ2] he makes attempt to solve this task. But this here as far as for it succeeded, you judge themselves. ----------------------------------------------------------------- *)Here as everywhere on the site, words “Chief Designer” concerns to whom, that not was personal, but is implied organization NIKIET as a whole. to Site Map |
