15 Mar 11
3 edits
Originally posted by jimslyp69lolz...you think it's that easy? the fact is that plants are designed and built with adequate redundancy; someone or some group of people have to make decision on this and they do; wheter or not the right decison is made is tricky to answer because the plant was built and tested to specifications and handed over and most people are happy because it is operating as it should, and life goes on you don't even know they existed most times, until of course something drastic happens...extremely drastic as in this case...
"but you are correct, the more systems redundancy the more safer your plant becomes, but then at some point the design will become very impractical and\or too expensive"
Make your mind up dude...
edits: btw i did make up my mind, what you quoted there from me is a broad but true statement,,,but who really knows how much safety is truly SAFE, it is a very subjective matter,,, but when the stakeholders and engineers and consultants get together and discuss and sign-off on it, then who are you to argue with anything? also in genera, the rules are not always followed and we can all find examples where human error due to lack of foresight or otherwise has been the cause of some failure,,,although we should all strive for perfect world, it will never be that way, and in the meantime we all have to learn from our mistakes (codes and standards will be revised as i mentioned before)...
15 Mar 11
Originally posted by Iere manlulz
lolz...you think it's that easy? the fact is that plants are designed and built with adequate redundancy; someone or some group of people have to make decision on this and they do; wheter or not the right decison is made is tricky to answer because the plant was built to specifications and handed over and most people are happy because it is operating as it ...[text shortened]... ed most times until of course something drastic happens...extremely drastic as in this case...
15 Mar 11
Originally posted by ElleEffSeeeI know where you are coming from with this: short wavelengths means high frequency waves (gamma rays, bluetooth, microwave,...) and long wavelengths mean low frequency waves (radiowaves, tsunamis,...)...but where is amplitude or intensity taken in account in the formula you posted there? In other words, the earthquake's richter scale measurement gives us an idea of how much one plate has moved over\under the other and how much energy was expended in the subduction,,,and all i'm reminding you is that when this happens in the ocean floor, it has a direct relationship to the power of the tsunami generated and therefore, it's not exactly ALL about the wavelength...
It's all about the wavelength. A Tsunami wavelength is massive (50-100km), which means it acts as a shallow water wave propagating through the ocean. For a shallow water wave, wave speed is sqrt(g * water depth), so as it reaches shallower water it slows down greatly.
15 Mar 11
Originally posted by Crowleyit doesn't matter the Japanese were the most prepared when it comes to earthquake response, that tsunami simply came too quickly for any kind of real evacuation to have occured, this was evident in many video footage, you can see moving vehicles trying in vain to outrun the waves,,,and from those photos I am sure the death toll is going to skyrocket into tens of thousands, impending nuclear crisis on top of that...you're right very crazy and very very tragic...
Check out the before and after satellite photos. Crazy.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/03/13/world/asia/satellite-photos-japan-before-and-after-tsunami.html
15 Mar 11
Originally posted by Iere manI argued that the Japanese were NOT the most prepared, in fact far from it. They have already stated that the reactors were only tested to mag 7.5, as any event following 2004 was 'highly' unlikely. One would have thought that ANY Asian government being 'responsible' for running Nuclear Outlets would have, in fact, been even more responsible, following 2004, and re-tested and re-standardised to prepare for such repeated possibilities.
it doesn't matter the Japanese were the most prepared when it comes to earthquake response, that tsunami simply came too quickly for any kind of real evacuation to have occured, this was evident in many video footage, you can see moving vehicles trying in vain to outrun the waves,,,and from those photos I am sure the death toll is going to skyrocket into te ...[text shortened]... nds, impending nuclear crisis on top of that...you're right very crazy and very very tragic...
It was clear in 2004 that trains, cars, lorries and airports were ill-prepared to run away from catastophic earthquakes, and following tsunamis.
Do you still think Japan was the most prepared for this event? I think they thought, alike other nations, this just won't happen to us! How bombastic, and rueful.
I think, also, that the death toll has been highly covered, and is probably nearer to 40,000 solely at this moment..... purely as a result of quake and seas. When the nuclear division nets its load, maybe closer to 70-80,000 minimum.
-m.
15 Mar 11
1 edit
Originally posted by mikelomtotally agree, it does appear that important re-assessments were neglected and put aside due to arrogance, underestimation and oversight and other human flaws,,,they are surely paying a heavy price now however,,, this disaster is going to set a whole lot of new precedents and wake up the superpower and developing nations,,,also I think 'green technology' R&D will get a major push to try and realize alternative energy solutions,,,on the side, nuclear energy will not necessarily be phased out, it is a very effiecient system when conditons are normal and it is like a renewable energy source, which is always preferrable (but not always available) because it doesn't use up the ever-depleting and precious non-renewable energy sources (oil, gas, coal,..) remaining in the world,,, so instead it will undergo extensive re-design to seek and totally mitigate any disastrous result which can arise when the conditions are not normal...won't be the first nor the last time a challenge like that will be taken and still result in disaster because nothing in this world will ever be 100% perfect or fail-safe...and not to even mention natural disasters, for sure there is more to come and no-one can stop it...
I argued that the Japanese were NOT the most prepared, in fact far from it. They have already stated that the reactors were only tested to mag 7.5, as any event following 2004 was 'highly' unlikely. One would have thought that ANY Asian government being 'responsible' for running Nuclear Outlets would have, in fact, been even more responsible, following 2004, nd seas. When the nuclear division nets its load, maybe closer to 70-80,000 minimum.
-m.
15 Mar 11
Originally posted by mikelomIt wasn't the earthquake that killed the reactors, but the tsunami. In that regard, they could have built a wall around the reactor, maybe they will now, in retrospect. If they built a 30 foot, 10 meter high wall, it would protect the reactor proper. I think the tsunami broke aux pumps and backup diesel power units. Right now, radiation has been measured from two separate US naval vessels coming in to help out. 3 separate explosions, probably hydrogen.
I argued that the Japanese were NOT the most prepared, in fact far from it. They have already stated that the reactors were only tested to mag 7.5, as any event following 2004 was 'highly' unlikely. One would have thought that ANY Asian government being 'responsible' for running Nuclear Outlets would have, in fact, been even more responsible, following 2004, ...[text shortened]... nd seas. When the nuclear division nets its load, maybe closer to 70-80,000 minimum.
-m.
15 Mar 11
Originally posted by Iere manInterference is not a process which reduces the total wave energy. As wave crests of the same wavelength cross you may get areas where opposite phases cancel out the change in water level but just as many where wave troughs add together and the same again for wave peaks.
I think such a structure can break down a tsunami by the interference it will cause as it passes through.
In terms of reducing Tsunami wave energy your grid would achieve this through frictional effects, but I'm willing to bet that the biggest such grid man could build would lead to a reduction in energy many orders of magnitude less than that contained in the wave.
15 Mar 11
2 edits
Originally posted by ElleEffSeeecool, thx for clarifying,,, i thought about it a bit more and the lacking strength you pointed out can indeed be increased by keeping the grid lattice structure as described, but instead of arranging it broadface (like a square) we make a diamond formation instead. This is of course due to the relationship that force is inversely proportional to area, in other words this means:
Interference is not a process which reduces the total wave energy. As wave crests of the same wavelength cross you may get areas where opposite phases cancel out the change in water level but just as many where wave troughs add together and the same again for wave peaks.
In terms of reducing Tsunami wave energy your grid would achieve this through fri ld lead to a reduction in energy many orders of magnitude less than that contained in the wave.
a) force is applied over a small surface area = larger or more concentrated force
b) force is applied over a large surface area = weaker or more distributed force
you would use an axe instead of a piece of pipe to chop down a tree won't you? well for humans anything can work (oops fruedian slip)...yh so anywho this diamond-oriented structure again with the 'diverters' at various angles is now certainly a very formidable structure...oh yh I forgot to mention the interference cancelling out thingy is even more effective because it will also work as the water is receeding, so it won't exactly be returning as this raging unstoppable wall of water but something more manageable for the second pass through the diverters...what you think now? shall we take it to the tank and run some experiments? anyone come up with other ideas btw? come on now, don't leave me hanging like this, I aint the only mad scientist in here...