Help | Contact Us
NukeWorker.com
NukeWorker Menu Switching between PWR and BWR

Author Topic: Switching between PWR and BWR  (Read 3501 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline TVA

  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 611
  • Total likes: 113
  • Karma: -33
  • Tell Recruiters to use NukeWorker.com
Re: Switching between PWR and BWR
« Reply #25 on: Nov 12, 2018, 09:15 »
Props to TVA for being one hell of a poster in this thread!! Great information, man. Its finally you are your best, cleansed of your worst.


Although it did take a dirty, low level (dumb) RP to point out that Pu-239 is the majority of core fission at the EOC for BWR's....and not Pu-235 or whatever "typo" you inserted.  O:)


I was like what is he talking about?
Then I noticed the what was in the color ree.


Btw I have never said anyone in this industry is dumb. That is far from the case!


Thank you!

Offline hiddencamper

Re: Switching between PWR and BWR
« Reply #26 on: Dec 28, 2018, 09:29 »
As others have said, BWR EOP/AOP are very different and grant a tremendous amount of operational authority to the unit supervisor.

The EOPs are built around stabilizing your critical safety parameters but do not diagnose or correct the problem, it’s up to the operator to determine the problem, fix it, determine which things need immediate attention or are “causing” the event and focus on those.

An example is an ATWS with main steam isolated. You absolutely need to get power down by terminating feedwater injection, otherwise you’ll dump too much steam into the pool and exceed the heat capacity limit. You’ll be in the containment and rpv EOPs at the same time, and the only reason you’re in the containment EOP is because you’re dumping tons of steam into it. To stabilize containment you need to lower power. But I’ve seen cases where the unit supervisor will stop ATWS EOPs to take time to try and address containment, which makes the problem worse.

So it really takes a different type of mentality. The nrc seems to hate it. But I’m on the emergency procedure committee for BWR owners group and we do a hell of a lot of work to keep them highly functional.

Wait for next rev of EOPs, ATWS response gets crazy.

Aside from that, BWRs are a pain dealing with the rod sequence, and are finicky as hell at low power. They are easy to operate overall though. BWR = Better Water Reactor

Offline shehane

  • Moderate User
  • ***
  • Posts: 84
  • Total likes: 13
  • Karma: 96
  • Gender: Male
  • You never know, do you?
Re: Switching between PWR and BWR
« Reply #27 on: Jan 08, 2019, 10:55 »
A lot of good discussion here.  From an HP's point of view I preferred BWRs.  Complacency happened at the PWRs I worked because everything is clean and the bad stuff sneaks up on you.  At the BWRs you just knew you could find something bad anywhere you looked so you were more careful.  Just my opinion.  I would take a big nasty BWR any day.
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be! Dirk Gently

 


NukeWorker ™ is a registered trademark of NukeWorker.com ™, LLC © 1996-2019 All rights reserved.
All material on this Web Site, including text, photographs, graphics, code and/or software, are protected by international copyright/trademark laws and treaties. Unauthorized use is not permitted. You may not modify, copy, reproduce, republish, upload, post, transmit or distribute, in any manner, the material on this web site or any portion of it. Doing so will result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the law.
Privacy Statement | Terms of Use | Code of Conduct | Spam Policy | Advertising Info | Contact Us | Forum Rules | Password Problem?