CHERNOBYL DISASTER - An Inside Look - 3D

[@thenstyle1]

I'm so impressed by the visualization in this video. I've always wondered what the RBMK core truly looks like and how its proportions are structured, and you've done a fantastic job showcasing it. Thank you for that!

[@Mike-Bell]

One very satisfied viewer. One very satisfied author… thanks ☺️

[@Deceptive24]

Incredible animations! Perfect for those with a technical mindset that want more detail that what is currently easily available!!!

[@Mike-Bell]

Hey Karl Satchell glad the effort is appreciated 👍

[@lewiemcneely9143]

@@Mike-Bell It IS!

[@greg7345]

shut the fuck up

[@RandoManFPV]

Thank you! Exactly! I love they people out there that make youtube videos like this. So much detail and info to ease my wandering mind. Even tho some things fall outside my understanding, I am so thankful that someone can break it down to me in their own way, and just leave me with little something to ponder

[@MimiDec1996]

Technical mindset? What's that?

[@FalconFlurry]

"This city is impregnable" -Babylon, 539 BCE "This ship cannot sink" -Titanic, 1912 "This reactor cannot explode" -Chernobyl, 1986 I'm starting to notice a pattern here

[@mvygantas]

"I have the best words" - D J Trump 2017

[@taelight8854]

"There is no war in Ba sing Se" - the 14th episode of the 2nd season of ATLA

[@milesium-487]

"The virus will die out soon." -Coronavirus, 2020

[@donlove3741]

@samir panjwani ain't dead yet or even close

[@mysteriousmemethief]

laogai

[@Rockin_Ross]

Beautiful. My dad worked for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission here in the US when this happened. I was 16 at the time & it’s all he talked about for a good while.

[@anant5014]

Clearly there are some people in the comments who received their doctors degree from the university of HBO

[@Grahf0]

Take Anant to the infirmary, they're delusional.

[@sebastianaquino7454]

Its the shock, take them to the infirmary

[@Boxinaboxwithinanotherbox]

Hi don't mock my HBO degree. I bought it preowened for £10 and it came with my lectures in TV format.

[@henry-td1ew]

Can tell if ur being sarcastic or not

[@abbasali3100]

we had fatilty in gas powered plant due to incorrect isolation do i have to blam the system. i have seen HBO movie their are a lot of misinformation. i believe that something else was going on that is not shown to the public. u don't think that those operators are unaware of such huge danger. we nurmally called power plant action as turtle action due to high sensitivity.

[@masamune2984]

I was just randomly on a Chernobyl “kick,” if you wanna call it that, and was just thinking “man, I wish there was a really good cutaway 3D model describing the location and the systems ‘under the curtain’ “, and then this popped up. It was EXACTLY what I was looking for, and then some. Thank you, and wonderful job!

[@marisjanelsins1563]

Microchip planted by Bill Gates in your head put this in your recomendations lol

[@bigjaffa02]

The 3D models are incredibly detailed and have helped me understand what happened. Thanks for your efforts in producing this.

[@madddog9xderby447]

The 3d modeling is fucking phenomenal

[@Mike-Bell]

Thanks 😊 ... then you won’t be dissapointed by my future modelling. It does take time though. Wish I could do this fulltime 😀

[@subzero871NL]

rest in peace to all the heros going in there and make the world a safer place

[@oliwiermiekus]

That three fireman who leaked radioactive water and saved World from other explosion from lava room up

[@PrecisionHaze]

They died like pigs lmao

[@PrecisionHaze]

@@oliwiermiekus those weren't firefighters.....

[@adam.2004.4]

@@oliwiermiekus they where soldiers

[@skateboardingjesus4006]

@@PrecisionHaze Are you trolling, or a professional idiot?

[@mrmattandmrchay]

Easy to understand and very well illustrated. Answered a few of my questions as well on the basic design. Loved the panning shot where you showed the before and after at 4:42. Impressive.

[@Mike-Bell]

I’m really glad you appreciate the underlay of the reactor hall floor and steam separator tank in the rubble. I thought that was very useful to understand how the exposion rubble piled up 👍

[@EmeraldEyedBabyBee]

mrmattandmrchay Hay it’s you! I’m one of your subscribers lol! I didn’t knew you where into Chernobyl’s history!

[@mrmattandmrchay]

@@EmeraldEyedBabyBee I went there about 3 years ago, made a series of videos on the elevators in the old buildings :)

[@TYSuggested]

This is by far the the best animation and explaination I've seen thus far regarding Chernobyl. Great job and thanks for sharing.

[@Mike-Bell]

Thanks TR. Its nice to hear my efforts are appreciated and are helpful. When I coulndt find the visual detail I was interested in on the internet I decided to generate it myself and share it for other likemnided viewers.

[@РамисБасыров-и1ю]

This is, without exaggeration, one of the best pictorial and schematic on KZbin on the Chernobyl topic

[@Mike-Bell]

The following reactors can be re-fuelled while at power. CANDU reactors: Pressurised heavy-water cooled and moderated, natural uranium fuel reactors of Canadian design. Operated 1947-present. (Used NON-enriched uranium), positive VC Magnox reactors: CO2-cooled, graphite-moderated, natural uranium fuel reactors of British design. Operated 1954-2015. (Used NON-enriched uranium) UNGG reactors: CO2-cooled, graphite-moderated, natural uranium fuel reactors of French design. Operated 1966 - 1994. (Used NON-enriched uranium) AGR (Advanced gas-cooled) reactors: CO2-cooled, graphite-moderated, enriched uranium fuel reactors of British design. Operated 1976-present.

[@arturfijakowski9572]

Not true. It was stated that MOST of Western Reactors can't be re-fueled online. MOST differs from ALL.

[@thewonkwonk]

Boom

[@markwestwood9730]

Mike Bell This was a very good video. Many others are around but they're hard to understand when they describe what actually happened. I'm not a nuclear scientist so the videos tend to run away from me. Yours was perfect.

[@ericoxford7069]

Candu reactors can be refueled while running.

[@tesla242]

Also, the Siemens design deployed in Atucha NPP I&II, unique of his type, with online refueling and pressure vessel

[@rishabram4389]

I think you are mistaken comrade. RBMK reactors don’t explode.

[@andyawesome2842]

This man is delusional. Send him to the infirmary.

[@gauravjha8938]

They shouldn't explode if all safety norms, regulations & measures are appropriately & strictly taken.

[@Euro_AT]

Yes they can

[@GOLTURBO555]

@@Euro_AT they didn't... After many many mistakes, and a incredible 3 GIGAWATTSS of power output, it blew up. BWR, PWR, Fast Breed Reactors, Liquid Metal Cooled Reactors, wich one can take, on average... 25% of maximum output power peak? And hold? Befores it reaches 20% of safety margin, it's already gone. The truth about Chernobyl? Well... Dyatlov died with it.

[@augurseer]

Explain how a RBMK reactor explodes. You can't!! Disgraceful.

[@captaincarpo9783]

From the visuals its funny to think that the reactor was located and the explosion happened next to and ABOVE the staff in the control room. Seeing people walk on the reactor lid I automatically assumed that the actual reactor is underground.

[@zpirryz]

I also thought it was underground. Crazy to think the control room was so close though

[@MrAndyman0512]

It was cheaper to build up. Excavation into the ground wouldve been both expensive and annoying.

[@abandonedlmao9433]

I seen jojo and mista was right 4 is the bad number

[@tanman.]

you saw people walk on the reactor lid?!?! Is there a video of this?

[@MrAndyman0512]

@@tanman. Reactors 1 2 & 3 reactor lids were relatively safe to be near for short periods, and due to soviet design. The actual reactor was not encased in a steel frame.

[@RW-ij1ci]

Anyone else blown away by the fact that they still ran the plant like 20 years after the first explosion.... thats crazy..

[@1jeffr]

Absolutely amazing animations. I couldn't even imagine how much work went into that.

[@Mike-Bell]

1jeffr thanks, it’s good to know my effort is appreciated and can inform others.

[@GT-Tezzy]

@@Mike-Bell very appreciated. Keep going

[@kyleanderson2949]

This was absolutely beautiful; thank you for taking the time to visualize this for us.

[@ctkeyvinhtran9818]

This has been the most technological video on youtube about this topic, appreciated your great work man

[@Mike-Bell]

Glad you liked it!

[@luistpuig]

At 7:48, you see those white flashes in the film... well, that is the radiation being recorded by the film of the camera...

[@marisjanelsins1563]

Is that true? If so Radiation moves up in my list if creepy things

[@itzmitzkitz]

@@marisjanelsins1563 Yes! If you look for photage of the elephant's foot, you'll see a lot more of the white dots and Lin's because of the massive amount of radiation coming from it

[@derfurz8618]

@@marisjanelsins1563 in the end, what "colors" film is photons hitting crystals on the film. Gamma radiation is energy emitted as photons, so it's not really a surprise film is sensitive to Radioactive radiation. Although I agree that radioactive radiation is creepy, especially with gamma radiation, as, because of it being photons, you can't really protect yourself from it.

[@fungdark8270]

Is this case, the white specs are probably snow seeing as it was snowy, but yes, high energy particles will affect cameras. Thunderf00t has a fascinating video in which he puts an iPhone in the path of a neutron beam while recording. Lots of white streaks and dots

[@derfurz8618]

@@fungdark8270 just to be clear though, photons are not particles. That is what makes gamma radiation so hard to protect from.

[@anatolystepanovichdyatlov1747]

Iam sorry, guys.

[@natsariat430]

LMAO

[@texas_mustanggt1924]

that is fine everyone make a mistake.

[@melaniemeyer3558]

Not good not terrible

[@bbhelmet1]

Way

[@Hydrasito]

Anatoly Stepanovich Dyatlov Don't worry there's 3.6 rotgens, like a chest x-ray, not great not terrible

[@stellasammy5124]

I lived in Moldova near Ucraine and Mom used to say that something awful happened! Watched many videos to understand what actually happened but only with your video I got an idea cause its explained for normal simple people ! Thank you!

[@amramjose]

Many don't realize that Chernobyl is in the Ukraine, and that Belarus as well as Ukraine, not to mention all the countries which were also irradiated by fallout, were damaged for centuries. Ukraine was considered the "breadbasket of the Soviet Union"...

[@jamiegargan894]

Wow.. I’ve never seen a more easy to follow in depth explanation of what happened here 👏🏼👏🏼 this lets me know exactly what happened finally! Thank you!

[@phungquyen3511]

Thank you for the visual. I watched the HBO series Chernobyl 2019 and understood the working mechanism of an RBMK reactor, somewhat. This video showed me how the fuel rods and control rods looked like and how they were arranged.

[@forrest2457]

“50,000 people used to live here, now it’s a ghost town”

[@vishah3896]

And yet still zakaev goes there to deal arms

[@IndianYouThoober90]

And for 40k years it is barren

[@sagarock5528]

@@vishah3896 yeah in zakaev's mind,he thought that if he ever got his arm shot off he would grow another one because he was in chernobyl😂

[@AntzolY111]

@@sagarock5528 great one mate! 😆😆😆😆👍👍👍👍

[@AntzolY111]

@foxo pirkl mcmilan! Best one mate

[@fifasims1996]

Thank you so much. Someone finally explained and showed just exactly how a rbmk reactor looks and works. I've seen a lot of explanations, and 2d graphics but you really need an in depth 3d graphic to really understand

[@debbiekerr3989]

This is the 2nd video I've watched that was produced by this gentleman, and he has done the best, and most importantly the clearest explanation of the situation. He uses the best animation, and visuals. Thank you for sharing this, and for providing such presicise information.

[@Mike-Bell]

Glad it was helpful!

[@pintohoareau579]

I finally know how far the control room is from the reactor.

[@ciscof4041]

Valery Legasov would be proud of this. Anatoly Dyatlov was not the chief engineer, he was deputy chief.

[@cb2000a]

He was, in a nutshell, the example of why the Soviet system was a failure. Russia to this day still plays a dangerous game with nuclear.

[@pauloconnor2980]

Yeah, but he was Chief Fuckwit!!!

[@COFFIE-in4fd]

Valery Legasov was not such a hero as in HBO story

[@Л.С.Мото]

@@pauloconnor2980 I just did Cherynobl on the toilet. Every heard of poo-phoria? Man, its almost 30 minutes ago, it still smells and I still have goosebumps. Amazing feeling and that smell.... smell of victory. Amazing. Thank you for listening :)

[@dmitriikopylov7033]

@@COFFIE-in4fd really? Could you please elaborate?

[@i.robles5785]

Thank you for this clean modeling! It greatly illustrates what happened with no distracting colors or confusing graphics. The lightbulb in my head finally lit up when seeing this.

[@JohnSmith-ng2ek]

Well done comrade. I enjoyed the footage of the close up look of the sarcophagus. And the animation of the reactor lid

[@Mike-Bell]

Thanks comradski. You will certainly enjoy the next more detailed contents. But perfection takes time ....

[@abrahamedelstein4806]

4:00 Ackchyually! Nikolai Fomin as the chief engineer was relatively inexperienced when it came to nuclear reactors, Anatoly Dyatlov on the other hand was very knowledgeable with reactors and many of his junior colleagues looked up to him, it's part of the reason why the reactor operators went along so recklessly with his instructions, "The old man knows best" was the thinking.

[@Mike-Bell]

Dyatlov had extensive practical experience of reactors which including from the construction of the Chernobyl reactors. However his theoretical understanding of reactor physics was clearly limited especially how at low power the RBMK was extremely precarious. At full power this reactor was predictable and stable however at low power when the xenon poisoning and heat slowing effect were absent this reactor effectively had no brakes. Dyatlov didn’t understand or believe this. The Soviet Physicists knew about low power precarious nature of the RBMK and had included safety procedures to manage the risk.

[@abrahamedelstein4806]

@@Mike-Bell I'll take your word for it. There is a lot of contradictory statements out there, some who want to paint Nikolai Fomin as a complete buffoon who had no understanding of how a reactor worked, others that say Dyatlov was an irredeemable cunt, certainly how HBO's Chernobyl tried to portray him as well as general incompetence. Statements made by Dyatlov's colleagues seem to contradict this picture however, at least from what I've seen. I wish I had my sources at hand but at least one of them said something to the tune of; Dyatlov knew the reactors like the back of his hand and everyone relied on him. Another reason why I doubt the official narrative is that Akimov supposedly claimed to his death that "he did everything right" which never sounded quite right if he was a totally unwilling stooge in the drama but I've not taken the time to read the actual transcripts and to be quite honest, it was still the Soviet Union, a dead man can be sworn to have said anything.

[@060POTEHb]

@@abrahamedelstein4806 Dyatlov knew about xenon poisoning. You can watch his last interview, where he said that, plus on official chernobyl NPP channel, you can find alot of intervies with his collegues, that confirms, that he had realy good knowledge about reactors, even theoretical. Atleast it's all the sources i can remember right now, problably there is more, but they are mostly on russian. If i remember correctly, he doesn't know only about tips, altho Fomin can knew about it (Leningrad npp get this effect earlyer and tryed to warn other npp with RBMK about it, atleast that stated by Valentin Kupnii, that was a director of beloyarsk npp before accedent and become director of... I dunno how to translate correctly, but basicly in charge of sarcofagus). But again, this reactors was realy hard to maintain, even at high power. So there was alot of situation, there operators, in kinda similar condition (after a long working on low energy levels) just "burn" xenon by increasing power inside. It wasn't that common, but it was. So, it's easy to think and blame Dyatlov, as almost whole ussr did, but reality is so, that he wasn't more then a cog. If he didn't be there, somebody else had all the chances of making same mistakes. And that's why "system" was involved and was responsible for all this. If you know about Bhopal, it's somewhat similar situation.

[@seho8722]

@@abrahamedelstein4806 just a minute! Dyatlov died in 1995... USSR collapsed in 1991... There was no USSR at then!

[@seho8722]

@@060POTEHb wait... Just wonder how "system" should be blamed on technical issue???

[@panther8707]

"... And hopefully it will retain the title of worst nuclear disaster in history." The idea that there could be something worse is terryifing.

[@tech83studio38]

The RBMK 1000 is massive wow . I was 5 when this happened I remember my mother telling me about the radioactive cloud .

[@krashd]

A British AGR completely dwarfs an RBMK. Check out the comparison image en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_II_reactor

[@TheHarry30rb]

Rob Fraser so if fucks will kill more people is that what meant to say

[@Kumari_44]

The animations helped sooo much in terms of trying to imagine and understand exactly how this all went down. Thank you.

[@JoshLamoreaux1]

After watching the HBO series this was exactly what I was looking for! Trying to understand the scale and layout of the plant, your work is appreciated!

[@100GTAGUY]

Some of my buddies back in the day got to tour a nuclear power plant in Virginia for a merit badge, and all they could say was just how incredibly massive the entire facility was inside and out (granted also how amazing it was to see certain things operating etc.) But the sheer scale of it all in consideration with the physics behind how it operates, was I guess very awe inspiring for lack of better words I suppose. One of them is now working on a nuclear sub in the Navy ironically enough.

[@tropickman]

The reactor had operated for 20 years prior. It had design flaws, but this was caused by negligence of Dyatlov and 2 of his techs. The reactor was undergoing a 24 hour shut down procedure, allowing for a specific test. The test involved disconnecting one of the turbines from the reactor, as it was being wound down, and using its energy to power water pumps. The test should have been a one off, lasting only 45 seconds. Anatoly Dyatlov (head technician on midnight shift) planned to lower output to 700 Mw, the lowest setting at which the reactor should have been operated. But he failed to properly set it up and the output fell below 100 Mw. Instead of allowing it to shut down, he tried to bring the reactor output back up to 700 Mw, in order to perform the test. To do this, he overrode safety systems and warnings, and ordered graphite control rods MANUALLY WITHDRAWN from the reactor. The rods are a critical safety mechanism; if the system senses a run off reaction, it will automatically lower these rods into reactor and sap off energy output. Sadly, he ordered the rods disconnected from the system, so that it would not interfere with his quest for more heat. Once the positive heat loop kicked in, it kept increasing the water temperature in the reactor, in turn causing higher fission reaction, and on and on. The heat and pressure built up, until reactor 4 housing and piping exploded, propelling a 1,000-ton concrete slab above it clean off the building. The reactor was now exposed; contaminated water and coolant were spraying everywhere. Dyatlov was sentenced to 10 years of prison, but was released in 1991 after collapse of USSR. He tried to scape goat authorities, apparently ordering him to press on with a not so important test and jeopardize billions of dollars and national catastrophe. In reality, he was public enemy #1 and public demanded his execution. He died in 1995 from heart attack. kzbin.info/www/bejne/eZSQp6mejL1_b7M

[@Merthalophor]

This is important. The reactor didn't explode because it was poorly built, it exploded due to mismanagement. If the USSR hadn't been organized the way it was, and perhaps even if Dyatlov hadn't been employed there, we'd not question the safety of nuclear reactors, even if RBMK were deployed just like in Chernobyl.

[@Bileygr20]

@@Merthalophor definitely poorly built. An emergency shut down button that makes the reactor explode?

[@757Spy]

Really well done. Great blending photos and your animations to give a clearer picture of what happened.

[@tomwalters3772]

Nicely done! Thank you for putting this summary together

[@chloe19815]

The Chernobyl disaster has fascinated me for years. The Russian subs kursk and k19 too. Great video thanks for sharing.

[@_RudyBoi]

50,000 people used to live here. Now it's a ghost town. - Captain MacMillan

[@DestroyerWill]

Alpha Six

[@duncangodfrey1448]

According to pretty much everywhere, it was more than double that 😂 figures on this video is bs 😂

[@ronjon7942]

Excellent work! Great animations, footage, research, and narration. Subscribed.

[@Mike-Bell]

Thanks and welcome

[@emuriddle9364]

-Bad design, to cut costs. -Needed to do a Safety Check. -Bypassed protocol for proper shutdown. -Shut-Off Switch became an unintentional "Self Destruct" button.

[@rrock1970]

CANDUs and RBMK's share some design similarities (online refuelling, pressure tubes instead of pressure vessel, physical size due to low-enriched / natural uranium) but have some significant safety-related design differences. CANDUs are moderated by liquid heavy water, not graphite, and the water-filled reactor is immersed in another large tank of light water called the shield tank. As a result, the CANDUs have a significant amount of passive cooling capacity, and water doesn't catch fire. Another critical difference is the CANDUs are fully inside a concrete containment structure, and the Ontario Hydro multi-unit stations have a massive negative pressure vacuum building to reduce pressure within the containment building if there is a large steam release in containment as a result of an accident. CANDUs do have a positive void reactivity, and for this reason they have two independent, fast-acting shutdown systems that are physically separate from each other and the control systems. Each system is designed to shut down the reactor in a matter of seconds on its own without needing the other system, however both systems are designed to initiate shutdown independently and immediately if a design-basis accident occurs. Also, following the Chernobyl event Canadian engineers travelled to the Soviet Union to learn what happened and determine if anything needed to be fixed or addressed in the CANDU design. There weren't any significant design issues identified in the CANDUs, but one operating change was to reduce the maximum flux tilt allowed within the CANDUs before reactor trip is initiated. This reduced maximum flux tilt limit is still in use today. Great video, btw. (Edit: corrected "end shield tank" to "shield tank". The end shields are distinct from the shield tank.)

[@Mike-Bell]

Thanks for the detailed explanation. It is significant that Canadian Scientists were allowed to talk to the Soviets when safety was the focus. But admittedly that was in the time of Glasnost and shortly before the Soviet Union dissolved.

[@thepowerofdreams6816]

@@jingchenbi7419 They actually thinked in making a larger and cheaper version of the RBMK, the RBMKP-4800 with 14400MWt of power, it was going to be a square block and assembled outside over rails, they would remove a wall of one of the units while still operating, and and move the new reactor block until attaching it to the operating one, so you can imagine a miles long strip of a single modular RBMK-4800. kzbin.info/www/bejne/kGTCZaRjqrmjhs0 at the 10:42 you can get an idea of what they planned it has to be said tho, that they didn't want to stop it there, the RBMK was originally designed to work at 50% efficiency or more using supercritical steam turbines, so the RBMKP-4800 could have outputs of over 7700MWe per block, they also were thinking in using a fast neutron version of it with 15% enriched uranium that could have much higher power outputs since fast rectors have very small cores that they wanted to make very big, the 1300MWe BN-1200 fast breeder will have a core of just 85 in height and 2 meters in diameter. it has to be said tho that 1500MWe and thermal power are very diferent things, generally the sweetspot for reactors is around 2700-3300MWt, the EPR thermal output is 4650MWt, the Mitsubishi APWR and General electric ESBWR have 4550MWt and a power ouput of 1780MWe, altho japan planes to scall them down to 3280MWt/1300MWe very large reactors are bastards to build, the Chineses are studying to scale the Westinghouse AP-1000 to make the AP-1400 and then possibly the AP-1700 and AP-2100 with a thermal output over 6000MWt

[@thepowerofdreams6816]

@@jingchenbi7419 China will build a larger 1400MWe version of the AP-1000 called the CAP-1400 at rocheng, and they have planned 64 of Westinghouse AP1000 fully manufactured in china, westinghouse sold china the manufacturing licences in 2009, they already made 4 of those things

[@thepowerofdreams6816]

@@jingchenbi7419 France? Not really, today, this very day, the leader of nuclear industry is really russia, Chinese reactors are copied from the french and the american designs. The VVER design is a tremndous PWR.

[@thepowerofdreams6816]

@@jingchenbi7419 The problem of making a reactor as large as the epr, or larger than 3.3GWt is that it becomes hard to engineer and construct, originally Rosatom didn't plan the VVER-1200 but rather a VVER-1500 or VVER-1800, they ditched it for the VVER-1200 because it was easier to do, as a result they build those things in their country for 1800U$D/KWe, and the VVER-TOI they are in road to do it for less than 1400U$D/KWe The sweetspot for nuclear power size is around 2700-3300MWt, where scalability and size meet, larger than that and you need a higher degree of engineering to guarantee the safety of a 4.5GWt reactor that has pretty much the same pressure vessel as a 3GWt one, as such the level of engineering of the safety systems increases more than the possible benefits of a larger thermal output The workhorse of france's nuclear industry has been the 900MWe class, while the reactor on which the epr is based, the N4 has been taken 15 years to construct in chooz and civaux.The EPR-2 hopefully will have around 1300MWe and 3200MWt, it simply becomes less challenging to build. The same issue happened to South korea, they builded the OPR-1000 for 1900U$D/KWe, and when they decided to supersize it into the APR-1400 they ended building those for 2250U$D/KWe, they are planning to replace it with the iPower with a output of 1200MWe and 3200MWt Taishan 1&2 costed around 2300U$D/KWe, sure better than Flamanville and Olkiluoto, but not good enough to be better than the 900MWe french ones. The lower construction time of taishan and less delays has to deal with the fresh experience the chinese have at building reactors, and the more fordist and direct approach they have, they like to have everything built before starting construction, while in europe and the usa they went for a more toyotist way of doing things, or in-time logistics.

[@tdmtu1500ag]

Реакторы с инженерной точки зрения могут быть поделены по множеству принципов, например по механизмам переноса тепловой энергии из активной зоны, по построению активной зоны, по наличию защитных оболочек и так далее. Реакторы, если рассуждать с инженерной точки зрения могут быть гомогенные, гетерогенные/композитные, кипящие, спокойные, одноконтурные, двухконтурные, с открытой активной зоной, с закрытой, водяные, водо-водяные, кипящие водо-водяные, канальные, с металлическим теплоносителем, на быстрых нейтронах и так далее. Не бывает "Западных" реакторов и "Восточных" реакторов. Технические особенности определенных конструкций всегда имеют определенные плюсы и минусы. Если вы обсуждаете механизм, инженерный продукт, но при этом вместо фактов начинаете рассуждать о том, что он плох просто по стране происхождения - Восток или Запад, то вы занимаетесь пропагандой.

[@Mike-Bell]

Я согласен. Я очень серьезно отношусь к таким комментариям, как ваш и от других. Я работаю над ремейком этого видео, удаляя неточности и политический комментарий. Это отвлекает от видео. В ремейке также будет дополнительное моделирование. I agree with you. I take comments like yours and from others seriuosly. I am working on a remake of this video removing the inaccuracies and the political commentary. It detracts from the video. The remake will also have additional modelling.

[@ШевкуновКирилл]

@@Mike-Bell тогда стоит напомнить неискушённому зрителю, что хотя поводом для аварии на "западной" электростанции в фукусиме стало цунами, причины были те же - ошибки конструкторов и неадекватные действия персонала.

[@shynodaa]

@@Mike-Bell когда видео выйдет ?

[@Mike-Bell]

@@shynodaa Видео с объяснением воздействия кнопки АЗ-5 займет еще около 6 недель. The video explaining the impact of the AZ-5 button will take about 6 more weeks.

[@Mike-Bell]

@@ШевкуновКирилл Да, я объясню это. Нет такого понятия, как "западные реакторы". Советы также построили реакторы на кипящей воде. Yes I will explain that. There isnt such a thing as a "western reactor" The Soviets also built boiling water reactors.

[@ZieSpiralOut]

Even though a lot of the disaster was mitigated, winscale in Britain was one of the craziest imo. The fact that air cooled reactors was actually a thing blows my mind.

[@JAAPJXBIT]

Thank you. I have been for years trying to piece together in my mind how the entire Chernobyl site fit together along the inside of the reactor building. Outstanding animation!

[@davemaverick8438]

finally an actual location of control room, couldnt find it on google, it seems that they sealed that entrance to control room 4 and made entrance from another path, i think maybe corridor collapsed in that part so thats why they go around to get there as seen in expedition videos

[@060POTEHb]

It was changed just as radiation safety measure. Long story short - 3 and 4 units shared much of same systems as ventelation and etc. And to split, somewhat safe zone of unit 3(and the control room of reactor 4), they changed the layout.

[@normanroscher7545]

carlwillis.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/chnpp_phase_ii_map_raw2.jpg There you can see exactly where the control room is, and what is covered by the sarcophagus.

[@Vcd832]

Best video yet about this disaster. With thoughtful animations. Thnx a lot

[@Mike-Bell]

Thanks 👍

[@boydsinclair7606]

Everybody can learn from this: arrogance is dangerous, and cutting costs often doesn't save any money: Building a containment building after the meltdown is like going into a burning house to install a fire extinguisher.

[@megami.x]

This is awesome. Thanks for the 3D rendering, really helps explain the workings of the reactor.

[@reyglc1425]

50k ppl used to live here, now it’s a ghost town

[@jakelc9597]

The pool and Ferris wheel bruh. I remember that mission

[@reyglc1425]

@@jakelc9597 hardest mission hands down on veteran mode 1 shot 1 kill. Carrying ur partner

[@BB-gr9hq]

A very well made video. I was working in the US nuclear defense industry when the accident at Chernobyl occured. I followed with great interest, but the information was very scarce in the late 80s due to the secrecy the Soviets imposed on the situation.

[@jwalster9412]

"you couldn't have seen graphite, THERE IS NO GRAPHITE!"

[@bendapkiewicz5947]

You didn’t mention the radiation reading from the core. But I’m told it’s the equivalent of a chest xray.

[@Angel_V8]

close, its equivalent to having 20 million Xrays all at once. possible even twice that amount even 4 times. Its so much that .0001 second of exposure immediately decays your immune system and burns your white blood-cells.

[@Angel_V8]

Watch the series Chernobyl, its soooo good. Its the best Disaster cinema imo

[@coldwarkiwi_2nd183]

⁠​⁠@@Angel_V8"equivalent of a chest X-ray" is taken directly from that series btw :D

[@Angel_V8]

@@coldwarkiwi_2nd183 yes, but then it was corrected by the scientist that it would actually be so much worse than a single Xray.

[@Aaron-zu3xn]

"like not wearing your seatbelt" if i don't wear my seatbelt my car doesn't poison the black sea when it reaches the watet table

[@eversunnyguy]

Fantastic animation for novices like me. Thanks. The more read about this, the more interesting it becomes. Unfortunately, Nuclear energy will disappear soon due to these accidents. A cheapest, reliable, zero pollution source of energy but safety is a huge concern.

[@平和につながる]

This video is insanelly good, thank you for sharing this information! I've always loved learning about Chernobyl Dissaster since I was a child, I've learnt more than I knew with this video, thanks!

[@TheTeddyGuy28]

After years of interest in Chernobyl, this is the first video to give me proper perspective on the plant layout. Thanks!

[@beyondfubar]

Incredible 3d modeling work! Love the visuals!

[@brittislove]

this is one of the best, hands down explanatorial videos about Chernobyl. Yes I made up a word, but it works.

[@Mike-Bell]

Thanks 😊 I like the word.

[@SupkevGaming420J]

Such a detailed, well thought out view ! I really enjoyed watching these videos. Great job

[@Mike-Bell]

Awesome, thank you!

[@RenedyOnTren]

50 000 people used to live here, but now it's a ghost town...

[@donniecatalano]

I lived in the north of Italy, I was 10 yo. I remember how scared people were, as news were poor and scarce. I still remember the emergency announcements telling people to stay inside, keep their animals under cover and abandon their vegetable gardens.

[@trustmebro4841]

Great video. There is a slight correction to be made. The reactor did actually slow down with increase in temperature (negative temperature coefficient). However, it did have a positive void coefficient which has nothing to do with temperature but it means the reactivity will increase if the water converts into steam. This usually isn’t an issue cause the water is circulated but on this day they were running a test which required the pumps circulating water to be switched off which allowed the water enough time to boil and convert into steam.

[@weilandcock]

great explanation and username

[@jahenders]

Good video. If you're interested in Chernobyl, I highly recommend the book "Midnight in Chernobyl."

[@guymanguy5208]

The animation and explanation was great! I was confused when I saw you only have 4,25K subs, I thought it was supposed to be 4,25M.

[@markusklyver6277]

I believe the video is wrong. Temperature does decrease the radioactivity. The positive void coefficient has to do with steam: if the coolant is a liquid, it may boil if the temperature inside the reactor rises. These steam bubbles are called voids. The amount of void inside the reactor can affect the reactivity of the reactor. The change in reactivity caused by a change of voids inside the reactor is directly proportional to the void coefficient, so it is a scalar. This has to do with steam, not temperature. The Chernobyl reactor did have a negative temperature coefficient, meaning that higher temperatures slowed the reaction down. However in the lack of control rods and fresh coolant, this wasn't enough to stop the reaction from becoming an explosion.

[@thompsonmatthew]

Don't overlook that the steam voids are ultimately the result of an increase in temperature. The void coefficient was so significant in this type of reactor that it dominated other coefficients including the fuel temperature coefficient. An increase in temperature creates steam voids, and because the reactor is graphite moderated, it leads to an increase in reactivity, which further raises the temperature and reduces cooling capability - then this repeats - a disasterous positive feedback loop.

[@biff5856]

Marcus Klyver, Thank you. This account isn't quite accurate as well. For all those HBO naysayers.

[@thenax7998]

Very good animations, gives a brilliant insight into how the design of the building was.

[@ElizabethBurkhart-tc9gs]

It's also ironic that the emergency shutdown switch made reactor 4 go critical

[@petertimowreef9085]

In a way we humans are exactly like a runaway nuclear reactor. Not only have we gotten really smart, far too smart for our own good to be honest, but on top of that we found ways to transfer that knowledge to the next generation far more efficiently. The gorgeous animations in this video are testimony to that. Imagine if you had to explain in text what only 5 seconds of animation can show!

[@robertgresham3603]

The liquidators are heroes.

[@C2H6Cd]

Yes, but with pathetically low pension and totally neglected by previous and current governments.

[@richsackett3423]

@@C2H6Cd Those are not the considerations of heroes.

[@C2H6Cd]

@@richsackett3423 : Yes, you're perfectly right. Even for that man, who stopped the 3rd world war in 1983 by cancelling rocket attack in the Soviet Union against USA, do you know him? He got some decoration after decades. Pathetic. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanislav_Petrov

[@richsackett3423]

@@C2H6Cd It is truly one of the most foul injustices. You should see how we treated our American 9/11 first responder heroes. Beyond pathetic and bordering on criminal. It's bad when a TV comedian has to go to bat against the politicians for our heroes. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_effects_arising_from_the_September_11_attacks

[@jackmehoff6302]

The shocking thing is the other three reactors ran for years after 1986

[@KevinS47]

How is that shocking? The reactors were fine, all of them even number 4 the day before the disaster.... if you knew anything of what happened and what lead to the disaster you would see how misinformed you are in writing this comment. It was a very specific concatenation of events that lead to it, it’s not like all of a sudden the other ones could end up with the same outcome (unless the exact same mistakes were to be repeated precisely in that order again, which would have been basically impossible unless if done on purpose...), so yes, you and the 17 people who liked your comment are not quite using your brain.

[@Zacck66]

@@KevinS47 22 now

[@cytrynowy_melon6604]

@@KevinS47 Those reactors were heavily flawed by the design. Explosion could happen not just because of Dyatlov (as his behaviors is exaggerated btw, as HBO and many books are based on ,,thruth about chernobyl" book by grigorij medvedvev, which is often inaccurate). You know that Leningrad Power Plant's RBMK once almost exploded too? The only thing that saved them was fresh fuel, so the void coefficient was a bit different. BTW the modifications made to reactors later have still not made them safe enough in case of bad operator. So it's quite surprising they kept them working until 2000, but it was necessary because ukraine needed power. In Russia they function to this day, but russians have lower standards when it comes to human safety and they are too dependent of those reactors, because they have even more of them than Ukraine, and russia is not so wealthy today. But they are not safe.

[@tonybotting9548]

You skirted over one of the most important parts , the poisoning of the reactor . A major contribution to the sequence of events leading to the Chernobyl nuclear disaster was the failure to anticipate the effect of "xenon poisoning" on the rate of the nuclear fission reaction in the Chernobyl nuclear reactor. Which was as a result of the space between the lowest point of the rods and the bottom of the reactor and being run partially shut down for so long before the test was done . Which basically means the reactor was already unstable before the test was done . So many videos about Chernobyl fail to explain this .

[@mikerzisu9508]

Pretty sure this was explained in the HBO series

[@Mike-Bell]

My next video on the same channel explains just what you are referring to kzbin.info/www/bejne/poDde4SAZt50l68

[@gringotom242]

Fascinating thanks. I've studied this disaster a lot but have never been able to get my head around it fully before seeing this 3d model

[@ranjitcherian7292]

The graphic production is awesome.

[@Gunny_101st]

This was the best condensed break-down of this event that I personally have ever watched. Brilliant.

[@Tom55data]

0:50 : Western reactors are safer by design but are not fail safe. The largest problem with nuclear reactors is that even when fully "off" - with all control rods in place, so "shut-down", the core still produces heat which must be removed (ie put a large amount of nuclear material in one place - it gets hot even with neutron absorbers around it). The amount of "water" (or other coolant) required is too much for gravity feed (using the differential density based on coolant temperature) which means it needs pumping or energy from somewhere to operate. If there is a total loss of control or power, a reactor even with full shut down it will overheat - this is what happened at Fukashima where water was no longer pumped in the primary circuit, resulting in overheating (while in shutdown state), excess steam pressure and cracking of the primary containment - even though they vented the steam to the atmosphere. Although much safer by design, reactors in the west are not fail-safe, but are unlikely to be much more destructive that Fukashima.

[@chadwells7562]

Reactors can be designed to be walk away safe if we want to, though. The need for active cooling measures isn’t an inherent feature of nuclear power technology.

[@Tom55data]

@@chadwells7562 then you don't understand all the current nuclear power generation or how nuclear fusion happens. You first port of call is video of Fukashima. That is exactly what happened, it is because decay causes heat, that cannot be turned off , the second problem is Zirconium is used as rod cladding as it is neutron neutral, and that reacts with steam above 500C to create hydrogen, again the problem of Fukashima and the second explosion at Chenobyl.

[@chadwells7562]

@@Tom55data Exactly as I said. It’s a design and engineering choice. The choice can be made to develop a walk away safe reactor, such as a pebble bed.

[@connykomen4237]

Very nice and clear visual presentation of the plant, the cores and their possitions! I did not realize reactor 3 was just in the next building...

[@BrookieCooki84]

Thank you for the accurate diagrams of the reactor layout.

[@georgiatrainproductions5986]

The 3D view outside of the core in amazing!

[@fixedguitar47]

You should try the virtual reality tour

[@renj6531]

Three mile Island was audited and determined to be insufficient in terms of safety standards and basic engineering practices. but the worst part is NRC had a hand in not remediating said issues and the utility company refused to place the plant out of commission because they would have lost money. A bunch of documents were destroyed too.

[@Turtle1631991]

I join others with the praise on the animations. It is clear that lot of careful work was put into it. Kudos. I grew up in country that was formerly Czechoslovakia and I heard many stories from older people and my parents about just how inherently messed up the soviet style of leadership was. There is no doubt in my mind that it is the root cause of all the contributing factors of the catastrophe.

[@sixthgear5874]

Amazing video, easy to understand and great visuals, thank you for taking the time to make this video

[@Mike-Bell]

Sixth Gear thanks. I’m glad the effort is appreciated. I attempted to accurately as possible model the components and buildings.

[@TheHighlander71]

I enjoyed the graphics in this video, they give a good overview of the structure and the damage afterwards. One question I still have about the original design of the control rods: the bottom end of the rods were graphite which is a moderator meant to increase reactivity. When these are inserted, the graphite was meant to replace the water inside the control channels. Some videos mention that this water is an absorber (decreasing reactivity) while other videos mention that hydrogen (the H part of H2O or water) is a moderator. What were the graphite ends of the control rods meant to do originally? replace a moderator or replace an absorber?

[@jordanpottruff3602]

Light water is both a neutron moderator and a neutron absorber. As in, when a neutron interacts with water it can either be absorbed or it can "bounce off" with less energy, i.e. moderate. In isolation, its net effect is predominantly as a moderator, boosting reactivity. In a typical western reactor, the water is the sole neutron moderator. As more water is added, the power increases, and if the water is lost or boils away, power decreases. This creates a negative feedback loop that can help prevent a runaway chain reaction and helps stabilize the reactor. An RBMK, however, is graphite moderated. The graphite moderator provides a substantial boost in reactivity that allows the reactor to run on far less enriched uranium, saving on operational costs. The impact of that, though, is that water is no longer a net moderator but instead a net absorber. This is because there are diminishing returns to moderating neutrons. The graphite is already ***heavily*** moderating the neutrons in the core, and the addition of water through the reactor has a comparatively negligible moderating effect. The water's absorbing effect is now more pronounced, making it a net absorber in an RBMK. Effectively the impact of water on reactivity has reversed compared to a typical water-moderated reactor. In an RBMK, as water is lost (e.g. by boiling it), the power will increase, boiling more water, increasing power more, boiling more water, etc etc etc. This is what is referred to as the positive void coefficient, it is a positive feedback look that makes the reactor unstable. Back to your main question--the water is an absorber in an RBMK, and the graphite extensions are therefore meant to replace an absorber. The reason for this is that it creates a greater differential in reactivity between the rods being inserted and withdrawn. When withdrawn, the graphite is within the reactor and boosts power. When inserted, the graphite moderator exits the bottom of the reactor and power decreases even more. Without it, the control rod (an absorber), when inserted, is simply pushing away the water in the channel, which is another absorber. The water is admittedly a worse absorber than the control rod, but the result is that the impact of the control rod is less significant nonetheless. So the graphite extension helps compensate for this effect.

[@TheHighlander71]

​@@jordanpottruff3602 Thank you. That is very useful information. It makes a lot more sense to me now.

[@connordenney4228]

The new cover was not rolled, it was actually slid because there were no wheels that could support the weight.

[@THEchiQ]

We knew so little about it at the time. A few years after the explosion, I moved to Sweden, and lived in the university town of Uppsala. Radiation levels were still very elevated there at the time.

[@RazgovorIsDialog]

'Look at this place. 50000 people used to live in this city and now it's a ghost town. Never seen anything like it '.

[@linjunda9617]

Q: Why did it explode? A: It was made by the Soviet Union

[@hackn001]

My dad was journalist in the 80's and he had the canche to see the project of Chernobyl and he said that was really poor made...i still remember his words "walls should've been 5 meters large and were only 2" 😳

[@linjunda9617]

Russia's and China's land is a radioactive junk yard, but not everywhere.

[@redsun9261]

​@@linjunda9617 Radioactive junkyard? Most of russia is unpopulated land with a wild and untouched nature. Russia has state-of-the-art nuclear reactors, its enriched urainum centrifuges are second to none in the world. Bet your shithole couldnt even build a NPP itself. Wtf you even talking about idiot.

[@ZEDRA09]

@@redsun9261 lool fuck you and your 3rd world russia shithole

[@duncangodfrey1448]

Fran Cesco your dad lied😂 they were 2 metres thick. Not 2 inches. (“ is inches)

[@grablicH]

excellent explanation,always wanted to know where was control room

[@Mike-Bell]

Glad it helped

[@gaz6629]

Thank you for this. As someone who isn't well versed in science, this was really easy for me to understand, and the first time I've really learned exactly how the the disaster happened from a technical standpoint.

[@lachesis8004]

It is a misconception that the reactor exploded from the emergency protection system. By the time the operator pressed the AZ-5 button, the reactor was already collapsing

[@garrettbirkel7750]

That's incorrect for two reasons. First, the reactor was not "collapsing", it was in a state of xenon poisoning and near-total shutdown. It was unstable, but if the crew wasn't under pressure to avoid shutdown and continue the test, they could have backed it off to a stable state. And two... Yes, AZ-5 is an emergency protection system. You activate an emergency protection system, it's supposed to protect you in the case of an emergency, right? From everything the crew knew, AZ-5 would do what they wanted. A design flaw in the reactor - which was DELIBERATELY HIDDEN by the Soviet nuclear energy commission for political reasons - made AZ-5 cause a spike in reactivity, which was the opposite of what the crew wanted. AZ-5 blew up the reactor.

[@lachesis8004]

@@garrettbirkel7750 "The Japan political system, and the ridiculous sense of national pride it engendered, is what blew up Fukushima made-in-USA reactors", - an example of not sticking out politics where it shouldn't be

[@garrettbirkel7750]

@@lachesis8004 In Japan there was no government-led attempt to suppress the design flaws of the reactor. The Soviets were notorious for thinking in terms of "embarrassment of the state". Everything was a contest between the state and some other state, e.g. "the West". That way of thinking lives on, in your comment here. Chernobyl exploded because some аппара́тчик thought that sharing important design flaws in the RBMK was "embarrassing to the state", and so, that information was hidden from the people trained to operate the RBMK. You really need to stop thinking in terms of the defunct Soviet state versus other states, and turning everything into a pissing match between it and the USA. It's embarrassing, ... and demonstrably bad for your health.

[@dimitri9933]

yeeeaaaah ill just go ahead and stick to what they said on HBO, since you know, its based on actual testimonies.

[@CC3GROUNDZERO]

@@garrettbirkel7750 "The Soviets were notorious for thinking in terms of 'embarrassment of the state'." -- Yeah, totally different from the truth management that the US typically engages in, right? If some type of disaster had happened in 1986, the US government would have made sure that an avoidable catastrophe like that could never happen again in 2003...

[@yaksvk]

2:44 "It was only possible, because there was no pressure vessel. This can be likened to driving without a seatbelt". This is a bit lame actually and shows lack of understanding of the reactor design. RBMK is not a pressurised water reactor, so in principle, it doesn't require a pressure vessel. Instead, every individual fuel channel was its own (low) pressure vessel. That is why it could have been refueled at full power - they would disconnect the channel from the circuit, pull it out and replace it with a new one.

[@KibbyRose]

Please make more! This was awesome!!!

[@bleachiniac]

Glad that I found this video. Good explanation about the explosion and that reactor lid,i saw one of the videos and people said it's the reactor lid but i couldn't imagine what it's.so this video really helped me a lot.

[@СаняИнкогнито-п3э]

1:37 Graphite blocks do not have to be the same size. They are different in length so that there are no lumbago.

[@СаняИнкогнито-п3э]

Графитовые блоки не должны быть одинакового размера. Это нужно для того, чтобы не было прострелов между ними. Т.е. высота одна, но размеры в длинну КАЖДОГО блока должны быть разными, чтобы стыки между были не в одной плоскости.

[@Mike-Bell]

Thank you for explaining. To prevent the blocks moving out of alignment

[@martiivanov]

This is a great video with very detailed animations and it can be clearly seen that a lot of work has been put into it - great job! The only part I didn't appreciate much was the constant propagation of the phrases: "If this was a western reactor all of this would not have happened...". No one is safe and it doesn't matter if it is a Soviet reactor or a so called "western", science can't be limited by politics and should not be used to propagate political views.

[@Mike-Bell]

I actually entirely agree with you re the kommie bashing and western reactors bit. But unfortunately this can’t be edited once the video is posted. I’m considering doing a remake and just sticking to the facts.

[@Daemon861]

But it's true - why shouldn't author say it? Commies purposely ignored safety measures because they wanted to save money. Apart from this commies on purpose hid critical information (which could prevent this catastrophe at all) from operating staff of the power plant - event, similar to one that caused explosion, had happened on another RBMK some years prior! And to add insult to injury commies in attempts to swipe info `bout catastrophe exposed thousands of people to radiation.

[@mattg5878]

"Western reactors can only be refuelled during a reactor shutdown" Incorrect, much of the AGR fleet in the UK is refuelled on load or at partial load.

[@mattg5878]

@Richard Atkinson Yes, we had reactors like that. We called them "Magnox" on account of the magnesium oxide fuel type. AGRs do have a steel liner, and presressed concrete containment, and then most of the building at below reactor lid is concrete walls.

[@thomasfrye8996]

I find your video incredibly in gaging and informative and amazingly I actually learned some things in this little 8 minute video that I hadn't learned in videos that were over an hour

[@Justin.Franks]

A positive void coefficient isn't about the temperature of the fuel. The RBMK reactors have a negative temperature coefficient, which means reactivity _does_ drop as temperature rises. A positive void coefficient refers to reactivity increasing if the coolant water boils and forms voids of steam.

[@duftstabkerze4236]

Many thanks. I asked myself all the time where the term void comes from.

[@thenebular]

"Western reactors can only be refuelled during a reactor shutdown" This is incorrect CANDU reactors can be refuelled while online, and also use unenriched uranium and have a containment building.

[@Mike-Bell]

... see my pinned correction

[@MrsJolene-]

@@Mike-Bell No pin found in comments.

[@NoBody-ht1oh]

Get over yourself mate who cares