Nuclear Fission Reactor Principles

The general principles governing the way in which nuclear fission reactors operate.

[@caydencarrico]

Thank you, Dr. Eagle, for sharing with all of us your knowledge and understanding and taking the time to put together these videos. I've been going through the U.S. Naval Nuclear Power School and it has because of your videos, I have been able to succeed in the program.

[@atil4]

Thank you very much. As we say in Spanish, your explanations are clear as water.

[@bixstar1469]

si

[@davidcalin9086]

Love your sessions! keep them coming Sir.

[@jazztrumpet251]

Super heady, enjoying it!

[@AliSher-vd9lj]

Neutrons with 1-100eV will be captured by Uranium 235 or Uranium 238? I mean nonfission capture.

[@bishalbasak9081]

nice explanation and waiting for more contents

[@justpaulo]

Uh oh, your math is not correct at 27:25. The log of the product is the sum of the logs rather than the product of the logs. But b/c you do the inverse error when applying the exponential (exp(a.b)=exp(a)+exp(b) and not exp(a).exp(b)) the end result is OK. Sorry, but needed to point it out b/c it was confusing to me at 1st. Anyway, thanks for this great series.

[@DrPhysicsA]

Ooops! Thanks. I have added an annotation to make the correction.

[@rally1441]

I think some of the U238 when hit by a free neutron transmutes to P239 as another possible result

[@adamthornton7880]

Has anyone tried combining a fission reactor and a fusion reactor? I mean using the fusion reactor as a source of neutrons to drive a fission reactor at subcritical mass.

[@Rs07Jehts]

That's sort of how a thermonuclear bomb works. The energy from the fission explosion drives fusion, creating a large yield.

[@johannesdesloper8434]

??? 12 minutes... I think I learned that (a+b)^2 = a^2 + 2ab +b^2 in highscool... think something went wrong there or am I mistaken?

[@Saki630]

So all the variables in: K, T, t, delayed neutrons, and Qheat need to be experimentally determined before you can even attempt at trying any of this? At what point was anyone confident it would not explode? Is there a small enough mass required to do it on a small scale basis in order to avoid a large catastrophe? Or are large scale reactors the only safe way of continuously having fission reactions?

[@israelfigueroa7858]

That nuclear reactor seems like playing with fire. With that time constants, and a system so unstable... it's like making a generator from a dynamite bundle. I know there is alternatives like the thorium based. Could be nice to know the physics behing a self stabilized fission nuclear reactor.

[@ns4235]

Brilliant talk. @27:25 should be. ln [ n(0) (1+d)^(t/T) ] == ln n(0) + t/T ln (1+d) ~= ln n(0) + td/T exp ( ln n(0) + td/T ) = exp ln n(0) * exp td/T == n(0)exp(td/T) It doesn't change the result but I thought I should share since the captions don't seem to work for me.

[@robertconrad239]

There's 17 ways this Equation can be Improved, however its Obvious that this is Hidden so that the Viewers can not actually Construct a Weapon, so this is just Basic Mathematical Fun.

[@spencergee6948]

In the simple reactor described here there would not be an (atomic) explosion if there were no moderation. It's very difficult to technically) make an atomic bomb. and one needs highly enriched U235.

[@kpaasial]

Water moderated reactors have a negative void coefficient which in layman terms means that if the moderating water happens to boil into steam, the moderating effect of the water is lost and this will immediately halt the nuclear chain reactions because the neutrons will be too fast to trigger fissions in the uranium fuel.

[@frankfahrenheit9537]

What is missing in the 4-term equation is Xenon poisoning, or neutron absorption by Xenon which is a fission product. Not taking that into consideration was one reason why Tschernobyl happened.

[@eriksmith2513]

It does. The term “f” is often referred as fuel utilization. It is defined as the ratio of neutrons absorbed by the fuel (Uranium) to the number neutrons absorbed by the fuel AND non-fuel (anything that does not fission). The non fuel can be water or xenon. As the production of xenon increases f decreases therefore k decreases. This WAS taken into account at Chernobyl. To increase k due to the xenon buildup the control rods were removed completely which was greatly contributed to the accident.

[@WadcaWymiaru]

The reason WHY *Czarnobyl* disaster happen was Distłow - an communist party IDIOT who ordered to switch-off all reactor safety systems :(

[@mistermanoj3181]

Chernobyl episode 3 came to mind 😂

[@juangreen8194]

ok so if that water pump fails someone will have a very bad day

[@matttonkthetank5619]

New neutrons is fun to say.

[@bingruzhao5654]

you sound a lot like a teacher in Beijing New Talent Academy Cambridge International Centre, his name is Peter, you're not by any chance himself?

[@robertadorrough3852]

That's a complicated kettle. Can one use the water to make a cup of tea? No. Then what good is it? K1 Boom! Understanding how something happens is not necessarily advocacy. No explanation of waste products or how to decommission your ideal lead lined concrete box.

[@israelfigueroa7858]

because it's about physics not engenieering.

[@WadcaWymiaru]

2:15 Something smell - from WHERE those neutrons? 4:50 - he worst kind of reactor

[@shinjithenegotiator2795]

nuclear hot water heater he I come