It is currently Wed Oct 01, 2014 8:13 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 54 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2013 1:10 pm 
Offline
Forum Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 7:10 pm
Posts: 21900
Location: Making clean, safe, reliable power for Wisconsin with atoms - now with 17% more!
Quote:
NOTIFICATION OF UNUSUAL EVENT DECLARED DUE TO A BREAKER EXPLOSION IN THE PROTECTED AREA

"At 0750 [CDT] on 3/31/2013, during movement of the Unit 1 Main Turbine Generator Stator (~500 tons), the Unit 1 turbine temporary lift device failed. This caused a loss of all off site power on Unit 1. The ANO Unit 1 #1 and #2 EDG [Emergency Diesel Generator] have started and are supplying A-3 4160V switchgear and A-4 4160V switchgear. P-4A Service Water pump and P-4C Service Water pump has been verified running. Unit 1 has entered [procedures] 1202.007 - Degraded Power, 1203.028 - Loss of Decay Heat, and 1203.050 - Spent Fuel Emergencies. Unit 1 is in MODE 6.

"ANO-1 entered TS 3.8.2 A, 'One Required Offsite Circuit Inoperable'. All required actions are complete. The event caused a loss of decay heat removal on ANO Unit 1 which was restored in 3 minutes and 50 seconds.

"Unit 2 tripped and is in MODE 3. Emergency Feed Water was initiated on Unit 2 and Unit 2 was in [Technical Specification] 3.0.3 from 0817 [CDT] to 0848 [CDT] due to Emergency Feedwater. Unit 2 is being powered by off-site. Unit 2 Startup 3 [transformer] lock out at 0921 [CDT]. [Bus] 2A1 is on Start up 2 [transformer] and [bus] 2A3 is on #2 EDG.

"10CFR50.72 (b)(3)(iv)(A) - 4-hr. notification due to the ES [Engineered Safeguard Feature] actuation on both Unit 1 and Unit 2.
10CFR50 72 (b)(2)(iv)(B) - 4-hr. notification due to RPS [Reactor Protection System] actuation on Unit 2.
10CFR50.72 (b)(2)(xi) - 4-hr. notification due to Government Notification.
29CFR1904.39a - [OSHA] 8-hr. notification due to death on site.

"At 1033 [CDT] on 3/31/2013, Unit 2 entered a Notification of Unusual Event based on EAL HU4 due to damage in 2A1 switchgear. Notification of the NUE will be made lAW Emergency Plan requirements. Follow-up notifications will be made as appropriate."

At this time, the full extent of structural damage on Unit 1 is not known. There was one known fatality and 4 known serious injuries to workers. The local coroner is on site for the fatality and the injured personnel have been transported offsite to local hospitals. Investigation into the cause of the failure and extent of damage is ongoing.

On Unit 2, all rods inserted during the trip. The core is being cooled via natural circulation. Decay heat is being removed via steam dumps to atmosphere. There is no known primary to secondary leakage.

The licensee has notified the State of Arkansas, local authorities, OSHA and the NRC Resident Inspector.

Notified DHS SWO, DHS NICC, FEMA and Nuclear NSSA (via email).

* * * UPDATE FROM DAVID THOMPSON TO HOWIE CROUCH AT 1934 EDT ON 3/31/13 * * *

The licensee terminated the NOUE at 1821 CDT. The basis for termination was that the affected bus (2A2) is de-energized and no other equipment on Unit 2 was damaged.

The licensee has notified the state and local authorities and will be notifying the NRC Resident Inspector.

Notified R4DO (Pick), NRR EO (Howe), IRD (Gott), DHS SWO, DHS NICC, FEMA and Nuclear SSA (via email).



Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2013 1:11 pm 
Offline
Forum Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 7:10 pm
Posts: 21900
Location: Making clean, safe, reliable power for Wisconsin with atoms - now with 17% more!
Image


Last edited by pronuclear on Wed Apr 03, 2013 9:08 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2013 1:11 pm 
Offline
Forum Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 7:10 pm
Posts: 21900
Location: Making clean, safe, reliable power for Wisconsin with atoms - now with 17% more!
Image


Last edited by pronuclear on Wed Apr 03, 2013 9:09 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2013 1:11 pm 
Offline
Forum Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 7:10 pm
Posts: 21900
Location: Making clean, safe, reliable power for Wisconsin with atoms - now with 17% more!
Image


Last edited by pronuclear on Wed Apr 03, 2013 9:10 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2013 1:12 pm 
Offline
Forum Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 7:10 pm
Posts: 21900
Location: Making clean, safe, reliable power for Wisconsin with atoms - now with 17% more!
Image


Last edited by pronuclear on Wed Apr 03, 2013 9:10 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2013 1:12 pm 
Offline
Forum Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 7:10 pm
Posts: 21900
Location: Making clean, safe, reliable power for Wisconsin with atoms - now with 17% more!
Image


Last edited by pronuclear on Wed Apr 03, 2013 9:11 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2013 1:18 pm 
Offline
Forum Administrator
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 5:50 am
Posts: 54781
Location: (M) California - God Bless America!
So... Sounds like a maintenance operation on a turbogenerator at unit #1 resulted in a lift device tripping circuits and then dropping the lifted part, killing one person and injuring others.

Sounds like all safety shutdown procedures worked, but one must question the maintenance safety protocols: was the lifting device incorrectly rigged? Did riggers fail to follow appropriate lifting/moving procedures? Was the lifting device defective, and if so, why? Was the electrical distribution system defective, and if so, why?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2013 1:21 pm 
Offline
Forum Administrator
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 5:50 am
Posts: 54781
Location: (M) California - God Bless America!
Based on the photos, it looks like a crossbeam slid off of its support structure, dropping the stator, which then likely struck other equipment, resulting in the electrical failure and plant shutdown.

Is that the general chain of events being discussed?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2013 1:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 4:10 pm
Posts: 24643
Location: May God bless our brave volunteers!
Clean-up on Isle 9!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2013 1:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2008 8:37 pm
Posts: 4492
mason wrote:
Clean-up on Isle 9!


:gha:

That's not good.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2013 3:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 7:49 am
Posts: 16520
Location: MI
Elevators have physical clamps in the event of a power outage. Power plants have lots of safety equipment and procedures.

Obviously, something will be added since a recurrence needs to be prevented. God bless the accident victim and his loved ones.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 12:56 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 11:14 am
Posts: 7919
Location: oot and aboot
Og wrote:
Based on the photos, it looks like a crossbeam slid off of its support structure, dropping the stator, which then likely struck other equipment, resulting in the electrical failure and plant shutdown.

Is that the general chain of events being discussed?

Its been my experience ... and I have a whole lot of it with lifting heavy massive loads ... that structual failure occurs most often when the load mass is converted from the vertical lift rating to the quasi-rated horizontal capacity which many times is not taken into account of the object being lifted.

Meaning .. when moving heavy massive objects that are well under the engineered vertical lift rating of the crane or any other lifting device problems occur from un-expected or over-exaggerated lateral movement.

If the object is moving to fast and brought to a halt ... this energy is transferred to the vertical lift supports ... note in the pictures the vertical columns that support the overhead crane and the crossmembers that are meant to deal with lateral forces.

Also note the last picture from outside ... the building is pushed out ... suggesting a lateral forces failure

From what I see in these few pictures suggest the massive load was moved at to fast of a lateral speed and brought to a too sudden of a halt ... thus tipping the whole mechanism over.

Also to take into consideration that many of these shop cranes have two speeds or varible speeds for the purpose of moving it quickly into place to pick up a load.
Ive seen many times people leave it in the high speed mode or switch to higher speeds while moving the load.

One other thing ... cranes are highly over engineered.
If it is rated to lift 50 ton ... you can damn well bet that the thing can lift 80 ton ... not that you should.
Its just that engineers really know how to cover there asses when it comes to rating them.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 1:43 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 2:30 am
Posts: 5342
Location: Still on my tractor O=o
Post sequester:

"Obama said there'd be days like this
There'd be days like this, Obama said." :whistle:

(To the tune of "Mama Said There'd Be Days Like This")


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 2:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 4:55 pm
Posts: 6126
Location: Dixie
Cutting through all of the technical crap, it seems that a freaking steel beam fell on some important stuff. (A moment of silence for the dead guy) Some questions immediately jump to mind -- How and why does a steel beam like that fall? Who designed this *expletive deleted*?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 4:43 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2011 10:59 am
Posts: 9146
Location: I don't give a shit.
Rule #1- Don't stand under it.
Rule #2- Keep an eye on it and if something starts to go run like hell.

That crossmember supporting the Bigge beam looks way too small to handle such a large load.
A toothpick holding up an elephant.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 6:59 am 
Offline
Forum Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 7:10 pm
Posts: 21900
Location: Making clean, safe, reliable power for Wisconsin with atoms - now with 17% more!
Walkntall wrote:
Og wrote:
Based on the photos, it looks like a crossbeam slid off of its support structure, dropping the stator, which then likely struck other equipment, resulting in the electrical failure and plant shutdown.

Is that the general chain of events being discussed?

Its been my experience ... and I have a whole lot of it with lifting heavy massive loads ... that structual failure occurs most often when the load mass is converted from the vertical lift rating to the quasi-rated horizontal capacity which many times is not taken into account of the object being lifted.

Meaning .. when moving heavy massive objects that are well under the engineered vertical lift rating of the crane or any other lifting device problems occur from un-expected or over-exaggerated lateral movement.

If the object is moving to fast and brought to a halt ... this energy is transferred to the vertical lift supports ... note in the pictures the vertical columns that support the overhead crane and the crossmembers that are meant to deal with lateral forces.

Also note the last picture from outside ... the building is pushed out ... suggesting a lateral forces failure

From what I see in these few pictures suggest the massive load was moved at to fast of a lateral speed and brought to a too sudden of a halt ... thus tipping the whole mechanism over.

Also to take into consideration that many of these shop cranes have two speeds or varible speeds for the purpose of moving it quickly into place to pick up a load.
Ive seen many times people leave it in the high speed mode or switch to higher speeds while moving the load.

One other thing ... cranes are highly over engineered.
If it is rated to lift 50 ton ... you can damn well bet that the thing can lift 80 ton ... not that you should.
Its just that engineers really know how to cover there asses when it comes to rating them.


I'm guessing that these guys were lifting at "critical lift" speed, which is agnonizingly slow to those of us not responsible for the lift. The Root Cause Evaluation will obviously take months, and the lawyers for Entergy (the owners of ANO) are probably already done with their first draft of the lawsuit against Biggie (the lifting guys).

This is a very sad event, because one person at a minimum has died, with other having severe injuries.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 7:03 am 
Offline
Forum Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 7:10 pm
Posts: 21900
Location: Making clean, safe, reliable power for Wisconsin with atoms - now with 17% more!
Nonotone wrote:
Rule #1- Don't stand under it.
Rule #2- Keep an eye on it and if something starts to go run like hell.

That crossmember supporting the Bigge beam looks way too small to handle such a large load.
A toothpick holding up an elephant.

Image


I'm not a crane / rigging engineer, but my guess is the cross-member is not truly considered a "structural" part of the lifting device, but more to keep the actual lifting parts (the main beams) at the correct distance from each other.

Walkntall - am I right?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 7:41 am 
Offline
Forum Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 7:10 pm
Posts: 21900
Location: Making clean, safe, reliable power for Wisconsin with atoms - now with 17% more!
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 7:42 am 
Offline
Forum Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 7:10 pm
Posts: 21900
Location: Making clean, safe, reliable power for Wisconsin with atoms - now with 17% more!
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 7:42 am 
Offline
Forum Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 7:10 pm
Posts: 21900
Location: Making clean, safe, reliable power for Wisconsin with atoms - now with 17% more!
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 7:44 am 
Offline
Forum Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 7:10 pm
Posts: 21900
Location: Making clean, safe, reliable power for Wisconsin with atoms - now with 17% more!
gartay wrote:
Cutting through all of the technical crap, it seems that a freaking steel beam fell on some important stuff. (A moment of silence for the dead guy) Some questions immediately jump to mind -- How and why does a steel beam like that fall? Who designed this *expletive deleted*?


It's more like a lifting device failed with a multi-hundred ton load suspended. As Walkintall said, these devices are over-engineered, so this is a great puzzle at the moment. That won't, however, stop the lawsuits from flying.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 9:10 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2012 10:00 pm
Posts: 5244
Location: North central New Mexico
Walkntall wrote:
Og wrote:
Based on the photos, it looks like a crossbeam slid off of its support structure, dropping the stator, which then likely struck other equipment, resulting in the electrical failure and plant shutdown.

Is that the general chain of events being discussed?

Its been my experience ... and I have a whole lot of it with lifting heavy massive loads ... that structual failure occurs most often when the load mass is converted from the vertical lift rating to the quasi-rated horizontal capacity which many times is not taken into account of the object being lifted.

Meaning .. when moving heavy massive objects that are well under the engineered vertical lift rating of the crane or any other lifting device problems occur from un-expected or over-exaggerated lateral movement.

If the object is moving to fast and brought to a halt ... this energy is transferred to the vertical lift supports ... note in the pictures the vertical columns that support the overhead crane and the crossmembers that are meant to deal with lateral forces.

Also note the last picture from outside ... the building is pushed out ... suggesting a lateral forces failure

From what I see in these few pictures suggest the massive load was moved at to fast of a lateral speed and brought to a too sudden of a halt ... thus tipping the whole mechanism over.

Also to take into consideration that many of these shop cranes have two speeds or varible speeds for the purpose of moving it quickly into place to pick up a load.
Ive seen many times people leave it in the high speed mode or switch to higher speeds while moving the load.

One other thing ... cranes are highly over engineered.
If it is rated to lift 50 ton ... you can damn well bet that the thing can lift 80 ton ... not that you should.
Its just that engineers really know how to cover there asses when it comes to rating them.


So here is a question.
The load has completed the vertical lift and is then moved horizontally. If it is moved too fast and it could begin a pendulum like cycle which then exerts the lateral force you mentioned. Would this out of vertical line of force then create a moment arm type increase to the load? If so, wouldn't the load force then be increased beyond the static load? I may not be expressing this question very well, so I hope the question is clear. Maybe that increase increase is negligible? Just wondering.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 9:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 11:14 am
Posts: 7919
Location: oot and aboot
pronuclear wrote:
Nonotone wrote:
Rule #1- Don't stand under it.
Rule #2- Keep an eye on it and if something starts to go run like hell.

That crossmember supporting the Bigge beam looks way too small to handle such a large load.
A toothpick holding up an elephant.

Image


I'm not a crane / rigging engineer, but my guess is the cross-member is not truly considered a "structural" part of the lifting device, but more to keep the actual lifting parts (the main beams) at the correct distance from each other.

Walkntall - am I right?

The "small" crossmember (in Nonotones quote) is a important structural componant.
It keeps the vertical columns square to the vertical during lateral stress ..( when you begin moving and stopping the mass along the horizontal plane )

If these columns are anything but vertical and I mean truly 100% vertical ... what they can support or were designed to support falls dramatically.

********************************
Here's a simply way to understand this.

Take a pen and stand it vertically on edge on your desk.
Exert a moderate force on it with your finger ... actually as long as the pen remains 100% vertical it can hold a termendous amount of weight or force for its "small" size.
Next begin to lean it off the vertical untill it kicks out.
Thats kinda the idea.
But what holds the metal vertical columns in place and are meant to keep it square are bolts, pins, welding which are installed during assembly of the lifting device.
Thats usually what breaks 1st.

I also am not a engineer ... but I've been involved in lifting heavy loads that can crush people on a daily or weekly basis for well over 30 years.

The stories I can tell ... lets just say that long ago I've lost any sense of "ha ha" around heavy lifts.

.. and that would include asking those people in the pictures with stupid hardhats on ... what f-----g business they have being in the area of that heavy lift ... none ? ... get the f--k out of that area, dummy.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 9:37 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2012 10:00 pm
Posts: 5244
Location: North central New Mexico
That cross beam does seem way out of proportion to the Bigge beams supporting the lift. If that is so, wouldn't that have been obvious to everyone there?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 9:47 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 11:14 am
Posts: 7919
Location: oot and aboot
Toshtego wrote:

So here is a question.
The load has completed the vertical lift and is then moved horizontally. If it is moved too fast and it could begin a pendulum like cycle which then exerts the lateral force you mentioned. Would this out of vertical line of force then create a moment arm type increase to the load? If so, wouldn't the load force then be increased beyond the static load? I may not be expressing this question very well, so I hope the question is clear. Maybe that increase increase is negligible? Just wondering.

The short answer is yes.

You would need someone well versed in Newtonian Physics to answer the long version.

It's been my onsite experience that the vertical supports fail due to the operator failing to be "gentle" with the lateral movement of the load.

Other failures include slings/chains breaking/slipping ... hydraulic failures etc etc

I once had a hydraulic ram spit down its length because of a defect in it .. this is after the block values ... so the load came crashing down and broke a gravel truck in half ... oppps

Never ever be under a load or even beside a load.

Its more about knowing where not to be.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 10:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 4:55 pm
Posts: 6126
Location: Dixie
Toshtego wrote:
Walkntall wrote:
Og wrote:
Based on the photos, it looks like a crossbeam slid off of its support structure, dropping the stator, which then likely struck other equipment, resulting in the electrical failure and plant shutdown.

Is that the general chain of events being discussed?

Its been my experience ... and I have a whole lot of it with lifting heavy massive loads ... that structual failure occurs most often when the load mass is converted from the vertical lift rating to the quasi-rated horizontal capacity which many times is not taken into account of the object being lifted.

Meaning .. when moving heavy massive objects that are well under the engineered vertical lift rating of the crane or any other lifting device problems occur from un-expected or over-exaggerated lateral movement.

If the object is moving to fast and brought to a halt ... this energy is transferred to the vertical lift supports ... note in the pictures the vertical columns that support the overhead crane and the crossmembers that are meant to deal with lateral forces.

Also note the last picture from outside ... the building is pushed out ... suggesting a lateral forces failure

From what I see in these few pictures suggest the massive load was moved at to fast of a lateral speed and brought to a too sudden of a halt ... thus tipping the whole mechanism over.

Also to take into consideration that many of these shop cranes have two speeds or varible speeds for the purpose of moving it quickly into place to pick up a load.
Ive seen many times people leave it in the high speed mode or switch to higher speeds while moving the load.

One other thing ... cranes are highly over engineered.
If it is rated to lift 50 ton ... you can damn well bet that the thing can lift 80 ton ... not that you should.
Its just that engineers really know how to cover there asses when it comes to rating them.


So here is a question.
The load has completed the vertical lift and is then moved horizontally. If it is moved too fast and it could begin a pendulum like cycle which then exerts the lateral force you mentioned. Would this out of vertical line of force then create a moment arm type increase to the load? If so, wouldn't the load force then be increased beyond the static load? I may not be expressing this question very well, so I hope the question is clear. Maybe that increase increase is negligible? Just wondering.


I understand your question perfectly. :wave:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 12:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2007 12:20 am
Posts: 22839
Location: Occupying only 4 of the 11 dimensions
Walkntall wrote:
Toshtego wrote:

So here is a question.
The load has completed the vertical lift and is then moved horizontally. If it is moved too fast and it could begin a pendulum like cycle which then exerts the lateral force you mentioned. Would this out of vertical line of force then create a moment arm type increase to the load? If so, wouldn't the load force then be increased beyond the static load? I may not be expressing this question very well, so I hope the question is clear. Maybe that increase increase is negligible? Just wondering.

The short answer is yes.

You would need someone well versed in Newtonian Physics to answer the long version.

It's been my onsite experience that the vertical supports fail due to the operator failing to be "gentle" with the lateral movement of the load.

Other failures include slings/chains breaking/slipping ... hydraulic failures etc etc

I once had a hydraulic ram spit down its length because of a defect in it .. this is after the block values ... so the load came crashing down and broke a gravel truck in half ... oppps

Never ever be under a load or even beside a load.

Its more about knowing where not to be.


I hear myself being summoned...

A lateral oscillation will inevitably appear if an object suspended by a flexible cable. There are two issues with the oscillation: amplitude and frequency. The energy of the oscillation motion will depend on both.

The amplitude is the size of the motion laterally; how many cm or meters or whatever the object moves back and forth. This is determined by whatever lateral motion is imposed. The larger the amplitude, the faster the object will be moving as it moves through the center point of the oscillation, and therefore how much energy and momentum is contained is the motion.

The frequency is how many oscillation cycles are completed in a given amount of time. The frequency is determined only by the length of the pendulum, i.e. the cables.

Any object has a natural oscillation frequency- in such a case as this, the steel structure supporting the lift. If the pendulum oscillates at the same frequency as the natural oscillation frequency as the supporting structure, resonance occurs. In a condition of resonance, the supporting structure gets a little pull from the pendulum oscillation each cycle, which increases the energy of the supporting structure's motion. A very small pendulum oscillation can end up putting huge stresses on the supports. Eventually the stresses exceed the strength of the material (steel, presumably) and it fails.

The photos reveal some large level of damage in the overhead supporting structure, suggesting that a failure there caused the suspended stator to fall. I suspect a resonance-type accident.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 1:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 7:25 pm
Posts: 3788
Location: The West and the Muslim world will never share the same values
What he said....... Harmonic resonance or dust parity......


:whistle:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 1:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 4:10 pm
Posts: 24643
Location: May God bless our brave volunteers!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 2:02 pm 
Offline
Forum Administrator
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 5:50 am
Posts: 54781
Location: (M) California - God Bless America!
So my next question is whether part of the #1 secondary loop was compromised, resulting in the shutdown of unit #1, or if there was some sort of electrical failure associated with the actual accident (did it fell on a distribution panel, for example?).

The OP suggests that there was an electrical failure / Loss of on-site power.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 2:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 10:25 am
Posts: 9101
Location: Up with the sun, Gone with the wind
This is tragic. And most likely preventable.

We pull these units out all of the time.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 03, 2013 5:44 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2007 12:20 am
Posts: 22839
Location: Occupying only 4 of the 11 dimensions
rushrock wrote:
This is tragic. And most likely preventable.

We pull these units out all of the time.


If you have operators with (a) experience or (b) a theoretical understanding of the dynamics of a heavy load suspended from flexible cables, it's preventable. If neither, something like this is bound to happen.

Cranes have this sort of accident when a resonance is established between crane and load. An inexperienced or inexpert operator may not understand what it happening, or may try to damp out the resonance. If he doesn't make the damping effort properly timed, he will make the oscillation worse, hastening the accident.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 03, 2013 6:48 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 11:14 am
Posts: 7919
Location: oot and aboot
Starman wrote:
rushrock wrote:
This is tragic. And most likely preventable.

We pull these units out all of the time.


If you have operators with (a) experience or (b) a theoretical understanding of the dynamics of a heavy load suspended from flexible cables, it's preventable. If neither, something like this is bound to happen.

Cranes have this sort of accident when a resonance is established between crane and load. An inexperienced or inexpert operator may not understand what it happening, or may try to damp out the resonance. If he doesn't make the damping effort properly timed, he will make the oscillation worse, hastening the accident.

Yes .. you can either correct oscillation or you can simply put it back down on the ground.

I find that as 1) a operator doing heavy lifts b) overseeing heavy lifts c) working around heavy lifts thats its equally as important to stay in control of the people in the work area.

I really don't understand the "nonchalant" attitude some people have in these situations.
Which I believe comes from in-experience, ignorance or they're just f-----g stupid .. (the latter is usually the 1st question I ask them)

Of course the over-caffinated person needs to be removed from the site alltogether.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 03, 2013 9:03 am 
Offline
Forum Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 7:10 pm
Posts: 21900
Location: Making clean, safe, reliable power for Wisconsin with atoms - now with 17% more!
I got this from a former co-worker:

Quote:
spoke with (redacted), U1 Outage Manager, last night around 11:30pm about the events yesterday at ANO. Wade Walters, the Iron Worker that was killed, was (redacted)’s cousin. Needless to say, it was a tough phone call for him. Wade went to Pottsville High School, same as I did. So my home town community along with the Dover community is devastated as well. My nephew was friends with Wade.

ANO U1 entered into their refueling outage week before last. They planned to replace the 690 ton Westinghouse Generator Stator utilizing BiggE Crane and Rigging. The plan was to install jacks on the generator pedestal and lift the stator and casing into a Carriage and move it to the Train Bay. As (readacted) explained, the carriage carrying the stator was to slide over the train bay, perform a 90 degree turn and subsequently be lowered onto the Goldhofer below.

It was when the carriage assembly started its 90 degree turn when the large rails the carriage was moving upon folded up and resulting in load drop. The drop was approximately 32 feet. The rails used are about the same size as the ones used for the SGR (Pronuke- Steam Generator Replacement). The rails straddled both units exciters & generators and had an overall length of about 120 feet or more. The rails were supported from underneath in the Train Bay. Again as (redacted) explained it, the entire assembly was approximately the same size as a SGR rig. As of last night ANO did not have any idea why it happened.

Just below the turbine deck adjacent to the Train Bay is both units Non 1E switchgear along with Offsite Power Supply Feeds. The collapse totally destroyed U1 switchgear and resulted in loss of decay heat and auto start of the diesels. U2 did not initially suffer switchgear damage, however the collapse was so violent that U2 turbine tripped from it. The front standards of the turbines are at opposite ends of the Train Bay.

About 10 minutes after U2 tripped the offsite transformer(SU3) feeder breaker catastrophic failed resulting in loss of offsite power and unit 2 going onto diesels. As of midnight last night both units remained on EDG power with no immediate time when normal power restored. Today investigators begin their efforts to determine what happen.

The destruction also includes the Ops Extension and minor damage on the Ops Block House. (redacted) said the Ops Block House only suffered a crushed door. The machine shop below as heavily damaged with its wall adjacent to the Train Bay collapsing. The Switchgear Mezzanine on U1 has significant damage and total loss(crushed) of the A1 & A2 switchgear. Currently the turbine decks and the train bay are red flagged off.


Hope this sheds some more light.


Last edited by pronuclear on Wed Apr 03, 2013 9:14 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 03, 2013 9:07 am 
Offline
Forum Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 7:10 pm
Posts: 21900
Location: Making clean, safe, reliable power for Wisconsin with atoms - now with 17% more!
Walkntall wrote:
pronuclear wrote:
Nonotone wrote:
Rule #1- Don't stand under it.
Rule #2- Keep an eye on it and if something starts to go run like hell.

That crossmember supporting the Bigge beam looks way too small to handle such a large load.
A toothpick holding up an elephant.

Image


I'm not a crane / rigging engineer, but my guess is the cross-member is not truly considered a "structural" part of the lifting device, but more to keep the actual lifting parts (the main beams) at the correct distance from each other.

Walkntall - am I right?

The "small" crossmember (in Nonotones quote) is a important structural componant.
It keeps the vertical columns square to the vertical during lateral stress ..( when you begin moving and stopping the mass along the horizontal plane )

If these columns are anything but vertical and I mean truly 100% vertical ... what they can support or were designed to support falls dramatically.

********************************
Here's a simply way to understand this.

Take a pen and stand it vertically on edge on your desk.
Exert a moderate force on it with your finger ... actually as long as the pen remains 100% vertical it can hold a termendous amount of weight or force for its "small" size.
Next begin to lean it off the vertical untill it kicks out.
Thats kinda the idea.
But what holds the metal vertical columns in place and are meant to keep it square are bolts, pins, welding which are installed during assembly of the lifting device.
Thats usually what breaks 1st.

I also am not a engineer ... but I've been involved in lifting heavy loads that can crush people on a daily or weekly basis for well over 30 years.

The stories I can tell ... lets just say that long ago I've lost any sense of "ha ha" around heavy lifts.

.. and that would include asking those people in the pictures with stupid hardhats on ... what f-----g business they have being in the area of that heavy lift ... none ? ... get the f--k out of that area, dummy.


Thanks for the insight.

Me personally - I stay far away from heavy lifts whenever possible. Unfortuantely, I've spent a bit of time standing right next to the closure head of a reactor pressure vessel when it's being lifted - but that's only 18 inches high (keeping "the shine" minimized) and then blocked so I can stick my hand under there and perform an ultrasonic examinaiton to look for cracking around the threaded stud holes (the ligaments between the holes).


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 54 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group