20-03-2018, 12:27 PMYour_Majesty Wrote: Zeros MethLab? - Last version
Gmodstore link :
Download link :
Content has been stripped. Go to the quoted post to view the content.
Garry's Mod Leaks
[LEAK] Zeros MethLab [LATEST]
Submitted by Your_Majesty, 20-03-2018, 12:27 PM, Thread ID: 80841
Thread Closed
RE: [LEAK] Zeros MethLab [LATEST] 13-02-2020, 10:49 AM #41
13-02-2020, 10:49 AM
#41 RE: [LEAK] Zeros MethLab [LATEST] nice i like the addon
really cool keep on the work on these and good luck
nice i like the addon
really cool keep on the work on these and good luck
12-02-2020, 09:04 PMnoahrh5 Wrote: It's been a while since I've seen this addon, I'll definately check it out.
nice i like the addon
really cool keep on the work on these and good luck
20-03-2018, 12:27 PMYour_Majesty Wrote: Zeros MethLab? - Last version
![[Image: 10bb229d3467db9ec1fa05a6cad8f1a1.png]](https://s3.scriptfodder.com/script_banners/10bb229d3467db9ec1fa05a6cad8f1a1.png)
Gmodstore link :
Download link :
Content has been stripped. Go to the quoted post to view the content.
can you send more leaks like that please they are really useful
20-03-2018, 12:27 PMYour_Majesty Wrote: Zeros MethLab? - Last version
Gmodstore link :
Download link :
Content has been stripped. Go to the quoted post to view the content.
pretty amazing how many more do you have if you do then post them please
20-03-2018, 12:27 PMYour_Majesty Wrote: Zeros MethLab? - Last version
Gmodstore link :
Download link :
Content has been stripped. Go to the quoted post to view the content.
lmaoxd69420 pretty amazing keep up the addons its worth the wait
20-03-2018, 12:27 PMYour_Majesty Wrote: Zeros MethLab? - Last version
Gmodstore link :
Download link :
Content has been stripped. Go to the quoted post to view the content.
TheChernobyl disasterwas anuclear accidentthat occurred on Saturday 26 April 1986, at the No.4nuclear reactorin theChernobyl Nuclear Power Plant, near the city ofPripyatin the north of theUkrainian SSR.[1][2]It is considered the worst nuclear disaster in history and is one of only two nuclear energy disasters rated at seventhe maximum severityon theInternational Nuclear Event Scale, the other being the 2011Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disasterin Japan.
The accident started during a safety test on anRBMK-type nuclear reactor, which was commonly used throughout theSoviet Union. The test was a simulation of an electrical power outage to aid the development of a safety procedure for maintaining cooling water circulation until the back-up generators could provide power there is a time gap between the moment of power outage and the moment at which the back-up generators reach full power. This operating gap was about one minute and had been identified as a potential safety problem that could cause thenuclear reactor coreto overheat. Three such tests had been conducted since 1982, but they had failed to provide a solution.
On this fourth attempt, the test was delayed by 10 hours, so an unprepared operating shift had to perform it.[3]During a gradual decrease of reactor power that was done in preparation for the test, the power unexpectedly dropped to a near-zero level at one moment. The operators were able to partially restore power, but this put the reactor in a highly unstable condition. The risks were not made evident in the operating instructions, despite a similar accident occurring years before, and the test proceeded even though the power was still lower than prescribed. Upon test completion, the operators triggered a reactor shutdown, but a combination of unstable conditions and reactor design flaws caused an uncontrollednuclear chain reactioninstead.[4]:33
A large amount of energy was suddenly released, vapourisingsuperheated cooling waterand rupturing the reactor core in a highly destructivesteam explosion. This was immediately followed by an open-air reactor core fire that released considerable airborneradioactive contaminationfor about nine days that precipitated onto parts of the USSR and western Europe, before being finally contained on 4 May 1986.[5][6]The fire gradually released about the same amount of contamination as the initial explosion.[7]As a result of rising ambient radiation levels off-site, a 10-kilometre (6.2mi) radiusexclusion zonewas created 36 hours after the accident. About 49,000people were evacuated from the area, primarily from Pripyat. The exclusion zone was later increased to 30 kilometres (19mi) radius when a further 68,000people were evacuated from the wider area.[8][8]
The reactor explosion killed two of the reactor operating staff. In the emergency response that followed, 134firemen and station staff were hospitalized withacute radiation syndromedue to absorbing high doses ofionizing radiation. Of these 134 people, 28 died in the days to months afterward and approximately 14 suspectedradiation-induced cancerdeaths followed within the next 10years.[9][10]Among the wider population, an excess of 15childhoodthyroid cancerdeaths were documented as of 2011.[11][12]TheUnited Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation(UNSCEAR) has, at multiple times, reviewed all the published research on the incident and found that at present, fewer than 100 documented deaths are likely to be attributable to increased exposure to radiation.[13]Determining the total eventual number ofexposure related deathsis uncertain based on thelinear no-thresholdmodel, a contested statistic
To reduce the spread ofradioactive contaminationfrom the wreckage and protect it from weathering, the protectiveChernobyl Nuclear Power Plant sarcophaguswas built by December 1986. It also providedradiological protectionfor the crews of the undamaged reactors at the site, which continued operating. Due to the continued deterioration of the sarcophagus, it was further enclosed in 2017 by theChernobyl New Safe Confinement, a larger enclosure that allows the removal of both the sarcophagus and the reactor debris, while containing the radioactive hazard. Nuclear clean-up is scheduled for completion in 2065.[17]The Chernobyl disaster is considered the worst nuclear power plant accident in history, both in terms of cost and casualties.[18]The initial emergency response, together with laterdecontaminationof the environment, ultimately involved more than 500,000personneland cost an estimated 18billionSoviet rublesroughly US$68billion in 2019, adjusted for inflation.[7][19]The accident resulted in safety upgrades on all remaining Soviet-designed RBMK reactors, of which 10 continue to be operational as of 2019.[20][21]
In steady-state operation, a significant fraction (over 6%) of the power from a nuclear reactor is derived not from fission but from thedecay heatof its accumulated fission products. This heating continues for some time after thechain reactionhas been stopped (e.g. following an emergencyscram) and active cooling is required to preventcore meltdown.[22]RBMKreactors like those at Chernobyl use water as a coolant.[23][24]Reactor No.4 at Chernobyl included about 1,600 individual fuel channels, each of which required coolant flow of 28 metric tons (28,000 litres or 7,400 US gallons) per hour.[25]
Since cooling pumps still require electricity and must run for some time after an emergency shutdown in the event of a power grid failure, each of Chernobyl's reactors had three backupdiesel generators. The backup generators could start up in 15 seconds, but took 6075 seconds to attain full speed[25]:15and generate the 5.5megawattoutput required to run one main pump.[25]:30
This one-minute delay constituted a significant safety risk. It had been theorized that the stored rotational inertia of thesteam turbinesand the residual steam pressure could be used to generate the required electrical power to cover this gap. Analysis indicated that this might be sufficient to provide electrical power to run the coolant pumps for 45 seconds,[25]:16notquitebridging the gap between an external power failure and the full availability of the emergency generators.[26]
This capability still needed to be confirmed experimentally, and previous tests had ended unsuccessfully. An initial test carried out in 1982 indicated that theexcitationvoltage of the turbine-generator was insufficient; it did not maintain the desiredmagnetic fieldafter the turbine trip. The system was modified, and the test was repeated in 1984 but again proved unsuccessful. In 1985, a test was conducted a third time but also yielded negative results. The test procedure was to be run again in 1986, and scheduled to take place during a maintenance shutdown of reactor No.4.[26][4]:51
The test program was not problematic per se, even though its documentation of safety measures would not hold up to modern standards. However, the test program developers were not aware of the unusual RBMK-1000 reactor behavior under the planned operating conditions.[4]:52It was regarded as purely an electrical test, not a complex unit test, even though it involved critical unit systems. According to the regulations in place at the time, such a test did not require approval by either the chief designer of the reactor (NIKIET), the scientific manager or the Soviet nuclear oversight regulator.[4]:5152The test required disabling of some safety systems (in particular, theemergency core cooling system, a passive/active system of core cooling intended to provide water to the core in aloss-of-coolant accident), and a special approval from the chief engineer had been obtained according to regulations.[4]:18
The test was to be conducted during the day-shift of 25 April 1986 as part of a scheduled reactor shut down. The day shift crew had been instructed in advance on the reactor operating conditions to run the test and in addition, a special team ofelectrical engineerswas present to conduct the one-minute test of the new voltage regulating system once the correct conditions had been reached.[27]As planned, a gradual reduction in the output of the power unit began at 01:06 on 25 April, and the power level had reached 50% of its nominal 3,200MW thermal level by the beginning of the day shift.[4]:53
![[Image: 220px-Gen_II_nuclear_reactor_vessels_sizes.svg.png]](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/49/Gen_II_nuclear_reactor_vessels_sizes.svg/220px-Gen_II_nuclear_reactor_vessels_sizes.svg.png)
[/url]
Comparative[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_II_reactor]Generation II reactorvessels size comparison, a design classification of commercial reactors built until the end of the 1990s.
The day shift performed many unrelated maintenance tasks, and was scheduled to perform the test at 14:15[28]:3and preparations for the test were carried out, including the disabling of theemergency core cooling system.[4]:53Meanwhile, another regional power station unexpectedly went offline and at 14:00[4]:53theKievelectrical grid controller requested that the further reduction of Chernobyl's output be postponed, as power was needed to satisfy the peak evening demand. The Chernobyl plant director[citation needed]agreed, and postponed the test.
Soon, the day shift was replaced by the evening shift.[28]:3Despite the delay, theemergency core cooling systemwas left disabled it was disconnected by a manual isolating slide valve[4]:51which in practice meant that two or three people spent the whole shift manually turning sailboat-helm sized valve wheels.[28]:4The system would have no influence on the events that unfolded next, but allowing to run the reactor for 11 hours outside of the test without emergency protection indicated a generally low level of safety culture.[4]:10,18
At 23:04, the Kiev grid controller allowed the reactor shutdown to resume. This delay had some serious consequences: the day shift had long since departed, the evening shift was also preparing to leave, and the night shift would not take over until midnight, well into the job. According to plan, the test should have been finished during the day shift, and the night shift would only have had to maintain decay heat cooling systems in an otherwise shut-down plant.[25]:3638
The night shift had very limited time to prepare for and carry out the experiment.Anatoly Dyatlov, deputy chief-engineer of the entireChernobyl Nuclear Power Plant, was present to supervise and direct the experiment; as he out-ranked all other supervisory personnel present, his orders and instructions overrode any objections of other senior personnel present during the test and its preparation. Serving under Dyatlov,Aleksandr Akimovwas chief of the night shift, and Leonid Toptunov was the operator responsible for the reactor's operational regimen, including the movement of thecontrol rods. Toptunov was a young engineer who had worked independently as a senior engineer for approximately three months.[25]:3638
nice i like the addon
really cool keep on the work on these and good luck
nice i like the addon
really cool keep on the work on these and good luck
really cool keep on the work on these and good luck
The accident started during a safety test on anRBMK-type nuclear reactor, which was commonly used throughout theSoviet Union. The test was a simulation of an electrical power outage to aid the development of a safety procedure for maintaining cooling water circulation until the back-up generators could provide power there is a time gap between the moment of power outage and the moment at which the back-up generators reach full power. This operating gap was about one minute and had been identified as a potential safety problem that could cause thenuclear reactor coreto overheat. Three such tests had been conducted since 1982, but they had failed to provide a solution.
On this fourth attempt, the test was delayed by 10 hours, so an unprepared operating shift had to perform it.[3]During a gradual decrease of reactor power that was done in preparation for the test, the power unexpectedly dropped to a near-zero level at one moment. The operators were able to partially restore power, but this put the reactor in a highly unstable condition. The risks were not made evident in the operating instructions, despite a similar accident occurring years before, and the test proceeded even though the power was still lower than prescribed. Upon test completion, the operators triggered a reactor shutdown, but a combination of unstable conditions and reactor design flaws caused an uncontrollednuclear chain reactioninstead.[4]:33
A large amount of energy was suddenly released, vapourisingsuperheated cooling waterand rupturing the reactor core in a highly destructivesteam explosion. This was immediately followed by an open-air reactor core fire that released considerable airborneradioactive contaminationfor about nine days that precipitated onto parts of the USSR and western Europe, before being finally contained on 4 May 1986.[5][6]The fire gradually released about the same amount of contamination as the initial explosion.[7]As a result of rising ambient radiation levels off-site, a 10-kilometre (6.2mi) radiusexclusion zonewas created 36 hours after the accident. About 49,000people were evacuated from the area, primarily from Pripyat. The exclusion zone was later increased to 30 kilometres (19mi) radius when a further 68,000people were evacuated from the wider area.[8][8]
The reactor explosion killed two of the reactor operating staff. In the emergency response that followed, 134firemen and station staff were hospitalized withacute radiation syndromedue to absorbing high doses ofionizing radiation. Of these 134 people, 28 died in the days to months afterward and approximately 14 suspectedradiation-induced cancerdeaths followed within the next 10years.[9][10]Among the wider population, an excess of 15childhoodthyroid cancerdeaths were documented as of 2011.[11][12]TheUnited Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation(UNSCEAR) has, at multiple times, reviewed all the published research on the incident and found that at present, fewer than 100 documented deaths are likely to be attributable to increased exposure to radiation.[13]Determining the total eventual number ofexposure related deathsis uncertain based on thelinear no-thresholdmodel, a contested statistic
To reduce the spread ofradioactive contaminationfrom the wreckage and protect it from weathering, the protectiveChernobyl Nuclear Power Plant sarcophaguswas built by December 1986. It also providedradiological protectionfor the crews of the undamaged reactors at the site, which continued operating. Due to the continued deterioration of the sarcophagus, it was further enclosed in 2017 by theChernobyl New Safe Confinement, a larger enclosure that allows the removal of both the sarcophagus and the reactor debris, while containing the radioactive hazard. Nuclear clean-up is scheduled for completion in 2065.[17]The Chernobyl disaster is considered the worst nuclear power plant accident in history, both in terms of cost and casualties.[18]The initial emergency response, together with laterdecontaminationof the environment, ultimately involved more than 500,000personneland cost an estimated 18billionSoviet rublesroughly US$68billion in 2019, adjusted for inflation.[7][19]The accident resulted in safety upgrades on all remaining Soviet-designed RBMK reactors, of which 10 continue to be operational as of 2019.[20][21]
In steady-state operation, a significant fraction (over 6%) of the power from a nuclear reactor is derived not from fission but from thedecay heatof its accumulated fission products. This heating continues for some time after thechain reactionhas been stopped (e.g. following an emergencyscram) and active cooling is required to preventcore meltdown.[22]RBMKreactors like those at Chernobyl use water as a coolant.[23][24]Reactor No.4 at Chernobyl included about 1,600 individual fuel channels, each of which required coolant flow of 28 metric tons (28,000 litres or 7,400 US gallons) per hour.[25]
Since cooling pumps still require electricity and must run for some time after an emergency shutdown in the event of a power grid failure, each of Chernobyl's reactors had three backupdiesel generators. The backup generators could start up in 15 seconds, but took 6075 seconds to attain full speed[25]:15and generate the 5.5megawattoutput required to run one main pump.[25]:30
This one-minute delay constituted a significant safety risk. It had been theorized that the stored rotational inertia of thesteam turbinesand the residual steam pressure could be used to generate the required electrical power to cover this gap. Analysis indicated that this might be sufficient to provide electrical power to run the coolant pumps for 45 seconds,[25]:16notquitebridging the gap between an external power failure and the full availability of the emergency generators.[26]
This capability still needed to be confirmed experimentally, and previous tests had ended unsuccessfully. An initial test carried out in 1982 indicated that theexcitationvoltage of the turbine-generator was insufficient; it did not maintain the desiredmagnetic fieldafter the turbine trip. The system was modified, and the test was repeated in 1984 but again proved unsuccessful. In 1985, a test was conducted a third time but also yielded negative results. The test procedure was to be run again in 1986, and scheduled to take place during a maintenance shutdown of reactor No.4.[26][4]:51
The test program was not problematic per se, even though its documentation of safety measures would not hold up to modern standards. However, the test program developers were not aware of the unusual RBMK-1000 reactor behavior under the planned operating conditions.[4]:52It was regarded as purely an electrical test, not a complex unit test, even though it involved critical unit systems. According to the regulations in place at the time, such a test did not require approval by either the chief designer of the reactor (NIKIET), the scientific manager or the Soviet nuclear oversight regulator.[4]:5152The test required disabling of some safety systems (in particular, theemergency core cooling system, a passive/active system of core cooling intended to provide water to the core in aloss-of-coolant accident), and a special approval from the chief engineer had been obtained according to regulations.[4]:18
The test was to be conducted during the day-shift of 25 April 1986 as part of a scheduled reactor shut down. The day shift crew had been instructed in advance on the reactor operating conditions to run the test and in addition, a special team ofelectrical engineerswas present to conduct the one-minute test of the new voltage regulating system once the correct conditions had been reached.[27]As planned, a gradual reduction in the output of the power unit began at 01:06 on 25 April, and the power level had reached 50% of its nominal 3,200MW thermal level by the beginning of the day shift.[4]:53
The day shift performed many unrelated maintenance tasks, and was scheduled to perform the test at 14:15[28]:3and preparations for the test were carried out, including the disabling of theemergency core cooling system.[4]:53Meanwhile, another regional power station unexpectedly went offline and at 14:00[4]:53theKievelectrical grid controller requested that the further reduction of Chernobyl's output be postponed, as power was needed to satisfy the peak evening demand. The Chernobyl plant director[citation needed]agreed, and postponed the test.
Soon, the day shift was replaced by the evening shift.[28]:3Despite the delay, theemergency core cooling systemwas left disabled it was disconnected by a manual isolating slide valve[4]:51which in practice meant that two or three people spent the whole shift manually turning sailboat-helm sized valve wheels.[28]:4The system would have no influence on the events that unfolded next, but allowing to run the reactor for 11 hours outside of the test without emergency protection indicated a generally low level of safety culture.[4]:10,18
At 23:04, the Kiev grid controller allowed the reactor shutdown to resume. This delay had some serious consequences: the day shift had long since departed, the evening shift was also preparing to leave, and the night shift would not take over until midnight, well into the job. According to plan, the test should have been finished during the day shift, and the night shift would only have had to maintain decay heat cooling systems in an otherwise shut-down plant.[25]:3638
The night shift had very limited time to prepare for and carry out the experiment.Anatoly Dyatlov, deputy chief-engineer of the entireChernobyl Nuclear Power Plant, was present to supervise and direct the experiment; as he out-ranked all other supervisory personnel present, his orders and instructions overrode any objections of other senior personnel present during the test and its preparation. Serving under Dyatlov,Aleksandr Akimovwas chief of the night shift, and Leonid Toptunov was the operator responsible for the reactor's operational regimen, including the movement of thecontrol rods. Toptunov was a young engineer who had worked independently as a senior engineer for approximately three months.[25]:3638
really cool keep on the work on these and good luck
nice i like the addon
really cool keep on the work on these and good luck
nice i like the addon12-02-2020, 09:04 PMnoahrh5 Wrote: It's been a while since I've seen this addon, I'll definately check it out.
really cool keep on the work on these and good luck
can you send more leaks like that please they are really useful20-03-2018, 12:27 PMYour_Majesty Wrote: Zeros MethLab? - Last version
Gmodstore link :
Download link :
Content has been stripped. Go to the quoted post to view the content.
pretty amazing how many more do you have if you do then post them please20-03-2018, 12:27 PMYour_Majesty Wrote: Zeros MethLab? - Last version
Gmodstore link :
Download link :
Content has been stripped. Go to the quoted post to view the content.
lmaoxd69420 pretty amazing keep up the addons its worth the wait20-03-2018, 12:27 PMYour_Majesty Wrote: Zeros MethLab? - Last version
Gmodstore link :
Download link :
Content has been stripped. Go to the quoted post to view the content.
TheChernobyl disasterwas anuclear accidentthat occurred on Saturday 26 April 1986, at the No.4nuclear reactorin theChernobyl Nuclear Power Plant, near the city ofPripyatin the north of theUkrainian SSR.[1][2]It is considered the worst nuclear disaster in history and is one of only two nuclear energy disasters rated at seventhe maximum severityon theInternational Nuclear Event Scale, the other being the 2011Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disasterin Japan.20-03-2018, 12:27 PMYour_Majesty Wrote: Zeros MethLab? - Last version
Gmodstore link :
Download link :
Content has been stripped. Go to the quoted post to view the content.
The accident started during a safety test on anRBMK-type nuclear reactor, which was commonly used throughout theSoviet Union. The test was a simulation of an electrical power outage to aid the development of a safety procedure for maintaining cooling water circulation until the back-up generators could provide power there is a time gap between the moment of power outage and the moment at which the back-up generators reach full power. This operating gap was about one minute and had been identified as a potential safety problem that could cause thenuclear reactor coreto overheat. Three such tests had been conducted since 1982, but they had failed to provide a solution.
On this fourth attempt, the test was delayed by 10 hours, so an unprepared operating shift had to perform it.[3]During a gradual decrease of reactor power that was done in preparation for the test, the power unexpectedly dropped to a near-zero level at one moment. The operators were able to partially restore power, but this put the reactor in a highly unstable condition. The risks were not made evident in the operating instructions, despite a similar accident occurring years before, and the test proceeded even though the power was still lower than prescribed. Upon test completion, the operators triggered a reactor shutdown, but a combination of unstable conditions and reactor design flaws caused an uncontrollednuclear chain reactioninstead.[4]:33
A large amount of energy was suddenly released, vapourisingsuperheated cooling waterand rupturing the reactor core in a highly destructivesteam explosion. This was immediately followed by an open-air reactor core fire that released considerable airborneradioactive contaminationfor about nine days that precipitated onto parts of the USSR and western Europe, before being finally contained on 4 May 1986.[5][6]The fire gradually released about the same amount of contamination as the initial explosion.[7]As a result of rising ambient radiation levels off-site, a 10-kilometre (6.2mi) radiusexclusion zonewas created 36 hours after the accident. About 49,000people were evacuated from the area, primarily from Pripyat. The exclusion zone was later increased to 30 kilometres (19mi) radius when a further 68,000people were evacuated from the wider area.[8][8]
The reactor explosion killed two of the reactor operating staff. In the emergency response that followed, 134firemen and station staff were hospitalized withacute radiation syndromedue to absorbing high doses ofionizing radiation. Of these 134 people, 28 died in the days to months afterward and approximately 14 suspectedradiation-induced cancerdeaths followed within the next 10years.[9][10]Among the wider population, an excess of 15childhoodthyroid cancerdeaths were documented as of 2011.[11][12]TheUnited Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation(UNSCEAR) has, at multiple times, reviewed all the published research on the incident and found that at present, fewer than 100 documented deaths are likely to be attributable to increased exposure to radiation.[13]Determining the total eventual number ofexposure related deathsis uncertain based on thelinear no-thresholdmodel, a contested statistic
To reduce the spread ofradioactive contaminationfrom the wreckage and protect it from weathering, the protectiveChernobyl Nuclear Power Plant sarcophaguswas built by December 1986. It also providedradiological protectionfor the crews of the undamaged reactors at the site, which continued operating. Due to the continued deterioration of the sarcophagus, it was further enclosed in 2017 by theChernobyl New Safe Confinement, a larger enclosure that allows the removal of both the sarcophagus and the reactor debris, while containing the radioactive hazard. Nuclear clean-up is scheduled for completion in 2065.[17]The Chernobyl disaster is considered the worst nuclear power plant accident in history, both in terms of cost and casualties.[18]The initial emergency response, together with laterdecontaminationof the environment, ultimately involved more than 500,000personneland cost an estimated 18billionSoviet rublesroughly US$68billion in 2019, adjusted for inflation.[7][19]The accident resulted in safety upgrades on all remaining Soviet-designed RBMK reactors, of which 10 continue to be operational as of 2019.[20][21]
In steady-state operation, a significant fraction (over 6%) of the power from a nuclear reactor is derived not from fission but from thedecay heatof its accumulated fission products. This heating continues for some time after thechain reactionhas been stopped (e.g. following an emergencyscram) and active cooling is required to preventcore meltdown.[22]RBMKreactors like those at Chernobyl use water as a coolant.[23][24]Reactor No.4 at Chernobyl included about 1,600 individual fuel channels, each of which required coolant flow of 28 metric tons (28,000 litres or 7,400 US gallons) per hour.[25]
Since cooling pumps still require electricity and must run for some time after an emergency shutdown in the event of a power grid failure, each of Chernobyl's reactors had three backupdiesel generators. The backup generators could start up in 15 seconds, but took 6075 seconds to attain full speed[25]:15and generate the 5.5megawattoutput required to run one main pump.[25]:30
This one-minute delay constituted a significant safety risk. It had been theorized that the stored rotational inertia of thesteam turbinesand the residual steam pressure could be used to generate the required electrical power to cover this gap. Analysis indicated that this might be sufficient to provide electrical power to run the coolant pumps for 45 seconds,[25]:16notquitebridging the gap between an external power failure and the full availability of the emergency generators.[26]
This capability still needed to be confirmed experimentally, and previous tests had ended unsuccessfully. An initial test carried out in 1982 indicated that theexcitationvoltage of the turbine-generator was insufficient; it did not maintain the desiredmagnetic fieldafter the turbine trip. The system was modified, and the test was repeated in 1984 but again proved unsuccessful. In 1985, a test was conducted a third time but also yielded negative results. The test procedure was to be run again in 1986, and scheduled to take place during a maintenance shutdown of reactor No.4.[26][4]:51
The test program was not problematic per se, even though its documentation of safety measures would not hold up to modern standards. However, the test program developers were not aware of the unusual RBMK-1000 reactor behavior under the planned operating conditions.[4]:52It was regarded as purely an electrical test, not a complex unit test, even though it involved critical unit systems. According to the regulations in place at the time, such a test did not require approval by either the chief designer of the reactor (NIKIET), the scientific manager or the Soviet nuclear oversight regulator.[4]:5152The test required disabling of some safety systems (in particular, theemergency core cooling system, a passive/active system of core cooling intended to provide water to the core in aloss-of-coolant accident), and a special approval from the chief engineer had been obtained according to regulations.[4]:18
The test was to be conducted during the day-shift of 25 April 1986 as part of a scheduled reactor shut down. The day shift crew had been instructed in advance on the reactor operating conditions to run the test and in addition, a special team ofelectrical engineerswas present to conduct the one-minute test of the new voltage regulating system once the correct conditions had been reached.[27]As planned, a gradual reduction in the output of the power unit began at 01:06 on 25 April, and the power level had reached 50% of its nominal 3,200MW thermal level by the beginning of the day shift.[4]:53
![[Image: 220px-Gen_II_nuclear_reactor_vessels_sizes.svg.png]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gen_II_nuclear_reactor_vessels_sizes.svg)
[/url]
Comparative[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_II_reactor]Generation II reactorvessels size comparison, a design classification of commercial reactors built until the end of the 1990s.
Comparative[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_II_reactor]Generation II reactorvessels size comparison, a design classification of commercial reactors built until the end of the 1990s.
The day shift performed many unrelated maintenance tasks, and was scheduled to perform the test at 14:15[28]:3and preparations for the test were carried out, including the disabling of theemergency core cooling system.[4]:53Meanwhile, another regional power station unexpectedly went offline and at 14:00[4]:53theKievelectrical grid controller requested that the further reduction of Chernobyl's output be postponed, as power was needed to satisfy the peak evening demand. The Chernobyl plant director[citation needed]agreed, and postponed the test.
Soon, the day shift was replaced by the evening shift.[28]:3Despite the delay, theemergency core cooling systemwas left disabled it was disconnected by a manual isolating slide valve[4]:51which in practice meant that two or three people spent the whole shift manually turning sailboat-helm sized valve wheels.[28]:4The system would have no influence on the events that unfolded next, but allowing to run the reactor for 11 hours outside of the test without emergency protection indicated a generally low level of safety culture.[4]:10,18
At 23:04, the Kiev grid controller allowed the reactor shutdown to resume. This delay had some serious consequences: the day shift had long since departed, the evening shift was also preparing to leave, and the night shift would not take over until midnight, well into the job. According to plan, the test should have been finished during the day shift, and the night shift would only have had to maintain decay heat cooling systems in an otherwise shut-down plant.[25]:3638
The night shift had very limited time to prepare for and carry out the experiment.Anatoly Dyatlov, deputy chief-engineer of the entireChernobyl Nuclear Power Plant, was present to supervise and direct the experiment; as he out-ranked all other supervisory personnel present, his orders and instructions overrode any objections of other senior personnel present during the test and its preparation. Serving under Dyatlov,Aleksandr Akimovwas chief of the night shift, and Leonid Toptunov was the operator responsible for the reactor's operational regimen, including the movement of thecontrol rods. Toptunov was a young engineer who had worked independently as a senior engineer for approximately three months.[25]:3638
RE: [LEAK] Zeros MethLab [LATEST] 23-02-2020, 01:35 AM #43 Yo good job for the share man really appreciate it
23-02-2020, 01:35 AM
#43 Yo good job for the share man really appreciate it
RE: [LEAK] Zeros MethLab [LATEST] 23-02-2020, 03:50 PM #44 Uh, it looks hype, you can not be ashamed to put on any server!
23-02-2020, 03:50 PM
#44 Uh, it looks hype, you can not be ashamed to put on any server!
RE: [LEAK] Zeros MethLab [LATEST] 23-02-2020, 07:58 PM #45 That's very good script, i think it's clear, recommend by me))
23-02-2020, 07:58 PM
#45 That's very good script, i think it's clear, recommend by me))
RE: [LEAK] Zeros MethLab [LATEST] 24-02-2020, 04:19 PM #46 Be careful ! This addon doesnt works with addon "Enchanted meth lab", because this addons has similar commands.
24-02-2020, 04:19 PM
#46 Be careful ! This addon doesnt works with addon "Enchanted meth lab", because this addons has similar commands.
RE: [LEAK] Zeros MethLab [LATEST] 03-03-2020, 09:50 AM #47 wish i can use it, ill be able to after 14 posts. It seems pretty chill tho. I really want it really bad but i have to do this 15 posts thing
03-03-2020, 09:50 AM
#47 wish i can use it, ill be able to after 14 posts. It seems pretty chill tho. I really want it really bad but i have to do this 15 posts thing