Jed,
Further to your oft repeated comments on the flow meter and references
to the unsigned Exhibit 5, I have read this again and it strikes me that
whoever wrote it is not an engineer.
The flowmeter MWN130-80-NC. Has numbers and letters that indicate
various things.130 is the max water temperature, 80 refers to the inside
pipe diameter (mm) and the letters to various adapters.
It is clear that Penon selected the meter to bolt directly onto the feed
line.It is quite accurate at the flow rates used should you care to read
the specs (at worst would read 3% low) and Penon had it calibrated both
before and after the test at the flow rate and temperatures
encountered.So to quote the name plate as damning in these circumstances
is silly.
Why does IH not show the location of the flow meter?This is critical to
know whether it ran partly filled.Apparently the flow meter can
compensate for being partially filled too.
All we have is this unsigned document claiming the flow rate was
constant.You are relying on someone else to report that and say you have
not seen the complete log. Coming from IH this is not proof.
Likewise there is no written record of the number of reactors working
and how would Murray know that anyway?The writer seems to also assume
the output of each reactor is constant and can’t be altered.This is also
wrong.
So the water level in the condensation tank was different on Feb16 &
17,So what?Why would that alter the ability of the flow meter to measure
the flow?
Then there are some temperature and pressures given without written
references and it is stated the steam pipe was DN40.Really?The STEAMpipe
was only 1.5” nominal bore?A glance at the photos would show the steam
pipe was larger than that. (The water pipe was DN80)
A very amateurish piece looking for problems
