Vattenfall AB är ett europeiskt energiföretag som strävar efter att bli fossilfria och investerar i att öka andelen energiproduktion med låg koldioxidutsläpp. Företaget äger kärnkraftverk i Ringhals där de producerar stora mängder fossilfri el. I Ringhals har termografering används på den elektriska avdelningen som en metod för att undersöka temperaturökningar i bland annat kablar, kretsar, kopplingar osv. Då denna metod har visat sig vara effektiv för att förebygga fel. Vill man nu utöka användningsområdena och möjligtvis använda termografering inom den mekaniska avdelningen. Främst för de system som liknar sprinklersystemet 322, vilket är ett säkerhetssystem som aktiveras först vid större rörbrott i inneslutningen på huvudsystemet till reaktorn. Målet med detta examensarbete är att undersöka ifall termografering är en bra investeringsmetod som kan användas vid bedömningen av ett säkerhetssystems driftklarhet och bidra till ökad säkerhet vid användning av kärnkraft. För att utföra detta arbete genomfördes en litteraturstudie, intervjuer samt studiebesök där med hjälp av värmekameran observerades värmemönster. Faktorer som har identifierats är brist på underlag av datainsamlingar i form av ronder med värmekameran för att hitta sambandet på hur temperaturskillnaden i komponenterna påverkar systemet. Samt ett system som samlar in all data och hittar potentiella avvikelser. Ett antal förbättringsförslag har givits efter projektets gång för att kunna effektivisera användningen av termografering inom säkerhetsbedömning. / Vattenfall AB is a European energy company that strives to become fossil-free and invests in energy production with low carbon dioxide emissions. The company owns nuclear power plants in Ringhals where they produce large amounts of fossil-free electricity. In Ringhals, thermography has been used in the electrical department as a method for examining temperature increases in, among other things, cables, circuits, connections, etc. Since this method has proven to be effective in preventing errors. They now want to expand the areas of use and the possibly to use thermography in the mechanical department. Mainly for the systems similar to the sprinkler system 322, which is a safety system that is activated only in the event of major pipe breaks in the enclosure on the main system to the reactor. The aim of this thesis is to investigate whether thermography is a good investment method which can be used in the assessment of a safety system's operational readiness and contribute to increased safety when using nuclear power. To carry out this work, a literature study, interviews, and study visits were carried out where heat patterns were observed with the help of the thermal imager. Factors that have been identified are the lack of data collection and data in the form of rounds with the thermal imager to find the connection on how the temperature difference in the components affects the system. As well as a system that collects all data and finds potential discrepancies. A number of improvement proposals have been given after the project has progressed in order to be able to streamline the use of thermography in safety assessment.

Myndighetskraven som ställs på tekniska egenskaper vid uppförande av byggnader uppdaterasårligen och blir alltmer skarpare. I Boverkets byggregler 19 infördes automatiskt släcksystem somföreskriftskrav. Tidigare tillämpades de endast under allmänna råd. Syftet med denna rapport är attidentifiera kravbilden för installation av sprinkleranläggning i byggnader i Sverige, främst urmyndighetsperspektiv genom litteraturstudie samt informationsinsamling via intervjuer med diverseerfarna nyckelpersoner med olika bakgrund inom branschen.Kravbilden för installation av sprinkler styrs redan från riksdagsnivån via Plan- och bygglagen. Kravenförtydligas och specificeras mer detaljerat för varje instans fram till Svensk standard där reglernafinjusterats in i detaljer som bland annat aktiveringstid, tryck och vattentäthet. Reglerna ärdimensionerande och anpassad för olika typer av verksamheter samt områden.Myndighetskrav reglerar krav för installation av sprinkler i vissa vård- och omsorgslokaler medanförsäkringsbolagen reglerar villkor för installation av sprinkler i bland annat industrilokaler. Slutsatsenför rapporten är att kravbilden för installation av sprinklersystem skiljer sig mellan myndighetskravoch villkor enligt försäkringsbolagen. Myndighetskraven identifierar risker för människans liv ochhälsa och tar inte hänsyn till egendomsskydd, vilket försäkringsbolagen gör.I denna rapport kartläggs kravbilden för installation av sprinkler utifrån samhället krav från Plan- ochbygglagen till tidigare RUS 120 för att ge en inblick i hur juridiken inverkar på tekniken inombyggbranschen. / For every year, the authority requirements regarding building technology gets more acute andintense. In Boverkets byggregler 19 automatic sprinkler system changed from advice to requirement.Purpose of this report is to identify pretension for installation of automatic sprinkler system inbuildings in Sweden with focus in authority requirements through literatures and interviews.Requirements for installation of automatic sprinkler system are controlled by the parliament byPlanning and Building Act. The requirements clarify and gets clearer for every authority all the way toSvensk standard where the requirements adjust into details and regulates terms like response time,pressure and design density. The requirements are dimensional and customized for different activityand section.Authority requirements settles the pretension for installation of automatic sprinkler system in somebuildings for care in the same time insurance companies settles the pretension for installation ofautomatic sprinkler system in industry buildings. Conclusion for this report is that requirements forinstallation of automatic sprinkler system are different depends on if authority or insurancecompanies settles them. Requirements from authority focus in protection of lives while insurancecompanies focus in property loss. Boverket wants insurance companies to be more responsible foruse of automatic sprinkler system in other buildings than buildings for care.Different requirements from different parts of the society specifies in this report just to let thereader have an insight how jurisprudence affects technology in building industry.

Master of Science / Department of Biological & Agricultural Engineering / Ronaldo G. Maghirang / Large cattle feedlots in Kansas are often considered to be large sources of particulate matter (PM), including PM with equivalent aerodynamic diameter of 10 micrometers or less (PM[subscript]10). To control PM emissions from cattle feedlots, water sprinkler systems can be implemented; however, limited data are available on their PM control efficiency. This research was conducted to determine the control efficiency of a water sprinkler system in reducing PM[subscript]10 emission from a cattle feedlot. This was accomplished by monitoring the PM[subscript]10 concentrations, with tapered element oscillating microbalance (TEOM™) PM[subscript]10 monitors, at the upwind and downwind boundaries of a cattle feedlot (KS1) from January 2006 to July 2009. The feedlot was equipped with a sprinkler system that can apply up to 5 mm of water per day. It had approximately 30,000 head of beef cattle and total pen area of approximately 50 ha. The control efficiency of the sprinkler system was determined by considering the PM[subscript]10 data during sprinkler on/off events, i.e., the sprinkler system was operated (on) for at least one day and either followed or preceded by at least one day of no water sprinkling (off). For each of the selected sprinkler on/off events, the percentage reduction in net PM[subscript]10 concentration was calculated and considered to be a measure of the control efficiency. Net PM[subscript]10 concentration was defined as the difference between downwind and upwind PM[subscript]10 concentrations. The control efficiency for PM[subscript]10 ranged from 32% to 80%, with an overall mean of 53% based on 24-h PM[subscript]10 values for 10 sprinkler on/off events. In general, the effect of the water sprinkler system in reducing net PM[subscript]10 concentration lasted for one day or less. The percentage reduction in net PM[subscript]10 concentration at KS1 due to rainfall events was also determined using a similar approach. In addition, a second cattle feedlot (KS2) that was not equipped with a sprinkler system and with approximately 25,000 head of beef cattle and 68 ha pen area was considered. Percentage reductions in net PM[subscript]10 concentrations due to rainfall events were mostly in the range of 60% to almost 100% for both feedlots, with overall means of 75% for KS1 and 74% for KS2. The effects of rainfall events (with rainfall amounts > 10 mm/day) lasted for three to seven days, depending on rainfall amount and intensity. Limited data are also available on PM[subscript]10 emission rates from cattle feedlots in Kansas. This research quantified PM[subscript]10 emission rates from the two feedlots (KS1 and KS2) and a third cattle feedlot (KS3) in Kansas by using inverse dispersion modeling with the AMS/EPA Regulatory Model (AERMOD), which is the US EPA preferred regulatory atmospheric dispersion model. PM[subscript]10 emission rates were back-calculated using the resulting PM[subscript]10 concentrations modeled by AERMOD, together with measured PM[subscript]10 concentrations (24 months of data for KS1 and KS2, 6 months of data for KS3). Overall mean PM[subscript]10 emission fluxes for the 2-year period were 1.29 g/m[superscript]2-day (range: 0.04 – 4.98 g/m[superscript]2-day) for KS1, 1.03 g/m[superscript]2-day (range: 0.07 – 4.52 g/m[superscript]2-day) for KS2, and 2.48 g/m[superscript]2-day (6-months; range: 0.05 – 5.00 g/m[superscript]2-day) for KS3. The corresponding mean PM[subscript]10 emission factors were 21, 29, and 48 kg/1,000 hd-day for KS1, KS2, and KS3, respectively. The emission factors for KS1 and KS2 were considerably smaller than the published US EPA emission factor for cattle feedlots (i.e., 42 kg/1000 hd-day). The emission factor for KS3 was slightly greater than the US EPA emission factor; however, it was a biased estimate because it was based only on a six-month period.