{"title":"Combination of two-fluid model and delayed equilibrium model for the critical flow in a slit","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.pnucene.2024.105406","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Accurately predicting the mass flux, pressure profile, and velocity profile of the critical flow in a slit is essential for analyzing the breaking process of the liquid phase and calculating the aerosol source term for leak-before-break (LBB) monitoring and Loss of Coolant Accident (LOCA) risk analysis. A new critical flow model combining Two-fluid Model (TFM) and Delayed Equilibrium Model (DEM) is built to get accurate profiles while avoiding the same phase velocity in DEM and the arbitrary critical flow criterion in TFM. The new model is verified using past experiments of the critical flow in a slit. It proves to be accurate in mass flux but not in critical pressure, with maximum relative errors of around 25% in mass flux and around 80% in critical pressure. The new model is optimized for higher accuracy in critical pressure. The empirical equation of saturated phase mass flow rate fraction gradient is optimized by conducting approximate pressure profile calculation and regression analysis. The maximum relative error decreases little while the ratio of critical pressure relative errors lying in the range of ±40% increases after optimization. In contrast, the difference in the average abstract relative error of pressure between original TFM-DEM and DEM is much larger, for the maximum relative error of mass flux and critical pressure are around 25% and 110%. The comparison between the original and optimized TFM-DEM proves that the new critical flow model is accurate in mass flux and can be optimized to raise pressure calculation accuracy. The comparison between the original TFM-DEM and DEM proves that the phase velocity difference is the major source of accuracy improvement in the pressure profile.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":20617,"journal":{"name":"Progress in Nuclear Energy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Progress in Nuclear Energy","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149197024003561","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NUCLEAR SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Accurately predicting the mass flux, pressure profile, and velocity profile of the critical flow in a slit is essential for analyzing the breaking process of the liquid phase and calculating the aerosol source term for leak-before-break (LBB) monitoring and Loss of Coolant Accident (LOCA) risk analysis. A new critical flow model combining Two-fluid Model (TFM) and Delayed Equilibrium Model (DEM) is built to get accurate profiles while avoiding the same phase velocity in DEM and the arbitrary critical flow criterion in TFM. The new model is verified using past experiments of the critical flow in a slit. It proves to be accurate in mass flux but not in critical pressure, with maximum relative errors of around 25% in mass flux and around 80% in critical pressure. The new model is optimized for higher accuracy in critical pressure. The empirical equation of saturated phase mass flow rate fraction gradient is optimized by conducting approximate pressure profile calculation and regression analysis. The maximum relative error decreases little while the ratio of critical pressure relative errors lying in the range of ±40% increases after optimization. In contrast, the difference in the average abstract relative error of pressure between original TFM-DEM and DEM is much larger, for the maximum relative error of mass flux and critical pressure are around 25% and 110%. The comparison between the original and optimized TFM-DEM proves that the new critical flow model is accurate in mass flux and can be optimized to raise pressure calculation accuracy. The comparison between the original TFM-DEM and DEM proves that the phase velocity difference is the major source of accuracy improvement in the pressure profile.
期刊介绍:
Progress in Nuclear Energy is an international review journal covering all aspects of nuclear science and engineering. In keeping with the maturity of nuclear power, articles on safety, siting and environmental problems are encouraged, as are those associated with economics and fuel management. However, basic physics and engineering will remain an important aspect of the editorial policy. Articles published are either of a review nature or present new material in more depth. They are aimed at researchers and technically-oriented managers working in the nuclear energy field.
Please note the following:
1) PNE seeks high quality research papers which are medium to long in length. Short research papers should be submitted to the journal Annals in Nuclear Energy.
2) PNE reserves the right to reject papers which are based solely on routine application of computer codes used to produce reactor designs or explain existing reactor phenomena. Such papers, although worthy, are best left as laboratory reports whereas Progress in Nuclear Energy seeks papers of originality, which are archival in nature, in the fields of mathematical and experimental nuclear technology, including fission, fusion (blanket physics, radiation damage), safety, materials aspects, economics, etc.
3) Review papers, which may occasionally be invited, are particularly sought by the journal in these fields.