Combination of two-fluid model and delayed equilibrium model for the critical flow in a slit

IF 3.3 3区 工程技术 Q1 NUCLEAR SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY Progress in Nuclear Energy Pub Date : 2024-09-16 DOI:10.1016/j.pnucene.2024.105406
Yuxiang He , Weiguo Gu , Dezhong Wang
{"title":"Combination of two-fluid model and delayed equilibrium model for the critical flow in a slit","authors":"Yuxiang He ,&nbsp;Weiguo Gu ,&nbsp;Dezhong Wang","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":"177 ","pages":"Article 105406"},"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.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
狭缝中临界流的双流体模型与延迟平衡模型的结合
准确预测狭缝中临界流的质量通量、压力廓线和速度廓线对于分析液相的破裂过程以及计算用于泄漏前监测(LBB)和冷却剂损失事故(LOCA)风险分析的气溶胶源项至关重要。结合双流体模型(TFM)和延迟平衡模型(DEM)建立了一个新的临界流模型,以获得精确的剖面,同时避免了 DEM 中的同相速度和 TFM 中的任意临界流标准。新模型通过过去的狭缝临界流实验进行了验证。实验证明,该模型在质量流量方面是准确的,但在临界压力方面并不准确,质量流量的最大相对误差约为 25%,临界压力的最大相对误差约为 80%。新模型经过优化,临界压力精度更高。通过近似压力曲线计算和回归分析,优化了饱和相质量流量分数梯度的经验方程。优化后,最大相对误差略有减小,而临界压力相对误差在 ±40% 范围内的比率有所增大。相比之下,原始 TFM-DEM 和 DEM 的压力平均抽象相对误差差异较大,质量通量和临界压力的最大相对误差分别在 25% 和 110% 左右。原始 TFM-DEM 与优化 TFM-DEM 的对比证明,新临界流模型在质量通量方面是准确的,并且可以通过优化提高压力计算精度。原始 TFM-DEM 与 DEM 的比较证明,相位速度差是提高压力剖面精度的主要来源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Progress in Nuclear Energy
Progress in Nuclear Energy 工程技术-核科学技术
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
14.80%
发文量
331
审稿时长
3.5 months
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.
期刊最新文献
Nonlinear vibrations analysis of a fuel rod in nuclear heating reactor Experimental and model development of lead-bismuth eutectic solidification phenomenon flowing inside the tube Machine learning in critical heat flux studies in nuclear systems: A detailed review Experimental study of three-dimensional trajectory and dynamic characteristics of rising bubbles China's law and policy initiatives for integrating nuclear energy in maritime applications: A critical review
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1