Assessment of Different Turbulence Models on Melt Pool Natural Convection Simulations With Internal Heat Source

IF 4.3 3区 工程技术 Q2 ENERGY & FUELS International Journal of Energy Research Pub Date : 2025-01-09 DOI:10.1155/er/5995562
Pengya Guo, Peng Yu, Fengyang Quan, Yidan Yuan, Jiyang Yu, Weimin Ma
{"title":"Assessment of Different Turbulence Models on Melt Pool Natural Convection Simulations With Internal Heat Source","authors":"Pengya Guo,&nbsp;Peng Yu,&nbsp;Fengyang Quan,&nbsp;Yidan Yuan,&nbsp;Jiyang Yu,&nbsp;Weimin Ma","doi":"10.1155/er/5995562","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n <p>In the context of severe nuclear accidents, the migration of corium into the reactor pressure vessel (RPV) poses significant hazards, prompting the proposal of the in-vessel melt retention (IVR) strategy, particularly the external reactor vessel cooling (ERVC) approach. Evaluating the accuracy of turbulence models within the melt pool is crucial for assessing the feasibility of IVR. However, previous studies have yet to reach a consensus about the most suitable model due to the lack of data comparison. We aim to conduct a comprehensive comparative analysis of turbulence models to evaluate their performance across a range of Rayleigh numbers, particularly under conditions relevant to IVR scenarios. Therefore, this study employs six commonly used turbulence models in computational fluid dynamics (CFD) software, ANSYS Fluent, to simulate three natural convection experiments (Kulacki–Goldstein, BALI, and LIVE-3D). The results demonstrate that the choice of turbulence model significantly impacts the accuracy of temperature and heat flux predictions within the melt pool. Although the relative temperature deviation is less than 0.1% in all the simulations of the Kulacki–Goldstein experiment, the differences among turbulence models become increasingly pronounced with rising Rayleigh numbers. Among the models tested, wall-modeled large eddy simulation (WMLES) proved the most reliable for complex geometries and high Rayleigh numbers, while the realizable k-epsilon and generalized k-omega (GEKO) models also showed consistent performance. However, the Reynolds stress model (RSM)–baseline (BSL) and detached eddy simulation (DES) models exhibited notable limitations, particularly in scenarios involving solidification and melting. These findings provide valuable guidance for selecting appropriate turbulence models in IVR-related natural convection simulations and highlight the need for further refinement to improve model accuracy across varying melt pool conditions.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":14051,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Energy Research","volume":"2025 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1155/er/5995562","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Energy Research","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/er/5995562","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENERGY & FUELS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In the context of severe nuclear accidents, the migration of corium into the reactor pressure vessel (RPV) poses significant hazards, prompting the proposal of the in-vessel melt retention (IVR) strategy, particularly the external reactor vessel cooling (ERVC) approach. Evaluating the accuracy of turbulence models within the melt pool is crucial for assessing the feasibility of IVR. However, previous studies have yet to reach a consensus about the most suitable model due to the lack of data comparison. We aim to conduct a comprehensive comparative analysis of turbulence models to evaluate their performance across a range of Rayleigh numbers, particularly under conditions relevant to IVR scenarios. Therefore, this study employs six commonly used turbulence models in computational fluid dynamics (CFD) software, ANSYS Fluent, to simulate three natural convection experiments (Kulacki–Goldstein, BALI, and LIVE-3D). The results demonstrate that the choice of turbulence model significantly impacts the accuracy of temperature and heat flux predictions within the melt pool. Although the relative temperature deviation is less than 0.1% in all the simulations of the Kulacki–Goldstein experiment, the differences among turbulence models become increasingly pronounced with rising Rayleigh numbers. Among the models tested, wall-modeled large eddy simulation (WMLES) proved the most reliable for complex geometries and high Rayleigh numbers, while the realizable k-epsilon and generalized k-omega (GEKO) models also showed consistent performance. However, the Reynolds stress model (RSM)–baseline (BSL) and detached eddy simulation (DES) models exhibited notable limitations, particularly in scenarios involving solidification and melting. These findings provide valuable guidance for selecting appropriate turbulence models in IVR-related natural convection simulations and highlight the need for further refinement to improve model accuracy across varying melt pool conditions.

Abstract Image

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
不同湍流模型对内部热源熔池自然对流模拟的评价
在严重核事故的背景下,堆芯向反应堆压力容器(RPV)的迁移带来了重大危害,促使人们提出了容器内熔体保留(IVR)策略,特别是反应堆容器外部冷却(ERVC)方法。评估融池内湍流模型的准确性对于评估IVR的可行性至关重要。然而,以往的研究由于缺乏数据比较,对最合适的模型尚未达成共识。我们的目标是对湍流模型进行全面的比较分析,以评估它们在瑞利数范围内的性能,特别是在与IVR场景相关的条件下。因此,本研究采用计算流体力学(CFD)软件ANSYS Fluent中常用的六种湍流模型,模拟了三种自然对流实验(Kulacki-Goldstein、BALI和LIVE-3D)。结果表明,湍流模型的选择对熔池内温度和热通量的预测精度有显著影响。尽管在Kulacki-Goldstein实验的所有模拟中,相对温度偏差小于0.1%,但随着瑞利数的增加,湍流模型之间的差异变得越来越明显。在测试的模型中,壁式大涡模拟(WMLES)被证明对复杂几何形状和高瑞利数最可靠,而可实现的k-epsilon和广义k-omega (GEKO)模型也表现出一致的性能。然而,雷诺兹应力模型(RSM) -基线(BSL)和分离涡模拟(DES)模型显示出明显的局限性,特别是在涉及凝固和熔化的情况下。这些发现为在ivr相关的自然对流模拟中选择合适的湍流模型提供了有价值的指导,并强调了进一步改进以提高模型在不同熔池条件下的精度的必要性。
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
International Journal of Energy Research
International Journal of Energy Research 工程技术-核科学技术
CiteScore
9.80
自引率
8.70%
发文量
1170
审稿时长
3.1 months
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Energy Research (IJER) is dedicated to providing a multidisciplinary, unique platform for researchers, scientists, engineers, technology developers, planners, and policy makers to present their research results and findings in a compelling manner on novel energy systems and applications. IJER covers the entire spectrum of energy from production to conversion, conservation, management, systems, technologies, etc. We encourage papers submissions aiming at better efficiency, cost improvements, more effective resource use, improved design and analysis, reduced environmental impact, and hence leading to better sustainability. IJER is concerned with the development and exploitation of both advanced traditional and new energy sources, systems, technologies and applications. Interdisciplinary subjects in the area of novel energy systems and applications are also encouraged. High-quality research papers are solicited in, but are not limited to, the following areas with innovative and novel contents: -Biofuels and alternatives -Carbon capturing and storage technologies -Clean coal technologies -Energy conversion, conservation and management -Energy storage -Energy systems -Hybrid/combined/integrated energy systems for multi-generation -Hydrogen energy and fuel cells -Hydrogen production technologies -Micro- and nano-energy systems and technologies -Nuclear energy -Renewable energies (e.g. geothermal, solar, wind, hydro, tidal, wave, biomass) -Smart energy system
期刊最新文献
×
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学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
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