0
Research Papers: Design and Analysis

Design and Integrity Evaluation of a Finned-Tube Sodium-to-Air Heat Exchanger in a Sodium Test Facility

[+] Author and Article Information
Hyeong-Yeon Lee, Hyungmo Kim, Jong-Bum Kim, Ji-Young Jeong

Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute,
989-111 Daedeok-Daero,
Yuseong-gu,
Daejeon 34057, South Korea

Contributed by the Pressure Vessel and Piping Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF PRESSURE VESSEL TECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received June 15, 2016; final manuscript received October 15, 2016; published online November 4, 2016. Assoc. Editor: Haofeng Chen.

J. Pressure Vessel Technol 139(3), 031203 (Nov 04, 2016) (13 pages) Paper No: PVT-16-1097; doi: 10.1115/1.4035038 History: Received June 15, 2016; Revised October 15, 2016

A high-temperature design and an integrity evaluation for a finned-tube sodium-to-air heat exchanger (FHX) in a sodium test facility were conducted based on full 3D finite-element analyses, and comparisons of the design codes were made. A model FHX has been installed in a sodium test facility of sodium thermal-hydraulic experiment loop for finned-tube sodium-to-air heat exchanger (SELFA) for simulating the thermal hydraulic behavior of the FHX unit in the prototype Gen IV sodium-cooled fast reactor (PGSFR). For the design evaluations, ASME Section VIII Div. 2 has been applied for the FHX as a whole. For parts of the FHX operating in the creep regime, nuclear grade elevated temperature design (ETD) codes of ASME Section III Subsection NH and RCC-MRx were additionally applied to evaluate the integrity against creep-fatigue damage. For parts of the FHX operating at low temperature, ASME Section III Subsection NB was applied additionally to evaluate the integrity upon load-controlled stresses and fatigue. The integrity of the FHX was confirmed based on the design evaluations as per the design codes. Code comparisons were made in terms of the chemical compositions, material properties, and conservatism. The conservatism was quantified and compared at the critical low temperature location between ASME Section VIII Div. 2 and ASME-NB, and at the critical high-temperature location between ASME-NH and RCC-MRx.

Copyright © 2017 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Schematic of prototype Generation IV sodium-cooled fast reactor (PGSFR)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Schematic of active decay heat removal system (ADHRS) concept in PGSFR

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Schematics of FHX (a) FHX (PGSFR), (b) FHX_1 (SELFA), and (c) FHX_2(SELFA)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Configurations of the test section in the SELFA test facility

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Three-dimensional image of the SELFA test facility

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Shape of finned tubes in M-FHX

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Test section part with bent tubes in M-FHX

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Finite-element model of M-FHX test section

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Design transients of the M-FHX

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Heat transfer condition of the M-FHX

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Heat transfer analysis results of the SELFA test section (unit:  °C) (a) t = 35 min and (b) t = 7 h

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Temperature distribution of the tube structure in M-FHX (t = 7 h) (unit:  °C)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Stress analysis results of the FHX frame (t = 35 min, 130.2 °C) (unit: MPa)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Stress analysis results of the tube bundle (t = 7 h, 479.83 °C) (unit: MPa)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Stress analysis results of the tube bundle of M-FHX under combined primary and secondary loads (t = 7 h, 430.07 °C) (unit: MPa)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Stress analysis results of upper and lower chamber of M-FHX under combined loads (t = 7 h, lower chamber max: 479.54 °C) (unit: MPa) (a) upper chamber and (b) lower chamber

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Stress analysis results of the outer shell in M-FHX (unit: MPa) (a) t = 35 min and (b) t = 7 h

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Comparison of material strengths in design codes for 304SS (a) yield strength and (b) tensile strength

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Comparison of design stress intensity for 304SS

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

Comparison of design stress intensity (Sm) and maximum allowable stresses (S) for 304L SS

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

Comparison of maximum allowable stresses in ASME codes and RCC-MRx for 304L stainless steel

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 22

Comparison of fatigue strengths in ASME-NH and RCC-MRx

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 23

Comparison of creep rupture strengths in stainless steel 304 between ASEM-NH and RCC-MRx

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 24

Comparison of thermal expansion coefficients for 304SS between ASME code and RCC-MRx

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 25

Comparison of thermal conductivity for 304SS between ASME code and RCC-MRx

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 26

Creep-fatigue damage evaluation results according to ASEM-NH and RCC-MRx at upper chamber nozzle

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In