0
Research Papers: Fluid-Structure Interaction

Evaluation of a Numerical Analysis Model for the Transient Response of Nuclear Steam Generator Secondary Side to a Sudden Steam Line Break

[+] Author and Article Information
Jong Chull Jo

Reactor System Evaluation Dept.,
Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety,
62 Gwahak-ro,
Yusung-gu,
Daejeon 34142, Korea
e-mail: jcjo@kins.re.kr

Bok Ki Min

Reactor System Evaluation Dept.,
Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety,
62 Gwahak-ro,
Yusung-gu,
Daejeon 34142, Korea
e-mail: k075mbk@kins.re.kr

Jae Jun Jeong

School of Mechanical Engineering,
Pusan National University,
63 Busandaehak-ro,
Geumjeong-gu,
Busan 46241, Korea
e-mail: jjjeong@pusan.ac.kr

Contributed by the Pressure Vessel and Piping Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF PRESSURE VESSEL TECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received July 20, 2016; final manuscript received October 28, 2016; published online December 1, 2016. Editor: Young W. Kwon.

J. Pressure Vessel Technol 139(3), 031305 (Dec 01, 2016) (7 pages) Paper No: PVT-16-1118; doi: 10.1115/1.4035130 History: Received July 20, 2016; Revised October 28, 2016

This paper presents an evaluation of the applicability of a numerical analysis model to the transient thermal-hydraulic response of steam generator (SG) secondary side to blowdown following a steam line break (SLB) at a pressurized water reactor (PWR). To do this, the numerical analysis model was applied to simulate the same blowdown situation as in an available experiment which was conducted for a simplified SG blowdown model, and the numerical results were compared with the measurements. As a result, both are in reasonably good agreement with each other. Consequently, the present numerical analysis model is evaluated to have the applicability for numerical simulations of the transient phase change heat transfer and flow situations in PWR SGs during blowdown following a SLB.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2017 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Shier, W. G. , and Levine, M. M. , 1980, “ PWR Steam Line Break Analysis Assuming Concurrent Steam Generator Tube Rupture,” ANS/ASME Topical Meeting on Reactor Thermal-Hydraulics, Saratoga, NY, Oct. 9, ASME Paper No. CONF-801002-9.
Gallardo, S. , Querol, A. , and Verdu, G. , 2012, “ Simulation of a Main Steam Line Break With Steam Generator Tube Rupture Using Trace,” PHYSOR 2012, Knoxville, TN, Apr. 15–20, American Nuclear Society, La Grange Park, IL, pp. 2131–2144.
Gallardo, S. , Querol, A. , and Verdú, G. , 2014, “ Improvements in the Simulation of a Main Steam Line Break With Steam Generator Tube Rupture,” Joint International Conference on Supercomputing in Nuclear Applications + Monte Carlo, Paris, France, Oct. 27–31, Paper No. 05104.
Kalra, S. , and Adams, G. , 1980, “ Thermal Hydraulics of Steam Line Break Transients in Thermal Reactors—Simulation Experiments,” ANS International Conference, American Nuclear Society, Washington, DC, Nov. 17–21, Vol. 35, Paper No. CONF-801107.
Wolf, L. , 1982, “ Experimental Results of Coupled Fluid-Structure Interactions During Blowdown of the HDR-Vessel and Comparisons With Pre- and Post-Test Predictions,” Nucl. Eng. Des., 70(3), pp. 269–308. [CrossRef]
Tinoco, H. , 2002, “ Three-Dimensional Modeling of a Steam-Line Break in a Boiling Water Reactor,” Nucl. Sci. Eng., 140(2), pp. 152–164.
Joo, H. G. , Jeong, J.-J. , Cho, B.-O. , Lee, W. J. , and Zee, S. Q. , 2003, “ Analysis of the OECD Main Steam Line Break Benchmark Problem Using the Refined Core Thermal-Hydraulic Nodalization Feature of the MARS/MASTER Code,” Nucl. Technol., 142(2), pp. 166–179. [CrossRef]
Hamouda, O. , Weaver, D. S. , and Riznic, J. , 2013, “ Commissioning Tests for an Experimental Study of Steam Generator Tube Loading During Blowdown,” ASME Paper No. PVP2013-97809.
Hamouda, O. , Weaver, D. S. , and Riznic, J. , 2014, “ Instrumentation Development and Validation for an Experimental Study of Steam Generator Tube Loading During Blowdown,” ASME Paper No. PVP2014-28137.
Hamouda, O. , Weaver, D. S. , and Riznic, J. , 2015, “ An Experimental Study of Steam Generator Tube Loading During Blowdown,” ASME Paper No. PVP2015-45250.
Jo, J. C. , and Moody, F. J. , 2015, “ Transient Thermal-Hydraulic Responses of the Nuclear Steam Generator Secondary Side to a Main Steam Line Break,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 137(4), p. 041301.
Jo, J. C. , 2015, “ Thermal-Hydraulic Response of the Secondary Side of a PWR Steam Generator With an Internal Structure to a Main Steam Line Break,” ASME Paper No. PVP2015-45092.
Jo, J. C. , and Moody, F. J. , 2016, “ Effects of a Venturi Type Flow Restrictor on the Thermal-Hydraulic Response of the Secondary Side of a Pressurized Water Reactor Steam Generator to a Main Steam Line Break,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 138(4), p. 041304.
ANSYS, Inc., 2012, “ ANSYS CFX User's Guide-14,” New York.
Menter, F. R. , 1994, “ Two Equation Eddy-Viscosity Turbulence Models for Engineering Applications,” AIAA J., 32(8), pp. 1598–1604. [CrossRef]
Vieser, W. , Esch, T. , and Menter, F. R. , 2002, “ Heat Transfer Predictions Using Advanced Two-Equation Turbulence Models,” European Metallurgical Conference (EMC), Hannover, Germany, Sept. 16–19, pp. 1157–1170.
Zwart, P. J. , Gerber, A. G. , and Belamri, T. , 2004, “ A Two-Phase Flow Model for Predicting Cavitation Dynamics,” Fifth International Conference on Multiphase Flow (ICMF), Yokohama, Japan, May 30–June 3, Paper No. 152.
Simoes-Moreira, J. R. , Vieira, M. M. , and Angelo, E. , 2002, “ Highly Expanded Flashing Liquid Jets,” J. Thermophys. Heat Transfer, 16(3), pp. 415–424. [CrossRef]
Huber, M. L. , and McLinden, M. O. , 1992, “ Thermodynamic Properties of R134a (1,1,1,2-Retrafloroethane),” International Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Conference, Paper No. 184.
Guedes, H. J. R. , and Zollweg, J. A. , 1992, “ Speed of Sound in Liquid R134a,” Int. J. Refrig., 15(6), pp. 381–385. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Simplified analysis models of the experimental SG blowdown simulation model [810]: (a) analysis model and (b) analysis model 2

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Discretized solution domain

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Transient vapor velocity contours

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Transient vapor velocity variations at the five monitoring points in the analysis models 1 and 2 during blowdown: (a) analysis model 1 and (b) analysis model 2

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Transient pressure variations at the monitoring points 1 and 2 in the analysis model 1 during blowdown

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Transient pressure variations in the analysis models 1 and 2 at the five points during blowdown: (a) analysis model 1 and (b) analysis model 2

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Pressure wave propagations at points 1 and 2 in the analysis models 1 and 2 during blowdown

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