0
SPECIAL SECTION PAPERS

Insight From Recent Experimental and Empirical-Model Studies on Flow-Regime Characteristics in Debris Bed Formation Behavior

[+] Author and Article Information
Songbai Cheng

Sino-French Institute of Nuclear Engineering &
Technology,
Sun Yat-Sen University,
Tang-Jia-Wan,
Zhuhai City 519-082,
Guangdong Province, China
e-mail: chengsb3@mail.sysu.edu.cn

Ting Zhang, Jinjiang Cui, Pengfeng Gong, Yujia Qian

Sino-French Institute of Nuclear
Engineering & Technology,
Sun Yat-Sen University,
Tang-Jia-Wan,
Zhuhai City 519-082,
Guangdong Province, China

1Corresponding author.

Manuscript received October 26, 2017; final manuscript received February 17, 2018; published online May 16, 2018. Assoc. Editor: Tomio Okawa.

ASME J of Nuclear Rad Sci 4(3), 031003 (May 16, 2018) (13 pages) Paper No: NERS-17-1197; doi: 10.1115/1.4039597 History: Received October 26, 2017; Revised February 17, 2018

Studies on debris bed formation behavior are important for improved evaluation of core relocation and debris bed coolability that might be encountered in a core disruptive accident (CDA) of sodium-cooled fast reactors (SFR). Motivated to clarify the flow-regime characteristics underlying this behavior, both experimental investigations and empirical-model development are being performed at the Sun Yat-sen University in China. As for the experimental study, several series of simulated experiments are being conducted by discharging various solid particles into water pools. To obtain a comprehensive understanding, a variety of experimental parameters, including particle size (0.000125– 0.008 m), particle density (glass, aluminum, alumina, zirconia, steel, copper, and lead), particle shape (spherical and nonspherical), and water depth (0–0.8 m) along with the particle release pipe diameter (0.01–0.04 m) were varied. It is found that due to the different interaction mechanisms between solid particles and water pool, four kinds of flow regimes, termed, respectively, as the particle-suspension regime, the pool-convection dominant regime, the transitional regime, and the particle-inertia dominant regime, were identifiable. As for the empirical-model development, aside from a base model which is restricted to predictions of spherical particles, in this paper considerations on how to cover more realistic conditions (esp. debris of nonspherical shapes) are also discussed. It is shown that by coupling the base model with an extension scheme, respectable agreement between experiments and model predictions for regime transition can be achieved for both spherical and nonspherical particles given our current range of conditions.

Copyright © 2018 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Tentner, A. M. , Parma, E. , Wei, T. , and Wigeland, R. , 2010, “ Evaluation of Design Measures for Severe Accident Prevention and Consequence Mitigation,” Argonne National Laboratory, Lemont, IL, Report No. ANL-GENIV-128.
Zhang, B. , Harada, T. , Hirahara, D. , Matsumoto, T. , Morita, K. , Fukuda, K. , Yamano, H. , Suzuki, T. , and Tobita, Y. , 2011, “ Experimental Investigation on Self-Leveling Behavior in Debris Beds,” Nucl. Eng. Des., 241(1), pp. 366–377. [CrossRef]
Waltar, A. E. , and Reynolds, A. B. , 1981, Fast Breeder Reactors, Pergamon Press, New York, p. 700.
Suzuki, T. , Kamiyama, K. , Yamano, H. , Kubo, S. , Tobita, Y. , Nakai, R. , and Koyama, K. , 2014, “ A Scenario of Core Disruptive Accident for Japan Sodium-Cooled Fast Reactor to Achieve In-Vessel Retention,” J. Nucl. Sci. Technol., 51(4), pp. 493–513. [CrossRef]
Ren, L. X. , 2012, “ Severe Accidents Analysis in CEFR and Technology Gaps,” International Workshop on Prevention and Mitigation of Severe Accidents in Sodium-Cooled Fast Reactors, Tsuruga, Japan, June 11–13, p. 22. https://www.jaea.go.jp/04/turuga/internationalworkshop/presentationPDF/201206131110Lixia%20Ren_China.pdf
Vasilyev, B. A. , Shepelev, S. F. , Ashirmetov, M. R. , and Poplavsky, V. M. , 2013, “ BN-1200 Reactor Power Unit Design Development,” International Conference on Fast Reactors and Related Fuel Cycles: Safety Technologies and Sustainable Scenarios (FR-13), Paris, France, Mar. 4–7, p. 19. http://www.iaea.org/inis/collection/NCLCollectionStore/_Public/45/089/45089480.pdf
Cheng, S. , Hirahara, D. , Tanaka, Y. , Gondai, Y. , Zhang, B. , Matsumoto, T. , Morita, K. , Fukuda, K. , Yamano, H. , Suzuki, T. , and Tobita, Y. , 2011, “ Experimental Investigation of Bubbling in Particle Beds With High Solid Holdup,” Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci., 35(2), pp. 405–415. [CrossRef]
Lipinski, R. , 1982, “ A Model for Boiling and Dryout in Particle Beds,” Sandia National Laboratory, Albuquerque, NM, Report No. NUREG/CR-2646 https://inis.iaea.org/search/search.aspx?orig_q=RN:14732098.
Hesson, J. C. , Sevy, R. H. , and Marciniak, T. J. , 1971, “ Postaccident Heat Removal in LMFBRs: In-Vessel Considerations,” Argonne National Laboratory, Lemont, IL, Report No. ANL-7859. https://inis.iaea.org/search/search.aspx?orig_q=RN:3018620
Gabor, J. D. , 1974, “ Simulation Experiments for Internal Heat Generation,” Reactor Development Program Progress, Argonne National Laboratory, Lemont, IL, Report No. ANL-RDP-32.
Alvarez, D. , and Amblard, M. , 1982, “ Fuel Leveling,” Fifth Information Exchange Meeting on Post Accident Debris Cooling, Karlsruhe, Germany, July 28–30, pp. 9–12.
Basso, S. , Konovalenko, A. , and Kudinov, P. , 2014, “ Sensitivity and Uncertainty Analysis for Prediction of Particulate Debris Bed Self-Leveling in Prototypic Severe Accident (SA) Conditions,” International Congress on Advances in Nuclear Power Plants (ICAPP), Charlotte, NC, Apr. 6–9, p. 10. http://kth.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2%3A807347&dswid=9093
Konovalenko, A. , Basso, S. , Karbojian, A. , and Kudinov, P. , 2012, “ Experimental and Analytical Study of the Particulate Debris Bed Self-Leveling,” Nineth International Topical Meeting on Nuclear Thermal-Hydraulics, Operation and Safety (NUTHOS), Kaohsiung, Taiwan, Sep. 9–13, p. 13. https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:679425/FULLTEXT01.pdf
Cheng, S. , Tanaka, Y. , Gondai, Y. , Kai, T. , Zhang, B. , Matsumoto, T. , Morita, K. , Fukuda, K. , Yamano, H. , Suzuki, T. , and Tobita, Y. , 2011, “ Experimental Studies and Empirical Models for the Transient Self-Leveling Behavior in Debris Bed,” J. Nucl. Sci. Technol., 48(10), pp. 1327–1336. [CrossRef]
Cheng, S. , Yamano, H. , Suzuki, T. , Tobita, Y. , Nakamura, Y. , Zhang, B. , Matsumoto, T. , and Morita, K. , 2013, “ Characteristics of Self-Leveling Behavior of Debris Beds in a Series of Experiments,” Nucl. Eng. Technol., 45(3), pp. 323–334. [CrossRef]
Cheng, S. , Yamano, H. , Suzuki, T. , Tobita, Y. , Gondai, Y. , Nakamura, Y. , Zhang, B. , Matsumoto, T. , and Morita, K. , 2013, “ An Experimental Investigation on Self-Leveling Behavior of Debris Beds Using Gas-Injection,” Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci., 48, pp. 110–121. [CrossRef]
Cheng, S. , Tagami, H. , Yamano, H. , Suzuki, T. , Tobita, Y. , Zhang, B. , Matsumoto, T. , and Morita, K. , 2013, “ Evaluation of Debris Bed Self-Leveling Behavior: A Simple Empirical Approach and Its Validations,” Ann. Nucl. Energy, 63(1), pp. 188–198.
Cheng, S. , Tagami, H. , Yamano, H. , Suzuki, T. , Tobita, Y. , Taketa, S. , Nishi, S. , Nishikido, T. , Zhang, B. , Matsumoto, T. , and Morita, K. , 2014, “ An Investigation on Debris Bed Self-Leveling Behavior With Non-Spherical Particles,” J. Nucl. Sci. Technol., 51(9), pp. 1096–1106. [CrossRef]
Shamsuzzaman, M. , Horie, T. , Fuke, F. , Kai, T. , Zhang, B. , Matsumoto, T. , Morita, K. , Tagami, H. , Suzuki, T. , and Tobita, Y. , 2013, “ Experimental Evaluation of Debris Bed Characteristics in Particulate Debris Sedimentation Behavior,” ASME Paper No. ICONE21-15693.
Holdich, R. G. , 2002, Fundamentals of Particle Technology, Midland Information Technology & Publishing, Shepshed, Leicestershire, UK, p. 182.
Matsuba, K. , Kamiyama, K. , Toyooka, J. , Tobita, Y. , Zuyev, V. , Kolodeshnikov, A. , and Vassiliev, Y. , 2016, “ Experimental Discussion on Fragmentation Mechanism of Molten Oxide Discharged Into a Sodium Pool,” Mech. Eng. J., 3(3), p. 15-00595. [CrossRef]
Abe, Y. , Matsuo, E. , Arai, T. , Nariai, H. , Chitose, K. , Koyama, K. , and Itoh, K. , 2006, “ Fragmentation Behavior During Molten Material and Coolant Interactions,” Nucl. Eng. Des., 236(14–16), pp. 1668–1681. [CrossRef]
IAEA, 2006, Fast Reactor Database: 2006 Update, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria.
Barabasi, A. , Albert, R. , and Schiffer, P. , 1999, “ The Physics of Sand Castles: Maximum Angle of Stability in Wet and Dry Granular Media,” Phys. A, 266(1–4), pp. 366–371. [CrossRef]
Morita, K. , Matsumoto, T. , Nishi, S. , Nishikido, T. , Cheng, S. , Tagami, H. , Suzuki, T. , and Tobita, Y. , 2016, “ A New Empirical Model for Self-Leveling Behavior of Cylindrical Particle Beds,” J. Nucl. Sci. Technol., 53(5), pp. 713–725. [CrossRef]
Cheng, S. , Zhang, T. , Wang, S. , Jiang, G. , Lin, S. , Yu, J. , and Wang, L. , 2017, “ Knowledge From Recent Investigation on Flow Regime Characteristics in Debris Bed Formation Behavior Related to SFR Severe Accident Analyses,” ASME Paper No. ICONE25-66143.
Matsuba, K. , Kamiyama, K. , Konishi, K. , Toyooka, J. , Sato, I. , Zuev, V. A. , Kolodeshnikov, A. A. , and Vasilyev, Y. S. , 2012, “ Experimental Study on Material Relocation During Core Disruptive Accident in Sodium-Cooled Fast Reactors: Results of a Series of Fragmentation Tests for Molten Oxide Discharged Into a Sodium Pool,” Eighth Japan-Korea Symposium on Nuclear Thermal Hydraulics and Safety (NTHAS-8), Beppu, Japan, Dec. 9–12, p. 7. https://inis.iaea.org/search/search.aspx?orig_q=RN:46074204
Ergun, S. , 1952, “ Fluid Flow Through Packed Columns,” Chem. Eng. Prog., 48(2), pp. 89–94.
Geldart, D. , 1990, “ Estimation of Basic Particle Properties for Use in Fluid-Particle Process Calculations,” Powder. Technol., 60(1), pp. 1–13. [CrossRef]
Geldart, D. , 1987, Gas Fluidization Technology, Wiley, Chichester, UK, p. 476.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Debris bed formation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Investigation of flow-regime characteristics underlying debris bed formation behavior at Sun Yat-sen University

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Experimental setup used in this work

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

A photograph of some representative nonspherical particles

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Characteristics of flow regimes in several typical cases (Glass beads, Hw = 0.6 m, and Dpipe = 0.03 m): (a) dp = 0.00025 m, (b) dp = 0.0005 m, (c) dp = 0.002 m, and (d) dp = 0.006 m

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Diagram of defined angles: (a) pool convection dominant regime and (b) particle inertia dominant regime

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Effect of particle size on measured angles (glass beads, HW = 0.6 m, and Dpipe = 0.03 m): (a) base angle and (b) vertex angle

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Effect of particle density on final bed geometry for small particles (sphere, dp = 0.0005–0.0006 m, HW = 0.6 m, and Dpipe = 0.03 m): (a) glass, (b) alumina, and (c)steel

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Effect of particle density on final bed geometry for big particles (sphere, dp = 0.006 m, HW = 0.6 m, and Dpipe = 0.03 m): (a) glass, (b) alumina, (c) steel, and (d) lead

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Effect of particle shape on final bed geometry for small particles (alumina particles, HW = 0.6 m, and Dpipe = 0.03 m): (a) spherical particles, dp = 0.0005 m, (b) nonspherical particles, dp = 0.0005–0.0006 m, (c) spherical particles, dp = 0.001 m, and (d) nonspherical particles, dp = 0.0009–0.001 m

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Effect of particle shape on final bed geometry for bigger particles (alumina particles, HW = 0.6 m, and Dpipe = 0.03 m): (a) spherical particles, dp = 0.004 m, (b) spherical particles, dp = 0.006 m, (c) cylinder (ϕ = 0.410), dp = 0.00444 m, and (d)triangular prism (ϕ = 0.569), dp = 0.00496 m

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Effect of water depth on final bed geometry (small particles) (alumina beads, Dpipe = 0.03 m): (a) alumina particles, dp = 0.0005 m, Hw = 0 m, (b) alumina particles, dp = 0.0005 m, Hw = 0.25 m, (c) alumina particles, dp = 0.0005 m, Hw = 0.45 m, and (d) alumina particles, dp = 0.0005 m, Hw = 0.6 m

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Effect of water depth on final bed geometry (big particles) (alumina beads, Dpipe = 0.03 m): (a) alumina particles, dp = 0.006 m, Hw = 0.3 m and (b) alumina particles, dp = 0.006 m, Hw = 0.6 m

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Effect of particle release pipe diameter on final bed geometry (small particles) (alumina beads, dp = 0.0005 m, and HW = 0.6 m): (a) Dpipe = 0.01 m, (b) Dpipe = 0.02 m, and (c) Dpipe = 0.03 m

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Effect of particle release pipe diameter on final bed geometry (medium-sized particles) (alumina beads, dp = 0.002 m, and HW = 0.6 m): (a) Dpipe = 0.01 m, (b) Dpipe = 0.02 m, and (c) Dpipe = 0.03 m

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

A regime map developed according to the base model (spherical particles)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Regime map for both spherical and non-spherical particles with the extension scheme coupled

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