1 / 23

Boiling Heat Transfer in ITER First Wall Hypervapotrons

FNST/MASCO/PFC Meeting. Boiling Heat Transfer in ITER First Wall Hypervapotrons. Dennis Youchison, Mike Ulrickson and Jim Bullock Sandia National Laboratories Albuquerque, NM August 6, 2010.

iden
Télécharger la présentation

Boiling Heat Transfer in ITER First Wall Hypervapotrons

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. FNST/MASCO/PFC Meeting Boiling Heat Transfer in ITER First Wall Hypervapotrons Dennis Youchison, Mike Ulrickson and Jim Bullock Sandia National Laboratories Albuquerque, NM August 6, 2010 Sandia is a multiprogram laboratory operated by Sandia Corporation, a Lockheed Martin Company,for the United States Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration under contract DE-AC04-94AL85000. 1

  2. Outline • What are hypervapotrons? • Why hypervapotrons? • Geometry optimization • Boiling heat transfer in hypervapotrons • Why CFD? • Benchmarking with HHF test data • CHF prediction 2

  3. Background • Star-CCM+ Version 5.04.006, User Guide, CD-adapco, Inc., New York, NY USA (2010). • S. Lo and A. Splawski, “Star-CD Boiling Model Development”, CD-adapco, (2008). • D.L. Youchison, M.A. Ulrickson, J.H. Bullock, “A Comparison of Two-Phase Computational Fluid Dynamics Codes Applied to the ITER First Wall Hypervapotron,” IEEE Trans. On Plasma. Science, 38 7, 1704-1708 (2010). • Upcoming paper in the 2010 TOFE . 3

  4. ITER First Wall 04 4

  5. Why hypervapotrons? • Advantages: • High CHF with relatively lower pressure drop • Reduction in E&M loads due to thin copper faceplate • Lower Cu/Be interface temperature (no ss liners) • Less bowing of fingers due to thermal loads • Disadvantages: • CuCrZr/SS316LN UHV joint exposed to water 5

  6. What are hypervapotrons? Hypervapotron FW “finger” 6

  7. Two-phase CFD in water-cooled PFCs • Problem: conjugate heat transfer with boiling • • Focus on nucleate boiling regime below critical • heat flux • • Use Eulerian multiphase model in FLUENT & Star-CCM+ • • RPI model (Bergles&Rohsenow) • • Features heat and mass transfer between liquid • and vapor, custom drag law, lift or buoyancy and influence of bubbles on turbulence • CCM+ transitions to a VOF model for the film when vapor fraction is high enough – need to know when to initiate VOF 7

  8. 5 MW/m2 400 g/s t=2.05s Velocity distributions Drag on bubbles, lift or buoyancy, changes in viscosity and geometry, all affect the velocity distribution under the heated zone. 2mm-deep teeth and 3-mm spacing optimized to produce a simple reverse eddy in the groove. 8

  9. Star-CCM+ 560 k polyhedra mesh Switches from Eulerian multi-phase mixture to VOF for film boiling. 9

  10. Star-CCM+ Results CCM+ boiling models were benchmarked against US and Russian test data for rectangular channels and hypervapotrons to within 10oC. Case analyzed is a hot “stripe” on a section of the ITER first wall. Surface temperature distribution, t=6.3 s capability to predict CHF from CFD 10

  11. With no boiling, heat transfer is highest under the fins With boiling, the vapor fraction in grooves is 4%-6% on average Star-CCM+ Results Case analyzed is a hot “stripe” on a section of the ITER first wall. The details of the heat transfer change dramatically as boiling ensues. Iso-surface of 2% vapor volume fraction t=6.3 s 11

  12. Star-CCM+ gives same h as Fluentfor nucleate boiling. Heat transfer coefficients increase in grooves where boiling takes place ranging from 12,000 to 13,000 W/m2K. 12

  13. Systematic parameter study performed on rectangular channels – then applied to hypervapotrons. 13

  14. Thermocouple response 3.5 MW/m2 through 6 s Thermocouple response 4.0 MW/m2 through 6 s Russian data ICHF Trip @ 400 C Temperature (C) Not ss yet! Temperature (C) Rectangular channel results 14

  15. Russian HV CHF Mock-up flow 15

  16. Total of 490k poly cells in mesh 3 prism layers Heated area is 100 mm x 48 mm 16

  17. Surface temperature – 6.0 MW/m2, 1 m/s 115 C inlet, 2 MPa 17

  18. CCM+ solid/fluid interface temperatures for 6.0 MW/m2 @6s 18

  19. Vapor fraction – 6.0 MW/m2 @6s 19

  20. Thermocouple response through 6 s 4 s for TCs to ss Russian data 20

  21. Outlet temperature close to steady state. 21

  22. All flow regimes can exist simultaneously. T: h: • sub-cooled • nucleate to transition boiling • film boiling • sub-cooled 4.0 MW/m2 115 oC, 2 MPa water 1.0 m/s 22

  23. CHF Testing Testing of the HV mock-up T/C (1.5 mm from CuCrZr surface) Water 2 m/s Pabs 10 MW/m2 tpuls 300s Second pulse at 10 MW/m2) ICHF ! 23

More Related