1 / 16

Accident Management Issues within the ARTIST Project

Accident Management Issues within the ARTIST Project S. Güntay, A. Dehbi , D. Suckow, J. Birchley Laboratory for Thermal-Hydraulics Paul Scherrer Institut Villigen, Switzerland OECD Workshop o n the Implementation of Severe Accident Management Measures Villigen , Switzerland

julian-cooper
Télécharger la présentation

Accident Management Issues within the ARTIST Project

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. Accident Management Issues within the ARTIST Project S. Güntay, A. Dehbi, D. Suckow, J. Birchley Laboratory for Thermal-Hydraulics Paul Scherrer Institut Villigen, Switzerland OECD Workshop on the Implementation of Severe Accident Management Measures Villigen, Switzerland September 13, 2001

  2. Motivation behind ARTIST Project • ARTIST: Aerosol Trapping in Steam Generator • No credit given for FP retention in secondary side of a SG. • Up to now: only one large scale SGTR experiment at Westinghouse: droplet carryover in DBA-type accident. • Theoretical & laboratory-scale separate effect experiments: evidence of high aerosol removal in SGTR due to: • Turbulent deposition inside ruptured tube • Inertial & turbulent impaction on secondary structures • Thermophoresis between hot gas and colder walls • Condensation-diffusiophoresis in water pool

  3. Location DF Uncertainty Inside 0.3 m tube  3 Not known  Inside 1 m tube  10  Not known  In SG break stage  10-60  Not known  In SG far field bundle  3-10  Not known  Separator  Not known  Not known  Dryer  Not known  Not known  Flooded bundle, 4 m  20  50% Expected DF‘s according to Available Simple Models and Experiments

  4. Scaling of SG Bundle Size using CFD • Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) simulations conducted to: • Estimate momentum dissipation near break • Decide on ARTIST bundle size (large enough number of tubes & economically feasible) • Simulation conducted with 3 types of breaks (fish-mouth, axisymmetric) • Results: • Velocity drops by > 1 order of magnitude after 5 tube rows • Thus: momentum dissipation and aerosol removal in vicinity of break can be reproduced in ARTIST 1 to 1. • Pictures(1,2)

  5. Main Geometric Parameters in ARTIST Parameter Unit BeznauARTIST Number of tubes -3238 (U tube) 264(staight) Number of dryers - 12 1 Number of separators- 12 1 Max. tube lengthm9.0 3.8 Tube IDmm16.7 16.7 Surface/volume ratiom2/m3102.2 87.2 Porosity- 0.67 0.71

  6. ARTIST Consortium Experiments • ARTIST: International project • Running time: 2003-2007 • Many potential partners: NRC, AVN, IPSN, FRAMATOME-ANP, CSN, HSK, Skidpower, etc. • 7 Phases, addressing fission product retention in • Severe accidents (aerosols) • DBA (droplets)

  7. ARTIST Consortium (cont‘d) • Phase I: In-tube aerosol retention.Sonic flows. Velocities in tube: 200-300 m/s. • Phase II: Aerosol retention in bundle break stage, dry conditions. Sonic flows. Velocities at exit of break: 200-300 m/s • Phase III: Retention in bundle far-field, dry conditions. Impaction & thermophoresis. Low velocities: 0.1-1 m/s. • Phase IV: Aerosol retention in separator & dryer. Small velocities, less than 1 m/s.

  8. ARTIST Consortium (cont‘d) • Phase V: Aerosol retention in flooded bundle. • Phase VI: Droplet retention in separator & dryer. DBA-type experiment. • Phase VII: Integral tests. Retention in the whole SG

  9. Selected SAM Issues in ARTIST • ARTIST facility also suitable for particular AM issues • Two sets of issues identified so far: • Impact of water level on droplet formation at the water pool surface (size, flux of droplet flow) • Potential for more accurate determination of • Break location • Water level in the SG.

  10. Droplet Generation at Pool Surface • AM in SGTR involves flooding SG to scrub aerosols • Gas bubbling in SG pool creates droplet flow  new source of release • Retention in separator & dryer depends on droplet inertia  importance of droplet size • Droplet size, flux determined by flow regime upstream of water surface • Turbulent flow  large drops  easier to retain • Bubbly flow  small drops  harder to retain • Aerosol vs. droplet retention? conflicting goals. Need for optimization.

  11. Droplet Generation at Pool Surface (cont‘d) • With high water level: • Bubbly flow at surface • small bubbles • small droplets • Net effects: • High aerosol retention in pool • High droplet source to separator and dryer Aerosol Droplet Gas

  12. Droplet Generation at Pool Surface (cont‘d) • With low water level • Turbulent gas flowat surface • Large bubbles • Large droplets • Net effects: • Low aerosol retention in pool • Low droplet source to separator and dryer Aerosol Droplet Gas

  13. Droplet Generation at Pool Surface (cont‘d) • Proposed experiment: • Determine drop size & flux as function of: • Water level • Gas flow rate • Determine effect of support plate on droplet size & flux • Main objective of experiment: characterize optimum flooding level which minimizes source due to: • Aerosols • Droplets

  14. Break & Water Level Determination • Current practice: following SGTR, flooding up to 2/3 of separator (assumption: break at U bend, for lack of better guess) • Level estimated by wide-range Dp measurement of collapsed level • Uncertainty of 1 m on water level. Large. Need to preclude overfilling with potential leakage through SRV • Investigations in ARTIST proposed onfollowingtopics (related): • Determination of break level • Reduction in water level uncertainty

  15. Break & Water Level Determination (cont‘n) • Proposed experiment: • Gas discharge from a break in ARTIST • Vary: break location, flow rate, water level • Pressure measurement taken along flooded bundle • Determine correlation between break location & Dp profile • Once correlation between break location & Dp is found, correlate water level in the bundle versus: • Break flow rate • Break location • Collapsed water level • Objective of experiment: reduce uncertainty on water level estimation.

  16. Summary • ARTIST: wide-ranging project which addresses key safety issues in SGTR • Strong international interest and participation • ARTIST-Consortium experiments (2003-2007): 7 phase project, dealing with aerosol/droplet retention. Separate effects & integral tests. • Possibility to use ARTIST for further AM tests. Potential test matrix proposes investigation in two directions: • Determination of optimum flooding level to minimize source due to aerosol+ droplets • Lowering uncertainty on water level estimation in SGTR events

More Related