0
Research Papers: Nuclear Power

Effects of Surface Tension on Two-Phase Void Drift Between Triangle Tight Lattice Subchannels

[+] Author and Article Information
Akimaro Kawahara, Michio Sadatomi, Tatsuya Higuchi

Department of Mechanical System Engineering, Graduate School of Science and Technology, Kumamoto University, Kumamoto City 860-8555, Japan

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 131(1), 012903 (Oct 02, 2008) (8 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2983083 History: Received July 18, 2008; Revised July 18, 2008; Published October 02, 2008

In this study, void drift phenomena, which are one of three components of the intersubchannel fluid transfer, have been investigated experimentally and analytically. In the experiments, data on flow and void redistributions were obtained for hydraulically nonequilibrium flows in a multiple channel consisting of two subchannels simplifying a triangle tight lattice rod bundle. In order to know the effects of the reduced surface tension on the void drift, water and water with a surfactant were used as test liquids. In addition, data on the void diffusion coefficient, D̃, needed in a void drift model, have been obtained from the redistribution data. In the analysis, the flow and the void redistributions were predicted by a subchannel analysis code based on a one-dimensional two-fluid model. From a comparison between the experiment and the code prediction, the present analysis code was found to be valid against the present data if newly developed constitutive equations of wall and interfacial friction were incorporated in to the model to account for the reduced surface tension effects.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2009 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Cross section of the test channel

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Explanatory diagram of the experimental method for determining the flow redistribution due to void drift: (a) flow and channel arrangement, (b) pressure distributions, and (c) flow distributions

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Redistribution data for the slug or churn flow: (a) flow rate ratios for both phases and (b) the subchannel void fraction

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Redistribution data for the annular flow: (a) flow rate ratios for both phases and (b) the subchannel void fraction

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Void diffusion coefficient data: effects of the surface tension

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Flow in the tight lattice subchannel under a flow condition of jL=1.0m∕s and jG=6.0m∕s: (a) air-water and (b) air-PLE

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Control volume for deriving an axial momentum equation based on the two-fluid model

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Comparison of the axial variation in flow parameters between the experiment and calculation for a typical slug or churn flow for air-water system: In the calculation, the homogeneous flow model with Beattie–Whalley’s viscosity model is used for FW and the modified correlation of Tomiyama for FI. (a) Flow rate ratios for both phases and (b) the subchannel void fraction.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Comparison of the axial variation in flow parameters between the experiment and calculation for a typical slug or churn flow for the air-PLE system: In the calculation, the homogeneous flow model with Beattie–Whalley’s viscosity model is used for FW and the modified correlation of Tomiyama for FI. (a) Flow rate ratios for both phases and (b) the subchannel void fraction.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Comparison of the axial variation in flow parameters between the experiment and calculation for a typical slug or churn flow for the air-PLE system: In the calculation, the homogeneous flow model with Beattie–Whalley’s viscosity model is used for FW and the TRAC-PF1/MOD1 correlation for FI. (a) Flow rate ratios for both phases and (b) the subchannel void fraction.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Comparison of the axial variation in flow parameters between the experiment and calculation for a typical annular flow for the air-PLE system: In the calculation, the homogeneous flow model with Beattie–Whalley’s viscosity model is used for FW and the modified correlation of Fukano–Furukawa for FI. (a) Flow rate ratios for both phases and (b) the subchannel void fraction.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Comparison of the axial variation in flow parameters between the experiment and calculation for the flow in a churn flow to the annular flow transition region for the air-PLE system: In the calculation, the homogeneous flow model with Beattie–Whalley’s viscosity model is used for FW and an interpolation equation 12 for FI. (a) Flow rate ratios for both phases and (b) the subchannel void fraction.

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