Thermal-Hydraulic Design

Similar documents
Lectures on Applied Reactor Technology and Nuclear Power Safety. Lecture No 6

ENGINEERING OF NUCLEAR REACTORS. Fall December 17, 2002 OPEN BOOK FINAL EXAM 3 HOURS

Coupling of thermal-mechanics and thermalhydraulics codes for the hot channel analysis of RIA events First steps in AEKI toward multiphysics

APPLICATION OF THE COUPLED THREE DIMENSIONAL THERMAL- HYDRAULICS AND NEUTRON KINETICS MODELS TO PWR STEAM LINE BREAK ANALYSIS

Thermal Hydraulic Considerations in Steady State Design

DEVELOPMENT OF COMPUTATIONAL MULTIFLUID DYNAMICS MODELS FOR NUCLEAR REACTOR APPLICATIONS

Fuel - Coolant Heat Transfer

Comparison of Silicon Carbide and Zircaloy4 Cladding during LBLOCA

SUB-CHAPTER D.1. SUMMARY DESCRIPTION

DEVELOPMENT OF A COUPLED CODE SYSTEM BASED ON SPACE SAFETY ANALYSIS CODE AND RAST-K THREE-DIMENSIONAL NEUTRONICS CODE

Design constraints Maximum clad temperature, linear power rating

A METHOD TO PREVENT SEVERE POWER AND FLOW OSCILLATIONS IN BOILING WATER REACTORS

ENGINEERING OF NUCLEAR REACTORS

VVER-1000 Reflooding Scenario Simulation with MELCOR Code in Comparison with MELCOR Simulation

Fuel BurnupCalculations and Uncertainties

The Dynamical Loading of the WWER440/V213 Reactor Pressure Vessel Internals during LOCA Accident in Hot and Cold Leg of the Primary Circuit

Introduction to Reactivity and Reactor Control

22.06 ENGINEERING OF NUCLEAR SYSTEMS OPEN BOOK FINAL EXAM 3 HOURS

Lesson 14: Reactivity Variations and Control

HWR Moderator Sub-cooling Requirements to Demonstrate Back-up Capabilities of Moderator During Accidents

A PWR HOT-ROD MODEL: RELAP5/MOD3.2.2Y AS A SUBCHANNEL CODE I.C. KIRSTEN (1), G.R. KIMBER (2), R. PAGE (3), J.R. JONES (1) ABSTRACT

NPP Simulators for Education Workshop - Passive PWR Models

Steady-State and Transient Neutronic and Thermal-hydraulic Analysis of ETDR using the FAST code system

A Study on Hydraulic Resistance of Porous Media Approach for CANDU-6 Moderator Analysis

Reactivity Coefficients

Chapter 7. Design of Steam Generator

The Research of Heat Transfer Area for 55/19 Steam Generator

1. INTRODUCTION 2. EAEA EXISTING CAPABILITIES AND FACILITIES

Coupled Neutronics Thermalhydraulics LC)CA Analysis

ULOF Accident Analysis for 300 MWt Pb-Bi Coolled MOX Fuelled SPINNOR Reactor

Radiation Damage Effects in Solids. Los Alamos National Laboratory. Materials Science & Technology Division

BERYLLIUM IMPREGNATION OF URANIUM FUEL: THERMAL MODELING OF CYLINDRICAL OBJECTS FOR EFFICIENCY EVALUATION

DOE NNSA B&W Y-12, LLC Argonne National Lab University of Missouri INR Pitesti. IAEA Consultancy Meeting Vienna, August 24-27, 2010

ATLAS Facility Description Report

CFD SIMULATIONS OF THE SPENT FUEL POOL IN THE LOSS OF COOLANT ACCIDENT

Title: Development of a multi-physics, multi-scale coupled simulation system for LWR safety analysis

DETAILED CORE DESIGN AND FLOW COOLANT CONDITIONS FOR NEUTRON FLUX MAXIMIZATION IN RESEARCH REACTORS

A VALIDATION OF WESTINGHOUSE MECHANISTIC AND EMPIRICAL DRYOUT PREDICTION METHODS UNDER REALISTIC BWR TRANSIENT CONDITIONS

SINGLE-PHASE AND TWO-PHASE NATURAL CONVECTION IN THE McMASTER NUCLEAR REACTOR

THE PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY SCHREYER HONORS COLLEGE DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL AND NUCLEAR ENGINEERING

In-Vessel Retention Analysis for Pressurised Heavy Water Reactors (PHWR) under Severe Core Damage Accident (SCDA)

Lectures on Applied Reactor Technology and Nuclear Power Safety. Lecture No 7

School on Physics, Technology and Applications of Accelerator Driven Systems (ADS) November 2007

Advanced Heavy Water Reactor. Amit Thakur Reactor Physics Design Division Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, INDIA

Comparison of 2 Lead-Bismuth Spallation Neutron Targets

United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission US-NRC, USA

FUEL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION THROUGH IODINE ACTIVITY MONITORING K.ANANTHARAMAN, RAJESH CHANDRA

The Pennsylvania State University. The Graduate School. Department Of Mechanical & Nuclear Engineering

The exergy of asystemis the maximum useful work possible during a process that brings the system into equilibrium with aheat reservoir. (4.

Reactivity Coefficients

The moderator temperature coefficient MTC is defined as the change in reactivity per degree change in moderator temperature.

QUALIFICATION OF A CFD CODE FOR REACTOR APPLICATIONS

Quiz, Physics & Chemistry

PREDICTION OF MASS FLOW RATE AND PRESSURE DROP IN THE COOLANT CHANNEL OF THE TRIGA 2000 REACTOR CORE

«CALCULATION OF ISOTOPE BURN-UP AND CHANGE IN EFFICIENCY OF ABSORBING ELEMENTS OF WWER-1000 CONTROL AND PROTECTION SYSTEM DURING BURN-UP».

Journal of NUCLEAR SCIENCE and TECHNOLOGY, Vol. 41, No. 7, p (July 2004)

MIT: Akshay Dave, Lin-wen Hu, Kaichao Sun INL: Ryan Marlow, Paul Murray, Joseph Nielsen. Nuclear Reactor Laboratory

INTRODUCTION: Shell and tube heat exchangers are one of the most common equipment found in all plants. How it works?

The Pennsylvania State University. The Graduate School. College of Engineering

ANALYSIS OF THE OECD PEACH BOTTOM TURBINE TRIP 2 TRANSIENT BENCHMARK WITH THE COUPLED NEUTRONIC AND THERMAL-HYDRAULICS CODE TRAC-M/PARCS

Instability Analysis in Peach Bottom NPP Using a Whole Core Thermalhydraulic-Neutronic Model with RELAP5/PARCS v2.7

Idaho National Laboratory Reactor Analysis Applications of the Serpent Lattice Physics Code

English text only NUCLEAR ENERGY AGENCY COMMITTEE ON THE SAFETY OF NUCLEAR INSTALLATIONS

USE OF CFD TO PREDICT CRITICAL HEAT FLUX IN ROD BUNDLES

HIGH TEMPERATURE THERMAL HYDRAULICS MODELING

Improvement of Critical Heat Flux Performance by Wire Spacer

Application of System Codes to Void Fraction Prediction in Heated Vertical Subchannels

COMPARISON OF COBRA-TF AND VIPRE-01 AGAINST LOW FLOW CODE ASSESSMENT PROBLEMS.

2017 Water Reactor Fuel Performance Meeting September 10 (Sun) ~ 14 (Thu), 2017 Ramada Plaza Jeju Jeju Island, Korea

Lectures on Applied Reactor Technology and Nuclear Power Safety. Lecture No 5. Title: Reactor Kinetics and Reactor Operation

Chapter 10: Boiling and Condensation 1. Based on lecture by Yoav Peles, Mech. Aero. Nuc. Eng., RPI.

ENGINEERING OF NUCLEAR REACTORS. Tuesday, October 9 th, 2014, 1:00 2:30 p.m.

AN UNCERTAINTY ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY FOR MATERIALS BEHAVIOUR IN ADVANCED FAST REACTORS

Figure 22.1 Unflattened Flux Distribution

Fundamentals of Nuclear Power. Original slides provided by Dr. Daniel Holland

EFFECT OF DISTRIBUTION OF VOLUMETRIC HEAT GENERATION ON MODERATOR TEMPERATURE DISTRIBUTION

ADVANCED MULTIPHYSICS THERMAL-HYDRAULICS MODELS FOR THE HIGH FLUX ISOTOPE REACTOR

Chapter 8 - Technology of Accident Analysis

SCWR Research in Korea. Yoon Y. Bae KAERI

PWR CONTROL ROD EJECTION ANALYSIS WITH THE MOC CODE DECART

Onset of Flow Instability in a Rectangular Channel Under Transversely Uniform and Non-uniform Heating

NEUTRONIC ANALYSIS STUDIES OF THE SPALLATION TARGET WINDOW FOR A GAS COOLED ADS CONCEPT.

Safety Analysis of Loss of Flow Transients in a Typical Research Reactor by RELAP5/MOD3.3

Name: 10/21/2014. NE 161 Midterm. Multiple choice 1 to 10 are 2 pts each; then long problems 1 through 4 are 20 points each.

Kord Smith Art DiGiovine Dan Hagrman Scott Palmtag. Studsvik Scandpower. CASMO User s Group May 2003

Numerical Simulation of the MYRRHA reactor: development of the appropriate flow solver Dr. Lilla Koloszár, Philippe Planquart

3D CFD and FEM Evaluations of RPV Stress Intensity Factor during PTS Loading

Nuclear Fuel Bundle Design Optimization using a Simplex Method. Anders Haulin. Supervisor: Jan Pallon, Ph.D.

NUCLEAR SAFETY AND RELIABILITY WEEK 8

Available online at ScienceDirect. Energy Procedia 71 (2015 ) 52 61

Role of the Halden Reactor Project for TVEL nuclear fuels & materials development. B. Volkov IFE/HRP (Norway) Sochi, May 14-16

Thermal Systems. What and How? Physical Mechanisms and Rate Equations Conservation of Energy Requirement Control Volume Surface Energy Balance

Loads on RPV Internals in a PWR due to Loss-of-Coolant Accident considering Fluid-Structure Interaction

Reactor Operation with Feedback Effects

FRAPTRAN-1.5: A Computer Code for the Transient Analysis of Oxide Fuel Rods

Study of Burnup Reactivity and Isotopic Inventories in REBUS Program

Chapter 11: Heat Exchangers. Dr Ali Jawarneh Department of Mechanical Engineering Hashemite University

PREDICTION OF THE RESPONSE OF THE CANADIAN SUPER CRITICAL WATER REACTOR TO POTENTIAL LOSS OF FORCED FLOW SCENARIOS

X. Neutron and Power Distribution

(Refer Slide Time: 4:41)

Transcription:

Read: BWR Section 3 (Assigned Previously) PWR Chapter (Assigned Previously) References: BWR SAR Section 4.4 PWR SAR Section 4.4 Principal Design Requirements (1) Energy Costs Minimized A) Maximize Plant Thermal Efficiency Thermal-Hydraulic Design As known from basic thermodynamics, this implies maximizing the temperature difference between the source and sink. or the reactor core, this translates into making the coolant (HO) outlet temperature as high as possible, but not violating thermal constraints. Material constraints (crud deposition on clad) also enter. B) Increase Core Power Density (kw/liter) We desire to make the core as compact as possible, thereby reducing pressure vessel size and hence plant investment fixed charges/kwhr. Aided by a flat power profile provided by the Nuclear Design (ND). C) Increase uel Specific Power (kw/kg-u) or a fixed thermal output, increasing the fuel specific power results in less kg-u required, and hence reduced fuel costs. Once again thermal limitations will constrain the fuel specific power. () Safety Criteria Satisfied This is concerned primarily with maintaining the clad s integrity under accident conditions. High fuel or clad temperature, high fuel rod internal pressure or mechanical movement of the assemblies could all lead to clad perforation and resulting fission product release. Certain chemical reactions between the materials in the core must also be prevented, which occur at high temperatures.

Design Limitations A design must be produced that, during normal and abnormal operation does not violate: A) Maximum allowed fuel temperature, determined by: (I) Centerline melt (conservatively set to 4700 O for un-irradiated UO) => fuel slumps, contacts and fails clad (II) uel Pellet Clad mechanical Interaction (PCI) => fuel heats up and expands making contact with clad. Neutron irradiation embrittles the cladding making it susceptible to cracking. Local increases in clad temperature can also be an issue. (III) Maximum allowed rod internal pressure, dictated by clad burst limit (IV) Maximum allowed clad temperatures, as limited by: (a) Exceeding the Critical Heat lux (CH) PWR: Departure from Nucleate Boiling (DNB) DNB Dominated low Boiling Curve Bubble density on the rod surface becomes sufficiently high to impede liquid return to the surface leading to transition to stable film boiling. DNB is a complicated function of flow rate, coolant temperature and pressure, quality, inlet enthalpy and equivalent flow diameter. Correlations are obtained from experiments, such as the W-3 correlation of L.S. Tong.

BWR: Dryout Dryout Dominated low Boiling Curve If flow conditions allow the transition to annular flow, increases in heat flux can lead to dryout of the liquid film and transition to single phase forced convection with a superheated vapor Less severe temperature excursion than DNB since high steam velocities provide some cooling, however can still exceed clad material limits As with DNB, CH (or CPR) predicted by correlations based on experimental data (CISE or GE GEXL)

In general CHDNB > CHDryout Implication: Core Average Heat lux = Power Generated in Average uel Rod = (π*clad Radius*Length) Q N f rods 1 D H o = Linear Power Rating (kw/ft) = (π*clad Radius) Q f 1 N H D rods o or same kw/ft rating: => (Clad Radius)PWR < (Clad Radius)BWR (b) Loss of Coolant Accident (LOCA) The clad temperature resulting from the temporary loss of coolant is highly dependent on the Emergency Core Cooling System (ECCS). This is a complicated area treated by specialist. The normal function of the core T/H designer is to minimize initial stored energy in the fuel by minimizing fuel temperatures. (B) Maximum Allowed Coolant Pressure To increase thermal efficiency and avoid exceeding CH and Bulk Boiling (for a PWR), the T/H designer desires high coolant pressures. Increased pressures allow for higher coolant temperatures. But TCoolant => TClad => Cladding corrosion. BWR: TCoolant = Tsat(PCoolant), PCoolant~1000 psia PWR: Max TCoolant=Tsat(PCoolant)-ΔTSubcooling, PCoolant~50 psia (PWR higher pressure to suppress boiling in primary loop and allow high core outlet temperature, to transfer energy across steam generator)

(C) Lift and Jetting orce Constraints (I) Due to flow resistance, the fuel assembly is subjected to hydraulic forces. The T/H designer must assure that the assembly will not be lifted or individual components distorted. Example: PWR has about 0-30 psi drop across core. (II) Jetting occurs when an internal core structure (or transverse ΔP exists) forces the coolant to flow perpendicular to its normal vertical flow direction at high velocity. Such jetting can impinge on an individual fuel rod and cause clad failure by erosion or vibration. Grids and core baffle plates (surround outside assemblies) should be such as to avoid undue jetting. (D) Hydrodynamic low Stability This involves the coolant flow stability as dictated by cross-flow behavior caused by lateral pressure (and density) gradient effects PWR: Instability avoided by restricting maximum allowed quality of coolant BWR: Instability avoided by employing canned assemblies (restricting cross flow), imposing Power-low limits (remember core flow rate variable via recirculation system), and using inlet orifices Interconnection with Material/Mechanical Design (M/M) Many of the calculations performed by T/H design depend on the behavior of the fuel rod under irradiation and thermal stress. M/M design therefore provides information about: (1) fuel swelling and material degradation effects on fuel melting temperature, fuel thermal conductivity and clad-fuel interface (gap) size () clad deformation (3) fission product release to gap (effects gap thermal conductivity and internal rod pressure)

Thermal/Hydraulic undamentals: uel Rod Heat Transfer uel Rod Cross Section Clad R uel Ro Ri Gap uel/gap/clad Gap behavior is a complicated function of burnup. Gap conductance (resistance) is a function of the fission gas inventory and pellet/clad contact pressure. Gap conductance obtained empirically from experimental data.

Volumetric Heat Generation Rate (Power Density) q( r) G ( r, E) ( r, E) de 0 f Linear Heat Rate q( z) q( r) da q( r, z) rdr q( z) R A x R 0 Cylindrical Rod Uniform Radial Distribution Heat lux q ( z) Do dz q( z) dz q( r) da dz q( z) R dz A x Uniform Radial Distribution Cylindrical uel Rod

uel Temperature Behavior Neglecting axial conduction and assuming a radially uniform volumetric heat generation rate (power density), the conduction equation in the fuel is 1 d dt rk ( T ) q 0 rdr dr Multiply by r and integrate from r = 0 to some r = r r d dt rk ( T) dr qrdr 0 dr dr 0 0 r dt dt qr rk ( T) rk ( T) 0 dr dr r r 0 0 dt qr rk ( T) 0 dr Divide by r and integrate from r = 0 to the pellet radius dt qr k ( T) 0 dr R dt qr k ( T ) dr dr0 dr 0 0 R Assume k ( T) k, i.e. constant fuel thermal conductivity qr k[ T( R) T(0)] 0 4 qr q T(0) T( R) T 4k 4 k In addition 1 1 R 1 o q 1 1 R o 1 T( R) T q( Ro) Ro ln ln H G R i k c R i h c R o H G R i k c R i h c R o

q( Ro ) q Tc( Ro) T h R h c o c Conclusion: Temperature rise at any point across a fuel rod is proportional to the linear heat rate. With the fuel pellet surface temperature fixed (nearly) by coolant conditions and the maximum fuel temperature limited by melting, this implies T max known, hence max q allowed bounded by q k T max max 4 Relaxing the assumption of constant fuel thermal conductivity, MELT T max q 4 k T dt T R Conductivity Integral *This integral has been experimentally measured under irradiation conditions. MELT inal Conclusion: T, coolant temperature (relates to T(R)) and fuel thermal conductivity uniquely specify the maximum linear power rating, nearly independent of pellet O.D. or UO: max( q ) 0 3 kw/ft Hot Spot of core, i.e. highest power density pellet, limits the entire core. Implication: Nuclear Designer desires to flatten the spatial power distribution. Complications: k(t), gap conductivity, convective heat transfer coefficient, internal rod and overall core power distribution all change with time (burnup). Hence one must design to worst condition throughout core life. How is max( q ) value that produces centerline fuel melt temperature used? To assure overpower reactor protection system trip setpoint has appropriate value, which protects fuel for accident situations.

Representative PWR uel Temperatures at BOC as a unction of Linear Heat Rate

What limits q during normal operating conditions? LOCA: uel stored energy and fission product decay heat ( q ) dictate that q not exceed a specified value or else cladding temperature will exceed temperature limit (inal Acceptance Criteria limits cladding temperature to 00 o ). max ( q) nominal max ( q) 0.07 LOCA Decay Heat raction Typical max ( q ) value allowed during normal operation 15 kw/ft rom neutronics calculations, Nuclear Designer (ND) can tell T/H designer what is peak-toaverage power density in a core of a given size and loading pattern Total Peaking actor (Denoted q) = Maximum Power Density/ Average Power Density LOCA Limit impact on Maximum Core Thermal Output ( Q ) RX q core QRX NrodsH f max ( q) nominal q f ( N H) rods How is Q matched to required power, e.g. RX RX target RX Q ( Q ) (1) Reduce q by revised loading pattern choice (and for BWRs control rod program) ND responsibility () Increase length of all fuel in the core (NrodsH), which implies: (A) More fuel assemblies of same length and diameter rods (larger core and vessel) or longer assemblies employed (B) Smaller diameter rods such that more length of fuel in a given assembly footprint PWR: q.0-.8 Core Average kw/ft 5.4-6.7 BWR: q.0-.6 Core Average kw/ft 4.5-7.1

Determination of fuel pin radius q 1 uel Specific Power where U is the U density in UO R R U Desire high fuel specific power for low capital cost => minimize fuel pellet radius: Limitations on smallness of R: (1) Structural fuel pellet and surrounding clad (fuel rod) must form a sound structural unit Typical uel Rod Length 1 ft. If R is too small, the assembly design would require much more support, increasing manufacturing cost and fuel costs (poorer neutron economy due to structural materials). Tolerance control would also be difficult. () CH Limitation: q Rod Surface Heat flux, where R o = clad outer radius Ro Decreasing R decreases the clad OD, hence increases the heat flux, which must be below the CH value. Conclusion: R must be large enough to avoid exceeding CH or a given linear heat rate R specific power but CHR Pick smallest R such that CH limits are met. Resulting Values of uel Pin Radius: PWR: (0.19-0.1 ) for 17x17 15x15 BWR: (0.17-0.8 ) for 10x10 8x8 because (CH)PWR > (CH)BWR uel Specific Power: PWR: 38 kw/kg BWR: 5 kw/kg

Determination of Gap Size Considerations: (1) Gap size should be minimized for good heat transfer and structural rigidity () Gap size should be maximized to simplify manufacturing (tolerances) Compromise: (1) Pressurize rod initially with He (few atm (BWR) to 450 psia (PWR)) to increase heat transfer and minimize pressure on clad () Design upper plenum to reduce internal pressure buildup with burnup (3) Allow sufficient gap for ease of manufacturing In reality for a PWR, clad creeps down onto fuel in a few 1000 hours of operation due to primary system pressure. Gap sizes: PWR: 6 mils (Cold) BWR: 3.5 (hot) -1 (Cold) mils Determination of Clad Thickness Considerations: (1) Thick enough to add structural support () Thick enough to retain fission products and protect fuel from moderator. (i) early in cycle, net forces are directed inward (collapse failure) (ii) late in cycle, net forces are balanced but sudden depressurization with high clad temperatures (LOCA) create outward forces (burst failure) (3) Thin enough to minimize temperature drop (4) Thin enough to promote good neutron economy Resulting Values of Clad Thickness PWR:.5-4 mils BWR: 6-3 mils

Determination of uel Height The maximum linear heat rate is related to the core thermal power by q max Q f nh q or a given core thermal output and nh that satisfy this relationship What determines H? q max, there are an infinite number of combinations of Desirable Properties: (1) Neutron economy: or a fixed critical Buckling, minimum core volume occurs if H D eff 0.9 () uel costs are reduced if the number of fuel rods and assembly units fabricated is minimized. SOLUTION: a) ix core height allowing a standard fuel assembly to be fabricated. b) Increase plant power rating by increasing the number of assemblies (simplifies T/H design considerably). c) Select a value of H, such that (H/Deff) is acceptable over a fixed range of plant power ratings. Compromise: H = 1 ft. and (H/Deff) has a range of acceptable values depending on plant power rating. H 0.9 1.5 D eff

Define an effective core diameter Deff, such that D 4 eff A core The core area is constructed from an integer number of Assemblies A ( N ) N N S core assemblies assemblies array S Nassemblies Narray D o D Set by CH o Set by neutronics D eff ( N ) assemblies 4 A ( N ) core assemblies or a target H D eff H( N ) D ( N ) assemblies eff assemblies The number of fuel rods is also a function of the number of assemblies nn ( ) N ( N N ) assemblies assemblies array H O q max f nn ( ) HN ( ) assemblies Q q assemblies Which can be solved for Nassemblies H

X-Sectional Area for Coolant low Since fuel rod size is fixed by constraints previously discussed, specifying the water/fuel (Pitch/Diameter) ratio uniquely fixes the X-sectional area for coolant flow. But as we shall discuss in ND section, water/fuel ratio is bounded on the lower side by the need for sufficient moderation (economics fuel cycle cost) and on the upper side by the safety constraint that a moderator (coolant) density decrease must result in a negative addition of reactivity. Conclusion: There is a limited range of (water/fuel) ratios dictated by neutronics. Core Inlet/Outlet Temperatures and Mass low Rate How does a T/H designer choose coolant inlet and outlet temperature and mass flow rate (PWR only since pressure fixes outlet temperature for a BWR)? The core temperature rise and coolant mass flux are inter-dependent Total Power: HO Q C T GA RX p core flow m HO T T T HO core out in (coolant temperature rise) # G = coolant mass flux hr ft =X-sectional area for HO flow A flow Desirable Coolant System Characteristics (1) Mass flow rate (A) large G desirable to provide margin to CH (B) low G desirable to minimize lift forces, jetting and pumping costs () T HO out core outlet temperature HO (A) High T desirable to maximize plant efficiency and/or reduce capital costs out Q Q U A T PWR S/G: RX SG SG SG M

T T ( T, T, T ) m m HL CL SG, => ASG HO T T T out HL m ASG THL TSG SG or smaller steam generator size. (and P ) increasing thermal efficiency. (3) (B) low T HO out desirable to provide margin to CH (C) low T HO out desirable to avoid crud deposition on fuel rods and resulting corrosion problems HO T core inlet temperature in (A) high (B) low HO T desirable to minimize steam generator size and/or increase steam pressure in HO T desirable to provide margin to CH in T/H Design Compromise: (1) Choose T HO out (averaged over core) such that voiding in hot channel is as high as allowable => dictated by maximum primary loop pressure (PWR design restricts amount of voiding allowed during normal operation). Also impose crud deposition limit (oxidation of clad sets current limit). () Assuming (water/fuel) ratio is fixed from neutronic considerations, total power output calls for T core G to have a unique value. This in turn implies specifying T HO in fixes G. One now evaluates the highest T HO in (and associated G) that provides appropriate margin to the CH.

Typical Behavior for a PWR H T O o in about 5 o 0 % Power 100 PWR BWR HO T in T HO out 560 o (@ ull Power) 65 o (@ ull Power) 530 o 550 o (sat.) low 1.4x10 8 #/hr 1.1x10 8 #/hr

Representative PWR Primary Coolant Temperatures as a unction of Power

Core (Height/Diameter) Ratio (Affect on T/H Design) Assembly low Area D o S NArray S NArray D o 4 4 fixed D o fixed Core low Area D o S Aflow Nassemblies NArray S Nassemblies NArray D o 4 4 fixed D o fixed or HO Q C T GA RX p core flow m Change (H/Deff) => Change Nassemblies => Change Aflow => Change G for specified (ΔT)core

Additional Points (A) It should be noted that only about 97.5% of the fission energy is deposited in the fuel, which contributes to the surface heat flux. About.5% of the fission energy is in the form of neutron kinetic energy, which is deposited directly in the moderator during thermalization. (B) Grids are usually designed to have mixing vanes, which promotes turbulence and increases the CH. ND information about the power distribution is needed by the T/H designer to determine a design which does not exceed rod thermal limits. The most important power constraints can be summarized as: PWR: (1) Total core peaking factor q = Peak Power Density / Average Power Density (a) During normal operation sets core average kw/ft based on LOCA limit (b) During accidents sets overpower protection system trip function to preclude fuel damage via centerline melt and other non-ch mechanisms () Axial peaking factor (peak to average ratio) or q( z) q 0Z( z) qz ( z ) Z( z ) 1 1 qzzdz ( ) Zzdz ( ) H 0 max max z H H 0 0 H 0 (3) Most limiting axial power shapes from a CH ratio viewpoint (4) Enthalpy peaking factor H R as a function of power level / q H z H q z R / H q z = Highest powered rod in the core/average rod power Items () through (4) are used to evaluate whether the CH ratio limits are violated, with specified minimum values for normal operation and accidents.

Typical Allowed ΔH Values During Normal Operation for a PWR H 1.75 1.55 *Goes up with decreasing power since more CH margin 0 % Power 100 BWR: (1) Maximum raction of Limiting Power Density = Power Density for Pellet " k " max k Limiting Power Density for Pellet " k " Originates due to clad strain limit. () Maximum raction of Limiting Average Planar Linear Heat Generation Rate = Power Density for Bundle " j" at elevation z max jz, Limiting Power Density for Bundle " j" at elevation z Originates due to LOCA limit. (3) Minimum raction of Limiting Critical Power Ratio = Limiting Critical Power Ratio for Bundle " j" min j Critical Power Ratio for Bundle " j" Critical Power Ratio = Core power level that causes dryout/operating Power for a fixed power distribution and coolant inlet conditions.