Effect of bubble interactions on the prediction of interfacial area in TRACE

Abstract The conventional thermal-hydraulic nuclear reactor system analysis codes utilize a two-field, two-fluid formulation for two-phase flows. To provide closure, static flow regime transition criteria and algebraic relations are employed to estimate the interfacial area concentration ( a i ). To better reflect the dynamic evolution of two-phase flow, an experimental version of TRACE is developed to estimate the a i using the one-group interfacial area transport equation (IATE), which includes mechanistic models for bubble coalescence and disintegration. These models account for: (1) bubble break-up due to impact of a turbulent eddy, (2) bubble coalescence due to random collision driven by turbulent eddies, and (3) bubble coalescence due to the acceleration of a bubble in the wake region of a preceding bubble. To assess the impact of including bubble interaction models in TRACE, code predictions of experimental data measured by a multi-sensor conductivity probe are compared to both the IATE and flow regime based predictions. In total, 50 air–water vertical co-current upward and downward bubbly flow conditions in pipes with diameters ranging from 2.54 to 20.32 cm are evaluated. It is found that TRACE, using the conventional flow regime relation, always underestimates a i by predicting a larger bubble size than observed in the experimental data. Additionally, the axial trend of the a i prediction is always linear because a i in the conventional code is predominantly determined by the pressure. However, TRACE with the one-group IATE significantly improves the prediction results, yielding a ±13.0% difference with the data. It is found that the non-linear developments observed in the experimental data, which reflect bubble interactions, are predicted well using the IATE. Moreover, in several conditions dominated by bubble interactions, the a i trend displayed is opposite to the effect of pressure. In these cases, the conventional TRACE relation predicts an incorrect trend in a i , while the IATE predicts the experimental data well.

[1]  Xiaodong Sun.  Two-group interfacial area transport equation for a confined test section , 2001 .

[2]  Mamoru Ishii,et al.  Foundation of the interfacial area transport equation and its closure relations , 1995 .

[3]  Seungjin Kim,et al.  Implementation and evaluation of one-group interfacial area transport equation in TRACE , 2011 .

[4]  Mamoru Ishii,et al.  Development of the Miniaturized Four-sensor Conductivity Probe and the Signal Processing Scheme , 2000 .

[5]  Alice Ying,et al.  OVERVIEW OF FUSION BLANKET R&D IN THE US OVER THE LAST DECADE , 2005 .

[6]  Xinyu Fu.  Interfacial area measurement and transport modeling in air -water two -phase flow , 2001 .

[7]  Mamoru Ishii,et al.  Two-fluid model and hydrodynamic constitutive relations , 1984 .

[8]  Mamoru Ishii,et al.  Local drag laws in dispersed two-phase flow , 1979 .

[9]  Seungjin Kim,et al.  Development of One-Group and Two-Group Interfacial Area Transport Equation , 2004 .

[10]  G. Batchelor,et al.  Pressure fluctuations in isotropic turbulence , 1951, Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society.

[11]  Mamoru Ishii,et al.  Interfacial area transport and evaluation of source and sink terms for confined air–water bubbly flow , 2003 .

[12]  Mamoru Ishii,et al.  DEVELOPMENT OF INTERFACIAL AREA TRANSPORT EQUATION , 2005 .

[13]  Mamoru Ishii,et al.  Interfacial area transport equation: model development and benchmark experiments , 2002 .

[14]  Mamoru Ishii,et al.  One-group interfacial area transport in vertical bubbly flow , 1998 .

[15]  N. Zuber,et al.  Average volumetric concentration in two-phase flow systems , 1965 .

[16]  Mamoru Ishii,et al.  Experimental study on interfacial area transport in bubbly two-phase flows , 1999 .

[17]  Seungjin Kim,et al.  Interfacial area transport equation and measurement of local interfacial characteristics , 1999 .

[18]  J. M. Kelly.  Thermal-hydraulic modeling needs for passive reactors , 1997 .

[19]  M. Ishii,et al.  Thermo-Fluid Dynamics of Two-Phase Flow , 2007 .

[20]  Mamoru Ishii,et al.  Interfacial structures and interfacial area transport in downward two-phase bubbly flow ☆ , 2004 .

[21]  I. Kataoka.  Development of Research on Interfacial Area Transport , 2010 .

[22]  M. Ishii,et al.  Flow regime transition criteria for upward two-phase flow in vertical tubes , 1984 .

[23]  Mamoru Ishii,et al.  Interfacial Area Transport Equation and Implementation Into Two-Fluid Model , 2009 .

[24]  Mamoru Ishii,et al.  Sensitivity study on double-sensor conductivity probe for the measurement of interfacial area concentration in bubbly flow , 1999 .