On the One-Dimensional Modeling of Vertical Upward Bubbly Flow
Clicks: 376
ID: 54767
2018
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Emerging Content
75.7
/100
376 views
254 readers
Trending
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
EmergingRanked #2 of 6 articles by views in science and technology of nuclear installations
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
The one-dimensional two-fluid model approach has been traditionally used in thermal-hydraulics codes for the analysis of transients and accidents in water–cooled nuclear power plants. This paper investigates the performance of RELAP5/MOD3 predicting vertical upward bubbly flow at low velocity conditions. For bubbly flow and vertical pipes, this code applies the drift-velocity approach, showing important discrepancies with the experiments compared. Then, we use a classical formulation of the drag coefficient approach to evaluate the performance of both approaches. This is based on the critical Weber criteria and includes several assumptions for the calculation of the interfacial area and bubble size that are evaluated in this work. A more accurate drag coefficient approach is proposed and implemented in RELAP5/MOD3. Instead of using the Weber criteria, the bubble size distribution is directly considered. This allows the calculation of the interfacial area directly from the definition of Sauter mean diameter of a distribution. The results show that only the proposed approach was able to predict all the flow characteristics, in particular the bubble size and interfacial area concentration. Finally, the computational results are analyzed and validated with cross-section area average measurements of void fraction, dispersed phase velocity, bubble size, and interfacial area concentration.
| Reference Key |
penamonferrer2018onscience
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Peña-Monferrer, C.;Gómez-Zarzuela, C.;Chiva, S.;Miró, R.;Verdú, G.;Muñoz-Cobo, J. L.; |
| Journal | science and technology of nuclear installations |
| Year | 2018 |
| DOI |
DOI not found
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.