To submit a request, click below on the link of the version you wish to order. Rules for end-users are available here.
|Program name||Package id||Status||Status date|
|Package ID||Orig. computer||Test computer|
|NEA-1849/04||Many Computers||PC Windows|
An approach, similar to the OECD/NRC BFBT benchmark (NEA-1731), is adopted by dividing the PSBT benchmark activity in Phases. Each Phase consists of several Exercises. It is desirable also to plan the benchmark specification to accept as many potential numerical approaches as possible.
The NUPEC PSBT benchmark will consist of two Phases, with each Phase consisting of three Exercises. The Phase I is the Void distribution benchmark, and Phase II is the DNB benchmark. The participants can choose either of the following two Phases and any of the Exercises within the Phases to take part and contribute. The preliminary indications show that a sufficient number of participants will attempt both Phases with different numerical approaches.
In addition to the measured experimental data and the relevant boundary conditions, the detailed geometrical data of mock-up assemblies, spacers and the test loop will be included as far as possible in the specification in order to allow a wide range of numerical modelling. Below is the definition of the corresponding Exercises of the two Phases:
Phase I: Void Distribution Benchmark
Exercise I-1: Steady-State Single Sub-channel Benchmark
The goal of this exercise is to benchmark the subchannel, meso- and microscopic numerical approaches. The experimental data includes CT scan measurements of the subchannel averaged void fraction in four subchannel types: typical central, central with a guide tube, side, and corner. In addition, graphical images of the void distribution within the typical central subchannels and central subchannel with guide tube are available. The test cases are selected at PWR rated conditions. Different types of single subchannel test assemblies are used to investigate the effect of geometry on phenomenon in concern.
Exercise I-2: Steady-State Bundle Benchmark
This exercise is designed for benchmarking meso-scopic numerical approaches. The experimental data includes X-ray densitometer measurements of void fraction (chordal averaged over the four central subchannels) at three axial elevations along the bundle length and graphical images of the bundle void distribution. The test cases for this exercise are chosen at PWR rated conditions and deviations of quality from the rated conditions.
Exercise I-3: Transient Bundle Benchmark
NUPEC PSBT database includes simulation of four representative transients of PWRs; power increase, flow reduction, depressurization, and temperature increase. All four transients are selected as benchmark cases. The experimental data includes time histories of X-ray densitometer measurements of void fraction (chordal averaged over the four central subchannels) at three axial elevations along the bundle length for four transient scenarios: power increase; flow reduction; depressurization; and temperature increase. Exercise 3 of Phase I is designed for benchmarking subchannel numerical approaches.
Exercise I-4: Pressure Drop Benchmark
This exercise is designed for performing code-to-code comparisons concerning axial pressure drop. Although no empirical data is available, code results will be compared with relevant graphical data.
Phase II: DNB Benchmark
Exercise II-1: Steady-State Fluid Temperature Benchmark
Exercise 1 of Phase II is designed to assess the thermal-hydraulic codes' capabilities of predicting the exit coolant temperature. The experimental data includes measurements of the subchannel-averaged fluid outlet temperatures.
Exercise II-2: Steady-State DNB Benchmark
The goal of Exercise 2 of Phase II is to assess the thermal-hydraulic codes' capabilities of correct prediction of DNB along rod bundles. The experimental data includes the power at which DNB occurs and the corresponding locations in the bundle.
Exercise II-3: Transient DNB Benchmark
Exercise 3 of Phase II is designed to enhance the currently underway development of truly mechanistic models for DNB prediction during the four postulated transients in PWRs. The experimental data includes the time histories of the boundary conditions and the detected DNB time for four transient scenarios: power increase; flow reduction; depressurization; and temperature increase.
ZZ-PSBT-PROCS (NEA-1849/04) contains the electronic documents, the summary of the Sixth Workshop on the NUPEC BFBT, and the Final Problem Specifications for PSBT.
ZZ-PSBT-SPECS (NEA-1849/06) contains the documents of NEA-1849/04 and the PSBT database in Excel format, accessible to only the participants in the benchmarks.
Version NEA-1849/06 replaces version NEA-1849/05 following the correction of a typo in file "PSBT_Benchmark_Void_Distribution_Database_rev1.xls".
This information is restricted to benchmark participants.
Please visit Benchmark Based on NUPEC Pressurised Water Reactor (PWR) Subchannel and Bundle Tests (PSBT)
|Package ID||Status date||Status|
Dr. Maria AVRAMOVA
Associate Director of RDFMG
Nuclear Engineering Program
The Pennsylvania State University
231 Reber Bldg
University Park, PA 16802, USA
Dr. Hideaki UTSUNO
Safety Analysis and Evaluation Division
Japan Nuclear Energy Safety Organization (JNES)
Kamiya-cho MT Bldg.,
4-3-20, Toranomon, Minato-ku,
Tokyo, 105-0001, Japan
Sponsors: OECD Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA)
NEA Nuclear Science Committee (NSC), NEA Committee on Safety of Nuclear Installations (CSNI)
Penn State University (PSU), Japan Nuclear Safety Organisation (JNES),
and US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (US NRC)
Keywords: coolants, departure from nucleate boiling, pressurized water reactor, thermal hydraulics, transients, void fraction.