Abstract

The two-group coupled model with IATE is benchmarked with the recently available adiabatic phase-change flow datasets. The current state of adiabatic phase-change data is extensively discussed, followed by a thorough review of the two-group two-fluid model and the two-group IATE. The interfacial mass generation models from RELAP5/MOD3.3 are benchmarked and are observed to underpredict the group-2 interfacial mass generation rate which then causes underprediction of void fraction under flashing conditions. A new group-2 interfacial mass generation model is proposed using the mass-energy balance approach where slug bubbles are assumed as a cylinder with a constant width that only grows in the lengthwise direction. The proposed model is implemented to the two-group coupled model with IATE and benchmarked with the flashing datasets where the accuracy of the predicted values is significantly improved. Similar benchmark is carried out for flashing conditions with a near-zero initial void faction and adiabatic phase-change flows with an initial condensing phase followed by a flashing phase. It is observed that due to the lack of interfacial area concentration, the interfacial mass generation model is unable to produce a significant enough interfacial mass generation rate to allow the growth of bubbles. Bubble generation models are implemented to the simulations at flashing inception where improved results are obtained.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call