Thermal Analysis of the Divertor Primary Heat Transfer System Piping During the Gas Baking Process

A preliminary analysis has been performed examining the temperature distribution in the Divertor Primary Heat Transfer System (PHTS) piping and the divertor itself during the gas baking process. During gas baking, it is required that the divertor reach a temperature of 350 C. Thermal losses in the piping and from the divertor itself require that the gas supply temperature be maintained above that temperature in order to ensure that all of the divertor components reach the required temperature. The analysis described in this report was conducted in order to estimate the required supply temperature from the gas heater

RELAP5 MODEL OF THE DIVERTOR PRIMARY HEAT TRANSFER SYSTEM

This report describes the RELAP5 model that has been developed for the divertor primary heat transfer system (PHTS). The model is intended to be used to examine the transient performance of the divertor PHTS and evaluate control schemes necessary to maintain parameters within acceptable limits during transients. Some preliminary results are presented to show the maturity of the model and examine general divertor PHTS transient behavior. The model can be used as a starting point for developing transient modeling capability, including control system modeling, safety evaluations, etc., and is not intended to represent the final divertor PHTS design. Preliminary calculations using the models indicate that during normal pulsed operation, present pressurizer controls may not be sufficient to keep system pressures within their desired range. Additional divertor PHTS and control system design efforts may be required to ensure system pressure fluctuation during normal operation remains within specified limits

Comparison of Alternatives to the 2004 Vacuum Vessel Heat Transfer System

A study comparing different alternatives for the Vacuum Vessel Primary Heat Transfer System has been completed. Three alternatives were proposed in a Project Change Request (PCR-190) by relocating the heat exchangers (HXs) from the roof of the Tokamak building to inside the Vacuum Vessel Pressure Suppression System (VVPSS) tank. The study evaluated the three alternatives and recommended modifications to one of them to arrive at a preferred configuration that included relocating the HXs inside the Tokamak building but outside the VVPSS tank as well as including a small safety-rated pump and HX in parallel to the main circulation pump and HX. The Vacuum Vessel (VV) Primary Heat Transfer System (PHTS) removes heat generated in the VV during normal operation (10 MW, pulsed power) as well as the decay heat from the VV itself and from the structures/components attached to the VV (first wall, blanket, and divertor {approx}0.48 MW peak). Therefore, the VV PHTS has two safety functions: (1) contain contaminated cooling water (similar to the other PHTSs) and (2) provide passive cooling during an accident event. The 2004 design of the VV PHTS consists of two independent loops, each loop cooling half of the 18 VV segments with a nominal flow of 475 kg/s of water at about 1.1 MPa and 100 C. The total flow for both loops is 950 kg/s. Both loops are required to remove the heat load during normal plasma operation. During accident conditions, only one loop is needed to remove by natural convection (no pump needed) the decay heat of the complete VV and attached components. The heat is transferred to heat exchanger (HXs) located on top of the roof, outside the Tokamak building. These HXs are air-to-water (A/W) HXs. Three alternatives have been proposed for this cooling system. For a detailed discussion of these alternatives, please refer to Project Change Request, PCR-190 (Ref. 1). A brief introduction is given here. Alternative 1 includes only one main forced circulation loop with a small safety-rated pump in parallel with the main circulation pump. In addition, this alternative has two natural circulation safety loops. Both the safety and main loops supply water to the bottom of the VV with six branch lines and collect the heated water at the top of the vessel through six branches. The distribution headers are located in the lower pipe chase and the collection headers in the upper pipe chase. Each of these loops (one main and two emergency) has a HX mounted in the Vacuum Vessel Pressure Suppression System (VVPSS) tank. The main HX is cooled using either Component Cooling Water System (CCWS) or Chilled Water System (CHWS) water, and the emergency HXs are cooled by natural circulation of the VVPSS water. See Fig. 1 taken from PCR-190. Alternative 2 is exactly the same as Alternative 1 except that there is only one emergency loop and one emergency HX. See Fig. 2 taken from PCR-190. Alternative 3 also has one main forced circulation loop with a small safety-rated pump in parallel with the main circulation pump and one natural circulation safety loop. In this case, both the safety and main loops supply water to the top of the VV with three branch lines and collect the heated water at the top of the vessel through three branches. Here, the distribution header is located in the upper pipe chase as is the collection header. As before, each of these loops has a HX mounted in the VVPSS tank. The main HX is cooled using either CCWS or CHWS water, and the emergency HXs are cooled by natural circulation of the VVPSS water. See Fig. 3 taken from PCR-190. The preferred configuration is developed by selecting specific attributes of the other configurations analyzed and the logic for selecting this configuration is discussed at the end of the document. It is a modification of Alternative 2 that eliminates the separate safety loop, but incorporates a small safety rated HX and pump in parallel with the main HX and pump. It uses 18 inlet and 18 outlet branches (as did the 2004 design) and locates the HXs outside of the VVPSS tank. Tables 1 and 2 examine alternatives to the 2004 VV heat transfer system design that were proposed in PCR-190, as well as the preferred option

Comparison of Alternatives to the 2004 Vacuum Vessel Heat Transfer System

A study comparing different alternatives for the Vacuum Vessel Primary Heat Transfer System has been completed. Three alternatives were proposed in a Project Change Request (PCR-190) by relocating the heat exchangers (HXs) from the roof of the Tokamak building to inside the Vacuum Vessel Pressure Suppression System (VVPSS) tank. The study evaluated the three alternatives and recommended modifications to one of them to arrive at a preferred configuration that included relocating the HXs inside the Tokamak building but outside the VVPSS tank as well as including a small safety-rated pump and HX in parallel to the main circulation pump and HX. The Vacuum Vessel (VV) Primary Heat Transfer System (PHTS) removes heat generated in the VV during normal operation (10 MW, pulsed power) as well as the decay heat from the VV itself and from the structures/components attached to the VV (first wall, blanket, and divertor {approx}0.48 MW peak). Therefore, the VV PHTS has two safety functions: (1) contain contaminated cooling water (similar to the other PHTSs) and (2) provide passive cooling during an accident event. The 2004 design of the VV PHTS consists of two independent loops, each loop cooling half of the 18 VV segments with a nominal flow of 475 kg/s of water at about 1.1 MPa and 100 C. The total flow for both loops is 950 kg/s. Both loops are required to remove the heat load during normal plasma operation. During accident conditions, only one loop is needed to remove by natural convection (no pump needed) the decay heat of the complete VV and attached components. The heat is transferred to heat exchanger (HXs) located on top of the roof, outside the Tokamak building. These HXs are air-to-water (A/W) HXs. Three alternatives have been proposed for this cooling system. For a detailed discussion of these alternatives, please refer to Project Change Request, PCR-190 (Ref. 1). A brief introduction is given here. Alternative 1 includes only one main forced circulation loop with a small safety-rated pump in parallel with the main circulation pump. In addition, this alternative has two natural circulation safety loops. Both the safety and main loops supply water to the bottom of the VV with six branch lines and collect the heated water at the top of the vessel through six branches. The distribution headers are located in the lower pipe chase and the collection headers in the upper pipe chase. Each of these loops (one main and two emergency) has a HX mounted in the Vacuum Vessel Pressure Suppression System (VVPSS) tank. The main HX is cooled using either Component Cooling Water System (CCWS) or Chilled Water System (CHWS) water, and the emergency HXs are cooled by natural circulation of the VVPSS water. See Fig. 1 taken from PCR-190. Alternative 2 is exactly the same as Alternative 1 except that there is only one emergency loop and one emergency HX. See Fig. 2 taken from PCR-190. Alternative 3 also has one main forced circulation loop with a small safety-rated pump in parallel with the main circulation pump and one natural circulation safety loop. In this case, both the safety and main loops supply water to the top of the VV with three branch lines and collect the heated water at the top of the vessel through three branches. Here, the distribution header is located in the upper pipe chase as is the collection header. As before, each of these loops has a HX mounted in the VVPSS tank. The main HX is cooled using either CCWS or CHWS water, and the emergency HXs are cooled by natural circulation of the VVPSS water. See Fig. 3 taken from PCR-190. The preferred configuration is developed by selecting specific attributes of the other configurations analyzed and the logic for selecting this configuration is discussed at the end of the document. It is a modification of Alternative 2 that eliminates the separate safety loop, but incorporates a small safety rated HX and pump in parallel with the main HX and pump. It uses 18 inlet and 18 outlet branches (as did the 2004 design) and locates the HXs outside of the VVPSS tank. Tables 1 and 2 examine alternatives to the 2004 VV heat transfer system design that were proposed in PCR-190, as well as the preferred option

Vortex Diode Analysis and Testing for Fluoride Salt-Cooled High-Temperature Reactors

Fluidic diodes are presently being considered for use in several fluoride salt-cooled high-temperature reactor designs. A fluidic diode is a passive device that acts as a leaky check valve. These devices are installed in emergency heat removal systems that are designed to passively remove reactor decay heat using natural circulation. The direct reactor auxiliary cooling system (DRACS) uses DRACS salt-to-salt heat exchangers (DHXs) that operate in a path parallel to the core flow. Because of this geometry, under normal operating conditions some flow bypasses the core and flows through the DHX. A flow diode, operating in reverse direction, is-used to minimize this flow when the primary coolant pumps are in operation, while allowing forward flow through the DHX under natural circulation conditions. The DRACSs reject the core decay heat to the environment under loss-of-flow accident conditions and as such are a reactor safety feature. Fluidic diodes have not previously been used in an operating reactor system, and therefore their characteristics must be quantified to ensure successful operation. This report parametrically examines multiple design parameters of a vortex-type fluidic diode to determine the size of diode needed to reject a particular amount of decay heat. Additional calculations were performed to size a scaled diode that could be tested in the Oak Ridge National Laboratory Liquid Salt Flow Loop. These parametric studies have shown that a 152.4 mm diode could be used as a test article in that facility. A design for this diode is developed, and changes to the loop that will be necessary to test the diode are discussed. Initial testing of a scaled flow diode has been carried out in a water loop. The 150 mm diode design discussed above was modified to improve performance, and the final design tested was a 171.45 mm diameter vortex diode. The results of this testing indicate that diodicities of about 20 can be obtained for diodes of this size. Experimental results show similar trends as the computational fluid dynamics (CFD) results presented in this report; however, some differences exist that will need to be assessed in future studies. The results of this testing will be used to improve the diode design to be tested in the liquid salt loop system

Pre-Conceptual Design of a Fluoride-Salt-Cooled Small Modular Advanced High Temperature Reactor (SmAHTR)

This document presents the results of a study conducted at Oak Ridge National Laboratory during 2010 to explore the feasibility of small modular fluoride salt-cooled high temperature reactors (FHRs). A preliminary reactor system concept, SmATHR (for Small modular Advanced High Temperature Reactor) is described, along with an integrated high-temperature thermal energy storage or salt vault system. The SmAHTR is a 125 MWt, integral primary, liquid salt cooled, coated particle-graphite fueled, low-pressure system operating at 700 C. The system employs passive decay heat removal and two-out-of-three , 50% capacity, subsystem redundancy for critical functions. The reactor vessel is sufficiently small to be transportable on standard commercial tractor-trailer transport vehicles. Initial transient analyses indicated the transition from normal reactor operations to passive decay heat removal is accomplished in a manner that preserves robust safety margins at all times during the transient. Numerous trade studies and trade-space considerations are discussed, along with the resultant initial system concept. The current concept is not optimized. Work remains to more completely define the overall system with particular emphasis on refining the final fuel/core configuration, salt vault configuration, and integrated system dynamics and safety behavior

Pre-Conceptual Design of a Fluoride-Salt-Cooled Small Modular Advanced High Temperature Reactor (SmAHTR)

This document presents the results of a study conducted at Oak Ridge National Laboratory during 2010 to explore the feasibility of small modular fluoride salt-cooled high temperature reactors (FHRs). A preliminary reactor system concept, SmATHR (for Small modular Advanced High Temperature Reactor) is described, along with an integrated high-temperature thermal energy storage or salt vault system. The SmAHTR is a 125 MWt, integral primary, liquid salt cooled, coated particle-graphite fueled, low-pressure system operating at 700 C. The system employs passive decay heat removal and two-out-of-three , 50% capacity, subsystem redundancy for critical functions. The reactor vessel is sufficiently small to be transportable on standard commercial tractor-trailer transport vehicles. Initial transient analyses indicated the transition from normal reactor operations to passive decay heat removal is accomplished in a manner that preserves robust safety margins at all times during the transient. Numerous trade studies and trade-space considerations are discussed, along with the resultant initial system concept. The current concept is not optimized. Work remains to more completely define the overall system with particular emphasis on refining the final fuel/core configuration, salt vault configuration, and integrated system dynamics and safety behavior

RELAP5 MODEL OF THE DIVERTOR PRIMARY HEAT TRANSFER SYSTEM

This report describes the RELAP5 model that has been developed for the divertor primary heat transfer system (PHTS). The model is intended to be used to examine the transient performance of the divertor PHTS and evaluate control schemes necessary to maintain parameters within acceptable limits during transients. Some preliminary results are presented to show the maturity of the model and examine general divertor PHTS transient behavior. The model can be used as a starting point for developing transient modeling capability, including control system modeling, safety evaluations, etc., and is not intended to represent the final divertor PHTS design. Preliminary calculations using the models indicate that during normal pulsed operation, present pressurizer controls may not be sufficient to keep system pressures within their desired range. Additional divertor PHTS and control system design efforts may be required to ensure system pressure fluctuation during normal operation remains within specified limits

Thermal Analysis of the Divertor Primary Heat Transfer System Piping During the Gas Baking Process

A preliminary analysis has been performed examining the temperature distribution in the Divertor Primary Heat Transfer System (PHTS) piping and the divertor itself during the gas baking process. During gas baking, it is required that the divertor reach a temperature of 350 C. Thermal losses in the piping and from the divertor itself require that the gas supply temperature be maintained above that temperature in order to ensure that all of the divertor components reach the required temperature. The analysis described in this report was conducted in order to estimate the required supply temperature from the gas heater

RELAP5 Model of the First Wall/Blanket Primary Heat Transfer System

ITER inductive power operation is modeled and simulated using a system level computer code to evaluate the behavior of the Primary Heat Transfer System (PHTS) and predict parameter operational ranges. The control algorithm strategy and derivation are summarized in this report as well. A major feature of ITER is pulsed operation. The plasma does not burn continuously, but the power is pulsed with large periods of zero power between pulses. This feature requires active temperature control to maintain a constant blanket inlet temperature and requires accommodation of coolant thermal expansion during the pulse. In view of the transient nature of the power (plasma) operation state a transient system thermal-hydraulics code was selected: RELAP5. The code has a well-documented history for nuclear reactor transient analyses, it has been benchmarked against numerous experiments, and a large user database of commonly accepted modeling practices exists. The process of heat deposition and transfer in the blanket modules is multi-dimensional and cannot be accurately captured by a one-dimensional code such as RELAP5. To resolve this, a separate CFD calculation of blanket thermal power evolution was performed using the 3-D SC/Tetra thermofluid code. A 1D-3D co-simulation more realistically models FW/blanket internal time-dependent thermal inertia while eliminating uncertainties in the time constant assumed in a 1-D system code. Blanket water outlet temperature and heat release histories for any given ITER pulse operation scenario are calculated. These results provide the basis for developing time dependent power forcing functions which are used as input in the RELAP5 calculations