RELAP5 Simulation of Thermal-Hydraulic Behavior in a CANDU Reactor—Assessments of RD-14 Experiments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The critical reactor header break and the thermosiphoning experiments in the RD-14 test facility were simulated with the RELAP5/MOD3.1 code. The RELAP5 code has been developed for best-estimate transient simulation of pressurized water reactors and associated systems, but it has not been assessed for a Canada deuterium uranium (CANDU) reactor. Therefore, this study has been initiated with an aim to identify the code applicability in a CANDU reactor by simulating some of the tests performed in the RD-14 facility. The RD-14 test facility at Whiteshell Nuclear Research Establishment is a full-scale pressurized-water loop. The RD-14 is not a scale model of any particular CANDU reactor. Rather, it possesses many geometric features of a CANDU reactor heat transport system and is capable of operating at conditions similar to those expected to occur in a reactor under normal operation and some postulated accident conditions. In this study, two critical reactor header break tests (B8711 and B8713) and three thermosiphoning tests (T8513, T8515, and T8517) were analyzed with the RELAP5 code. The results were compared with experimental data and those of CATHENA performed by Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. The RELAP5 analyses demonstrate the code’s capability to predict reasonably the main phenomena occurring in the transient, in both the qualitative and the quantitative view. However, some discrepancies after the emergency coolant injection for the critical break case and also related to the behaviors of the mass flow rate and the primary pressure for the thermosiphoning case were observed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".