MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1986410664 · doi:10.1115/icone21-16410

Power Distribution in a Pressure-Channel SuperCritical Water-Cooled Reactor (SCWR)

2013· article· en· W1986410664 on OpenAlexafffund
Wargha Peiman, Igor Pioro, Kamiel Gabriel

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNuclear reactor physics and engineering
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Institute of Standards and TechnologyAtomic Energy of Canada Limited
KeywordsNuclear engineeringCoolantSupercritical fluidBundleThermal hydraulicsMaterials scienceNuclear reactor coreHeat fluxElectricity generationMechanical engineeringPower (physics)MechanicsHeat transferEngineeringThermodynamicsPhysicsComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SuperCritical Water-cooled nuclear Reactor (SCWR) is one of the six nuclear-reactor concepts being developed under the Generation IV International Forum (GIF) initiative. A generic 1200-MWel pressure-channel SCWR operates at a pressure of 25 MPa with coolant inlet and outlet temperatures of 350°C and 625°C, respectively. High coolant outlet temperature allows for high thermal efficiencies within the range of 45–50%. On the other hand, the high operating temperature of SCWR in turn results in high fuel centerline and sheath temperatures. Hence, it is necessary to determine a power distribution inside a core of a reactor in order to ensure that a fuel and a fuel-bundle design comply with their corresponding temperature limits. The main objective of this paper is to determine a power distribution inside the core of a generic SCWR by using a lattice code DRAGON and a diffusion code DONJON. As a result of these calculations, heat-flux profiles in all fuel channels were determined. Consequently, the heat-flux profile in a channel with the maximum thermal power was used as an input into a thermalhydraulic code, which was developed in MATLAB in order to calculate a fuel centerline temperature of UO2 and UC nuclear fuels and a sheath temperature of a new fuel-bundle design. Results of this analysis showed that the fuel centerline temperature of the UC fuel was significantly lower than that of the UO2. This paper also proposes four energy groups for further neutronic studies related to SCWRs.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.796
Threshold uncertainty score0.975

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.167
Teacher spread0.163 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNuclear reactor physics and engineeringFrench-language works237,207