MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084640722 · doi:10.1115/icone18-30104

SuperCritical Water-Cooled Nuclear Reactor With Intermediate Heat Exchangers

2010· article· en· W2084640722 on OpenAlexaff
H. Thind, Igor Pioro, Glenn Harvel

Bibliographic record

Venue18th International Conference on Nuclear Engineering: Volume 2 · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNuclear reactor physics and engineering
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNuclear engineeringHeat exchangerThermal hydraulicsNuclear reactorEnvironmental scienceTurbineNuclear powerPressurized water reactorSupercritical fluidHeat transferWaste managementProcess engineeringMechanical engineeringEngineeringChemistryMechanicsNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At present, there are a number of Generation-IV nuclear reactor concepts under development worldwide, and the SuperCritical Water-cooled nuclear Reactor (SCWR) type is one of them. The main objective of developing SCWRs is to: 1) Increase the thermal efficiency of current Nuclear Power Plants (NPPs) from 30–35% to approximately 45–50%, and 2) Decrease capital and operational costs. SCW NPPs will have much higher operating parameters compared to current NPPs (i.e., pressures of about 25 MPa and outlet temperatures up to 625°C). This paper presents a SCWR single-reheat indirect cycle concept with intermediate heat exchangers. Similar to the current CANDU and Pressurized Water Reactor (PWR) NPPs, heat exchangers separate the primary loop from the secondary loop. In this way, the primary loop can be completely enclosed in the reactor building. The nuclear activities stay within the reactor building, and there is a reduced possibility for radioactive contamination of equipment in the turbine building. As SCW NPPs will have much higher operating thermal hydraulic parameters this paper analyzes the technical challenges and higher costs typically associated with heat exchangers. The double-pipe heat exchanger is analyzed in depth to determine the heat-transfer surface area, number of units and physical dimensions of the heat exchanger. This study will help to determine whether the advantages of the indirect cycle justify implementation of heat exchangers at a SCW NPP.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations3
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue18th International Conference on Nuclear Engineering: Volume 2Same topicNuclear reactor physics and engineeringFrench-language works237,207