MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2087093687 · doi:10.1115/icone16-48531

Thermalhydraulic Analysis of the Steam Generator Design for the 700 MWe Indian Nuclear Power Plant

2008· article· en· W2087093687 on OpenAlexaff
Benny John, John M. Pietralik

Bibliographic record

VenueVolume 1: Plant Operations, Maintenance, Installations and Life Cycle; Component Reliability and Materials Issues; Advanced Applications of Nuclear Technology; Codes, Standards, Licensing and Regulatory Issues · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater Systems and Optimization
Canadian institutionsAtomic Energy (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBoiler feedwaterNatural circulationBoiler (water heating)Nuclear engineeringHeaderBundlePressurized water reactorNuclear power plantEngineeringHeat transferElectricity generationAir preheaterSteam drumNuclear powerBoiler feedwater pumpEnvironmental sciencePower (physics)Waste managementMaterials scienceMechanicsSuperheated steamComputer scienceNuclear physicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The next stage in the Indian nuclear power programme envisions building 700 MWe Indian Pressurized Heavy Water Reactor (IPHWR) units. This development involves redesigning and up-rating of all the plant equipment including the reactor, steam generators (SGs), turbo-generator, major pumps, comparing to the current generation of the 540 MWe IPHWRs. The SG used is a vertical, inverted U-tube, natural-circulation type. The 700 MWe SG is of the same type, has the same tube bundle design and the same heat transfer area as the 540 MWe SG. In addition, the tube diameter, tube pitch, and outer diameter of the SG sections are the same as those for the 540 MWe SG. The geometry of the feedwater header, the flow restrictor in the downcomer, and the flow distribution plate are different in the two designs. The changes were required due to the 26% increase in steam flow rate while maintaining the same circulation ratio. This paper describes the design of the 700 MWe SG and a thermalhydraulic analysis of the SG using a one-dimensional, in-house code and a three-dimensional code called THIRST developed by AECL. The codes were validated for global parameters against the 540 MWe SG operating data. The analysis was made for two design versions, (1) with and (2) without integral preheater and for two versions of inlet primary water conditions, (1) with and (2) without primary steam at the entrance to the SG tubes. In addition, the effect of fouling and tube plugging on the long-term operation of the SG was considered. The paper covers the results obtained and discussion on the above-mentioned issues.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.611
Threshold uncertainty score0.793

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVolume 1: Plant Operations, Maintenance, Installations and Life Cycle; Component Reliability and Materials Issues; Advanced Applications of Nuclear Technology; Codes, Standards, Licensing and Regulatory IssuesSame topicWater Systems and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207