MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2089752092 · doi:10.1115/htr2008-58295

Development of Local Heat Transfer Models for the Safety Assessment of Prismatic Modular High Temperature Gas-Cooled Reactor Cores

2008· article· en· W2089752092 on OpenAlexaff
Richard Stainsby, Matthew A. Worsley, Frances Dawson, Joakim Baker, Andrew Grief, Ana Dennier, Paul Coddington

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNuclear reactor physics and engineering
Canadian institutionsAmec Foster Wheeler (Canada)
FundersU.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
KeywordsHeat transferNuclear engineeringModular designThermal conductionFinite element methodCoolantNuclear reactor coreTransient (computer programming)Materials scienceNeutron transportCoupling (piping)Computational fluid dynamicsMechanicsMechanical engineeringComputer scienceEngineeringStructural engineeringNeutronPhysicsNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a model developed for determining fuel particle and fuel block temperatures of a prismatic core modular reactor during both normal operation and under fault conditions. The model is based on multi-scale modeling techniques and has been qualified by comparison with finite element simulations for both steady state and transient conditions. Further, a model for determining the effective conductivity of the block fuel elements — important for heat removal in loss of flow conditions — is presented and, again, qualified by comparison with finite element simulations. A numerical model for predicting conduction heat transfer both within and between block fuel elements has been developed which, when coupled with the above multi-scale model, allows simulations of whole cores to be carried out whilst retaining the ability to predict the temperatures of individual coolant channels and individual coated particles in the fuel if required. This ability to resolve heat transfer on length scales ranging from a few meters down to a few microns within the same model is very powerful and allows a complete assessment of the fuel and structural temperatures within a core to be made. More significantly, this level of resolution facilitates interactive coupling with neutronics models to enable the strong temperature/reactivity feedbacks, inherent in such cores, to be resolved correctly.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.187 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations4
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNuclear reactor physics and engineeringFrench-language works237,207