MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2315926343 · doi:10.1115/icone16-48741

Review and Status of the Gen-IV CANDU-SCWR Passive Moderator Core Cooling System

2008· article· en· W2315926343 on OpenAlexafffund
Hussam F. Khartabil

Bibliographic record

VenueVolume 4: Structural Integrity; Next Generation Systems; Safety and Security; Low Level Waste Management and Decommissioning; Near Term Deployment: Plant Designs, Licensing, Construction, Workforce and Public Acceptance · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNuclear Engineering Thermal-Hydraulics
Canadian institutionsAtomic Energy (Canada)
FundersNatural Resources Canada
KeywordsNatural circulationNuclear engineeringCoolantHeat sinkDecay heatEnvironmental scienceWater coolingSupercritical fluidEngineeringMechanical engineeringThermodynamicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Enhanced safety is an important priority in the development of Generation IV reactors, which can be accomplished through the use of improved passive heat removal systems. In CANDU® reactors, the separation between the low-pressure moderator and high-pressure coolant provides a unique passive heat sink for decay heat removal during accident scenarios. Methods for enhancing this passive heat sink for the GenIV CANDU-SCWR (supercritical water cooled reactor) have been under investigation for the past several years to support a “no core melt” reactor design concept (1, 2). Initially, to test feasibility, tests and analysis at AECL studied a full-height passive cooling loop and showed that a flashing-driven natural circulation system was possible in principle. However, flow oscillations were observed at low powers and could not be readily explained through analysis. While these oscillations were not considered to be detrimental to the heat removal capability, additional separate-effects experiments were conducted and causal mechanisms proposed for the oscillations. In addition, these separate effects tests suggested that oscillations could be avoided at any power level by suitable design. A new test loop with a more representative geometry was recently constructed and commissioned. Preliminary commissioning tests confirmed conclusions from the separate effects tests. In this paper, the new tests are compared to the past tests to explain the improved and more stable loop operation. This comparison suggests that a complete system coupled to an ultimate heat sink has the potential to improve loop operation even more by eliminating or significantly reducing flow oscillations at low powers. Plans for validating this conclusion will be provided.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.182 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVolume 4: Structural Integrity; Next Generation Systems; Safety and Security; Low Level Waste Management and Decommissioning; Near Term Deployment: Plant Designs, Licensing, Construction, Workforce and Public AcceptanceSame topicNuclear Engineering Thermal-HydraulicsFrench-language works237,207