Investigation of Thermal Efficiency of Generic Pressure-Channel Reactors With Steam Reheat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Currently, i.e., in 2016, 4361 nuclear-power reactors operate in the world. 96.6% of these reactors are water-cooled (373 reactors (280 PWRs, 78 BWRs and 15 LGRs are cooled with light water and 48 reactors — PHWRs are cooled with heavy water. 15% of all water-cooled reactors are pressure-channel or pressure-tube design, the rest — pressure-vessel design. All current NPPs with water-cooled reactors have relatively low thermal efficiencies within 30–36% compared to that of current NPPs with AGRs (42%) and SFR (40%) and compared to that of modern advanced thermal power plants: combined-cycle plants (up to 62%) and supercritical-pressure coal-fired plants (up to 55%). Therefore, it is very important to propose ways of improvement of thermal efficiency for this largest group of nuclear-power reactors. It should be noted that among six Generation-IV nuclear-reactor concepts one concept is a SCWR, which might reach thermal efficiencies within the range of 45–50% and even beyond. However, this concept has been never tested, and the most difficult problem on the way of implementation of this type of reactor is the reliability of materials at supercritical pressures and temperatures, very aggressive reactor coolant – supercritical water, and high neutron flux. Up till now, no experiments on behavior of various core materials at these conditions have been reported so far in the open literature. As an interim way of thermal-efficiency improvement for water-cooled NPPs nuclear steam reheat can be considered. However, this way is more appropriate only for pressure-channel reactors, for example, CANDU-type or PHWRs. Moreover, in the 60’s and 70’s, Russia, the USA and some other countries have developed and implemented the nuclear steam reheat in subcritical-pressure experimental boiling reactors. Therefore, an objective of the current paper is to summarize this experience and to estimate effect of a number of parameters on thermal efficiencies of a generic pressure-channel reactors with nuclear steam reheat. For this purpose the DE-TOP program has been used.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".