MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

ASYST4.1 validation for gas cooled SMR applications using the HTTF experiment

2023· article· en· W4387591817 on OpenAlex
Nikolai Vododokhov, A.K. Trivedi, D. R. Novog

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueNuclear Engineering and Design · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNuclear reactor physics and engineering
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity Network of Excellence in Nuclear Engineering
KeywordsNuclear engineeringCoolantNatural circulationModular designThermal hydraulicsTransient (computer programming)Molten saltNuclear reactorHeat transferScramThermal conductionHeliumEnvironmental scienceMaterials scienceMechanical engineeringEngineeringThermodynamicsComputer scienceChemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) based on High Temperature Gas Cooled Reactors (HTGR) concepts are being considered for remote communities in Canada (power ∼ 5 MWe or less) and elsewhere. One such design is Micro-Modular Reactor (MMR) from USNC (Ultra-Safe Nuclear Corporation). It uses helium as primary coolant and molten salt as intermediate coolant and for thermal energy storage (TES). The molten salt can then be used to generate steam on-demand to match the local communities’ energy requirements. Reliable computational tools are needed for thermal hydraulic analysis of the integrated nuclear and molten salt systems. ASYST4.1 (Advanced SYStem Thermal system) is one such tool which has been recently validated for Solar Salt (40 % NaNO3 + 60 %KNO3) applications and has capability to simulate the helium coolant and reactor core behaviour. To enable the code to model the primary and intermediate loops of MMR there is a need to validate the code for helium coolants and its capabilities to simulate lateral conduction, natural circulation, and radiative heat transfer. The HTTF (High Temperature Test Facility) experiment PG-26, a Depressurized Conduction Cooldown transient, is used for this validation exercise. The results are compared with those of the experiment and those from RELAP5-3D calculations. The reference case and sensitivity analyses for the important parameters are presented. Mass flow rate and temperatures in the primary loop are compared for the steady-state and for the transient PG-26. For the initial assessment ASYST4.1 predictions are found in good agreement with RELAP5-3D, but these results deviate from the experiment. Significant improvement in simulation results is observed when simulations consider the entire trajectory of the warm-up period and of the experiment, indicating that the experiment was not in a steady-state condition at the time of the depressurization test. This is an important factor to be considered in all HTTF cases going forward.

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.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.880
Threshold uncertainty score0.561

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.229
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