0
Research Papers

Heat Transfer Characteristics of Passive Condensers for Reactor Containment Cooling

[+] Author and Article Information
Shripad T. Revankar

School of Nuclear Engineering,
Purdue University,
400 Central Drive,
West Lafayette, IN 47907;
Division of Advanced Nuclear Engineering,
POSTECH Pohang,
Gyeongbuk 790-784, South Korea
e-mail: shripad@purdue.edu;
shripad@postech.ac.kr

References cited in the Tables 1 and 2 are [25-32].

Manuscript received September 30, 2012; final manuscript received January 17, 2013; published online May 17, 2013. Assoc. Editor: Srinath V. Ekkad.

J. Thermal Sci. Eng. Appl 5(2), 021002 (May 17, 2013) (13 pages) Paper No: TSEA-12-1165; doi: 10.1115/1.4023600 History: Received September 30, 2012; Revised January 17, 2013

Passive condensers that are based on gravitational force do not require pumps or blowers to move fluid and, hence, are considered as safety measures in nuclear power plant containment cooling. In this paper vertical tube passive condensers with the tube inside condensation and cooled by a secondary pool of water are discussed as applied to reactor containment heat removal system. Series of experiments were carried out on scaled separate effects test facilities with vertical single tube and four tube bundle condensers. The results of experimental data on the rate of condensation heat transfer, the effects of noncondensable, and parametric effects, such as pressure, tube diameters and lengths, obtained from single tube and tube bundle passive condenser are presented. The data on the tube bundle indicated larger condensation heat transfer due to enhanced heat transfer in the secondary cooling. For tube bundle condensation, the turbulent mixing on the secondary pool side decreases the temperature difference between pool water and condenser tube outer wall, causing an increase in secondary heat transfer. Theoretical models on tube condensation based on heat and mass analogy and boundary layer models were developed. The data were compared with theoretical models and good agreement was observed between theoretical predictions and single tube condensation heat transfer data. For the tube bundle condenser, the theoretical model agreed with data when the secondary side enhancement in heat transfer due to turbulent mixing in the flow boiling was included. Practical heat transfer correlations are presented using available data on passive condensers for reactor application.

Copyright © 2013 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Passive containment cooling system (PCCS) condenser operation in the ESBWR

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Three operation modes of the PCCS

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Schematic of condensation test loop

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Test section schematics with thermocouple locations for (a) single tube condenser and (b) four tube bundle condenser

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Complete condensation with 26.6 mm and 52.5 mm tubes, (a) condensation rate as function of pressure, (b) condensation HTC versus ΔT

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Cyclic venting condensation in 52.5 mm tube with inlet steam flow rate of Mst = 2.35 g/s, (a) venting frequency for P = 180 kPa and 220 kPa, (b) condensation HTC as a function of noncondensable for P = 180 kPa

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Through flow condensation in 52.6 mm tube with inlet steam flow rate Mst = 4.0 g/s (a) pure steam condensation rate as function of pressure, (b) condensation HTC as function on noncondensable at P = 200 kPa

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Through flow condensation in 52.6 mm tube with noncondensable (a) effect of system pressure on condensation HTC with inlet steam flow rate Mst = 4.0 g/s, (b) effect of inlet steam flow rate on condensation HTC at P = 176 kPa

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Complete condensation in single tube and tube bundle condensers, (a) comparison of condensation heat flux as function of system pressure, (b) comparison of secondary HTC as a function of system pressure

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Flow through condensation in single tube and tube bundle condensers, (a) comparison of condensation heat flux as function of system pressure, (b) comparison of secondary HTC as function of system pressure

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Flow through condensation in single tube and tube bundle condensers, (a) comparison of condensation heat flux as function of system pressure, (b) comparison of secondary HTC as function of system pressure

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Physical model of film condensation in a vertical tube

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Comparison of average condensation HTC with respect to inlet NC gas mass fraction for (a) 26.6 mm i.d. tube at system pressure = 340 kPa, (b) for 52.5 mm i.d. tube with system pressure of 185–187 kPa

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Comparison of local condensation HTC for Kuhn's experiment [16], (a) inlet NC gas mass fraction = 2%, (b) inlet NC gas mass fraction = 34%

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Comparison of tube bundle experimental data with boundary layer model with secondary HTC model, (a) complete condensation, (b) through flow condensation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Comparison of present condensation correlation Purdue [25] with experimental data, analogy model, and with other correlations, UCB [26], Kuhn et al. [27]

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In