Nuclear Engineering and Technology

Korean Nuclear Society (한국원자력학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Experimental study on hydrogen behavior and possible risk with different injection conditions in local compartment

  • Liu, Hanchen (School of Mechanical Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University) ;
  • Tong, Lili (School of Mechanical Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University) ;
  • Cao, Xuewu (School of Mechanical Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University)
  • Received : 2019.06.18
  • Accepted : 2020.01.28
  • Published : 2020.08.25
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Comparing with the large containment, the gas can not flow freely within the local compartment due to the small volume of the compartment in case of serious accident, which affects the hydrogen flow distribution, and it will determines the location where high concentration occurs in compartment. In this paper, hydrogen distribution and possible hydrogen risk in the vessel under the different conditions are investigated. The results show that when the initial gas momentum is increased, the ability of gas enters into the upper region of the vessel will be strengthened, and the hydrogen volume fraction in the upper region of the vessel is higher. Comparing with horizontal source direction, when source direction is vertically towards upper space, hydrogen is more likely to accumulate in the upper region of the vessel. With the increasing of steam mass flow, the dilution effect of steam on the hydrogen volume fraction will be strengthened, while the pressure in the vessel is also increased. When steam flow is decreased, the hydrogen explosion risk is higher in the vessel. The experiment data can provide technical support for the validation of the CFD software and the mitigation of hydrogen risk in the containment compartment.

Keywords

References

  1. S. Gupta, Experimental investigations relevant for hydrogen and fission product issues raised by the Fukushima accident, Nucl. Eng. Technol. 47 (1) (2015) 11-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2015.01.002
  2. J. Deng, X.W. Cao, A study on evaluating a passive autocatalytic recombiner PAR-system in the PWR large-dry containment, Nucl. Eng. Des. 238 (10) (2008) 2554-2560. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nucengdes.2008.04.011
  3. Sumer Sahin, M.S. Sarwar, Hydrogen hazard and mitigation analysis in PWR containment, Ann. Nucl. Energy 58 (58) (2013) 132-140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2013.03.001
  4. C. Peng, L. Tong, X. Cao, Numerical analysis on hydrogen stratification and post-inerting of hydrogen risk, Ann. Nucl. Energy 94 (2016) 451-460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2016.04.029
  5. S.W. Hong, J. Kim, H.S. Kang, et al., Research efforts for the resolution of hydrogen risk, Nucl. Eng. Technol. 47 (1) (2015) 33-46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2014.12.003
  6. R. Zboray, D. Paladino, Experiments on basic thermalhydraulic phenomena relevant for LWR containments: gas mixing and transport induced by buoyant jets in a multi-compartment geometry, Nucl. Eng. Des. 240 (10) (2010) 3158-3169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nucengdes.2010.05.047
  7. M. Heitsch, R. Huhtanen, Z. Techy, et al., CFD evaluation of hydrogen risk mitigation measures in a VVER-440/213 containment, Nucl. Eng. Des. 240 (2) (2010) 385-396. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nucengdes.2008.07.022
  8. P. Royl, U.J. Lee, J.R. Travis, et al., Benchmarking of the 3D CFD Code GASFLOW II with containment thermal hydraulic tests from HDR and Thai, in: CFD4NRS Conference, Munchen, September 5-7, 2006.
  9. S. Kudriakov, F. Dabbene, E. Studer, et al., The TONUS CFD code for hydrogen risk analysis: physical models, numerical schemes and validation matrix, Nucl. Eng. Des. 238 (3) (2008) 551-565. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nucengdes.2007.02.048
  10. D. Wang, L. Tong, L. Liu, et al., Preliminary numerical study on hydrogen distribution characteristics in the process that flow regime transiting from jet to buoyancy plume in time and space, Nucl. Eng. Technol. 51 (6) (2019) 1514-1524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2019.05.002
  11. M. Heitsch, R. Huhtanen, Z. Techy, et al., CFD evaluation of hydrogen risk mitigation measures in a VVER-440/213 containment, Nucl. Eng. Des. 240 (2) (2010) 385-396. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nucengdes.2008.07.022
  12. OECD, Comparsion Report on ISP-35 NUPEC Hydrogen Mixing and Distribution Test (Test M-7-1), 1994. FRANCE:OECD.
  13. C.K. Chan, S.C. Jones, Gas mixing experiments in a large enclosure, Proc. Annu. Conf. Can. Nucl. Assoc. 14 (1997) 10-14, 35.
  14. M. Sonnenkalb, G. Poss, The International Test Programme in the Thai Facility and its Use for Code Validation, EUROSAFE Forum, Brussels, Belgium, 2009.
  15. OECD, OECD/SETH-2 Project PANDA and MISTRA Experiments Final Summary Report, IvoKljenak, Michele Andreani, PaRis, France, 2012.
  16. E. Studer, J.P. Magnaud, F. Dabbene, et al., International standard problem on containment thermalehydraulics ISP47: step 1dresults from the MISTRA exercise, Nucl. Eng. Des. 237 (5) (2007) 536-551. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nucengdes.2006.08.008
  17. U.J. Lee, G.C. Park, Experimental study on hydrogen behavior at a subcompartment in the containment building, Nucl. Eng. Des. 217 (1-2) (2002) 41-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0029-5493(02)00136-X
  18. E. Porcheron, P. Lemaitre, A. Nuboer, et al., Experimental study of heat, mass and momentum transfer in a spray in the TOSQAN facility. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/237642693, 2006.
  19. S. Gupta, T. Kanzleiter, K. Fischer, et al., Interaction of a stratified light gas layer with a buoyant jet in containment: hydrogen/helium material scaling, Proc. ICAPP 10 (2010) 13-17.
  20. D.C. Visser, M. Houkema, N.B. Siccama, et al., Validation of a FLUENT CFD model for hydrogen distribution in a containment, Nucl. Eng. Des. 245 (2012) 161-171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nucengdes.2012.01.025
  21. R. Zboray, D. Paladino, G. Mignot, et al., Mixing of density stratified containment atmosphere by horizontal jet release, Nucl. Energy N. Eur. (2009) 14-17.
  22. OECD, OECD/SETH-2 PROJECT PANDA AND MISTRA EXPERIMENTS FINAL SUMMARY REPORT, IvoKljenak, Michele Andreani, PaRis, France, 2012.
  23. U.J. Lee, G.C. Park, Experimental study on hydrogen behavior at a subcompartment in the containment building, Nucl. Eng. Des. 217 (1-2) (2002) 41-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0029-5493(02)00136-X
  24. E. Studer, J. Brinster, I. Tkatschenko, et al., Interaction of a light gas stratified layer with an air jet coming from below: large scale experiments and scaling issues, Nucl. Eng. Des. 253 (2012) 406-412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nucengdes.2012.10.009
  25. H.B. Fischer, J.E. List, C.R. Koh, et al., Mixing in Inland and Coastal Waters, Elsevier, 2013.
  26. J.S. Turner, Buoyancy Effects in Fluids, Cambridge university press, 1979.
  27. Z.M. Shapiro, T.R. Moffette, Hydrogen Flammability Data and Application to PWR Loss-Of-Coolant Accident, Westinghouse Electric Corp., Pittsburgh, PA (United States), 1957. Bettis Plant.
  28. J. Deng, X.W. Cao, Hydrogen and steam distribution following a small-break LOCA in large dry containment, Nucl. Sci. Tech. 18 (3) (2007) 181-185. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1001-8042(07)60043-8

Cited by

  1. Critical Factors Analysis of Severe Traffic Accidents Based on Bayesian Network in China vol.2020, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/8878265