0
Research Papers: Evaporation, Boiling, and Condensation

Pressure Drop and Void Fraction in Steam-Water Two-Phase Flow at High Pressure

[+] Author and Article Information
Wei Liu

e-mail: liu.wei@jaea.go.jp

Kazuyuki Takase

Japan Atomic Energy Agency (JAEA),
2-4 Shirakata Tokai,
Ibaraki 319-1195, Japan

Contributed by the Heat Transfer Division of ASME for publication in the Journal of Heat Transfer. Manuscript received February 10, 2011; final manuscript received January 23, 2013; published online July 11, 2013. Assoc. Editor: Wei Tong.

J. Heat Transfer 135(8), 081502 (Jul 11, 2013) (13 pages) Paper No: HT-11-1080; doi: 10.1115/1.4023678 History: Received February 10, 2011; Revised January 23, 2013

For a steam generator (SG) in a commercialized sodium-cooled fast breeder reactor (FBR), flow instability in the water side is one of the most important items needing research. As the first step of this research, thermal-hydraulic experiments using water as the test fluid were performed under high pressure conditions at the Japan Atomic Energy Agency (JAEA) by using a circular tube. Void fraction, pressure drop, and heat transfer coefficient data were obtained under 15, 17, and 18 MPa. This paper discusses the steam-water pressure drop and void fraction. Using the obtained data, we evaluated existing correlations for void fraction and two-phase flow multipliers under high pressure. As a result, the drift flux model implemented in the TRAC-BF1 code was confirmed to suitably predict the void fraction well under the present high pressure conditions. For the two-phase flow multiplier, the Chisholm correlation and the homogeneous model were confirmed to be the best under the present high-pressure conditions.

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

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

general scheme of the steam generator in FBR system

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Test loop and test section: (a) test loop and (b) test section

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Radiation heater and heater unit: (a) construction of the radiation heater and (b) heater unit

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Circuit for the measurement of void fraction

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Void fraction data (a) at 15 MPa and (b) at 18 MPa

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Pressure drop in single phase flow. (a) Comparison of friction loss between measured data and calculation results from Eq. (3) with Pfann's friction factor and (b) comparison of pressure drop between measured data and calculation results from Eq. (10) with Pfann's friction factor.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Evaluations of void fraction correlations at 15 MPa (a) at w = 40 g/s, (b) at w = 110 g/s, and (c) at w = 150 g/s

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Evaluations of void fraction correlations at 18 MPa (a) at w = 40 g/s, (b) at w = 70 g/s, and (c) at w = 110 g/s

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Evaluations of Martinelli–Nelson two-phase multiplier. (a) Comparison of friction loss between measured data and calculation results from Eq. (2) with Martinelli–Nelson two-phase multiplier and (b) comparison of pressure drop between measured data and calculation results from Eq. (1) with Martinelli–Nelson two-phase multiplier.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Evaluations of Friedel two-phase multiplier. (a) Comparison of friction loss between measured data and calculation results from Eq. (2) with Friedel two-phase multiplier and (b) comparison of pressure drop between measured data and calculation results from Eq. (1) with Friedel two-phase multiplier.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Evaluations of Hancox–Nicoll two-phase multiplier. (a) Comparison of friction loss between measured data and calculation results from Eq. (2) with Hancox–Nicoll two-phase multiplier and (b) comparison of pressure drop between measured data and calculation results from Eq. (1) with Hancox–Nicoll two-phase multiplier.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Evaluations to Chisholm two-phase multiplier. (a) Comparison of friction loss between measured data and calculation results from Eq. (2) with Chisholm two-phase multiplier and (b) comparison of pressure drop between measured data and calculation results from Eq. (1) with Chisholm two-phase multiplier.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Evaluations of homogeneous model in two-phase friction loss calculation. (a) Comparison of friction loss between measured data and calculation results from Eq. (27d) and (b) comparison of pressure drop between measured data and calculation results from Eq. (1) with homogeneous model used in two-phase friction loss calculation.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Pressure drop and its components against quality (a) at low flow rate (w = 70 g/s) and (b) at high flow rate (w = 200 g/s)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Simulation of the test section in the calculation with TRAC-BF1 code

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Prediction of pressure drop through the whole test section under 17 MPa with TRAC-BF1 code

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Prediction of pressure drop through the whole test section under 18 MPa with TRAC-BF1 code

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.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
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