Detonation waves in melt-coolant interaction: Part 2: Applied analysis

N. I. Kolev; H. Hulin

doi:10.1515/kern-2001-0006

Enjoy 40% off

academic books on De Gruyter Brill *

Article

Detonation waves in melt-coolant interaction

Part 2: Applied analysis

N. I. Kolev and H. Hulin

Published/Copyright: March 17, 2022

Published by

Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Submit Manuscript Author Information

From the journal Kerntechnik Volume 66 Issue 1-2

Abstract

Making use of the detonation theory presented in part 1 for melt-water interaction, detonation solutions for different meltwater pairs at different conditions are compared to each other. Discussion is provided on the existence of detonation solutions for water droplet – melt droplet – gas systems. The conclusion is made that even if such solutions can be realized in the nature, which is highly questionable, the resulting detonation pressures will be below 200 bar. This is an important result for judging the risk of the melt-water disperse mixtures in nuclear safety analysis. In addition, the detonation pressures for alumnacontinuous water systems have been found to be stronger then those for urania-continuous water systems, in agreement with the experimental observations and seems to give finally the searched for a long time explanation why alumna-water systems detonate much more violent than urania-water systems.

Abstract

Die im Teil 1 vorgestellte Theorie für Schmelze-Wasser Wechselwirkung wird auf unterschiedliche Paare von Schmelze und Wasser unter unterschiedlichen Bedingungen angewandt. Die Lösungen wurden miteinander verglichen. Die Existenz der Detonationslösungen für Systeme bestehend aus Wassertröpfchen, Schmelzetröpfchen, und Gas wird diskutiert. Die folgende Schlussfolgerung wird gezogen: Auch wenn solche Lösungen in der Natur realisiert werden könnten, was sehr fraglich ist, werden die resultierenden Druckwellen unter 200 bar liegen. Das ist ein wichtiges Ergebnis für die Beurteilung des Risikos von Schmelze-Wasser Dispersionen in der Reaktorsicherheitsanalyse. Weiterhin stellte sich heraus, daß die Detonationsdruckmaxima für Mischungen bestehend aus Aluminiumdioxidkontinuierliches Wasser größer sind als die Detonationsdruckmaxima für Mischungen bestehend aus Uraniumdioxide-kontinuierliches Wasser. Dies ist in Übereinstimmung mit den experimentellen Beobachtungen. Die Erklärung für diesen Unterschied, der lange widersprüchlich in der Literatur diskutiert wurde, scheint endlich gefunden zu sein.

Acknowledgment

Ms Iris Roloff-Bock contributed to this work by performing the quality assurance for the FORTRAN 90 subroutines for water properties for sub-critical state. The authors greatly acknowledge this support.

This work under was contract partially No. sponsored FI4SCT960037by the . European Commission

References

1 Kolev, N. I.: Detonation waves in melt-coolant interaction, Part 1: Theory. Kerntechnik 65 (2000) 25410.1515/kern-2000-655-617Search in Google Scholar

2 Huhtiniemi, I.; Magalon, D.; Hohmann, H.: Results of Recent KROTOS FCI Tests: Alumina vs. Corium Melts. OECD/CSNI Specialist Meeting on Fuel Coolant Interactions, JAERI-Tokai Research Establishment, Japan 19–21 May 1997Search in Google Scholar

3 Kolev, N. I.: In-vessel melt-water interaction caused by core support plate failure under molten pool, Part 1: Choice of the solution method. Kerntechnik 64 (1999) 20910.1515/kern-1999-640414Search in Google Scholar

4 Kolev, N. I.: In-vessel melt-water interaction caused by core support plate failure under molten pool, Part 2: Analysis. Kerntechnik 64 (1999) 27810.1515/kern-1999-645-614Search in Google Scholar

Specific capacity at constant pressure for urania and alumina

Fig. A1

Specific heat capacity c_p of UO₂ as function of temperature

Fig. A2

Specific heat capacity of ZrO₂ as function of temperature

Received: 2000-09-04

Published Online: 2022-03-17

You are currently not able to access this content.

Articles in the same Issue

https://doi.org/10.1515/kern-2001-0006