CFD IN SUPPORT OF CORIUM POOL

MODELING

CEA/DEN/DTN/SMTA/LPMA
L. SAAS , M. PEYBERNES, R. LE TELLIER, C. DANG

June 20th, 2017

| PAGE 1
 Outlines

Context and Problem: Severe Accidents (SA), the Focusing Effect risk and the CFD
for SA modelling

Validation of the TRUST+TrioCFD code for a thin layer with water

Parametric studies with thin metallic layer:

A first fit for lumped parameter model with fixed upper temperature
Work in progress with other upper boundary conditions

Conclusion and perspectives

| PAGE 2
 Context: Severe Accidents, In-vessel corium behavior

Core meltdown
Corium pool formation In-vessel
Propagation in core corium
Corium relocation in lower head behavior
Vessel failure
Relocation in reactor pit
Risks of rapid containment failure:
Hydrogen explosion
Steam explosion
In-vessel
corium Direct Containment Heating
behavior Bypass…
Risk of slow basemat melt through
Molten Core Concrete Interaction

In-Vessel Retention (IVR) through reactor pit flooding is an option

for existing and future Gen III reactor Severe Accident Management strategy:
 The IVR strategy is demonstrated for «low» power reactors (~500 MWe) where
in-vessel heat fluxes < Critical Heat Flux (CHF, dry out heat flux)

 We are wondering if IVR is a reliable solution for “medium and high” power | PAGE 3
reactors (≥1000 MWe) ?
 Corium relocation in lower head

During severe accident, corium relocates from the core into the vessel lower head:
The corium pool is stratified because of a miscibility gap in the U-Zr-O-Fe thermochemical system: different
layers: Heavy metal layer / Oxidic layer / Light Metal Layer
The steel vessel wall is melted due to the heat fluxes of the corium pool
The molten steel relocates at the top of the corium pool in order to form a thin metallic layer
This thin metallic layer is heated from below and cooled on the upper and lateral surface
Its thickness evolves with ablated molten steel (thickening) and thermochemical effects (thinning)
The lateral heat flux of the thin metallic layer depends on the thickness of the layer: for small thickness
focusing effect could occurs and consequently involves the vessel rupture

𝜑𝑢𝑝
𝜑𝑙𝑎𝑡 In the severe accident code the
lateral heat flux of the thin metallic
layer is evaluated with a stationary
0D model (MAAP (EPRI), MELCOR
𝜑𝑑𝑜𝑤𝑛 (NRC), ASTEC(IRSN),
PROCOR(CEA)…)

Example of stratified corium

pool | PAGE 4
 Thin metallic layer on top of corium pool : 0D model

Heat flux
concentration
factor :
𝜑𝑙𝑎𝑡 /𝜑𝑑𝑜𝑤𝑛

Corium pool
(oxidic layer)
BALI-métal
experiments (water)

Geometrical ratio
From Bonnet J.M. 1999 Γ = ℎ/𝐿
Comparison of this 0D model to experimental data with water (and not steel): some margin may exist for
reactor case ? Difficult to have experiments with steel material (T>2200K), but simulation with CFD is
achievable.
Objective of our CFD work → study the heat flux concentration factor 𝝋𝒍𝒂𝒕 /𝝋𝒅𝒐𝒘𝒏 with the TrioCFD code
in order to build a enhanced 0D model that takes into account some margins that may exist
Work to achieve with the CFD and the simplified modelling:
Validation of TrioCFD code in the case of thin layers: natural convection with lateral and top cooling
Parametric studies of the thin metallic layer in the reactor context in order to understand thermalhydraulic
phenomena and to generate data
Development of a new 0D model for Severe Accident using the CFD data and understanding
| PAGE 5
 Validation of TrioCFD code for thin layer with water

Validation on Bali-métal experiments (CEA-1999) :

Test 4U: water, uniform heating, 10cm
Benchmark on CFD code in the IVMR Project
Comparison between NEPTUNE_CFD (RANS), Fluent(RANS/DNS) and Trio CFD (DNS)

TrioCFD parameters set up:

Incompressible Navier Stokes Equations with Boussinesq approximation

𝛻. 𝑉 = 0
𝜕𝑉
𝜌 + 𝛻 . (𝑉 ⊗ 𝜌𝑉 − 𝜈𝛻𝑉) = 𝛻𝑃 − 𝜌𝑔𝛽(𝑇 − 𝑇0 )
𝜕𝑡
𝜕𝑇
𝜌𝐶𝑝 + 𝛻. 𝑉𝜌𝐶𝑝 𝑇 − 𝜆𝛻𝑇 = 0
𝜕𝑡
VDF spatial discretization and explicit time scheme
No turbulence model
19 JUIN 2017
| PAGE 6
 Rayleigh-Bénard convection

Mechanism : 𝐹 = 𝑔𝛽Δ𝑇 𝑒𝑧 Buoyancy forces

Cooling from above

𝑇𝑢𝑝 − 𝑇𝑢𝑝 − 𝑇𝑢𝑝 𝜌𝑢𝑝 (𝑇𝑢𝑝 )
𝑇𝑢𝑝 +
𝜌𝑢𝑝 > 𝜌𝑑𝑜𝑤𝑛

𝑇𝑑𝑜𝑤𝑛 𝜌𝑑𝑜𝑤𝑛 (𝑇𝑑𝑜𝑤𝑛 )

Heating from below

𝑇𝑢𝑝 < 𝑇𝑑𝑜𝑤𝑛

Rayleigh-Bénard convection is due to buoyancy forces because mass density is varying

with temperature:

• The hotter and lighter fluid at the bottom is flowing to the top where it
is cooled and become heavier and then moves down

• Rayleigh-Bénard cells are observed

𝑔𝛽Δ𝑇ℎ3
• Characterized by 𝑅𝑎 =
𝛼𝜈 | PAGE 7
 Rayleigh-Bénard convection

Tests and set up of parameters, models and numerical schemes for TrioCFD:
• Validation with Ouertatani et al. paper (2009)

Shematic diagram of the test case (Ra=10−6 ) Streamline contours Isotherm contours
Ouertatani et al. Ouertatani et al.

Streamline contours (TrioCFD) Isotherm contours (TrioCFD) | PAGE 8

 Rayleigh-Bénard convection

Tests and set up of parameters, models and numerical schemes for TrioCFD:

Shematic diagram of the test case

Local Nusselt number Vertical velocity

| PAGE 9
 Validation of TrioCFD code for thin layer

TrioCFD parameters set up:

Incompressible Navier Stokes Equations with Boussinesq approximation

𝛻. 𝑉 = 0
𝜕𝑉
𝜌
+ 𝛻 . (𝑉 ⊗ 𝜌𝑉 − 𝜈𝛻𝑉) = 𝛻𝑃 − 𝜌𝑔𝛽(𝑇 − 𝑇0 )
𝜕𝑡
𝜕𝑇
𝜌𝐶𝑝 + 𝛻. 𝑉𝜌𝐶𝑝 𝑇 − 𝜆𝛻𝑇 = 0
𝜕𝑡
Constant physical properties of water: dynamic viscosity 𝜈 = 1.1002. 10−3 𝑚2 /𝑠 , mass
density 𝜌 = 1001.8 𝑘𝑔/𝑚3 , thermal conductivity 𝜆 = 0.604 𝑊. 𝐾 −1 𝑚−1, specific heat
𝐶𝑝 = 4185.5 𝐽. 𝑘𝑔−1 𝐾 −1 4185.5, thermal expansion coefficient 𝛽 = 1.5. 10−4 𝐾 −1
VDF spatial discretization and explicit time scheme
No turbulence model
No slip boundary conditions: u = 0
Imposed temperature
temperature

Adiabatic
Imposed

Imposed heat flux

TrioCFD thermal boundary conditions

CEA | 10 AVRIL 2012 | PAGE 10
19 JUIN 2017
 Validation of TrioCFD code for thin layer

Validation of TrioCFD on Bali-métal experiments:

Example of temperature and velocity field obtained: cold strip can be observed

Cold Strip length

Temperature field (t=6000s)

Temperature field (t=7500s)

Velocity field (t=6000s)

Velocity field (t=7500s)

CEA | 10 AVRIL 2012 | PAGE 11

19 JUIN 2017
 Validation of TrioCFD code for thin layer

Validation of TrioCFD on Bali-métal experiments:

Mesh convergence achieved
Power split (ratio between the lateral power 𝑃𝑙𝑎𝑡 to the downward power 𝑃𝑑𝑜𝑤𝑛 coming from the
heating system) :
𝐏𝐥𝐚𝐭 𝟐𝐃 𝐏𝐥𝐚𝐭 𝟑𝐃
= 𝟏𝟔% 𝐚𝐧𝐝 = 𝟐𝟒, 𝟑% (experiment about 𝟐𝟓%)
𝐏𝐝𝐨𝐰𝐧 𝐏𝐝𝐨𝐰𝐧

Convergence for the Power balance vs time Temperature profile in the bottom of the domain (heating system)

Meshes

Cold strip

Thermal dimensionless number

Raup Nuup Ralat Nulat

Differences mainly due to constant physical
Experiment 4,95x107 68 1,23x109 162 properties

19Simulation
JUIN 2017 1,1x108 30 6,2x108 330 CEA | 10 AVRIL 2012 | PAGE 12
 1rst Parametric Study with steel : fit to 0D model

0D model (C. Villermaux, initially 9 equations):

Stationary thermal balance

Upper Thermal balance

Lateral thermal heat
exchange Lateral heat exchange correlation

Upper heat exchange correlation

Such that

Associated to the cold strip

Rayleigh-Bénard effects

2 parameters 𝑨, 𝑪 associated to the volume

global flow rate to be calibrated according
to 𝝋𝒅𝒐𝒘𝒏 , 𝑻𝒖𝒑 , 𝑳, 𝒆

Use of TrioCFD to
calibrate 𝑨, 𝑪 according
to 𝝋𝒅𝒐𝒘𝒏 , 𝑻𝒖𝒑 , 𝑳, 𝒆

19 JUIN 2017
CEA | 10 AVRIL 2012 | PAGE 13

19 JUIN 2017
 1rst Parametric Study with steel : fit to 0D model

Parameters A and C are calibrated according to the global volume flow rate

For a fixed temperature For a fixed thickness,

𝑻𝒖𝒑 , decrease according decrease according to
to the thickness 𝑻𝒖𝒑

Global volume flow rate contribution to the

Global volume flow rate contribution to the Rayleigh-Bénard effects (coefficient A),
Rayleigh-Bénard effects (coefficient A), dependancy according to 𝑻𝒖𝒑
dependancy according to e

JUIN 17
We search A and C such that | PAGE 14
 1rst Parametric Study with steel : fit to 0D model

Parameters A and C are calibrated according to the global volume flow rate

Decrease according to the

Decrease according to thickness
the thickness

Global volume flow rate contribution of the lateral Global volume flow rate contribution of the lateral boundary layer
boundary layer (coefficient C) according to the thickness (coefficient C) according to the upper temperature

JUIN 17
We search A and C such that | PAGE 15
 1rst Parametric Study with steel : fit to 0D model

We search A and C according to 𝒆 and 𝑻𝒖𝒑 − 𝑻𝒇𝒖 such that

with and

We assume the following forms of A and C taking into account the tendency of the previous results

We use a mean square method to deduce the set of coefficients

Calibration for
Calibration for

JUIN 17
The calibration is possible, but we have to complete the CFD work | PAGE 16
 Rayleigh-Bénard convection and Bénard-Marangoni effects
𝜕𝑣𝑥 𝛾 𝜕𝑇
Mechanism : =
𝜕𝑧 𝜇 𝜕𝑥

Pressure and viscous forces at surface

Boundary condition
For 𝜸 > 𝟎
𝑇𝑢𝑝 − 𝜎𝑢𝑝 − 𝑇𝑢𝑝 − 𝜎𝑢𝑝 −
+ +
𝑇𝑢𝑝 𝜎𝑢𝑝

𝜎𝑢𝑝 + < 𝜎𝑢𝑝 −

When layer has a free surface and there exists a temperature gradient on it (if surface tension is varying
with temperature) Bénard-Marangoni effects take place :

𝜌𝜈𝛼 𝑔h3
The top surface could be deformed: if Crispation number C𝑟 = ≪ 1 and Galileo number 𝐺𝑎 = ≫1
𝜎ℎ 𝜈2
no deformation occurs

𝛾h∆𝑇
Marangoni number 𝑀𝑎 = (when 𝑀𝑎<0 diffusion is observed if no natural convection take place)
𝜌𝜈𝛼

Rayleigh-Bénard convection and Bénard-Marangoni could occurs in the same time :

If 𝛾 > 0 they are in the same direction : top cooling could be enhanced
If 𝛾 < 0 they are in opposite direction : top cooling could decrease
We need to evaluate if Rayleigh-Bénard convection dominates or if it is Bénard-Marangoni
| PAGE 17
 Bénard-Marangoni effects

Development with ICOCO + TRUST

Validation with Boeck paper (2005) :

| PAGE 18
 Numerical evaluation : 0D model

In order to so, stationary solutions of the OD model is used : → 𝑇, 𝑇𝑢𝑝

The thickness varies from 0.5cm to 15cm;
𝑝𝑜𝑜𝑙
For instance, for R = 2.0𝑚, 𝜑𝑢𝑝 = 1 𝑀𝑊. 𝑚−2 𝑚𝑒𝑡
𝜑𝑢𝑝 4
= 𝜀𝜎𝑆𝐵 𝑇𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑓 − 𝑇∞4 𝜑𝑢𝑝

𝑇∞ = 𝑇𝑓𝑢𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛 , 𝜀 = 2/3 𝑚𝑒𝑡

𝜑𝑙𝑎𝑡
𝑇𝑓𝑢𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛
𝜑𝑑𝑜𝑤𝑛 hlat from Churchill & Chu
hup from Globe & Dropkin

Bénard-Marangoni effects dominate the flow for thickness less than 3cm :

Bénard Rayleigh
Marangoni Bénard
 2nd Parametric Study with steel : boundary conditions

Computations with TrioCFD code is in progress to evaluate the Bénard-Marangoni effects:

Introduction in TRUST via ICOCO
Parallelepiped geometry (thickness=2.5cm) + incompressible Navier-Stokes equations with Marangoni
upper boundary conditions : 𝜕𝑣𝑥 𝛾 𝜕𝑇
=
𝜕𝑧 𝜇 𝜕𝑥

Lateral
thermal Less convective cells
gradient is
smoother in a
longer length

Only radiative heat transfer on top Radiative heat transfer with Marangoni
boundary conditions

Total Heat looses seem to be more important with Bénard-Marangoni boundary conditions
The flow structure and the impact on the heat flux concentration have to be studied : some difference
could be observed
 Conclusion and perspectives
Thanks to TRUST, TrioCFD and CCRT teams for help and support.

Calculations on CRTT (DARI project) in 2016 (1M CPU hours) and in 2017 (1,2M CPU hours, in progress), in
the frame of the IVMR (In Vessel Melt Retention) european project.

The validation of TrioCFD with BALI experiment (water) has been done. The split power is in agreement
with experiment. Variable physical properties are required in order to obtain accurate Ra and Nu numbers.

We have proposed a first study for the thin metallic layer with fixed temperature at the top. A 0D model has
been calibrated with TrioCFD calculations.

A second study on the top boundary conditions for the thin metallic layer is in progress: the case of free
surface with radiative heat transfer

In this case Bénard-Marangoni effects dominates the flow for thickness less than 3cm (linear stability
analysis + CFD) :
If the lateral cooling has no impact on the Bénard-Marangoni effects, it seems that the concentration heat
flux factor decrease for positive Marangoni number

The CFD could help us :

to estimate the influence of the lateral cooling on the Bénard-Marangoni effects and on the heat flux
concentration factor. Validation of the CFD tools is needed (IVMR project, C. Le Guennic presentation)
to have an idea of what happens in case of negative Marangoni number (thermal diffusion on top or in a
part of the layer?). Iron has a positive Marangoni number, but depending of there compositions some steel
could have negative Marangoni number

Some measurement of the surface tension coefficient are actually done on the VITI (CEA) facility in the
frame of the IVMR project

Simulations with variable physical properties are in progress

 Context: In-Vessel Retention strategy

In-Vessel Retention (IVR) through reactor pit flooding is an option

for existing and future Gen III reactor Severe Accident Management strategy
 The IVR strategy is demonstrated for «low» power reactors (~500 MWe) where in-vessel heat
fluxes < Critical Heat Flux (CHF, dry out heat flux)

 We are wondering if IVR is a reliable solution for “medium and high” power reactors
(≥1000 MWe)? The different questions that we have to address are:

1) Is the natural convection in the reactor pit established and stable?

What is the CHF values associated to the reactor pit design and
to the water flow ?

2) Are the in-vessel heat fluxes lower than this determined CHF ?

A MORE ROBUST IVR demonstration is needed

Improve evaluation of thermal Improve evaluation of external RPV cooling

loading on the Reactor Not in this presentation
Pressurized Vessel (RPV) wall:
In vessel corium behaviour

IVMR European Project (H2020) : WP2 modelling/methodology, WP3

experimental (VITI), WP5 new design | PAGE 22
 Thin metallic layer on top of corium pool

During severe accident, corium relocates from the core into the vessel lower head
The steel wall of the vessel are melting due to the heat fluxes of the corium pool
The resulting molten steel could relocate on top of the corium pool in order to form a thin metallic layer
This layer is heated from below and cooled on top and laterally and may lead to the focusing effect and
consequently to the vessel rupture
Different scenario of the corium relocation lead to different heat transfer and top boundary conditions for the
liquid steel layer on top of the corium pool :
 Liquid top free surface with radiative heat exchange
 Debris bed with conductive and radiative heat exchange
 Solid steel layer with conductive heat exchange (reflooding or efficient radiative heat exchange)
Liquid top free surface Debris bed Solid rigide surface

Debris bed Solid steel layer

Liquid steel layer
Liquid steel layer Liquid steel layer

Corium pool Corium pool Corium pool

Do focusing effect happen? No focusing effect | PAGE 23