Nuclear Engineering and Design 139 (1993) 59-81 59

North-Holland

Passive decay heat removal in advanced LWR concepts

Pavel H e j z l a r *, Neil E. T o d r e a s * * a n d M i c h a e l J. Driscoll * * *
Department of Nuclear Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 77 Massachusetts At'e, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA

Received 1 June 1992

This paper explores the possibilities of developing a passive LWR design concept which could ensure sufficient decay heat
removal in the absence of emergency primary coolant supply without exceeding the safe temperature limit on cladding, and
which could achieve large nominal operating power output in the range 600-1000 MWe. Various possibilities of passive
decay heat removal in LWR concepts are assessed and choke points limiting the heat transfer from the fuel to the ultimate
heat sink are identified. To eliminate these choke points, new core configurations are studied. The most promising concept
appears to be a pressure tube reactor with fueled solid matrix and a separate moderator as a heat sink.

1. Introduction Passive 600MWe Reactor) [1], GE's SBWR (Simplified

In spite of the good safety record achieved by the
nuclear power industry, several major accidents have
added to the public's skepticism of nuclear power as an
acceptable option for electrical generation. In particu-
lar two serious accidents - at Three Mile Island and
Chernobyl - were crucial in this respect. Both showed
that safety devices are vulnerable to human error,
especially if the system is of a complicated character.
Consequently, new design options are currently be-
ing pursued to improve the safety of the new genera-
tion of nuclear power plants. One emphasis is on
simpler and easier to operate units with passive or
intrinsic characteristics which would provide not only
inherent stability of the chain reaction but would also
ensure continued cooling of fuel and its containment
systems under major accidents. These features enable
the plant to survive severe potential accidents without
fuel damage and without human intervention.
As a result of such efforts, several new advanced
reactor concepts with passive safety features have been
developed. The main effort has been concentrated on
LWR (Light Water Reactor), H T G R (High Tempera-
ture Gas-Cooled Reactor), and LMR (Liquid Metal
Reactor) technology. For LWRs, the principal systems
being developed are Westinghouse's AP600 (Advanced
* Research Assistant.
* * Professor.
** * Professor Emeritus.
BWR) [2] and ABB-Atom's PIUS (Process Inherent
Ultimate Safety) [3]. Light water technology is em-
ployed in most operating nuclear power plants and
consequently the LWR design is based on much greater
operating experience than the other principal types.
Consequently, this study is directed at the water cooled
reactor approach.
There are two main purposes for selecting passive
safety design characteristics. The first is to provide
stability of the fission process as well as passive shut-
down. The second is to provide assured removal of
decay heat to an ultimate heat sink. The latter is the
main focus of this paper.
Removal of decay heat from current LWR fuel
bundles necessitates the presence of coolant in the
core. The first generation of LWRs (all currently oper-
ating LWRs) provides emergency coolant delivery and
decay heat removal by active means, while current
advanced LWR concepts use passive means to accom-
plish these functions. They all employ water boiling
and steam condensation for transport of heat from the
fuel bundles to the ultimate heat sink. Boiling is uti-
lized for all three advanced concepts as a heat transfer
mode in the core region to remove decay heat. On the
heat sink side, the individual concepts differ. For the
AP600, steam condenses on the inner containment
wall, which is in turn cooled on the outside by film
evaporation and air flow. For the SBWR, steam con-
denses in an isolation condenser which is immersed in
a water pool, while in PlUS water boils off through

0 0 2 9 - 5 4 9 3 / 9 3 / $ 0 6 . 0 0 © 1993 - E l s e v i e r S c ie n c e Publishers B.V. All rights r e s e r v e d

60 t: Hejzlar et al. / Passi~,e decay tu'at remot'al

safety valves to atmospheric pools. Boiling and conden-
sation are very effective heat transfer modes, but all
these schemes require that the core is covered by
coolant under all circumstances. Figure 1 schematically
illustrates decay heat transfer mechanisms for these
concepts.
The study presented here investigates approaches
to ensure sufficient decay heat removal in the absence
of emergency primary coolant. To achieve such a goal,
the possibilities of developing a reactor core of materi-
als and geometry that can safely transmit the generated
decay heat to an ultimate heat sink during a complete
loss of coolant accident without exceeding the critical
temperature limit of the fuel, clad or matrix material
are considered Modularity of tile fucl is identified as a
key idea for maximization of the heal removal talc.
Another goal is to achievc reasonably high stcadk
state power output i.e. of the order of 6f)0-1l)l)0 MWc.
Employment of natural phenomena tot decay heat
removal generally leads to low achievable rcacmr
power, which is economically disadvantageous. To in-
crease power output, decay heat removal capabilities
must bc enhanced while their passive nature is pre-
served. Various arrangements of decay hea~: removal
schemes are assessed here with the goal of finding the
maximum heat rate which can bc passively removed
from the core to the ultimate heat sink. Further, the
physical design locations which limit heat rejection, i.e.

Core Primary Ambient

system Containment
boundary wall

AP600
Boiling I ~[ Condensation Convectionto air and
fihn evaporation
AI1~.

SBWR Boiling

Boiling Condensation

;,Yetr.~
PIUS
t • S:det),,/rel~e
f ;alve •
I Boiloff

I !
Fig. 1. Decay heat removal modes for current advanced LWR concepts.
 P. Hejzlar et al. / Passive decay heat remot,al 61

choke points, are identified and the possibility of new
design configurations which bypass these choke points
are explored.
2. Passive decay heat removal through barriers
A series of physical barriers is provided to prevent
release of fission product radionuclides. Taken to-
gether these exemplify the defense-in-depth safety
strategy employed in power reactor design. These bar-
riers, however, increase the thermal resistance to the
removal of decay heat from the fuel rods to the ulti-
mate heat sink. Hence a compromise must be found so
that
• control of radionuclides is maintained, and
• effective paths for decay heat removal are provided.
The physical barriers to heat passage can be divided
into 7 main categories which are schematically shown
in fig 2:
1. Cladding
2. Core
3. Cavity between the core and vessel wall
4. Vessel wall
5. Cavity between vessel and containment
6. Containment wall
7. Ambient.
Of these the cladding, vessel (and the remainder of the
primary system), and the containment provide barriers
to release of fission products.
The main alternatives for transfer of heat through
or around these barriers are summarized in fig. 3.
Vessel and containment walls are illustrated by long
vertical boxes. Arrows penetrating a wall symbolize
heat paths penetrating the wall (e.g. pipes going
through the wall). The horizontal boxes contain the
description of the heat transfer mechanism, the upper
limit on heat transfer rate (in MWt) by this mechanism
(as evaluated further in this paper) and the figure
number which illustrates the proposed concept.
We next examine the limits on heat transfer rates
for individual barriers and explore ways to maximize
these rates.
2.1. Cladding
The heat conduction from fuel pellets through the
gap and the cladding has been thoroughly investigated,
and will not be evaluated in this paper. Moreover, the
temperature limit on cladding under decay heat re-
moval conditions is typically more restricting than that
of the fuel, and we will therefore begin our evaluations
on the outer cladding boundary.

Containment
1 - cladding
2 - core
3 - cavity between the core and the veSsel
4 - vessel wall
5 - cavity between the vessel and the containment
6 - containment wall
7 - ambient
7a
Air
Vessel

4 5 6 7b
~-- Water

, i/);i)i((..?;):(?.ii?i.;)?; ¸

1 7c Ground

Fig.:2. Barriers to passive decay heat removal.

62 P. Hejzlar et at. / Passive decay heat remo~'al

Heat transfer Heat transfer Heat transfer

from the core from vessel wall to ambient

AZR

Coolant
thermosyphon Radiation
loops 3.4 MWt Combined convectionto air
25 MWt Fig.9 and radiation to baffle from
large containment
12 MWt Figl 1

Radiation from
core periphery Convenction from finned
to the vessel containment to air using
wall high chimney
0.6 MWt 20 MWt
Free convectton
through a water pool
15MWI Figl0
Radiation and
conduction
(coupled fuel/
coolant channel
0.9 MWt Fig.4
Walm"

Radiation and Pool evaporation/ Evaporation of water moat

] conduction condensation 32 MWt Fig.13
[ (Separatedfuel 77 MWt
[ coolant army)
1.8 MWt Fig.,

Pressure Tube D~
Conduction
(modular
approach)
50 MWt Fig.1. Conduction through solid
body to earth
1.8 MWt

Fig. 3. Assessment of decay heat removal paths.

2.2. Core
Two decay beat removal s c h e m e s from the core are
explored - heat transfer from an uncovered core by
radiation and convection in an s t e a m / a i r mixture, and
conduction t h r o u g h a solid matrix core.
2. 2.1. Radiation and convection in an a i r / s t e a m mixture
f r o m uncovered bundles
U n c o v e r e d L W R b u n d l e s are solely d e p e n d e n t on
radiation and natural convection by a mixture of air
and steam to remove the decay heat. The h e a t remov-
able by these processes is, however, very limited and
can be e s t i m a t e d in the following m a n n e r .
Let us take the typical L W R core with dimensions
from table 1 and with limiting clad t e m p e r a t u r e Tc~,l =
649°C (perforation limit). To transfer the decay heat to
the ambient, sufficient t e m p e r a t u r e potential b e t w e e n
the core o u t e r p e r i p h e r y and the a m b i e n t must be
established. For this purpose, the total driving t e m p e r -
ature potential is a p p o r t i o n e d such that the t e m p e r a -
ture of the outside surface of the core, To~ = 500°C.
The effective conductivity of a voided fuel bundle can
be estimated for an u p p e r t e m p e r a t u r e of 649°C using
 P. Hejzlar et aL / PassiL:e decay heat remoL~al 63

the results of Hoshide [4], as keff = 1.7 W / m K [5].
T h e n the heat transferred from this dry core can be
evaluated from the conduction equation for a cylinder
with a uniform heat source as
QD = (Tclm - Ts)47rkeffL/~t
= (649 - 500) • 4" 7r. 1.7' 3 . 8 / 2
= 6 × 10 -3 MWt,
where the total peaking factor, ~:t = 2, represents a
typical value for L W R cores.
Assuming the decay heat level to be 5% of rated
power, the achievable rated power of the reactor (based
on preventing overheating of the cladding in case of
depressurization and total loss of coolant) is 0.12 MWt.
This is a very low value. Even if the cladding limit
temperature is doubled to about 1200°C, the achiev-
able power is still negligible.
For this reason, existing water reactor concepts all
supplement this mode of cooling by transferring the
decay heat from the core directly to or through the
containment by mass transfer i.e. the generation of
steam in the core and its subsequent flow from the
primary system as shown in fig. 1.
2.2.2. Conduction through a solid matrix core
(1)
The abovc result implies that if we want to passively
remove the decay heat from an uncovered core without
the necessity of assuring continuous replenishment of
evaporated primary system inventory, we have to intro-
duce new core configurations. The possibilities for
improvement of heat transfer from the core can be
identified from the simplified analysis of a conduction
cooled annular core such that the achievable rated
power of this core with respect to passive decay heat
removal is maximized. Using the equation of conduc-

Coupled fuel/coolant channel configuration Separate fuel/coolant channel configuration

Low p r ~
vessel wall ~

~S

Fig, 4. Solid matrix core with coupled and separate fuel/coolant channels.
64 P. Hejzlar et al. / Passive decay heat remo~'at

tion from an a n n u l u s with a uniform heat source wc it is related to the t e m p e r a t u r e ot Ihc ambient. Also
can express t h e r a t e d p o w e r of an a n n u l a r core cooled the active length c a n n o t be increased considerably be-
only on its outside surface as cause of n e u t r o n i c a n d t h e r m a l hydraulic overall de-
sign consideralions.
0 = (zclm -- Tsink)47rkeffL T h e effcctive conductivity, /%,~ however, can bc
F~RD(, (2) increased by an o r d c r of m a g n i t u d e if wc design the
core with a solid matrix with dispersed fuel a n d coolant
w h e r e F~ is the a n n u l u s function given as channels.
T h e limiting t e m p e r a t u r c of the cladding, 7~lm, can
bc e n h a n c e d by the use of high t e m p e r a t u r e ceramic
R ~ R0
Fv=l-
In -
Rv
- - -
Rv
- 1
'
(3) fuels in the form of particles dispersed in the matrix.
T h e o r e t i c a l and e x p e r i m e n t a l results have already b e e n
o b t a i n e d using these fuels in a P W R [6]. Use of these
R D is the ratio of decay h e a t to r a t e d o p e r a t i n g power, fuels would also eliminate the g e n e r a t i o n of hydrogen
a n d ~t is the total p o w e r p e a k i n g factor. by r e p l a c e m e n t of zirconium with a ceramic.
In eq. (3) the t e m p e r a t u r e T~i,k is a fixed value since T h e a n n u l u s function, F,. is less than 1. T h e r e f o r e

te

mt channel
rcaloy clad
Fuel

1 ~hite

el + coolant (clad neglected)

The conductivity of the inner void and fuel region is

approximated as a single region with a conductivity
proportional to temperature

Using Selengut's fommla the two region cell can be

modeled as a homogenized region with a volume averaged
conductivity

Fig. 5. Homogenization of unit fuel cell for thermal conductivity.

 P. Hejzlaret al. / Passive decay heat removal
using annular instead of solid core geometry helps to
maximize the power output under passive safety decay
heat removal.
The ratio of decay heat (which has to be removed in
real time) to rated operating power, Ro, can be mini-
mized by maximizing the storage capabilities of the
core matrix. This effectively delays the time at which
the heat removal rate must equal the decay heat gener-
ation rate, by storing decay heat in the core structure.
The heat storage capability of the core can be en-
hanced by utilizing a solid matrix made of high specific
heat capacity materials. A higher cladding temperature
limit further enhances heat storage capacity.
There are several current techniques available to
minimize the peaking factor. In this paper, the total
peaking factor is assumed constant equal to current
PWR values and further minimization is not pursued.
To conclude, the main ways to maximize passive
heat removal from an uncovered core are:
1. Maximizing heat storage capabilities of the core
matrix
2. Maximizing the effective thermal conductivity of the
core matrix
3. Maximizing the maximum permissible cladding tem-
perature
4. Utilizing an annular core instead of a solid cylindri-
cal core.
Fortunately all these propositions are in harmony.
A solid matrix increases the heat storage, the effective
thermal conductivity, and is compatible with the use of
ceramic fuels having high temperature limits on their
coating.
Two possible configurations of a solid matrix core
composed of hexagonal blocks shown on fig. 4 are
assessed. The first configuration utilizes a coupled
fuel/coolant channel, where the fuel rod is located in
the center of a coolant channel and the coolant flows
around the rod. In the event of coolant depletion, the
heat is radiated to the solid matrix and then conducted
to the periphery of the core. The second configuration
uses separate fuel/coolant channels, where the fuel is
in a set of fuel holes, and coolant flows through sepa-
rate coolant channels. Heat from the fuel is conducted
directly to the solid matrix and through the solid matrix
to the periphery of the core. For the latter configura-
tion, a fuel type other than the conventional pin in
Zircaloy cladding is desirable to achieve good contact
between the fuel and the matrix. Approaches to fuel
design similar to those employed in the MHTGR
(Modular High Temperature Gas-Cooled Reactor) are
of particular interest since such fuel can withstand high
temperatures.
65
We next proceed to assess the thermal potential of
these two configurations.
2.2.2.1. Approach of a homogenized core - Although it
is possible to analyze these solid matrix core configura-
tions using detailed computer codes, it is not necessary
nor desirable for initial assessments. To estimate the
heat removal rates from the fueled solid matrix, a
homogenization approach will be utilized. Graphite
hexagonal blocks of MHTGR dimensions such as shown
on fig. 4 will be used as the matrix throughout this
study. The block is homogenized as schematically shown
in fig. 5. The homogenization for thermal conductivity
calculations was performed using Selengut's relation
for a two region cell [7]. The effective conductivity of a
homogenized two dimensional cell is obtained from the
Selengut relation
(l + y)kd + ( 1 - y l k b k
keff= ( 1 - - y ) k d + ( l + y ) k h b, (4)
where
y = volume ratio of distributed region to the total
volume (base material + distributed region),
k b = thermal conductivity of the base material,
k d = thermal conductivity of the distributed region.
First, eq. (4) is applied to the fuel rod and the voided
space surrounding the rod where k b - k v and k a ~- kf
(kzr is neglected) to obtain the effective thermal con-
ductivity of a voided coolant channel with fuel rods,
kf+ v. Then relation (4) is applied to the cross-sectional
area of one unit cell which contains a volume-averaged
portion of graphite (with thermal conductivity k b = kg)
associated with one channel and the previously homog-
enized channel with thermal conductivity k d = kf+ v.
More specific details on the homogenization process
are given in [8].
This approach uses the homogenized conductivity to
first establish the core radial temperature profile. Then
the centermost fuel pin is superimposed on this profile,
and the allowable core power is established as that
yielding the maximum clad outer surface temperature.
2.2.2.2. Limits and constraints used throughout the study
- A maximum cladding temperature of about 649°C
(1200 F) was adopted as the limiting value for this
exploratory investigation, though it is recognized that
Zircaloy cladding can sustain much higher tempera-
tures without major damage. This temperature limit
was imposed on Zircaioy cladding based upon the
avoidance of cladding perforation, which begins above
this temperature. A temperature of 500°C at the outer
66 P. Hejzlar et al. / Passive decay heat remocal

core boundary was also assumed, as noted earlier. The Table 1

traditional linear heat generation rate for fuels pins Typical LWR dimensions used throughout
during normal operation of about 44 k W / m was taken
Parameter Symbol Value
as another constraint. Finally, it was assumed for all
cases that the total power peaking factor is 2. The Core radius R 3 m
Core height l 3.8 m
constraints are summarized with other data used in the
Vessel height -BWR /., 2(i m
analysis in table 2.
PWR ]3 m
Vessel diameter- BWR I>, (~ m
2.2.2.3. Analysis o f various core configurations - Four - PWR 5 m
basic geometrical core configurations were assessed. Vessel wall thickness- BWR A.~ 0.152 m
These are solid core, annular core cooled on outer - PWR 0.252 m
side, annular core cooled on both sides, and modular Containment design pressure p 0.30 MPa
core. The annular core was assessed for coupled
f u e l / c o o l a n t channel and for separate f u e l / c o o l a n t
The core average matrix temperature at the beginning
channel configurations; the modular core was evalu-
of the transient, T,, was assumed to be about 300°C
ated for modules placed within the high pressure vessel
(corresponding to the matrix temperature during nor-
and for modules submerged in a low pressure heat
mal operation). Utilizing the ANS decay heat curve,
sink.
QD_IMW(t) and integrated decay heat curve pet 1
(A) Solid and a n n u l a r core in a coupled f u e l / c o o l a n t MWt, QD 1MW(t), [9] the time, t I, at which both the
channel configuration integrated decay heat energy equals the stored energy,
The analysis of the homogenized core with the Q, and the decay heat rate equals the maximum remov.-
matrix in the coupled f u e l / c o o l a n t channel arrange- able decay heat, 0r), can be calculated from the e q u a
ment cooled on the outer side was performed employ- tion
ing the following equations representing the decay heat
transfer rates from pin surface to the core surface plus Q QD
(10)
the energy balance within a core
f,('0,, ,Mw(t)dt 0D ,Mw(t,)
~rdco a
q ,x= This time t I from eq. (I0) is schematically illustrated
in fig. 6. The left hand side of eq. (I0) represents the
ratio of total energy storable in the core, Q, to the
Q;~t integrated decay energy per 1 MWt. For the fixed
Tgi - Tos = 4,n.kef------~Fv, (6) value of O, obtained from eq. (8), this ratio decreases
with time, since the integrated decay heat energy builds
up as time proceeds. The right hand side is the ratio of
O o' = N e,
- - = '~( R 2 - Rv)qmax
, , (7)
the core total decay heat rate removable without ex-
Acen~t
ceeding the imposed limits to the decay heat rate per 1
where F~ is given by eq. (3). MWt. For the value of QD equal to 0.1 MWt, obtained
Note that for a solid core R v = 0, F v = 1. Solution
of the above equations for the solid core of dimensions
from table 1 yields a removable decay power of about
0.1 MW. l ' QDqMW(t) dlL
To evaluate the rated power, 0 , heat storage in the
matrix must be taken into account. First, the energy
t
which can be stored in the matrix is estimated as

Q = r r ( R o2 - R 2 ) L p g c g ( T - Ti) , (8)

where T is the average temperature at the time, the

cladding limit is reached, and is estimated as
tl

= (Tel m + Tos)/2. (9) Fig. 6. Schematic representation of eq. (10).

 1°. Hejzlar et al. / Passive decay heat removal 67

from eqs. (5) through (7), this ratio increases with time
due to the decrease of decay heat with time. The
intersection of these curves represents the time, t~, at
which both the stored energy in the core equals inte-
grated decay heat energy, and the decay heat rate is
equal to the maximum removable decay heat by con-
duction. Once the time ta is obtained, the rated power
is calculated as
of an annular core cooled on its outer side with the
same outer radius and length as above, gives the high-
est removable decay heat 0.9 MWt, which translates
using eqs. (8) through (10) to rated power 3Q. The
value of 0.9 MWt is cited in fig. 3.
(B) Annular core in a separate f u e l / c o o l a n t channel
configuration cooled on one side.
For the arrangement of separate fuel/coolant chan-

Q 0D
QD 1MW(/1) "
Using the procedure above, eq. (11) yields a rated
power of about 28 MWt. This value is designated for
further comparison purposes as unit value Q. Analysis
(11)
nel, heat transfer resistance between fuel cladding and
the inner surface of the graphite matrix is eliminated,
hence eqs. (5) and (7) can be discarded. Assuming
perfect contact between the cladding and graphite ma-
trix (or Tgi ~ Trim) the core decay linear power is dic-
tated by the allowable conduction rate through the

1.2

1.0

0.8

0.6

Separated fueFcoolant
0.4'
¢D

¢D

0.2

Eqs. (5) - (7)

Coupled fuel/coolant channels
0,0 i

0 1 2 3
Void radius, R v (m)
Fig. 7. Comparison of coupled fuel/coolant channels and separate fuel/coolant channels for an annulus cooled on both sides.
68
core, which can be expressed in the form of equation
(6) as
(rcl m - - Tos)47"rkef f
Q~ =
Fv~t
The linear power for separate fuel/coolant chan-
nels computed from eq. (12) is compared with the
linear power for coupled fuel/coolant channels com-
puted from eqs. (5) through (7), using the same con-
straints, in fig. 7. Eq. (12) gives almost the same linear
heat power as eqs. (5) through (7) for small void radii
because of the low power density, and therefore a
negligible temperature difference between clad outer
surface and inner matrix temperature, Tgi, which re-
sults in low radiated heat flux between cladding and
graphite matrix. For large void radii, however, the
radiated heat flux from the cladding increases and
forces a reduction in the heat rate.
It is seen from fig. 7 that by introducing separate
holes for fuel and coolant, the heat rate removable
from the same slab with inner radius 2.8 m (optimum
radius according to first approach) can be approxi-
mately doubled i.e. 1.8 MWt. This value is introduced
into fig. 3. Using eqs. (8) through (11), rated power
output can be evaluated as 4.5Q. This is an enhance-
ment, and the configuration with separate coolant
channels is therefore preferable. The arrangement of
separate coolant/fuel channels has two additional ad-
vantages - elimination of spacers to separate cladding
from contact with the inside matrix surface, and conse-
quently lower pressure losses, and the possibility of use
of ceramic fuels with higher upper temperature limits.
Consequently, analysis of all other configurations was
performed for the separate fuel/coolant channel con-
figuration.
(C) A n n u l a r core in a separate f u e l / c o o l a n t channel
configuration cooled on both sides
Analysis of the annular core cooled from both sides
uses the same set of equations except with the annulus
function F v, which is now expressed as [5]
_
Fv
Ro)2_ :0)2_ +
i I ,
ln(~v) / I.~(RR~.=~2!21
+ - - I -
ln(:O) ~-o -i
P. Hejzlaret al. / Passivedecay heat remol'al
where
~14)
(12) rm = in(Ro/Rv)2
"
For thin annuli (for radius ratio (R o - R ~ ) / R , <_0.1
the error is less than 5%), an annulus can be treated as
a slab and the power is approximately doubled com-
pared to one-side-only cooling. Hence the achievable
power is about 9Q.
(D) Modular core in a separate f u e l / c o o l a n t channel
configuration
Finally, a modular configuration composed of small
modules each with an individual heat sink has been
considered. Heat sinks can be applied at the internal
surface, at the external surface, or at both.
First, modules with internal heat sinks (e.g. ther-
mosyphon loops) inside a high pressure vessel will be
considered. An approximate minimum practical radius
of these internal heat sinks was assumed to be the
same as for the CANDU pressure tube (i.e. about 10
cm). Figure 7 indicates that the optimum ligament for
the one-side-cooled annulus is about 20 cm, hence the
outer radius of the module was taken at 30 cm. Using
these dimensions and the matrix temperature at the
boundary with the heat sink, To.~, as 500°C. eq. (12)
yields the module linear heat rate of 0.037 M W / m . To
remove the decay heat from the heat sinks, the individ-
ual heat sinks have to reject the heat to the colder
vessel wall (no vessel penetrations and no vessel breach
are assumed). The ultimate power limit can be thus
estimated by calculating the maximum number of these
modules such that there is enough space available for
the internal heat sinks to exchange heat on the vessel
wall surface, i.e. the number of modules, N. must
satisfy the equation.
N2r i < 27rR~, (15)
where r~ is the radius of the internal heat sink and R.
is the vessel inner radius. Equation (15) yields approxi-
mately 90 modules, hence the total decay power can be
estimated as
90 (0.037 M W / m ) 3.8 m = 12.5 MWt.
Incorporating heat storage calculation by virtue of eqs.
(8) through (1t), the rated power can be obtained as
900 MW, or 32Q. Note that this estimate assumes that
, (13)
all of the vessel surface is available for heat exchange,
and the performance of the heat sinks is sufficient to
transfer the decay heat conducted out of the modules.
 P. Hejzlar et al. / Passive decay heat removal 69

Second, a more practical approach is to place each Table 2

module within the primary pressure boundary and to Constraints and data used for homogenized core power analy-
submerge the modules into the low pressure heat sink, sis
which can serve also as a moderator. Taking the mod- Constraints Data
ule radius equal to a typical C A N D U pressure tube
Tcim < 649°C Ace11= 7.3 × 10 -4 m 2, R o = 3 m
radius, the module linear heat rate was estimated from
Tgo = 500°C dco= 12.5 ram; dgi = 19.8 mm
eq. (12) with F v = 1 as 0.028 M W / m . The total decay q' _<44 k W / m Eco = 0.6; Eg i = 0.7, ~t = 2
power which can be extracted from the LWR-size core kg = 60 W/m-K, Og = 1670 J/kg-K,
is evaluated using the typical C A N D U pitch, 0.28 m, as cs = 1512 J/kg-K

0.028 M W / m (3.8 m) 7r (3 m ) 2 / ( 0 . 2 8 m) 2
= 50 MWt.
This value is introduced in fig. 3. Analogous to the
previous approach, rated power was calculated as 1300
Mwt, which is 45 times larger (i.e., 45Q) than the solid
core result. Moreover, the power output is not limited
by the size of the pressure vessel since the low-pressure
vessel dimension can be easily extended without the
penalties typical for high pressure vessels.
Performance of these individual core configurations
is summarized in fig. 8. Unit Q on fig. 8 corresponds to
28 MWt. This number designates the steady state oper-
ating power calculated from the limits (see table 2) on
decay heat removal capabilities in the total absence of

Coupled fuel/coolantchannel
Separate fuel/coolantarray
1~ Heatsink fluid
Directionof heat flow

B) Annular core C) Annular core with

with heat removal heat removal from
from outer surface 4.5 Q inner and outer surface
only . O If~

9ressure
noval

heat sink

D) Modular core with

A) Solid core cooling provided for
each module
Fig. 8. Comparison of achievable rated powers for various core configurations.
70 P. Hejzlar et al. / Passiue decay heat rernot'al
coolant. The figure shows that the modular approach is
by far the best with respect to the capability to dissi-
pate a large amount of decay heat. However, this
analysis has only considered limitations imposed by
core thermal resistance and storage. A practical reac-
tor system must include limitations imposed over the
entire path to the ultimate heat sink. These limitations
are examined subsequently in this paper.
Finally, it is important to note that the limit im-
posed on cladding in this scoping study is very conser-
vative. Zircaloy cladding could withstand, temperatures
up to about 1000°C without major damage, which would
increase the achievable power to about
1300 (1000 - 500)/(649 - 500) = 4300 MWt.
If ceramic fuel is used, the coating limit is even higher,
i.e., 1600°C. However, consideration of matrix material
behavior in a steam environment at such high tempera-
tures must be taken into account. This will limit the
maximum temperature to about 1300°C if silicon car-
bide is used as the matrix material or as a coating over
a graphite matrix.
2.3. CalJity between the core a n d the vessel wall
The basic heat transfer mechanism for heat transfer
between core outer periphery and the vessel wall is
radiation. This mechanism is passive but the achievable
heat rates are moderate. Using the equation of radia-
tion between two concentric cylinders, this heat rate
was evaluated to be about 0.6 MWt for a BWR core of
typical dimensions, temperature of core outer periph-
ery of 500°C and vessel wall temperature of 100°C.
This value is introduced into fig. 3.
To enhance the heat removal rate, the performance
of thermosyphon loops spanning the cavity between the
core and the vessel, as shown schematically in fig. 9,
was assessed. Fluid in the loops is heated in the core
regions (evaporator) and cooled in the vessel wall re-
gion (condenser). By choosing an operating loop pres-
sure corresponding to a saturation temperature slightly
higher than the matrix temperature during normal
operation, the fluid in the loop will be single phase
under operating conditions. This will decrease heat
losses during normal operation since the heat transport
in a one-phase naturally circulating loop is lower than
that in a two-phase loop. To utilize proven technology,
the diameter of the pressurized tube was chosen the
same as for CANDU technology i.e. a 0.105 m diame-
ter Zircaloy tube. To increase the heat transfer surface
in the condenser section, the shape of the loop is
~:=xe
O.105m
16m
20m J
!
x=xe Core 8mil
I
4 m ~ t
Innerves~I
,~ail
Fig. 9. Schematic of a thermosyphon loop between the core
and the Inner vessel wall.
changed from a circular cross section to an annular
cross section, so that vessel wall contact is maximized.
To find the heat rate which can be circulated by
these thermosyphon loops, Chert and Chang's ap-
proach [10] was utilized and a solution was encoded
into a computer program [5]. Water at pressure of 10.5
MPa was chosen as the working fluid. Using the di-
mensions given in fig. 9, outlet evaporator quality of
0.5, and conservatively large form losses of 20, the heat
rate which can be circulated through such loops was
found to be about 1.5 MWt per loop.
Since this evaluation was performed under the as-
sumption that the circulated heat can be transferred
into the loop within the evaporator region, a further
check on heat transfer from the matrix region into the
loop working fluid was performed. Assuming the tem-
perature of the solid matrix is 500°C, and using Chen's
correlation [II] for the heat transfer coefficient be-
tween the working fluid and tube inner wall, the heat
transfer rate in the evaporator region was calculated to
be 0.61 MWt per loop, which is lower than the circu-
lated heat. Since about 40 loops can be accommodated
around the core circumference, the total heat rate
removed by thermosyphon loops is approximately 25
MWt. This value is again shown in fig. 3. Compared to
radiation, this is a considerable enhancement. However
thermosyphon loops inside the vessel would be vulner-
able to failure in rapid depressurization events.
 P. Hejzlaret aL / Passivedecay heat removal 71

2.4. Vessel wall 2.5. Cavity between vessel wall and containment wall

An estimate of the energy which can be transmitted
through the vessel wall can be performed from the
heat conduction equation for a slab. For a typical slab
thickness of 0. 152m (BWR vessel), carbon steel ther-
mal conductivity of 40 W / m - K , a practical achievable
temperature difference of about 200°C, and typical
BWR vessel dimensions we obtain
AT 200
Q.D = k-~xLv~rDv = 40~-~i~207r6 = 20 MWt
Taking into account the thermal resistance between
the wall and cooling medium, the total heat removal
will be even lower. The best heat transfer can be
achieved for condensation on the inner side of the wall
and boiling on the outer side. Utilizing a condensation
cooling loop on the inner side of the wall, with a
saturation temperature (corresponding to the pressure
inside the vessel) of 315°C, and a boiling loop with a
saturation temperature of 140°C (corresponding to the
pressure inside containment of 50 psia) on the outside
of the wall, the total transferred heat rate was evalu-
ated as 16 MWt for a typical BWR-size vessel and only
6 MWt for a typical PWR vessel. Both values are
shown in fig. 3. Such a low value is a significant
limitation on the heat transfer rate, but is avoided in
current and advanced LWRs by their reliance on steam
mass transfer through the hypothetically ruptured pri-
mary system wall.
There are three basic heat transfer mechanisms
which can couple the cavity between the vessel wall
and containment wall - radiation, convection in air or
in liquid, and boiling and condensation.
2.5.1. Radiation and natural convection by air
The first two modes of passive heat removal from
the vessel to the containment wall are radiation and
(16) natural convection in air. The heat transfer rates of
these modes were estimated for a typical BWR vessel
and containment dimensions and assuming a vessel
wall temperature of 500°C and a containment wall
temperature of 100°C. Radiation between two infinite
concentric cylinders resulted in a heat rate ()D = 3.4
MWt. For natural convection by air from the vessel to
the containment walls, the results of Sparrow [12] for
natural convection between two vertical cylinders were
utilized to yield a heat rate of about 0.12 MWt. As
expected, the heat transfer rate by natural convection
of air is negligible.
2.5.2. Free convection through a water pool
In this arrangement, the reactor vessel is submerged
in the water pool. The saturation temperature of 140°C
corresponding to the typical BWR containment design
pressure (table 1) would set the limit on the maximum
achievable temperature of the pool. To achieve this

Containment walls
//~/////////f///////////////////////////////////J/////////////J~J~/~J/~

' ~ ~ - ..::::!:!)i!:!i:!~i:;:ii:i:ii~:i!:ii:ii:iii:i}i::!i!i!i!

NII ...... {I N w......

Fig. 10. Configuration of a vessel submerged in a water pool inside the containment.
72 P. Hejzlar et al. / Passive decay heat removal

pressure and hence the temperature in the pool, a
standpipe can be used, as shown in fig. 10. If the water
pool is hermetically isolated, then a water column of
height 28 m would suffice.
The assessment of heat transfer rate through the
water pool involves a three dimensional fluid flow
regime with boiling and condensation of the liquid
within the pool. To assess the heat transport from
vessel wall to containment wall these phenomena will
be treated in a simplified manner. Similar systems were
investigated by Bergles et al. [13], but for a horizontal
condenser surface. Their approach will be used here.
There are three possible modes of heat transfer in
the liquid-filled enclosure between the reactor vessel
and the containment wall.
(1) Natural convection for very low heat fluxes
(2) Subeooled boiling (bubbles condense in the liquid).
Here the heat transfer is increased by bubble
pumping.
(3) Condensation mode - bubbles begin to impinge on
the condenser surface and the heat transfer is
limited by the condensation rate.
We assume that the heat flux is high enough to
cause boiling• The second mode of heat transfer was
determined to be governing since the bubble collapse
distance defined as
D0'/2
L c=1.5 Ja2a48 , (17)
where
Ja = C P f p f ( r s a t - Tb) ,
hfgpg
-- 15/4 , hh=NU~[ ,
D O= 1.5 × 10 - 4 cpflsatPf[ / o"
l Vg(p,-oO
is less than the vessel height.The Nusselt number will
therefore be augmented above the natural convection
value by subcooled boiling as reflected in the correla-
tion
The coefficient h is difficult to determine, and wa,~
taken to be 6.4 for our heater-to-condenser surface
ratio of 0.28 per the recommendatkm of Bergles [13].
Utilizing water properties at a saturation tempera-
ture of 140°C, the bubble diameter from eq. (19). the
Jacob number from eq. (18), and lhe volume of the
enclosure evaluated from dimensions in fig. 10, eq. (21)
can be rewritten as
Nu*=(l + 9 × 10 ' 3 0 D ) ' / " , (22)
where QD is given in Watts.
The heat transferred from the vessel to the water
volume by boiling, QD, can be taken from previous
calculations in Section 2.4 as 16 MWt. This value
multiplied by the coefficient 9 × 10 -13 is negligible
compared with unity. Even a heat transfer rate of 100
MWt does not yield a significantly augmented Nusselt
number. Therefore the augmented Nusselt number in
our case is essentially equal to the Nusselt number for
natural convection.
The reason is that there is a huge volume of water in
the enclosure compared to the low heat load (e.g.
q " = 500 W/m3). Hence
NH* = 1 or NUaug = Nunat.conv. = 0.13 Ral/3~
where the Rayleigh number is defined as
gt (T - L)W c ,p
Ra = (23)
tzfkr
The heat transfer coefficients on the heated and cooled
(lS) (containment) side are
kf kf
hc = Nu L~7, (24,25)
(19)
and finally the overall heat transfer coefficient (based
on the condenser surface) is evaluated as

Nu aug = Nu* Nu nat.conv. (20)

where Table 3
Data used in evaluation of water pool performance
OD Pf -- Pg 1 Pool saturation temperature, Tsat (°C) 140
Nu* = 1 + A VePfhfiF,a ~ Of /3(rb-Tc) ' Pool bulk temperature, Tb (°C) 135
Temperature of heater surface, Th (°C) 144
(21) Temperature of condenser surface, Tc (°C) 100
Enclosure volume, V~(m3) 28000
where R o is bubble radius.
 P. Hejzlar et al. / Passive decay heat removal
Using the above approach, dimensions from fig. 10 and
input data given in table 3, the heat transported through
the pool was evaluated as QD = 15.1 MWt. This result
is included in fig. 3.
2.5.3. Pool evaporation with vapor condensation on con-
tainment walls
In this case the vessel is submerged in a pool which
freely communicates with the space above the water
level. Since the water pool does not directly transfer
the heat to the heat sink as in the previous case, the
pool will heat up until the saturation temperature is
reached and vapor bubbles will rise to the surface.
Vapor leaving the pool will condense on the contain-
ment walls. The heat transfer mode of condensation on
the containment inner wall of inventory boiled off in
the core is utilized in the AP600 reactor design.
Since pool boiling can transfer high heat fluxes, it is
assumed that pool boiling is sufficiently vigorous to
provide enough steam for subsequent condensation on
the containment walls. Therefore the heat removal
capabilities of this scheme will be estimated primarily
from condensation on the containment wall, which is
assumed to be the dominant heat transfer resistance.
Condensation occurs in the presence of nonconden-
sible gas (air) under natural convection. This process is
a complicated phenomenon in which the heat transfer
coefficient depends on the wall configuration, flow
pattern and air-to-vapor mass ratio. Uchida [14] corre-
lated experimental data as
hcon = 379( mm__~)0.707,
g (27)
where m g / m v is the air-to-vapor mass ratio.
Uchida's approach will be used in this assessment.
Since the heat transfer coefficient, hcon, is strongly
dependent on the air-to-vapor mass ratio, the air-to-
vapor mass ratio was chosen so that the resulting hcon
falls within the experimental values, e.g. h~on 300-1000
W/m2-K, from full scale experiments at Marviken [15].
A typical air to vapor mass ratio of 0.7 was utilized
yielding hcon 487 W/m2-K.
Choosing the saturation temperature inside the con-
tainment at 140°C and the temperature of the inner
containment wall as 120°C (boiling of water at atmo-
spheric pressure is assumed on the external side of the
wall), the total heat transferred to an inner contain-
ment wall of typical PWR plant dimensions was found
to be QD = 77 MWt. This heat transfer rate is shown
in fig. 3.
73
2.6. Containment wall
Conduction through the containment wall is charac-
terized by the material and thickness of the wall. The
carbon steel containment wall is thinner and has a
larger surface area than does the reactor pressure
vessel. Consequently the conducted heat will be higher.
For an assumed saturation temperature within the
containment of 140°C and an ambient temperature on
the outer side of the containment of 100°C (e.g. boiling
water), a 40°C temperature difference exists. A practi-
cal temperature difference across the wall will be lower
than 40°C because of the need to allow for thermal
resistance between the medium and the wall on both
sides. Assuming this practical temperature difference is
15°C, the heat rate conducted through the containment
wall can be evaluated from the conduction equation as
QD = 75 MWt. for the entire containment surface. This
value is shown on fig. 3.
2. 7. Heat transfer to the ambient
There are basically three media available as an
ambient. These are
• air
• water
• ground,
and they will be assessed next.
2.7.1. Air
Ambient air has an advantage in that it provides for
an infinite heat sink; but it also has a very low heat
transfer coefficient. To maximize heat transfer to the
air, two approaches can be pursued
(1) Enlargement of the heat transfer surface area
- larger diameter or height
fins,
-
(2) Enhancement o f the heat transfer coefficient
- modify surface to promote turbulence
- increase velocity (higher chimney).
One way to maximize the heat transfer to air as an
ultimate heat sink is the use of a large containment
surrounded by a baffle. This arrangement, with the
main dimensions, is shown schematically in fig. 11. A
similar arrangement is used by PRISM designers, and
in combination with water film evaporation, by the
AP600 designers. The baffle has two primary functions.
First, it creates a passage for buoyancy-induced air
flow and secondly, it receives the heat radiated from
the containment wall, which is subsequently convected
to the naturally circulating air. The effective heat
transfer area is thus increased. To estimate the perfor-
74 P. Hejzlar et al. / Passive de+ay heat remot al
mance of this configuration, a simple computer code,
which takes into account radiation and employs verti-
cal nodalization of containment and baffle walls, was
developed [5]. The heat transfer coefficient to air was
evaluated by a modified Dittus-Boelter correlation
which takes into account mixed convection effects [16].
The results of the model for a containment of
dimensions shown on fig. 11, using an inlet air temper-
ature of 20°C, and emissivities of 0.7 for the contain-
ment wall and the baffle, are presented in fig. 12.
Figure 12 shows the heat rate as a function of the
width of the annulus between the containment wall
and the vessel wall, for different containment wall
temperatures. As can be seen, there is an optimum
annulus width of 0.4 m due to competing heat transfer
coefficient and friction pressure loss effects.
Achievable power for a containment wall tempera-
ture of 140°C (saturation temperature corresponding to
maximum containment pressure) is 12.1 MWt. To fur-
ther increase the heat transfer rate, the effective chim-
ney height was doubled and fins were added to the
containment wall [5]. These measures increased power
by only 65%, to about 20 MWt. These values are
shown in fig. 3.
2. 7.2. Water
Water as a heat sink has the advantage of high heat
transfer coefficients, especially for boiling. There are,
however, two drawbacks:
- only a limited quantity can be stored, which provides
only a finite time span for decay heat removal (72
hours for AP600 and SBWR, 7 days for PLUS),
f
~ , Baffle
Containment
wall
Outer surface
of the baffle is
insulated
L=60m
Air
| heat can be transferred to the earth (pipe condenser
D=58m
Fig. 11. Schematic of a large containment with a baffle.
I under normal operation heat should not bc dissi-
pated to the ambient water pool to prevent it~
evaporation; otherwise continuous refilling of lhc
pool would be required.
Heat transfer from the containmcnt wall to +t water
moat surrounding the containment will be assessed
next. The arrangement of such a partially submerged
containment is shown on fig. 13. The best performance
can be achieved if condensation of saturated vapor
occurs on the inner side of the wall and boiling on thc
outer side. Utilizing the heat transfer coefficient for
film condensation on a vertical wall [17] and
Rohsenow's correlation [18] for pool boiling on the
outer sidc, a linear heat flux of q' = 3.2 M W t / m was
obtained for a typical wall thickness of 0.05 m and the
thermal conductivity of carbon steel. This yields a total
heat rate of 32 MWt for 10 m of submerged contain-
ment surface. This value is shown on fig. 3. Since the
submerged surface can be easily increased, the heat
rate can also be increased. Heat storage in concrete
structures would add some capacity but the allowable
concrete temperature for these structures is severely
limited.
2. 7. 3. Ground
The heat resistance which must be overcome in the
heat path between the vessel wall and the soil consists
of two sub-barriers.
(1) The distance between the heat source (e.g. vessel
wall) and soil
(2) The thermal resistance of the soil.
Both sub-barriers were investigated. The most restric-
tive value of achievable heat flux from these sub-bar-
riers was then chosen as a limiting factor and intro-
duced in fig. 3.
2.7.3.1. Heat transport between the uessel wall and the
earth - To surmount the first sub-barrier, conductors
with good thermal conductivity along an axial heat
transfer axis must be used. Two cases were studied -
heat pipes and solid cylinders. Heat pipes are superior
to solid conductors since they have very high conductiv-
ity along their axial axis. The performance of sodium
heat pipes about 50 m long attached to the vessel wall
at 500°C was evaluated using the theory of Dunn and
Reay [19]. Assuming that all the axially transported
region), the transportable heat rate was evaluated as
about 5 MWt for the 40 heat pipes which can be
attached to the vessel wall [5].
 P. Hejzlar et al. / Passive decay heat removal 75

2. 7.3.2. Heat transfer f r o m a conductor to surrounding
earth - Since the temperature of the surrounding earth
changes with time, the amount of heat directly re-
moved will gradually decrease. The time-dependent
rate of heat conduction to the earth will be evaluated.
The soil properties are expected to change with time
also, since as the soil is heated, moisture is removed,
which results in decreased thermal conductivity and
heat capacity. The changing moisture content of the
soil introduces uncertainties in the value of parameters
utilized in the calculation. The properties for two limit-
ing cases - dry and wet soil can be found for example
in Carg [20]:
(1) Wet soil: k = 2.51 W / m - K , c~ = 7 x 10 -7 m2/s,
(2) Dry soil: k = 0.25 W / m - K , a = 2.5 × 10 -7 m2/s.
An average thermal conductivity value of 1.1 W / m - K
will be used in this simplified analysis. Transient heat
flow in the ground can be computed with standard
methods. Since the cylindrical conductor is a very small
(in dimension) heat source compared with the sur-
rounding earth, a one dimensional conduction equa-
tion can be used. When integrated, this equation yields

13
Fixed values:
C o n t a i n m e n t diameter = 5 8 m
C o n t a i n m e n t height = 6 0 m
C o n t a i n m e n t wall emissivity = 0.7
Baffle emissivity = 0.7

12 Inlet air temperature = 43 °C

Entrance and exit form losses = 2 J

11'

10'

s"
"~ 9"

= 116 °C

6 , , , , ,
0.0 0,1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6

A n n u l u s width, a, (m)
Fig. 12. Decay heat removal from a large containment by natural convection of air and radiation to a baffle.
76 P. Hejzlar et al. / Passive decay heat removal

the temperature distribution as a function of distance assumed to be L = 50 m, its radius R = 0.I m and the
x from the heat source temperature along the length of the cylinder wall 500°C.
If we assume t 1 = 7 days as being a sufficient time
2 x/(ZvrdT) ~l to restore core cooling, the average decay heat power
T(x, t) = ~s - ( L - L ) ~ - - ~ ex~,~ - 7 2) d~.
removed by one pipe during this time period can bc
(28) found as

The surface heat flow from the cylinder is found from

f{i 1 Q ~ ' ) d t 26452
the one dimensional conduction equation as QD 0.0437 M W t / 1 pipe,
t1 7(24)3600
QD= - ~ ~x lx~,) = k S ~ t (29) (3o)
or
with S = 2 r R L .
The heat flow rate computed from eq, (29), together QD = 1.8 MWt per 40 pipes.
with the temperature history calculated from eq. (28)
at the distance x = 0.1 m from the cylinder surface, are Compared to the previous calculations it is observed
plotted in fig. 14. The length of the cylinder was that transient heat conduction to earth sets the lowest

Containment Baffle to induceair flow after water is evaporatedaway

Tsat= 140°C ////

////

¢///
////
slean

///,

,//z
e'/~'/
¢_//_1
¢///
I///
S sm
h I
¢//¢
vl/l
///)
Boiling ..... 1 ..... ~ i ) "
---- ;4//,

D--A-2m

Fig. 13. Schematic of a containment submerged in a water moat.

 P. Hejzlar et al. / Passive decay heat removal 77

500

4O0
r-4

12 c5

Heat rate
300 .~

Fixed values:
H e a t source radius = 0.1m
H e a t source t e m p e r a t u r e = 500 °C "200 ~
e~
o
H e a t source length = 50 m
T h e r m a l conductivity of the e a r t h = 1.1 W / m - K
length of the h e a t source = 50m

lOO ~

Steady state result, 0.06 MW

0 i i i

0 2 4 6 8 10

log time (s)

Fig. 14. Transient conduction to earth.

limit for heat dissipation to the ambient. Specifically,
the removable heat per single pipe, O D - l p i p e 0 . 0 4 3 7
MWt is 2.5 times lower than the heat transport capabil-
ities in the axial direction for a sodium heat pipe.
Therefore the value 1.8 MWt (for 40 heat pipes) is
included in fig. 3.
3. A passive light water pressure tube reactor concept
The study shows, as summarized in fig. 3, that the
vessel wall limit restricts the power output to 1600
MWt for a BWR and only 600 MWt for a PWR (if the
decay heat level is assumed to be 1% of full power)
regardless of the core's abilities to dissipate the heat.
There are two options to overcome this choke point.
The first one is to bypass the vessel wall. This occurs
naturally in a postulated primary system break, since
decay energy generates steam which escapes through
the break into the containment volume. However, there
is the attendant need to assure that sufficient emer-
gency coolant is added to keep the core flooded.
The second approach is to effectively thin the pres-
sure containing wall. Since pressure tubes are of much
78
smaller diameter than the vessel, stress analysis results
in a substantially thinner tube wall, effectively eliminat-
ing this wall as a thermal choke point. Furthermore,
the pressure tube approach is consistent with modular-
ity of the fuel, which was found to have the best decay
heat removal performance in the absence of primary
coolant. The ability to achieve a higher power output
for a modular solid matrix core than for an annular
core is attributed primarily to the shorter conduction
path. Consequently, the pressure tube, water cooled
reactor with solid fueled matrix (fig. 15) was identified
as a good potential candidate capable of surviving the
absence of primary coolant. The passively cooled mod-
erator in the calandria serves as a heat sink. Since the
I"II~b~UlF I,U I . K ; W | U l
and peripheral thermal switch
Schematic and not to scale
Fig. 15. Pressure tube reactor with fueled matrix in a separate fuel/coolant configuration and separate moderator,
P. Hejzlar et al. / Passive decay' heat remot'al
calandria is a low pressure vcs~ei, ~t cat~ bc enlarged
without large cost penalties, in contrast to high pres-
sure vessels. This approach allows lin higher power
outputs by adding more pressure tubes. This firs,: as-
sessment suggests that a large pressure tube reactor
which dissipates decay heat passively to the moderator
could achieve a power of about 1000 M W e [5].
One may argue that such a design replaces the Ic~ss
of coolant accident by the loss of moderator accident.
Though such an argument is true in the sense that the
loss of moderator cannot be allowed in the proposed
design, such a loss can be easily prevented by a guard
vessel, since the calandria is at a pressure close to
atmospheric pressure. Low pressure also makes it eas-
Low pressure vessel wall
tu~;lg, tl tllakllA
Coolant channel
 P. Hejzlar et al. / Passive decay heat removal
ier to design a passive cooling system which would
dissipate the decay heat to the ultimate heat sink.
Finally, coolant makeup from ubiquitous local sources
(city water, cooling tower basins, adjacent bodies of
water) is greatly simplified.
Two main issues have to be resolved to satisfactorily
exploit this design concept. The first involves the de-
sign of a passive thermal switch to be placed between
the pressure tube and the calandria tube. The function
of the thermal switch is to ensure minimum heat losses
from the pressure tube to the moderator during normal
operation, while also providing a sufficiently large heat
transfer rate during accident conditions. This switch is
a desirable, but not entirely necessary feature: in
CANDU reactors, for example, steady state heat losses
to the moderator of about 5% of fuel power are
tolerated. The second task is the replacement of the
heavy water coolant and the moderator by light water.
Replacement of heavy water is desirable primarily for
two reasons - cost savings, and the higher flexibility
provided by utilization of light water moderator in
designing the passive ultimate heat removal system. In
addition to the thermal-hydraulic aspects, one must of
course address the concurrent issues of reactor physics
performance.
These issues have been satisfactorily addressed and
the means for implementation of the essential features
- fuel containing matrix, thermal switch, light water
moderator and passive moderator cooling system - of a
passive light water cooled pressure tube concept have
been proposed [21].
4. S u m m a r y a n d c o n c l u s i o n s
Several important conclusions can be drawn from
this study. With respect to the magnitude of heat
transfer rates, water is the best ultimate heat sink.
However, its availability in tanks or pools within the
plant site is finite. Air as an ultimate heat sink requires
much larger heat transfer areas to achieve reasonable
power removal. The most promising arrangement for
heat transfer to air seems to be the configuration of a
large containment with a surrounding baffle (fig. 11). It
is a simple design and does not require a tall chimney,
which could be vulnerable to large seismic events.
Further, the performance could be augmented by
adding vertical fins. Earth (or civil structures) as an
ultimate heat sink has the lowest achievable heat trans-
fer rates, and cannot be considered as the sole ultimate
heat sink for LWRs of large power outputs.
The most efficient heat transfer schemes in the
79
cavity between the vessel wall and the containment
wall, are those using water as a medium. Heat transfer
rates achievable by thermosyphon loops and by free
convection through the water pool are roughly compa-
rable; the evaporation/condensation scheme using the
whole containment surface has the highest heat trans-
fer rate.
From fig. 3, it can be immediately seen that the
most restricting choke points are the core itself and the
vessel. To increase heat transfer from the core in the
absence of coolant, solid matrix fuel is introduced. A
solid core matrix considerably improves the heat re-
moval capabilities, but the achievable power output is
still low. Moreover, thermosyphon loops or some simi-
lar devices would have to be used to transfer the decay
heat from the core periphery to the vessel wall. Such
thermosyphon loops, while efficient mechanisms of heat
transport, may pose design complications, particularly
if their number is too large. Further they are vulnera-
ble to failure during rapid depressurization events. The
vessel wall limit can be effectively overcome by employ-
ment of a thinner primary pressure boundary, which
would shorten the conduction path. This necessitates a
smaller diameter for the pressure bearing boundary,
and leads to a modular core design where each module
has its own pressure bearing boundary.
Hence, the pressure tube reactor concept with solid
fuel matrix and passively cooled low pressure heat sink
is suggested as the best candidate for passive LWRs of
large power output. Modular solid matrix fuel sub-
merged in a low pressure heat sink increases the decay
heat removal capabilities considerably compared to an
annular core (see fig. 8), and furthermore, it enables
the use of a thin walled pressure boundary. Accord-
ingly, the pressure tube reactor concept has the best
capability for passive decay heat removal in the total
absence of emergency primary coolant since it effec-
tively eliminates the most restrictive heat transfer choke
points.
Nomenclature
A area (m2),
D diameter (m),
H height (m),
Ja Jacob number,
L length (m),
N number of modules,
Nu Nusselt number,
Q energy (J),
Q heat rate (W),
80 P. Hejzlar et al. / Passive decay heat remoual

Q' core linear heat rate ( W / m ) , e emissivity,

R radius (m), p density (kg/m3),
S surface (m), ~r surface tension ( N / n O ,
T temperature (°C), a coefficient,
V volume (m3), # dynamic viscosity (kg/m-s),
cp specific heat (J/kg-K), power peaking factor.
h enthalpy ( J / k g ) ,
h heat transfer coefficient ( W / m 2 - K ) ,
k thermal conductivity ( W / m - K ) , References
m mass (kg),
q' pin linear heat rate ( W / m ) , [1] R.J. Slember, From the bottom up: Nuclear technology
q" heat flux (W/mZ-K), evolves for the future, Part 1 - The Advanced Passive
r module radius, Reactor, Trans. Am. Nucl. Soc. 61 (March 1990) 253.
t time (s), [2] RJ. Mc Candless, Simplicity: the key to improved safety
x axial coordinate (m) or quality. performance and economics, Nucl. Engrg. Int. 34 (1989)
423.
[3] K. Hannerz, The PIUS principle and the secure reactor
Subscripts concepts, Advances in Nuclear Science and Technology
19 (1987) 41.
aug augmented, [4] A. Hoshide et al., Thermal testing of simulated BWR
b base, bulk, fuel bundles in dry cask, Trans. Am. Nucl. Soc. 59 (June
c collapse, condenser, 1989) 91.
clm cladding limit, [5] P. Hejzlar, N.E. Todreas and M.J. Driscoll, Passive decay
co cladding outside, heat removal in advanced reactor concepts, MIT Depart~
con condensation, ment of Nuclear Engineering Report MIT-ANP-TR-003
d distributed, (May 1991).
[6] W. Katscher, Coated particle fuel element for PWR's.
D decay,
Nucl. Technol. 35 (1977) 557.
e enclosure, earth, equilibrium, [7] D.S. Selengut, Diffusion coefficients for heterogeneous
eft effective, systems, Trans. Am. Nucl. Soc. 4, No.2 (June 1961).
f fluid at saturation, [8] J.C. Han, M.J. Driscoll, and N.E. Todreas, Effective
fg gas-liquid at saturation, thermal conductivity of prismatic MHTGR fuel blocks.
g graphite or gas at saturation, Trans. Am. Nucl. Soc. 65 (June 1992).
gi graphite inside, [9] ANSI/ANS-5A-1979, Decay heat power in Light Water
h heater, Reactors, American Nuclear Society (1979).
i initial, [10] K.S. Chen and Y.R. Chang, Steady state analysis of
two-phase natural circulation loop, Int. J. Heat Mass
max maximum,
Transfer 3t (1988) 931.
o outside,
[11] J.C. Chert, A correlation for boiling heat transfer to
os outer surface, saturated fluids in convective flow, ASME paper 63-HT-
R reactor, 34 (1963).
sat saturation, [12] E.M. Sparrow, P.C. Stryker and M.A. Ansari, Natural
v void, vessel, convection in enclosures with off center innerbodies. Int.
t total, J. Heat Mass Transfer 27 (1984) 49.
1 MW per 1 MW. [13] A. Markowitz and A.E. Bergles, Boiling and condensa-
tion in a liquid-filled enclosure, Rep. No. DSR 29077-73,
Superscripts MIT, Heat Transfer Lab. (1971).
[14] H. Uchida et. al., Evaluation of post-incident cooling
systems of LWRs, Proc. Int. Conf. Peaceful Uses of
average value. Atomic Energy, 13, 93 A'CONF:28/P436, IAEA (1965).
[15] J.J. Carbajo, Heat transfer coefficient under LOCA con-
Greek letters ditions in containment buildings, Nucl. Engrg. Des. 65
(1981) 369.
a thermal diffusivity (m2/s), [16] G. Fu, MJ. Driscoll, N.E. Todreas, M. Gavrilas and P.
/3 thermal expansion coefficient ( l / K ) , Hejzlar, Experimental and analytic evaluation of gas-
~, volume ratio, cooled reactor cavity cooling system performance, MIT
 P. Hejzlar et aL / Passive decay heat removal 81

Department of Nuclear Engineering Report, Revision 1
M1TNPI-TR-038 (December 1991).
[17] J.P. Holman, Heat Transfer (Mc.Graw Hill, N.Y., 1976).
[18] W.M. Rohsenow, Handbook of Heat Transfer (McGraw
Hill, N.Y., 1973). pp. 13-28.
[19] P.D. Dunn and D.A. Reay, Heat Pipes (Pergamon Press,
New York, 1982).
[20] H.P. Carg, Advances in Solar Energy Technology, Vol.1
(North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1987).
[21] J.R. Tang, N.E. Todreas and M.J. Driscoll, Conceptual
design of a passive light water pressure tube reactor
(PLPTR), Proceedings Int. Conf. on Design and Safety of
Advanced Nuclear Plants (ANP '92), Vol. I, pp. 4.2-1-
4.2-8, October 1992, Tokyo.