You are on page 1of 43


With great pleasure and deep sense of gratitude, we express our indebtedness to our respected Sir Mr. Sandip Ghosh for his invaluable guidance and constant encouragement at each and every step of our project work. He gave all the requirements that we had to implement in the project in very structured manner, not only that he helped us through proper analysis and discussions but always showed great interest in providing timely support and suitable suggestions. Last but not least we would like to thank Mr. Malay Kr Banerjee HOD, Mechanical Dept for his encouragement, support and help us in completing this program successfully. Thanking you, Subhra Roy Shangarab Bera Partha Sarathi Ghosh Souvik Das Nilkanta Mahato Amit Roy

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.


1) A compressible two phase domain modeling for a typical pipe crack will be approached by using ANSYS design modeler and FLUENT two phase flow setups using cavitation subroutines. 2) The Void fraction or the volume fraction of the flashing phase at outlet as well as the flow Mac No. for several upstream stagnation conditions are to be calculated and compared with standard experimental results or analytical predictions on flashing flow or those specific to LOCA accidents. 3) Pressure distribution through the narrow slit channel ( looks like a short duct of minute width) are to be found to know the flashing inception point for judging the flashing flow domain properly. 4) Critical leakage flow rates through modeled slit will be an important findings related to leak detection and plant safety shutdown factors. Effect of friction in channels can also be separately investigated.

A loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA) is a mode of failure for a nuclear reactor; if not managed effectively, the results of a LOCA could result in reactor core damage.

Nuclear reactors generate heat internally; to remove this heat and convert it into useful electrical power, a coolant system is used. If this coolant flow is reduced, or lost altogether, the nuclear reactor's emergency shutdown system is designed to stop the fission chain reaction.

A PWR primary system is shown in Figure. The design basis accident in the PWR is a doubleended guillotine break in a cold leg between the reactor coolant pump and the reactor vessel.

The average peak cladding temperature (PCT) during the blow down phase of a largebreak LOCA is approximately 1 500F (815C) and the PCT at 95% confidence level is about 1 750F (954C), assuming a lossof-offsite power and the worst single failure assumption for the emergency core cooling system.

The refill period occurs between 30 and 40 s following the start of the LOCA.
The reflood period occurs between 40 and 200 s

Zirconium-water reactions can occur for high temperature regions of the core The average reflood PCT during this period is approximately 1 680F (915C) and the PCT at 95% confidence is about 1 975F (1 080C)
The maximum amount of cladding oxidized at a given location during this phase of the LOCA is about 10% for beginning-of-life (BOL) UO2 fuel and the total oxidation is less than 1%.

Various LOCA tests were conducted at LSTF, the world's largest plant simulator with the same height and 1/48 volume of a 3423 MWt PWR, to examine the effectiveness of accident management (AM) measures if there is severe loss of coolant. In case of HPI total failure, it is important for operators to depressurize the primary coolant system by opening SG relief valves (RVs) to activate the AIS and LPI system. The tests verified the effectiveness of this AM measure even in a LOCA caused by vessel bottom break which is the worst break location. A code analysis also confirmed the effectiveness.



The design basis accident for a BWR-6 is a double-ended break in the suction-side of the recirculation line. Shortly after the break, the reactor scrams, typically on drive flow pressure. Because of the large flow reductions immediately following the LOCA caused by the depressurization, there is a rapid increase in the core average void fraction. The negative void reactivity rapidly shuts down the core. The flow reverses in the broken loop jet pump. With the flow reversal all the drive flow to that jet pump is lost and one-half the drive flow that is supporting the core flow is lost.

Valves are closed to isolate the system, typically within four seconds after the LOCA. As the LOCA and depressurization continue , the level inside the core region decreases, as well as forming a level in the lower plenum region. Within 35-40 s following the LOCA, the high pressure core spray system begins to deliver coolant to the top of the core, the time being determined by the time to start the diesel generator that drives the high pressure core spray system.

In a CANDU reactor, the fuel is loaded into horizontal pressure tubes, and is cooled by the flow of pressurized heavy water, In broad terms, a LOCA in a CANDU follows a similar sequence to that described for a PWR. A break in the heat transport system initiates reactor shut down. Despite these similarities with the PWR LOCA sequence, the horizontal pressure tube design and heavy water moderator mean that the details of the accident progression are quite different. In the CANDU-6 design, the coolant void reactivity is positive but the coolant void reactivity is negative in the advanced CANDU reactor (ACR) design.


The term flashing flow is reserved for the flow with dramatic evaporation of liquid due to a drop of pressure P. The process of production of the vapour phase is usually accompanied by massive thermodynamic and mechanical non-equilibrium by virtue of a difference in temperature and velocity of both phases.


This linear relationship does not always hold true. As the pressure drop is increased, the flow reaches a point where it no longer increases. Once this happens, additional increases in pressure drop across the valve do not result in additional flow, and flow is said to be choked. Here we will call this limiting or choking pressure drop the Terminal Pressure Drop, pT.


Conservation of energy dictates that since kinetic energy at the vena contracta has increased to a maximum, potential energy, in the form of static pressure, must decrease to a minimum. If the vena contracta pressure drops below the vapor pressure, vapor bubbles form at the vena contracta. Because vapor takes up a much larger volume that the liquid, the vapor bubbles fill the vena contracta and any additional lowering of the downstream pressure simply results in the bubbles getting bigger, but the flow does not increase. It is the formation of these bubbles in the vena contracta that causes the flow to become choked.

As the bubbles move down stream, the cross sectional flow area opens up, the velocity goes down and the pressure goes up. Now we have bubbles with an internal pressure equal to the vapor pressure surrounded by a higher pressure. The bubbles collapse in on themselves. This damage can happen very quickly, sometimes in as little as a few weeks or months. Because cavitation damage happens so quickly, we try to avoid cavitation at all costs. Very hard materials give some improvement, but usually the improved performance is not enough to justify the cost.

If we continue to decrease the downstream pressure, we reach a point where the pressure downstream of the valve is less than the vapor pressure of the liquid. The damage mechanism is a sand blasting effect. Downstream of the vena contracta the flow consists of a large volume of vapor with many tiny drops of liquid. Because the volume increases greatly when liquid vaporizes,

The noise caused by flashing is usually below 85 dBA and to the author's knowledge there is no method for calculating flashing noise.

In reality, at pressure drops approaching, but below the calculated value of pT, there is usually some formation of vapor bubbles and some degree of cavitation. Figure 5 shows what really happens as flow transitions from non-choked to fully choked flow. It is interesting to note that current control valve sizing methods do not include a method of calculating where the transition from non-choked to fully choked flow begins and ends.


The value of pT is a function of both the process condition and the valve's internal geometry represented by the experimentally determined Liquid Pressure Recovery Factor, FL. Higher values of FL are associated with valves that have a lower potential for cavitation, and smaller values of FL are associated with valves that have a greater potential for cavitation.

A more reliable method of preventing cavitation damage in control valves, according to one major control valve manufacturer, is to avoid valve applications where the calculated noise exceeds limits based on a broad range of application experience.

Computational Fluid Dynamics

The physical aspects of any fluid flow are governed by the following three fundamental principles: 1. Mass is conserved; 2. Energy is conserved. 3. It obeys the 2nd law of Newton. Computational fluid dynamics is, in part, the art of replacing the governing partial differential equations of fluid flow with numbers, and advancing these numbers in space and/or time to obtain a final numerical description of the complete flow field of interest.

Now in the previous slide the given expression is not all inclusive about ANSYS. there are some applications which involve integral equations rather than partial differential equations. all such problems involve the manipulation of, and the solution for, numbers. The end product of CFD is indeed a collection of numbers, in contrast to a closed-form analytical solution.

ANSYS is based on FEA ( Finite Element Analysis ). Before proceeding to obtain various solutions in it we should try to understand its working process very briefly.



The purpose of Finite Element Analysis (all varieties) is to mathematically model a physical problem that cannot be solved satisfactorily by other means. Typical reasons for difficulties in finding solutions are:1. that manual means of mathematical modelling cannot represent the problem sufficiently accurately. 2. that physical (real) models are deficient. 3. that full size prototypes are far too expensive.
In all Finite Element Analysis, the mathematical modelling of the problem is done by dividing the problem into small pieces whose performance can be modelled simply; Finite (size) Elements. The relationships between each neighbouring element are controlled so that, taken as a whole, the Mesh of Finite Elements approximates to the original problem.


For small deflection, elastic, static structural analysis, the system is modelled as:[K] {x} = {F} where [K] is the stiffness matrix {x} is the displacements (of the nodes) {F} is the forces (at the nodes) Solving this set of simultaneous equations yields the basis of the desired solution.


Many FEA systems are now often capable of modelling time varying quantities with nonlinear

properties and large changes in geometry. However the core of FEA analysis, and the most reliable, is still the static structural analysis limited to:elastic, homogeneous, isotropic materials linear material properties small deflections: geometry changes can be ignored all material well below yield: no plastic deformation

What is ANSYS?

ANSYS is a general purpose

finite element modeling package for numerically solving a wide variety of mechanical problems, used widely in industry to simulate the response of a physical system to structural loading, and thermal and electromagnetic effects. ANSYS uses the finiteelement method to solve the underlying governing equations and the associated problem-specific boundary conditions.


ANSYS can work integrated with other used

engineering software on desktop by adding CAD and FEA connection modules.

Advancement in 13.0 version


ANSYS 13.0 includes a great number of new and advanced features that make it easier, faster and cheaper for customers to bring new products to market, with a high degree of confidence in the ultimate results they will achieve. The product suite delivers new benefits in three major areas: * Greater accuracy and fidelity: As engineering requirements and design complexity increase, simulation software must produce more accurate results that reflect changing operating conditions over time. * Higher productivity: ANSYS 13.0 includes dozens of features that minimize the time and effort product development teams invest in simulation. * More computational power: For some engineering simulations, ANSYS 13.0 can provide speedup ratios that are five to 10 times greater than previous software releases. Even complex multiphysics simulations can be accomplished more quickly and efficiently.



ANSYS workbench 13.0 and created a new fluid flow analysis system in fluid flow (FLUENT) toolbar.This creates a new ANSYS FLUENT based analysis system in the project schematic.



ANSYS Design Modeler and set the unit in mm. Created the geometry of the pipe and the crack formation within it by giving certain dimension and selecting suitable planes. Generated the geometry.



the ANSYS Meshing application. Created name selections for geometry boundaries. Set some basic parameters for the ANSYS meshing application. Generated the mesh.


Proceeded to setting up a

CFD analysis Using ANSYS FLUENT. Enabled the proper options, Set some general settings for simulation and also the models,material settings, cell zone conditions, boundary conditions.


Set the solutions for the CFD simulation.

Changed the convergence criteria for the continuity

equation residual. Calculated a solution. Started a calculation by requesting 250 iterations. As the calculation processes ,the residuals plotted in the graphics window. Solution is converged after 180 iterations.

Some instant shots..


Some more.

Results and termination



results in ANSYS FLUENT. Displayed filled contours of pressure in all planes. After displaying the result Closed the ANSYS FLUENT and checked the all generated file write or not in the workbench window.

Problem Faced and Recovery


Installation problem

Meshing problem
Due to some unknown General settings Lack of data of boundary condition initially

In convergency

Key of Recovery Our group discussion ANSYS tutorials useful suggestions of our guide.


Nuclear Fuel Behavior in Loss-of-coolant Accident (LOCA) Conditions.


Schemes to compute unsteady flashing flows, M. Barret, E. Faucher, J.M. Herard

Basics of Cavitation E.I.P. Drosos, S.V. Paras and A.J. Karabelas.

Fluid Piping System. Indian Renewable Energy Development Agency, Core 4A, East Court, 1st Floor, India Habitat Centre, Lodhi Road, New Delhi 110003. Basics of Computational Fluid Dynamics. J. Anderson (Jr.) Basic aspects of Discritization.