4.7 Review

A review on recent heat transfer studies to supercritical pressure water in channels

期刊

APPLIED THERMAL ENGINEERING
卷 142, 期 -, 页码 573-596

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2018.07.007

关键词

Supercritical water; Heat transfer; Experimental investigation; Heat transfer deterioration; Turbulence modeling; Empirical correlation

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [11605057]
  2. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [2018MS046, 2016ZZD05]
  3. China Scholarship Council (CSC)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recent studies on heat transfer to super-critical water (SCW) in tubes, annuli and rod bundles have been reviewed in support of the development of supercritical water-cooled reactors. Experimental investigations are primarily focused on the heat transfer deterioration (HTD) to examine its general behaviors, transition boundary and physical mechanisms. Large amount of experimental data were obtained from the experiments supplementing the extensive database previously compiled for fossil fuel-fired power plants. Prediction methods for heat-transfer coefficient were developed from various databases. These methods provide reasonable predictions at normal and enhanced heat-transfer regions, but fail to capture HTD. The upstream effects have not been considered in the prediction methods and may have an impact on local heat transfer, particularly in a channel with a non-uniform axial power profile or with flow or pressure transients. Most numerical studies evaluated the applicability of turbulence models to SCW using the computational fluid dynamics tools. Significant challenges remain in establishing the reliability of the turbulence models and the modeling of buoyancy and turbulent heat flux. Direct numerical simulation and large eddy simulation have been applied in understanding the HTD phenomena. These studies are limited to simple channels over a short axial distance at relatively low Reynolds numbers.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据