Coupling neutronic and thermal hidraulics

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lutfi_fauzi
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Coupling Thermal
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers around developing software to couple neutronic and thermal hydraulics for a nuclear engineering thesis. The original poster is using Delphi 7 but seeks recommendations for faster software with a visual layout. Participants emphasize the complexity of coupling these systems, suggesting a focused approach on a specific reactor type to manage the project's scope. They recommend using lattice codes like CASMO for generating cross-sections and core simulators like SIMULATE for accurate calculations. The conversation highlights the challenges of steady-state versus unsteady-state calculations and the importance of choosing the right codes for effective coupling.
Lutfi_fauzi
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
I am on the last year of my study in nuclear ( engineering bachelor degree ).

I will make a software that can coupling neutronic and thermal hidraulics in my thesis

But i still confuse in case of choose the basic of software to make it because to handle Coupling neutronic and thermal hidraulics aspect need software base that have high speed prosess. Untill now i use delphi 7 as the basis software of my project, but if all of you have a recomended software that have speed more than delphi 7 and have a visual layout i will thanks to you.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
What core simulator and T/H code is one starting with?

Most core simulators have a basic T/H model in order to calculate the coolant temperature and density, which affect moderation and fuel temperature, which affect power distribution and reactivity.

I see that one is planning to use Delphi 7, an Object Pascal environment with to do object-oriented programming.

It might be worthwhile to limit the scope of ones project, considering that a core simulator or T/H is usually written by teams of engineers. For example, focus on a type of reactor system (PWR or BWR) and a single assembly, otherwise I believe it will be unmanageable.

See - http://www.studsvikscandpower.com/documents/publications/fp527.pdf

Because of spatial variation and temporal dependencies in power and exposure distribution, one would use a lattice code (e.g., CASMO) to generate the cross-sections for an assembly, which provide data for a core simulator (e.g., SIMULATE). That by itself is involved. Adding a detailed T/H code compounds the complexity, especially it involves 2-phases and cross-flows.

See also:

www.oecd-nea.org/science/docs/pubs/nea4452-crissue-s-vol1.pdf[/URL]
[PLAIN]www.oecd-nea.org/science/docs/pubs/nea5436-crissue-s-vol2.pdf
www.oecd-nea.org/science/docs/pubs/nea5434-crissue-s-vol3.pdf

http://www.oecd-nea.org/tools/abstract/detail/nea-1734
 
Last edited by a moderator:
hye

i am working on coupling for SCWR. i have coupled MCNP with a sub-channel code we developed for ourselves to be used with supercritical water systems. depends how you want to couple means for steady state (design calculation) or for unsteady state calculations. steady state are easy unsteady state needs a bit of more work.
http://elib.uni-stuttgart.de/opus/volltexte/2006/2751/pdf/FZKA7233_Waata.pdf

here is a thesis which helped me a lot in getting the basics.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306454907000655

this article can be a good help too. it gives the basic theory and kinds of coupling.

another thing is the choice of codes. if you are using MNCP then it is quite simple. if you are using some code to generate cross sections first and then use them later in some other code to calculate for whole assembly or core, then it can get quite tough as you may have to generate a lot of polynomials or have to devise some higher order table look up method to get accurate cross sections for your calculations.
 
Hello, I'm currently trying to compare theoretical results with an MCNP simulation. I'm using two discrete sets of data, intensity (probability) and linear attenuation coefficient, both functions of energy, to produce an attenuated energy spectrum after x-rays have passed through a thin layer of lead. I've been running through the calculations and I'm getting a higher average attenuated energy (~74 keV) than initial average energy (~33 keV). My guess is I'm doing something wrong somewhere...
Back
Top