矩形通道双群组界面浓度输运模型验证分析

于洋; 芦韡; 王文林; 宋小明; 曾辉; 郭凤晨; 李仲春; 孙梓彬

doi:10.13832/j.jnpe.2023.S2.0074

矩形通道双群组界面浓度输运模型验证分析

doi: 10.13832/j.jnpe.2023.S2.0074

1.
中国核动力研究设计院核反应堆系统设计技术重点实验室，成都，610213
2.
深圳技术大学中德智能制造学院，深圳，518118

详细信息

作者简介:
于　洋（1987—），男，博士研究生，现主要从事反应堆系统软件研发与仿真技术研究，E-mail: yuzhaoyang1987@qq.com

通讯作者:
王文林，男，E-mail: wlwang0618@126.com

中图分类号: TL334
计量
- 文章访问数: 38
- HTML全文浏览量: 29
- PDF下载量: 15
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2023-07-11
- 修回日期: 2023-08-19
- 刊出日期: 2023-12-30

Validation and Analysis of Two-group Interfacial Area Transport Model for Rectangular Channel

1.
Science and Technology on Reactor System Design Technology Laboratory, Nuclear Power Institute of China, Chengdu, 610213, China
2.
Sino-German College of Intelligent Manufacturing, Shenzhen Technology University, Shenzhen, Guangdong, 518118, China

摘要

摘要: 为了验证矩形通道双群组界面浓度输运模型的准确性与适用性，采用四探头电导探针测量方法，对竖直条件下矩形通道内气液两相界面输运特性开展了试验研究，获得了大量时均空泡份额、界面浓度等试验数据。试验在常温常压条件下进行，工质为空气-水，本体采用透明亚克力材质，尺寸为10 mm×200 mm，气、液相折算速度范围分别为0.047 ~2.014 m/s和0.315 ~4.416 m/s，流型范围覆盖泡状流、帽状湍流和搅混流区域。在此基础上，选取了8种试验工况对矩形通道双群组界面浓度输运模型进行验证，对影响界面浓度输运模型的气泡相互作用机制进行了分析。结果表明，群组1和群组2气泡界面浓度和空泡份额相对误差均在±10%以内，验证了矩形通道双群组界面浓度输运模型的正确性。
- 矩形通道 /
- 界面浓度 /
- 空泡份额 /
- 双群组界面浓度输运模型
Abstract: In order to demonstrate the accuracy and applicability of the two-group interfacial area transport model for rectangular channel, the transport characteristics of gas-liquid two-phase interface in rectangular channel under vertical condition were experimentally studied by using four-probe conductivity probe measurement method, and a large number of experimental data such as time-average void fraction and interfacial area concentration were obtained. The experiment was conducted in normal temperature and pressure with water and air as the working medium. The test sections of the channel were made of transparent acrylic material with a cross section of 10 mm×200 mm, and converted velocities of gas and liquid were 0.047-2.014 m/s and 0.315-4.416 m/s, respectively. Flow patterns involve bubbly flow, cap-turbulent flow and churn flow. On this basis, eight experimental conditions were selected to verify the two-group interfacial area transport model for rectangular channel, and the bubble interaction mechanism affecting the interfacial area transport model was analyzed. The results show that the relative errors of bubble interfacial area concentration and void fraction in group 1 and group 2 are within 10%, which verifies the correctness of the two-group interfacial area transport model for rectangular channel.
- Rectangular channel /
- Interfacial area concentration /
- Void fraction /
- Two-group interfacial area transport model

HTML全文

图 1 径向测点分布示意图

Figure 1. Schematic Diagram of Radial Measure Point Distribution　　　　　

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 2 基于Mishima&Ishii流型图（1984）的试验工况

j_g—气相折算速度；j_f—液相折算速度；图中不同的数字代表不同的验证工况点

Figure 2. Experimental Condition of Mishima&Ishii (1984)

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 3 程序计算流程图

Figure 3. Flow Chart of Code

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 4 泡状流条件下不同工况界面浓度和空泡份额参数变化对比图（误差带±10%）

Figure 4. Comparison of Interfacial Area Concentration and Void Fraction under Bubbly Flow Regime (Errorbar ±10%)

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 5 Run14工况界面浓度和空泡份额参数变化对比图

Figure 5. Comparison of Interfacial Area Concentration and Void Fraction in Run14

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 6 Run19工况界面浓度和空泡份额参数变化对比图

Figure 6. Comparison of Interfacial Area Concentration and Void Fraction in Run19

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

表 1 验证工况数据

Table 1. Validation Condition Data

序号	工况点	液相折算速度/(m·s⁻¹)	气相折算速度/(m·s⁻¹)	流型
1	工况1（Run1）	0.315	0.047	泡状流
2	工况2（Run2）	0.946	0.047	泡状流
3	工况3（Run3）	1.893	0.095	泡状流
4	工况4（Run4）	0.946	0.188	泡状流
5	工况5（Run5）	1.893	0.193	泡状流
6	工况9（Run9）	4.416	0.936	泡状流
7	工况14（Run14）	0.631	0.418	帽状湍流
8	工况19（Run19）	1.893	0.967	搅混流

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(10)

[1]	刘航. 棒束结构通道内两相流界面输运特性及理论模型[D]. 重庆: 重庆大学,2018.
[2]	KIM S, ISHII M, WU A, et al. Interfacial structures of confined air-water two-phase bubbly flow[J]. Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science, 2002, 26(5): 461-472. doi: 10.1016/S0894-1777(02)00152-8
[3]	KIM S, SUN X D, ISHII M, et al. Interfacial area transport and evaluation of source and sink terms for confined air-water bubbly flow[J]. Nuclear Engineering and Design, 2003, 219(1): 61-75. doi: 10.1016/S0029-5493(02)00289-3
[4]	SUN X D, KIM S, ISHII M, et al. Modeling of bubble coalescence and disintegration in confined upward two-phase flow[J]. Nuclear Engineering and Design, 2004, 230(1-3): 3-26. doi: 10.1016/j.nucengdes.2003.10.008
[5]	SUN X D. Two-group interfacial area transport equation for a confined test section[D]. West Lafayette: Purdue University, 2001.
[6]	于洋,宋小明,刘东,等. 矩形通道双群组界面浓度输运模型与验证方法研究[J]. 核动力工程,2021, 42(S1): 113-120. doi: 10.13832/j.jnpe.2021.S1.0113
[7]	ISHII M. Thermo-fluid dynamic theory of two-phase flow[M]. Eyrolles: Direction des Etudes et Re-cherches d’Electricité, 1975,217-240 .
[8]	WU Q, KIM S, ISHII M, et al. One-group interfacial area transport in vertical bubbly flow[J]. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 1998, 41(8-9): 1103-1112. doi: 10.1016/S0017-9310(97)00167-1
[9]	KIM S. Interfacial area transport equation and measurement of local interfacial characteristics[D]. West Lafayette: Purdue University, 1999.
[10]	WOROSZ T S. interfacial area transport equation for bubbly to cap-bubbly transition flows[D]. State College: The Pennsylvania State University, 2015.