Begell House Inc.
Multiphase Science and Technology
MST
0276-1459
6
1-4
1992
PHYSICAL BENCHMARKING EXERCISE: INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW
1-3
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.10
Theo G.
Theofanous
Center for Risk Studies and Safety, University of California, Santa Barbara, 6740 Cortona Drive, Goleta, CA-93117, California, USA
W. H.
Amarasooriya
Department of Chemical and Nuclear Engineering, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106
This contribution summarizes the results of the multi-phase flow physical benchmarking exercises arising from the Workshops on Two-Phase Flow Fundamentals organized under the auspices of US Department Energy and the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI). A central objective of these Workshops was to devise and approve experimental Data Sets and Numerical Benchmark Tests against which modelling methods could be evaluated. The first eighteen experimental Data Sets were published in Vol. 3 of Multiphase Science and Technology and a further 12 Data Sets are published in Vol. 6 (pp.145−519). These data provide valuable results for checking predictions.
As part of the Workshops, systematic comparisons were added between a number of Data Sets and available computer codes. The summaries of the basic codes are given in Multiphase Science and Technology, Vol. 6, pp.721−808. Comparisons between predictions and data sets are given for Data Sets No. 1, 4, 5, 9, 11, 12, 13, 16, 18, 21. These results are presented in succession in Multiphase Science and Technology, Vol. 6, pp.5−144.
The contributors to the calculation exercises were as follows:
M. Akimoto, N. Aksan, G. Analytis, M. Andreani, K. E. Carlson, M. Corradini, J. M. Cuta, J. S. Duffield, D. Emmerechts, A. Fritte, G. Friz, S. Gao, M. Giot, A. H. Govan, G. F. Hewitt, M. Hirano, A. Hora, H. Inoue, S. Kalkach-Navaro, H. Kamo, D. Kim, R. Kirmse, N. Kurul, S. J. Lee, D. C. Leslie, S. Lomperski, P. K. Malhotra, R. Nijsing, H. Osaki, D. G. Owen, L. N. Persen, M. Z. Podowski, C. Prakash, V. H. Ransom, J. C. Rousseau, I. Shepherd, C. W. Stewart, F. Tanabe, D. G. Tatchell, V. Teschendorff, J. R. Travis, T. Watanabe, P. B. Whalley, G. Yadigaroglu.
COMPARISONS OF PREDICTIONS WITH EXPERIMENTAL DATA SET NO.1: PRESSURE DROP AND ENTRAINED FRACTION IN FULLY DEVELOPED FLOW
5-13
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.20
Theo G.
Theofanous
Center for Risk Studies and Safety, University of California, Santa Barbara, 6740 Cortona Drive, Goleta, CA-93117, California, USA
W. H.
Amarasooriya
Department of Chemical and Nuclear Engineering, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106
Comparisons are reported between predictions and experiments for fully developed air-water flow in a vertical tube (Data Set No. 1, G.F. Hewitt and D.G. Owen, Multiphase Science & Technology, Vol. 3, pp.145-154, 1987). The participants in the calculations were M. Hirano, T. Watanabe, H. Kamo, H. Osaki, H. Inoue, F. Tanabe, M. Akimoto (JAERI), A. H. Govan, G. F. Hewitt, D. G. Owen (Harwell), A. H. Govan, P. B. Whalley (UK AEA Harwell/University of Oxford), S. Gao, D. C. Leslie (Queen Mary College, London), L. N. Persen (NTNU Trondheim). Very large discrepancies occur between the predictions themselves and between the predictions and experiments. It is concluded that taking into account waves and turbulence effects in both core and film is necessary to improve the modelling.
COMPARISONS OF PREDICTIONS WITH EXPERIMENTAL DATA SET NO.4: PHASE DISTRIBUTION IN A TRIANGULAR DUCT
15-21
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.30
Theo G.
Theofanous
Center for Risk Studies and Safety, University of California, Santa Barbara, 6740 Cortona Drive, Goleta, CA-93117, California, USA
W. H.
Amarasooriya
Department of Chemical and Nuclear Engineering, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106
Predictions obtained by C. Prakash and D. G. Tatchell (CHAM) using the PHEONICS code were compared with the experimental Data Set No. 4 (R.T. Lahey, Multiphase Science and Technology, Vol.3, pp.184−231, 1987). It was concluded that, though it was now possible to attain the prediction of complex three-dimensional flows, considerable improvements would be required to bring the predictions into agreement with the data.
COMPARISONS WITH PREDICTIONS WITH EXPERIMENTAL DATA SET NO. 5: AIR-WATER COUNTER-CURRENT FLOW IN VERTICAL TUBES
23-37
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.40
Theo G.
Theofanous
Center for Risk Studies and Safety, University of California, Santa Barbara, 6740 Cortona Drive, Goleta, CA-93117, California, USA
W. H.
Amarasooriya
Department of Chemical and Nuclear Engineering, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106
Predictions obtained by D. Emmerechts and M. Giot (University of Louvain) and by J. M. Cuta, D. Kim, C. W. Stewart (PNL) are compared with the experimental Data Set No. 5 (Bankoff & Lee, Multiphase Science and Technology Vol. 3, pp. 232−270, 1987). It was concluded that an analytical prediction of flooding consistent with other flow characteristics remained a significant challenge. The results were sensitive to the test section geometries.
COMPARISONS WITH PREDICTIONS WITH EXPERIMENTAL DATA SET NO. 9: DIVIDING FLOW IN A T-JUNCTION
39-49
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.50
Theo G.
Theofanous
Center for Risk Studies and Safety, University of California, Santa Barbara, 6740 Cortona Drive, Goleta, CA-93117, California, USA
W. H.
Amarasooriya
Department of Chemical and Nuclear Engineering, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106
Predictions obtained by S. Kalkach-Navarro, S. J. Lee, M. J. Podowski (RPI) and by C. Prakash (CHAM) are compared with the experimental Data Set No. 9 (R. T. Lahey, Multiphase Science and Technology Vol. 3, pp. 316−347, 1987) on dividing flow in a T-junction. Many predictions were encouraging; however, it is noted that significant additional efforts are needed in the area of closures and possibly including virtual mass effects.
COMPARISONS WITH PREDICTIONS WITH EXPERIMENTAL DATA SET NO. 11: REFLUX CONDENSATION
51-56
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.60
Theo G.
Theofanous
Center for Risk Studies and Safety, University of California, Santa Barbara, 6740 Cortona Drive, Goleta, CA-93117, California, USA
W. H.
Amarasooriya
Department of Chemical and Nuclear Engineering, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106
Predictions obtained by M. Corradini (University of Wisconsin) are compared with the experimental Data Set No. 11 (S. Banerjee and Q. Nguyen, Multiphase Science and Technology Vol. 3, pp. 360−367, 1987) on reflux condensation. In the model used, all of the liquid is calculated (incorrectly) to be pulled up by the vapour though there may be some heat sink errors which rendered the data less than perfect.
COMPARISONS WITH PREDICTIONS WITH EXPERIMENTAL DATA SET NO. 12: ANNULAR FLOW EVAPORATION
57-66
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.70
Theo G.
Theofanous
Center for Risk Studies and Safety, University of California, Santa Barbara, 6740 Cortona Drive, Goleta, CA-93117, California, USA
W. H.
Amarasooriya
Department of Chemical and Nuclear Engineering, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106
This paper summarizes calculations carried out by A. H. Govan , P. B. Whalley, G. F. Hewitt (UK AEA Harwell/Oxford Uniersity), J. M. Cuta, D. Kim, C. W. Stewart (PNL), and M. Hirano, T. Watanabe, H. Kamo, H. Osaki, H. Inoue, F. Tanabe, M. Akimoto (JAERI) on prediction of experimental Data Set No. 12 (G. F. Hewitt, Multiphase Science and Technology Vol. 3, pp. 368−377, 1987) on annular flow evaporation. It was concluded that the predicted trends were, on the whole, encouraging though more structural approaches were needed if true predictive capability is to be achieved.
COMPARISONS WITH PREDICTIONS WITH EXPERIMENTAL DATA SET NO. 13: FLASHING FLOW
67-76
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.80
Theo G.
Theofanous
Center for Risk Studies and Safety, University of California, Santa Barbara, 6740 Cortona Drive, Goleta, CA-93117, California, USA
W. H.
Amarasooriya
Department of Chemical and Nuclear Engineering, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106
Predictions obtained by J. R. Travis (LANL), A. Fritte and M. Giot (University of Louvain) and J. C. Rousseau (Grenoble) are compared with the experimental Data Set No. 13 (J. C. Rousseau, Multiphase Science and Technology Vol. 3, pp. 378−389, 1987) on flashing flows. It was concluded that widely different modelling approaches can reasonably represent the experimental data.
COMPARISONS WITH PREDICTIONS WITH EXPERIMENTAL DATA SET NO. 16: CONDENSATION IN STRATIFIED FLOW
77-93
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.90
Theo G.
Theofanous
Center for Risk Studies and Safety, University of California, Santa Barbara, 6740 Cortona Drive, Goleta, CA-93117, California, USA
W. H.
Amarasooriya
Department of Chemical and Nuclear Engineering, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106
Predictions carried out by N. Kurul, M. Z. Podowski (RPI), A. Hora, V. Teschendorff (GRS) and C. Prakash (CHAM) are compared with the experimental Data Set No. 16 (S. G. Bankoff and S. C. Lee, Multiphase Science and Technology Vol. 3, pp. 398−422, 1987) on condensation in stratified flow. It is concluded that current modelling approach has significant limitations in reflecting various features that affect condensation in stratified flow. Methods which explicitly account for turbulence in the liquid and its dependence on interfacial shear are needed, but were not used in the prediction methods.
COMPARISONS WITH PREDICTIONS WITH EXPERIMENTAL DATA SET NO. 18: BLOWDOWN
95-106
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.100
Theo G.
Theofanous
Center for Risk Studies and Safety, University of California, Santa Barbara, 6740 Cortona Drive, Goleta, CA-93117, California, USA
W. H.
Amarasooriya
Department of Chemical and Nuclear Engineering, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106
Predictions by N. Aksan, M. Andreani, G. Analytis, G. Yadigaroglu (ETH), V. H. Ransom, K. E. Carlson (INEL), M. L. Corradini, S. Lomperski (University of Wisconsin), J. S. Duffield, G. Friz, F. Nijsing, I. Shepherd (ISPRA), J. Travis (LANL) and J. M. Cuta, D. Kim, C. W. Stewart (PNL) are compared with the experimental Data Set No. 18 (J. C. Rousseau, Multiphase Science and Technology Vol. 3, pp. 442−449, 1987) on blowdown of simple pipe geometries. It was found that the prediction capability was variable; the measured void fraction data indicated an inverted annular flow regime but this could not be predicted in the 1D calculations. More advanced calculations seem to be necessary.
COMPARISONS WITH PREDICTIONS WITH EXPERIMENTAL DATA SET NO. 21: LEVEL SWELL DURING VESSEL BLOWDOWN
107-144
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.110
Theo G.
Theofanous
Center for Risk Studies and Safety, University of California, Santa Barbara, 6740 Cortona Drive, Goleta, CA-93117, California, USA
W. H.
Amarasooriya
Department of Chemical and Nuclear Engineering, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106
Predictions by R. Kirmse, P. K. Malhotra (GRS), M. Andreani, N. Aksan, G. Analytis, G. Yadigaroglu (ETH), V. H. Ransom, K. E. Carlson (INEL), J. S. Duffield, G. Friz, F. Nijsing, I. Shepherd (ISPRA), M. L. Corradini, S. Lomperski (University of Wisconsin), J. C. Rousseau (Grenoble) and M. Hirano, T. Watanabe, H. Kamo, H. Osaki, H. Inoue, F. Tanabe, M. Akimoto (JAERI) are compared with the experimental Data Set No. 21 (G. L. Sozzi, Multiphase Science and Technology Vol. 6, pp. 167−211, 1992) on level swell during vessel blowdown. The pressure decay was well predicted but results for void fraction (level swell) show variable agreement. This may partly reflect the different modelization scheme used. This paper concludes with overall conclusions and recommendations regarding the physical benchmarking exercise.
ADDITIONAL EXPERIMENTAL DATA SETS FOR PHYSICAL BENCHMARKING: INTRODUCTION
145-149
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.120
Geoffrey F.
Hewitt
Department of Chemical Engineering & Chemical Technology, Imperial College of Science, Technology & Medicine, Prince Consort Road, London SW7 2B Y, England, UK
To supplement Experimental Data Sets published in Vol. 3 of Multiphase Science and Technology, some additional Data Sets were defined later as part of the activities of the Workshops on Two-Phase Fundamentals. The contributors to these additional Data Sets were W. H. Amarasooriya, J. P. Brill, I. Catton, A. Hashemi, H. John, I. Kataoka, J. H. Kim, R. T. Lahey Jr., G. Lautenschlager, C. K. B. Lee, S. J. Lee, F. Maylinger, I. Michiyonshi, J. Reiman, A. E. Ruggles, W. Seeger, A. Serizawa, G. L. Sozzi, T. G. Theofanous, G. Yadigaroglu. A further 12 data sets were defined and should form a useful basis for further testing of prediction methods. The data sets were classified (together with the earlier data sets) in terms of the nature of the flow (no phase change, phase change, steady state, transient etc.) and the geometries (vertical ducts, horizontal ducts, etc.).
EXPERIMENTAL DATA SET NO. 19: FLOW IN VERTICAL WELLS
151-157
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.130
James P.
Brill
Tulsa University Fluid Flow Projects
A data set is presented for a 457.2 m long experimental well involving two-phase (air/water, air/oil) vertical upflow through tubes of various diameter. These data were exceptional in that the tube was very long, giving rise to large changes in pressure along its length.
EXPERIMENTAL DATA SET NO. 20: FLOW IN LARGE DIAMETER FLOW LINES
159-166
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.140
James P.
Brill
Tulsa University Fluid Flow Projects
Detailed data were presented for pressure drop, phase fraction, and slug characteristics for flow in 4.5 km long flow lines of 303.2 mm and 388.8 mm diameter. These data are therefore obtained for conditions outside of those normally encountered in laboratory experiments.
EXPERIMENTAL DATA SET NO. 21: LEVEL SWELL AND VOID FRACTION MEASUREMENTS DURING VESSEL BLOW DOWN EXPERIMENTS
167-211
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.150
G. L.
Sozzi
GE Nuclear Energy, United States of America
Data are presented for the level swell occurring during blowdown (depressurization) of two vessels having internal diameters of 0.288 and 1.19 m diameter. The extent of level swell following the depressurization was determined as a function of time, following blowdown. Results are applicable to a number of nuclear reactor safety conditions.
EXPERIMENTAL DATA SET NO. 22: TRANSITION FROM SLUG TO ANNULAR FLOW IN HORIZONTAL PIPES
213-239
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.160
J.
Reimann
Kernforschungszentrun Karlsruhe, Institut fur Reaktorbauelements D-7500 Karlsruhe, Germany
H.
John
Kernforschungszentrun Karlsruhe, Institut fur Reaktorbauelements D-7500 Karlsruhe, Germany
W.
Seeger
TUV Ulm, Germany
New data are presented for the slug-annular transition in horizontal pipes and are compared with existing prediction methods for the transition. Enormous discrepancies exist between the data and the prediction methods and between the prediction methods themselves.
EXPERIMENTAL DATA SET NO. 23: FLOW REGIMES IN A MODEL PWR HOT LEG
241-255
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.170
Ab
Hashemi
Lockheed Martin Missiles & Space, Advanced Technology Center, Palo Alto, California, USA
Jong H.
Kim
Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA
A total of 48 tests are described with a 30.5 cm pipe diameter simulating the PWR hot leg geometry. The experiments were carried out using air-water flows, flow regimes were observed and local void fraction was measured.
EXPERIMENTAL DATA SET NO. 24: PHASE DISTRIBUTION IN BUBBLY FLOW
257-301
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.180
Akimi
Serizawa
Department of Nuclear Engineering, Kyoto University, Yoshida-Honmachi, Kyoto 606-8501, Japan
Isao
Kataoka
Institute of Atomic Energy, Kyoto University, Japan
Itaru
Michiyoshi
Department of Nuclear Engineering, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan ; Engineering College of Matsue, Matsue, Japan
Detailed measurements are reported of characteristics of bubbly flow (void fraction, bubble velocity, bubble frequency, interfacial area concentration, liquid velocity and turbulence) in vertical bubbly flow in a 60 mm diameter tube.
EXPERIMENTAL DATA SET NO. 25: PHASE DISTRIBUTION AND TWO-PHASE TURBULENCE FOR BUBBLY FLOWS IN PIPES
303-349
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.190
S. J.
Lee
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, New York, USA
Measurements of void fraction, bubble diameter and local turbulence characteristics are presented for air-water flows in vertical 57 mm diameter pipe. Boundary layer and 3-Dimensional conical hot-film probes were used.
EXPERIMENTAL DATA SET NO. 26: THE DISPERSION AND ATTENUATION OF SMALL AMPLITUDE STANDING WAVES AND THE PROPAGATION OF ACOUSTIC PRESSURE PULSES IN BUBBLY AIR/WATER TWO-PHASE FLOWS
353-371
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.200
Arthur E.
Ruggles
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, New York, USA; Nuclear Engineering Department, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996-2300
A set of data were presented for the attenuation and propagation of sound waves in vertical two-phase bubbly flows.
EXPERIMENTAL DATA SET NO. 27: POST-DRYOUT HEAT TRANSFER IN STRAIGHT AND CURVED TUBES
373-407
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.210
G.
Lautenschlager
Institute A für Thermodynamic, Technical University of Munich
Franz
Mayinger
Lehrstuhl A für Thermodynamik, Technische Universität München, München, Germany; Technical University, Hannover, FRG Institut fur Verfahrenstechnik, Hanover, Germany
Experimental data are presented for post-dryout heat transfer for refrigerant 12 flow in straight and curved 28.5 mm diameter tubes. Measurements of wall temperatures, vapour temperatures and droplet concentrations are presented for a wide range of experimental conditions.
EXPERIMENTAL DATA SET NO. 28: REFLOOD OF A HOT TUBE
409-443
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.220
G.
Yadigaroglu
Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH), Nuclear Engineering Laboratory ETH Zentrum, CH-8092 Zurich, Switzerland
Detailed experimental data are presented for the rewetting of a 3.66 m long Inconel-600 tube, having an internal diameter of 14.35 mm. Two tests are reported in which the initial wall temperatures were 513 and 747 °C. The extent of the carryover liquid beyond rewetting front was determined.
EXPERIMENTAL DATA SET NO. 29: STEAM-WATER BLOWDOWN INTO A LIQUID POOL
445-469
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.230
Theo G.
Theofanous
Center for Risk Studies and Safety, University of California, Santa Barbara, 6740 Cortona Drive, Goleta, CA-93117, California, USA
W. H.
Amarasooriya
Department of Chemical and Nuclear Engineering, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106
Experimental data are given for the blowdown of a 305 mm diameter, 305 mm long vessel containing high pressure water. The blowdown takes place into another vessel containing cold water.
EXPERIMENTAL DATA SET NO. 30: LOW STEAM FLUX INJECTION INTO SUBCOOLED WATER
471-519
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.240
C. K. B.
Lee
Mechanical, Aerospace and Nuclear Engineering Department, University of California, Los Angeles, USA
Ivan
Catton
Morin, Martinelli, Gier Memorial Heat Transfer Laboratory, Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, School of Engineering and Applied Science, University of California, Los Angeles, USA
Detailed data are presented for the injection of steam into a vessel of cold water. Various flow regimes are observed and detailed measurements of transient phenomena are presented.
NUMERICAL BENCHMARK EXERCISE: INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW
521-527
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.250
Dudley Brian
Spalding
Concentration, Heat, and Momentum (CHAM), Limited, Bakery House, 40 High Street, Wimbledon Village, London SW19 5AU, England
Liu
Jun
Concentration, Heat and Momentum Ltd.(CHAM), Bukey House, 40 High Street, Wimbledon Village, London, SW11 5AU, England
H.
Qin
Concentration, Heat and Momentum Ltd.(CHAM), Bukey House, 40 High Street, Wimbledon Village, London, SW11 5AU, England
D.
Radosavjevic
Concentration, Heat and Momentum Ltd.(CHAM), Bukey House, 40 High Street, Wimbledon Village, London, SW11 5AU, England
K.
Taylor
Concentration, Heat and Momentum Ltd.(CHAM), Bukey House, 40 High Street, Wimbledon Village, London, SW11 5AU, England
F.
Villasenor
Concentration, Heat and Momentum Ltd.(CHAM), Bukey House, 40 High Street, Wimbledon Village, London, SW11 5AU, England
M. C.
Walsh
Concentration, Heat and Momentum Ltd.(CHAM), Bukey House, 40 High Street, Wimbledon Village, London, SW11 5AU, England
Z.
Wu
Concentration, Heat and Momentum Ltd.(CHAM), Bukey House, 40 High Street, Wimbledon Village, London, SW11 5AU, England
As part of the activities of the Workshops on Two-Phase Flow Fundamentals (on the auspices of US Department of Energy), a series of numerical benchmark tests were devised against which prediction methods from multiphase flows could be tested. The numerical benchmark tests are described in detail in Vol. 3, Multiphase Science and Technology. In this present volume (Vol. 6), results of comparisons between benchmark tests and predictions from computer codes for multiphase flow are presented. The contributors to the calculation exercises were M. Akimoto, P. S. Black, K. E. Carlson, J. M. Cuta, A. Deguchi, J. S. Duffield, G. Friz, M. Hirano, H. Inoue, A. V. Jones, H. Kamo, D. Kim, J. Liu, R. Nijsing, H. Ninokata, T. Okano, H. Osaki, H. Qin, V. H. Ransom, D. Radosavljevic, J. C. Roussea, I. Shepherd, D. B. Spalding, C. W. Stewart, F. Tanabe, K. Taylor, F. Villasenor, M. C. Walsh, T. Watanabe, Z. Wu and D. L. Youngs. This present paper introduces the history and the nature and rationale of the selected benchmark tests. It was found that the exercise has been very interesting in providing a framework for comparing methods and has shown the importance of ensuring proper numerical validity as an essential condition for success in predicting two-phase systems.
COMPARISONS OF PREDICTIONS WITH NUMERICAL BENCHMARK TEST NO. 1.1: NOZZLE FLOW
528-545
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.260
Z.
Wu
Concentration, Heat and Momentum Ltd.(CHAM), Bukey House, 40 High Street, Wimbledon Village, London, SW11 5AU, England
Dudley Brian
Spalding
Concentration, Heat, and Momentum (CHAM), Limited, Bakery House, 40 High Street, Wimbledon Village, London SW19 5AU, England
Predictions obtained by six different codes are compared with Numerical Benchmark Test No. 1.1 on nozzle flow (D. B. Spalding, Multiphase Science and Technology, Vol. 3, pp.456−458, 1987). There was reasonable agreement between the predictions of the majority of the codes, with one code showing some idiosyncrasies (thus illustrating the usefulness of the numerical benchmark test procedure).
COMPARISONS OF PREDICTIONS WITH NUMERICAL BENCHMARK TEST NO. 1.2: MONOPROPELLANT ROCKET
547-554
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.270
K.
Taylor
Concentration, Heat and Momentum Ltd.(CHAM), Bukey House, 40 High Street, Wimbledon Village, London, SW11 5AU, England
Dudley Brian
Spalding
Concentration, Heat, and Momentum (CHAM), Limited, Bakery House, 40 High Street, Wimbledon Village, London SW19 5AU, England
Predictions using the PHOENICS and MINCS codes were compared with Numerical Benchmark Test No. 1.1 for a monopropellant rocket (D. B. Spalding, Multiphase Science and Technology, Vol. 3, pp.459−461, 1987). The agreement between the numerical calculations and the exact solution is quite good for both codes, although there are minor discrepancies in predicted phase volume fraction and drop diameter.
COMPARISONS OF PREDICTIONS WITH NUMERICAL BENCHMARK TEST NO. 1.3: BOILING IN PIPE
555-575
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.280
Dudley Brian
Spalding
Concentration, Heat, and Momentum (CHAM), Limited, Bakery House, 40 High Street, Wimbledon Village, London SW19 5AU, England
H.
Qin
Concentration, Heat and Momentum Ltd.(CHAM), Bukey House, 40 High Street, Wimbledon Village, London, SW11 5AU, England
Predictions obtained by five different computer codes were compared with Numerical Benchmark Test No. 1.3 for boiling in pipe (D. B. Spalding, Multiphase Science and Technology, Vol. 3, pp.462−464, 1987). Despite its apparent simplicity, this problem brought to light significant differences between the various computer codes.
COMPARISONS OF PREDICTIONS WITH NUMERICAL BENCHMARK TEST NO. 2.1: FAUCET FLOW
577-590
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.290
H.
Qin
Concentration, Heat and Momentum Ltd.(CHAM), Bukey House, 40 High Street, Wimbledon Village, London, SW11 5AU, England
Predictions obtained by five different computer codes for Numerical Benchmark Test No. 2.1 on faucet flow (V. H. Ransom, Multiphase Science and Technology, Vol. 3, pp.465−467, 1987) are reported. Though the differences between the computations performed with the four participating computer codes were not great, the problem underlines the well-known fact that numerical solution procedures which employ non-adaptive grids have difficulty in adequately simulating the motions of discontinuities.
COMPARISONS OF PREDICTIONS WITH NUMERICAL BENCHMARK TEST NO. 2.2: OSCILLATING MANOMETER
591-609
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.300
Liu
Jun
Concentration, Heat and Momentum Ltd.(CHAM), Bukey House, 40 High Street, Wimbledon Village, London, SW11 5AU, England
Dudley Brian
Spalding
Concentration, Heat, and Momentum (CHAM), Limited, Bakery House, 40 High Street, Wimbledon Village, London SW19 5AU, England
The analytical solution for the oscillating manometer numerical benchmark test (V. H. Ransom, Multiphase Science and Technology, Vol. 3, pp.468−470, 1987) was compared with the predictions of five different computer codes. The results demonstrated consistently that implicit methods led to a numerical damping of the manometer oscillation whereas non-implicit formulations gave much better solutions.
COMPARISONS OF PREDICTIONS WITH NUMERICAL BENCHMARK TEST NO. 2.3: EXPULSION OF STEAM BY SUB-COOLED WATER
611-621
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.310
K.
Taylor
Concentration, Heat and Momentum Ltd.(CHAM), Bukey House, 40 High Street, Wimbledon Village, London, SW11 5AU, England
Dudley Brian
Spalding
Concentration, Heat, and Momentum (CHAM), Limited, Bakery House, 40 High Street, Wimbledon Village, London SW19 5AU, England
Predictions obtained using four different computer codes are compared with analytical numerical bench mark tests on expulsion of steam by sub-cooled water (V. H. Ransom, Multiphase Science and Technology, Vol. 3, pp.471−473, 1987). The predictions from the computer codes differ considerably from the analytical solution and from each other. These differences can be ascribed to the differences in the way in which condensation rates are computed by each code.
COMPARISONS OF PREDICTIONS WITH NUMERICAL BENCHMARK TEST NO. 2.4: ONE-DIMENSIONAL SEDIMENTATION
623-637
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.320
M. C.
Walsh
Concentration, Heat and Momentum Ltd.(CHAM), Bukey House, 40 High Street, Wimbledon Village, London, SW11 5AU, England
Dudley Brian
Spalding
Concentration, Heat, and Momentum (CHAM), Limited, Bakery House, 40 High Street, Wimbledon Village, London SW19 5AU, England
Predictions obtained by five different computer codes are compared with the analytical solution for one-dimensional sedimentation (D. L. Youngs, Multiphase Science and Technology, Vol. 3, pp.474−476, 1987). Qualitatively, all the computer codes agree about what transpires, and they do not differ enormously from the exact solution. However, the deviations are larger for some codes than for others.
COMPARISONS OF PREDICTIONS WITH NUMERICAL BENCHMARK TEST NO. 2.5: KELVIN-HELMHOLTZ INSTABILITY
639-651
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.330
F.
Villasenor
Concentration, Heat and Momentum Ltd.(CHAM), Bukey House, 40 High Street, Wimbledon Village, London, SW11 5AU, England
Dudley Brian
Spalding
Concentration, Heat, and Momentum (CHAM), Limited, Bakery House, 40 High Street, Wimbledon Village, London SW19 5AU, England
Predictions obtained using four computer codes are compared with the analytical solution for Kelvin-Helmholtz instability for the conditions specified in Numerical Benchmark Test No. 2.5 (D. L. Youngs, Multiphase Science and Technology, Vol. 3, pp.477−479, 1987). There are considerable differences in the predictive instability growth between various codes. These results were given which showed that, with too fine a nodalisation, rapid growth of the instability occurs with numerical damping failing to stop the growth at high wave number instabilities.
COMPARISONS OF PREDICTIONS WITH NUMERICAL BENCHMARK TEST NO. 2.6: SHOCK-TUBE
653-662
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.340
D.
Radosavjevic
Concentration, Heat and Momentum Ltd.(CHAM), Bukey House, 40 High Street, Wimbledon Village, London, SW11 5AU, England
Predictions obtained using three different computer codes are compared for Numerical Benchmark Test No. 2.6 for a shock-tube (D. L. Youngs, Multiphase Science and Technology, Vol. 3, pp.480−482, 1987). All three codes agree in respect of qualitative features of the predictions, but there are important detailed differences.
COMPARISONS OF PREDICTIONS WITH NUMERICAL BENCHMARK TEST NO. 2.7: STRATIFIED FLOW
663-679
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.350
Z.
Wu
Concentration, Heat and Momentum Ltd.(CHAM), Bukey House, 40 High Street, Wimbledon Village, London, SW11 5AU, England
Dudley Brian
Spalding
Concentration, Heat, and Momentum (CHAM), Limited, Bakery House, 40 High Street, Wimbledon Village, London SW19 5AU, England
Predictions obtained using four different computer codes are compared with analytical solutions for a stratified flow case (D. B. Spalding, Multiphase Science and Technology, Vol. 3, pp.483−484, 1987). A number of the codes show unphysical oscillatory behaviour and the codes could differ in the predicted direction of the liquid flow.
COMPARISONS OF PREDICTIONS WITH NUMERICAL BENCHMARK TEST NO. 3.1: IDEALISED TEE-JUNCTION
681-686
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.360
F.
Villasenor
Concentration, Heat and Momentum Ltd.(CHAM), Bukey House, 40 High Street, Wimbledon Village, London, SW11 5AU, England
Dudley Brian
Spalding
Concentration, Heat, and Momentum (CHAM), Limited, Bakery House, 40 High Street, Wimbledon Village, London SW19 5AU, England
Results are presented for calculations carried out on Numerical Benchmark Test No. 3.1 for an idealised T-junction (D. B. Spalding, Multiphase Science and Technology, Vol. 3, pp.485−487, 1987) using the PHOENICS code. Plausible results were obtained although there are some problems in the way in which the boundary conditions are applied.
COMPARISONS OF PREDICTIONS WITH NUMERICAL BENCHMARK TEST NO. 3.2: BOILING IN A CHANNEL
687-697
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.370
Dudley Brian
Spalding
Concentration, Heat, and Momentum (CHAM), Limited, Bakery House, 40 High Street, Wimbledon Village, London SW19 5AU, England
D.
Radosavjevic
Concentration, Heat and Momentum Ltd.(CHAM), Bukey House, 40 High Street, Wimbledon Village, London, SW11 5AU, England
Predictions are obtained using the PHOENICS and SABENA codes are compared for the conditions specified Numerical Benchmark Test No.3.2 (D. B. Spalding, Multiphase Science and Technology, Vol. 3, pp.488−491, 1987) for boiling in a channel. The results from the two codes differ significantly and significant differences are also revealed (from the PHOENICS code) between the two-dimensional and one-dimensional solutions.
COMPARISONS OF PREDICTIONS WITH NUMERICAL BENCHMARK TEST NO. 4.1: TWO-DIMENSIONAL SEDIMENTATION
699-704
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.380
M. C.
Walsh
Concentration, Heat and Momentum Ltd.(CHAM), Bukey House, 40 High Street, Wimbledon Village, London, SW11 5AU, England
Dudley Brian
Spalding
Concentration, Heat, and Momentum (CHAM), Limited, Bakery House, 40 High Street, Wimbledon Village, London SW19 5AU, England
Predictions obtained using various versions of the PHOENICS code are compared for Numerical Benchmark Test No.4.1 (D. L. Youngs, Multiphase Science and Technology, Vol. 3, pp.492−494, 1987). The predictions are shown to be particularly sensitive to the numerical analysis options that are activated within the codes.
COMPARISONS OF PREDICTIONS WITH NUMERICAL BENCHMARK TEST NO. 4.2: EXPULSION OF WATER BY AIR
705-719
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.390
Liu
Jun
Concentration, Heat and Momentum Ltd.(CHAM), Bukey House, 40 High Street, Wimbledon Village, London, SW11 5AU, England
Dudley Brian
Spalding
Concentration, Heat, and Momentum (CHAM), Limited, Bakery House, 40 High Street, Wimbledon Village, London SW19 5AU, England
Predictions obtained by the PHOENICS and COBRA/TRAC codes are compared for Numerical Benchmark Test No.4.2: expulsion of water by air (D. B. Spalding, Multiphase Science and Technology, Vol. 3, pp.495−497, 1987). Comparisons between the two codes indicate that they agree fairly well up to 5 seconds. Differences appear thereafter.
COMPUTER CODE DESCRIPTIONS: INTRODUCTION
721-722
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.400
Dudley Brian
Spalding
Concentration, Heat, and Momentum (CHAM), Limited, Bakery House, 40 High Street, Wimbledon Village, London SW19 5AU, England
Geoffrey F.
Hewitt
Department of Chemical Engineering & Chemical Technology, Imperial College of Science, Technology & Medicine, Prince Consort Road, London SW7 2B Y, England, UK
In Vol. 6 of Multiphase Science and Technology, extensive comparisons have been presented between experimental Data Sets and with Numerical Benchmark Test with a large variety of computer codes as used for predictions of multiphase flows in industry. Those supplying calculations were asked to also provide a brief summary of the characteristics of the computer codes which were used. The summaries are included in this Volume of Multiphase Science and Technology for completeness. It should be emphasized that the summary refers to the state of the computer codes at the time of the exercises conducted through the Workshop on Two-Phase Fundamentals, namely in the early 1990s. It is to be expected that all the codes described will be further developed in the future. We are grateful to the contributors to these specification exercises who included M. Akimoto, P. S. Black, M. Hirano, H. Inoue, A. V. Jones, H. Kamo, A. Kohsaka, H. Ninokata, R. Nijsing, H. Osaki, V. H. Ransom, J. C. Rousseau, C. W. Stewart, T. Watanabe, D. L. Youngs.
COMPUTER CODE DESCRIPTION NO. 1: ATHENA
723-729
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.410
V.H.
Ransom
Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, Idaho Falls, ID 83415, USA
This paper gives a brief description of the ATHENA Code which was developed for safety analysis of magnetic containment used in energy systems. The basic equations with the numerical solution scheme and the constitutive models are outlined.
COMPUTER CODE DESCRIPTION NO. 2: CATHARE
731
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.420
J. C.
Rousseau
Commissariat a I'Energie Atomique, Department des Reacteurs a Eau Serivice d'Etudes Thermohydrauliques, Centre d'Etudes Nucleaires de Grenoble, Grenoble, France
A brief description is given of the CATHARE thermal hydraulic system code jointed developed by CEA, EDF and Framatome. The code is one-dimensional, two-fluid code which solves up to six equations for mass, momentum and total energy.
COMPUTER CODE DESCRIPTION NO. 3: COBRA/TRAC
733-747
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.430
C. W.
Stewart
Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratories, Richland, Washington, USA
The BOBRA/TRAC code was developed as an analytical tool for examining thermal-hydraulic response of nuclear reactor primary circuit system. It uses three continuity, three momentum and two energy equations and constitutive relationships are related to flow pattern. Information is given on the solution schemes used in the code.
COMPUTER CODE DESCRIPTION NO. 4: DLY
749-750
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.440
D. L.
Youngs
Atomic Weapons Research Establishment, Aldermaston, UK
This brief contribution gives information on how the DLY code (which should be taken as a referring to generic series of code) was applied to Numerical Benchmark Test 2.4, 2.5 and 2.6.
COMPUTER CODE DESCRIPTION NO. 5: PHOENICS
751-763
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.450
Dudley Brian
Spalding
Concentration, Heat, and Momentum (CHAM), Limited, Bakery House, 40 High Street, Wimbledon Village, London SW19 5AU, England
The PHOENICS Code had its origins in the Mechanical Engineering Department of Imperial College but has subsequently been developed by Concentration, Heat and Momentum (CHAM) Ltd.. It is a general purpose fluid-fluid simulating complete code which solves the time averaged conservation equations. An example is given of a PHOENICS input file.
COMPUTER CODE DESCRIPTION NO. 6: PHOENICS VL
765-766
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.460
D. L.
Youngs
Atomic Weapons Research Establishment, Aldermaston, UK
A brief description is given of PHOENICS VL which is based on the PHOENICS Code, modified so as to employ an explicit transport routine for volume fraction and phase momentum.
COMPUTER CODE DESCRIPTION NO. 7: IMPI
767-774
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.470
A. V.
Jones
CEC Joint Research Centre, Ispra, Italy
IMPI is an Eulerian one-dimensional two-phase hydrodynamics code, which solves the physic conservation equations for mass, momentum and internal energy. The description of the code includes thermal dynamics relationships, heat transfer relationships, the methods of discretisation of the equations and numerical solution procedures.
COMPUTER CODE DESCRIPTION NO. 8: MINCS
775-791
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.480
Masayuki
Akimoto
Computing and Information Systems Center, Japan Atomic Energy Research Institute (JAERI), Tokai-mura, Naka-gun, Ibaraki-ken 319-11, Japan
M.
Hirano
Japan Atomic Energy Research Institute, Tokai-mura, Naka-gun, Ibaraki-ken 319-11, (0292) 82-5978, Japan
Takayuki
Watanabe
Research Laboratory for Nuclear Reactors, Tokyo Institute of Technology, 2-12-1 O-okayama, Meguro-ku, Tokyo 152-8550, Japan
A.
Kohsaka
Japan Atomic Energy Research Institute, Tokai-mura, Naka-gun, Ibaraki-ken 319-11, (0292) 82-5978
H.
Kamo
Japan Information Service Ltd, Kita-aoyama 3-5-12, Minato-ku, Tokyo, (02)423-3240
H.
Inoue
Japan Information Service Ltd, Kita-aoyama 3-5-12, Minato-ku, Tokyo, (02)423-3240
H.
Osaki
Japan Information Service Ltd, Kita-aoyama 3-5-12, Minato-ku, Tokyo, (02)423-3240
MINCS is a two-phase flow analyzer code which is capable of analyzing transient two-phase flow. The structure and the modelling used in MINCS are described in this contribution.
COMPUTER CODE DESCRIPTION NO. 9: THERF
793-797
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.490
R.
Nijsing
EEC Joint Research Centre, Ispra, Italy
THERF is a one-dimensional transient thermal hydraulic computer code which applies a hybrid method for radial transient conduction in a fuel rod, gives an Eulerian treatment of conservation equations for the liquid-two-phase- and superheat vapour region, and applies appropriate conservation equations.
COMPUTER CODE DESCRIPTION NO. 10: SABENA
799-801
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.500
Hisashi
Ninokata
O-arai Engineering Centre, O-arai; Tokyo Institute of Technology, Tokyo, Japan
This brief description introduces the constitutive equations (mass, momentum and enthalpy) and geometry conditions and outlines the solution procedure used in the SABENA code.
COMPUTER CODE DESCRIPTION NO. 11: JCR
803-805
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.510
J. C.
Rousseau
Commissariat a I'Energie Atomique, Department des Reacteurs a Eau Serivice d'Etudes Thermohydrauliques, Centre d'Etudes Nucleaires de Grenoble, Grenoble, France
The JCR code is designed to be introduced into the CATHARE code for more detailed calculations. It has a basic three-dimensional model including continuity, energy and equations of motion for the two phases. The numerical scheme and solution method are briefly described.
COMPUTER CODE DESCRIPTION NO. 12: TRAC
807-808
10.1615/MultScienTechn.v6.i1-4.520
P. S.
Black
UKAEA, Harwell Laboratory, Oxfordshire, England
This contribution briefly describes the TRAC code which was developed at the Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory in the USA. The basic equations are specified and the numerical methods are briefly described.