Multi Channel

Arab J ournal of Nuclear Science and Applications, 46(3), (219-230) 2013
219

Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis of Heated Plate under Asymmetrical Cooling
Conditions

Ahmed Khedr
Nuclear Safety Engineering Department
Egyptian Nuclear and Radiological Regulatory Authority (ENRRA)

Received: 14/12/2012 Accepted: 14/1/2013

ABSTRACT
The cooling of a vertical heated plate by two thin channels is encountered in
different applications such as MTR research reactors. The analytical solution of
the governing equation of such case is usually used provided that symmetricity of
the cooling channels is assumed. Under asymmetrical cooling conditions the
analytical solution is impossible and the numerical solution becomes the only way.
This problem is our case study in which the finite difference method is used to
convert the steady state governing equation into a number of algebraic equations
which are solved by Gauss Jordans method. The coolant flow distribution
through the channels is determined based on an equal overall pressure drop in
the two channels. The axial power distribution through the plate is considered
cosine shape. Therefore, a simple one-dimensional steady state computer
FORTRAN program named NSCHP is built to deal with the asymmetrical
cooling conditions encountered in MTR research reactors resulting from fuel
manufacturing uncertainties. This program has the capability to calculate the
axial and radial temperature distribution in the plate, the coolant axial
temperature, the flow distribution, the coolant velocity, and the channel pressure
drop.
The introduced program is verified by comparing its results with the
RELAP5 mode 3.3 where a good agreement was found. With respect to the
channel blockage or manufacturing uncertainties, the results show that an
inadvertent decrease in channel cross section up to 82.5% of the nominal channel
do not violate the approved maximum cladding temperature.

Key Words: Research Reactors/Thermal Hydraulics/Plate Type Fuel/Non-symmetrical
Channels/

INTRODUCTION

Plate type fuel research reactors (RRs) are widely used all over the world. In such reactors the
fuel elements (FEs) consist of a number of fuel plates that are assembled together by two grooved side
plates with an equal cooling channel thickness between them. Due to manufacturing uncertainties or
partial channel blockage some of these cooling channels may have different cross sectional area which
produces an asymmetrical cooling condition for one or more of the heated plates. Therefore, a
deviation in the coolant and temperature distribution from normal operation occurs. In MTR research
reactors the channel blockage is one of events that is considered in the design.

Another widespread application is the electronic devices which require an efficient method to
dissipate the heat produced due to their operation. These devices are usually cooled by finned surfaces
manufactured from good conducting material (such as Aluminum) exposed to forced air flow. These
220

fines are usually consisting of a number of parallel plates extrude from the device with thin cooling
channels between them.

Due to the importance of fuel cooling in RRs, the manufacturer of fuel elements shall establish
a quality assurance/control programs which ensure that the produced FEs shall fulfill the utility
requirements or better. Actually these programs do not assure that 100% of the cooling channels are
identical and in some cases the fuel elements may be refused due to the deviation in cooling channel
dimensions.

On Contrast to the reactivity insertion and the loss of electrical power events, small number of
researchers handled the non-similar channels or the channel blockage in MTR RRs. The total flow
blockage of a fuel assembly in a typical MTR RR using RELAP-5 is investigated by [1, 2]. This paper
focused on developing a simplified model for thermal hydraulic analysis of MTR plate type fuel
element containing two non-similar channels. Steady state FORTRAN program is built to solve the
Non-Symmetrical Cooling of Heated Plate (NSCHP) and calculate the axial and radial temperature
distribution through the fuel plate and its surrounding channels.

In normal condition, the heat generated in the fuel meat is transmitted by convection through an
equal coolant flow rate on the two sides of the fuel plates. Therefore, the mass and energy equations
can be solved analytically under the assumption that half of the heat generated is dissipated from each
side. If there is non-similar coolant channel on each side, the equations are usually solved numerically
using the finite difference methods.

THEORITICAL MODEL

A plan view for MTR fuel element is shown in Fig. 1. Each fuel plate usually consists of a layer
of fuel meat sandwiched into two aluminum plates. Core representative cell is considered consisting of
one fuel plate surrounded by two half's of coolant channels as shown in Fig. 2.

The heat generated into fuel is transferred by conduction through meat and clad and by
convection through coolant. If the coolant channels on the left side (LS) and right side (RS) are
similar, it is assume that each channel will carry half of the heat generated. Therefore, the mass,

Fig. 1 MTR fuel Plates, Plan view

Fig. 2 Unit cell, Plan view

221

energy, and momentum equations can be solved analytically. In cases where the two coolant channels
are not similar, this assumption is not valid. Therefore the analytical solution is not possible and the
numerical solution shall be used.

1. Heat structure temperature distribution :

For the case of non-similar coolant channels under steady state condition, the steady state one-
dimensional heat conduction equation through the unit cell shown in Fig. 3, is given by:

( )
0 . 0
2
2
=
dx
x T d
at 0<x<x1 and x2<x<x3 (1)

( )
( ) 0 . 0
1
2
2
= + x g
k dx
x T d
m
at x1<x<x2 (2)
At the boundary layers:

( )
( ) ( ) x T T h
dx
x dT
k
l f l
x
c
=
=
,
0
at x = x0 = 0 (3)

( ) ( )
1 1
x x
c
x x
m
dx
x dT
k
dx
x dT
k
= =
= at x = x1 (4)

( ) ( )
2 2
x x
c
x x
m
dx
x dT
k
dx
x dT
k
= =
= at x = x2 (5)

( )
( ) ( ) x T T h
dx
x dT
k
r f r c
=
,
at x = x3 (6)
Where
km meat thermal conductivity (W/cm.C)
kc clad thermal conductivity (W/cm.C)
T plate structure temperature (C)
Tf,l coolant temperature on the left side (C)
Tf,r coolant temperature on the right side (C)
hl heat transfer coefficient on the left side
(W/cm
2
C)
hr heat transfer coefficient on the right side
(W/cm
2
C
x thickness on x coordinate (cm)
g volumetric heat generation (W/cm
3
)

Fig. 3 Vertical view for unit cell

222

The discretization of these equations by using the central difference formula of the finite difference
method results in:

( ) ( ) ( )
0 . 0 2
1 , , 1 ,
= +
+ i j i j i j
T T T 0<i<N1 (7)

( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
0 . 0 2
2
1 , , 1 ,
= + +
+ j
m
f
i j i j i j
g
k
x
T T T
o
N1<i<N2 (8)

( ) ( ) ( )
0 . 0 2
1 , , 1 ,
= +
+ i j i j i j
T T T N2<i<N3 (9)

To discetize the equations at the interfaces we assume a fictitious node on the right or left of the
interface based on its location. Therefore, the following equations are obtained:

( ) ( )
0 . 0 2 2 2
0 0 , 0 1 ,
= + |
j j
T T i=0 (10)
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
0 . 0 2 2 2
1 , , 1 ,
= + +
+ j Nc Nc j Nc Nc j Nc Nc j
g T T T o | i=N1 (11)
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
0 . 0 2 2 2
2 2 2 2 2 2
1 , , 1 ,
= + +
+ j N N j N N j N N j
g T T T o | i=N2 (12)
( ) ( )
0 . 0 2 2 2
3 3 3 3
, ) 1 ,
= +
N N j N N j
T T o | i=N3 (13)
Where 1
0
+ =
c
l c
k
h x o
| and
fl
c
l c
T
k
h x o
=
0

c f
m c
N
k x
k x
o
o
| + = 1
1
,
c f
m c
N
k x
k x
o
o
o =
1
, and
c
f c
N
k
x x o o
=
1

Fig. 4 Cell grid points

To transform this group of
differential equations by finite
differences into a set of
algebraic equations the unit
cell is divided into a number
of grid points or nodes. In the
x direction, each of the clad
layers is divided into Nc nodes
and the fuel meat is divided
into N
f
nodes. In the Y
direction, the unit cell is
divided into M nodes as
shown in Fig. 4.
223

m c
c f
N
k x
k x
o
o
| + =1
2
,
m c
c f
N
k x
k x
o
o
o =
2
, and
f
f
N
k
x
2
2
o
=

c
r c
N
k
h x o
| + =1
3
, and
fr
c
r c
N
T
k
h x o
o =
3

Tfl , hl = the coolant temperature and heat transfer coefficient on the left boundary at the
corresponding channel control volume.
Tfr , hr = the coolant temperature and heat transfer coefficient on the right boundary at the
corresponding channel control volume
c
c
N
thickness clad
x

= o &
f
f
N
thickness meat Fuel
x

= o
2. Coolant flow distribution :
In MTR reactors the coolant channels extend between two common volumes, the lower and
upper plenums. Therefore, the inlet and outlet pressure and consequently the pressure drop in the
channels are the same. The flow distribution between the channels is controlled by this Characteristic.
The total pressure drop in the channel is the summation of inlet, exit and friction pressure drop. Its
mathematical expression is:

f ex in
Dp Dp Dp Dp + + = (14)
Where
K Dp
in
5 . 0 = , K
A
A
Dp
uc
ch
ex
2
1
|
|
.
|
\
|
= , K
Dy
L
f Dp
ch
fp
f
=

2 5
10 * 5 . 0
ch
V K
= ,
perimeter weted
A
Dy
ch
ch

4
=

ch
ch
ch
A
m
V

.
= , mch = the channel mass flow rate (Kg/sec),

= coolant density (Kg/m
3
), Ach = the channel cross section area (cm
2
),
Auc = the unit cell cross section area (cm
2
), Lfp= heated plate length (cm)

The friction factor f is calculated as follows [3]:

25 . 0
Re 316 . 0
= f Re<110
5
( ) 8 . 0 Re log 2
1
10
= f
f
Re>110
5

And Re is the Reynolds Number given by
ity vis dynamic
Dy V
ch ch
cos
Re =

The pressure drop in the left and right channels is calculated according to the above correlations. For a
given total mass flow rate, an iteration on the channel mass flow rate is performed until the pressure
drop in the two channels are nearly equal.

224

3. Coolant temperature :
To calculate the coolant axial temperature distribution, the coolant channels are divided into a
number of control volumes equal to the number of axial nodes in the structure. At steady state
conditions the energy balance on the control volume considers that the heat added from the
corresponding node equals to the change in the coolant heat content, i.e:

dx
dT
A k dT C m
s c f p ch
=
.
(15)
Where
.
ch
m = channel mass flow rate (kg/sec)
Cp = coolant specific heat (kj/kg
o
C)
As = node surface area = Plate width (Wp)*oy (cm
2
)
oy = active fuel plate length/number of axial nodes
Wp = plate width (cm)

The discretization of this equation at the left and right plate boundaries by using the forward and
backward difference formula respectively, results in:
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
( )
1 , 2 ,
.
0 , 0 , 1 j j
c p l
c s
j fi j fi
T T
Dx C m
k A
T T + =
+
(16)
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
( )
3 , 1 3 ,
.
3 , 3 , 1 N j N j
c p r
c s
N j fr N j fr
T T
Dx C m
k A
T T + =
+
(17)

4. Heat transfer coefficient :
The heat transfer coefficient is calculated from Dittus-Boelter correlation:
4 . 0 8 . 0
Pr Re 023 . 0
ch
f
Dy
k
h = (18)
Where
h heat transfer coefficient (W/cm2 C)
kf fluid thermal conductivity (W/cm C)
Pr prandetl number =
f
p
k
C
3
10

5- RELAP5 model :
For the purpose of verification, a RELAP5 input deck and nodalization for unit cell is prepared.
RELAP5 is a sophisticated thermal hydraulic system code used mainly in safety analysis of power
reactors. The new versions of this code (such as Mode 3.3 that is used in this analysis) are validated
for low pressure systems such as RRs [4]. The values of the main parameters characterizing the unit
cell used in the present analysis are shown in Table 1. The unit cell nodalization is shown in Fig. 5.
The main components of the nodalization are shown in Table 2.

225

Parameter Value Parameter Value
Active heat structure height
(cm)
80.0 Heat structure one side
surface area (cm
2
)
6.480.0
Clad thickness (cm) 0.04 Fuel thickness (cm) 0.07
Axial power distribution Cosine Left channel width (cm) 7.0
Active heated width (cm) 6.4 Right channel width (cm) 7.0

Component Nodalization
Element
Left channel 115
Right channel 110
Lower plenum 100
Upper plenum 200
Heat Structure 800
Cooling loop - Time dependent
volume 140 & 240
- Time dependent
Junction 150

RESULT ANALYSIS

The results are divided into two parts; in the first part the code is validated by comparing its
results with the corresponding results from RELAP-5 MOD 3.3, and in the second the minimum
channel thickness under which there is no violation for RR safety limits is considered. In the first part
two cases are considered; hot plate cooled by two similar channels and hot plate cooled by two non
similar channels. In this part the results of NSCHP are compared with RELAP-5 results. For the sake
of this comparison, a Fortran Program is built to reformat the last time step of RELAP-5 results and
put them in a suitable form for the comparison.

1. Hot plate cooled by two similar channels (Case A) :
The case considered is a vertical Heat Structure (HS) consisting of one fuel plate with 40 Kw
heat generations and surrounded by two similar channels each has 0.135 cm thickness and cooled by
0.957 Kg/sec of light water. Under the provision of equal pressure drop in the two channels, NSCHP
makes iteration on the flow distribution between them. The results summarized in Table 3 of NSCHP
and RELAP5 show good agreement between them. Also, the total flow is equally divided between the
two channels and the pressure drops are equal.

Table 2. Main components of the nodalization

Fig. 5 Unit cell nodalization

Table1. Main data
226

Table 3 the mass flow rate and pressure drop in similar channels

Left channel Right channel
Mass flow rate
Kg/s
Pressure drop
P (bar)
Mass flow rate
Kg/s
Pressure drop
P (bar)
RELAP5 0.4785 0.6476 0.4785 0.6476
NSCHP 0.4785 0.6242 0.4785 0.6242

The NSCHP results of the radial temperature distribution through the fuel plate and the axial
temperature distribution in plate and coolant channels in comparison with the corresponding results of
RELAP5 are shown in Figs. 6 and 7. Firstly, there is a very good agreement between NSCHP and
RELAP5. Secondly, there is symmetricity in the radial distribution around the plate centerline with
equal plate surface temperatures. The axial coolant temperature distribution in the left and right
channels is identical, i.e. each channel will be loaded by half of the heat generated. As the coolant
progress in the channel it picks up heat from the heated plate and therefore its temperature increases
gradually until reaches its maximum value at the channel exit. Due to the axial cosine distribution of
the heat generation, the heat structure temperature takes its maximum value at a point above the
centerline and shifted to the outlet due to the increase in coolant temperature.

2. Hot plate cooled by two non-similar channels

Two cases are considered (case B and C), in the first, the left and right channel thicknesses are
0.135 and 0.105 cm respectively. In the second case, the left and right channel thicknesses are 0.135
and 0.27 cm respectively. The heat generated in the heat structure is 40 Kw and the total flow is 0.957

0 20 40 60 80
Axial position (cm)
40
50
60
70
80
T
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e

(
C
)
NSCHP centerline temp. (C)
RELAP5 centerline temp. (C)
NSCHP left channel temp. (C)
RELAP5 left channel temp. (C)
NSCHPleft surface temp. (C)
RELAP5 left surface temp. (C)

Fig. 7 RELAP5 and NSCHP axial temperature
distribution in heated plate and its cooling
channels

0 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.16
Radial position (cm)
40
50
60
70
80
T
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e

(
C
)
RELAP-5 plate temp. at 2cm (C)
NSCHP plate temp. at 2cm (C)
RELAP5 plate temp. at 18 cm (C)
NSCHP plate temp. at 18 cm (C)
RELAP-5 plate temp. at 40 cm (
o
C)
NSCHP plate temp. at 40 cm (
o
C)
RELAP-5 plate temp at 62 cm (
o
C)
NSCHP plate temp. at 62 cm (
o
C)

Fig. 6 RELAP5 and NSCHP radial
temperature distribution in the heated plate

227

Kg/sec. All of the other dimensions are given in Table 1. The results of NSCHP program and RELAP5
regarding the mass flow rate and pressure drop in the left and right channels for cases A and B are
shown in Tables 4 and 5 respectively. Although there is a little difference between the pressure drop
values calculated by the two programs, a good agreement between the flow rates through the channels
is present.

Table 4 the mass flow rate and pressure drop in non-similar channels (case B)
Mass flow rate
Kg/s
Pressure drop
P (bar)
Mass flow rate
Kg/s
Pressure drop
P (bar)
RELAP5 0.57284 0.9132 0.38421 0.9132
NSCHP 0.57360 0.8652 0.38339 0.8652

The results of NSCHP in case B regarding the radial and axial temperature distribution in coolant
and structure in comparison with their corresponding results of RELAP5 are illustrated in Figs. 8 and
9 respectively. Firstly, the figures show good agreement between RELAP and NSCHP. Secondly,
although the right channel thickness decreases, the coolant velocity in the two channels increases due
to decreasing the overall cross section area. Also, decreasing the right channel cross section decreases
its related mass flow rate than the left channel. Therefore, the axial temperature distribution in the
right channel increases more rapidly than the left channel. The comparison with the previous case A
(similar channels) shows that the maximum plate temperature (clad and fuel) decreases with
decreasing the thickness of the right channel. This behavior returns to increasing the coolant velocity
in the two channels which improves the overall heat transfer coefficient.

0 20 40 60 80
Axial position (cm)
40
50
60
70
80
T
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e

(
C
)
NSCHP temp. in left channel (C)
Relap5 temp. in left channel (C)
NSCHP left surface temp. (C)
RELAP left surface temp. (C)
NSCHP temp. in right channel (C)
Relap temp. in right channel (C)
NSCHP right surface temp. (C)
RELAP right surface temp. (C)
NSCHP centrline temp. (C)
RELAP centerline temp. (C)

distribution in the heated plate and its cooling
channels (case B)

0 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.16
Radial distance (cm)
40
50
60
70
80
R
a
d
i
a
l

t
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e

(
C
)
RELAP5 plate temp. at 2 cm
NSCHP plate temp. at 2 cm
RELAP5 plate temp. at 18 cm
RELAP plate temp. at 38 cm
RELAP plate temp. at 68 cm

temperature distribution in the heated
plate (case B)
228

Table 5 Mass flow rate and pressure drop in non-similar channels (case C)
Mass flow rate
Kg/s
P
bar
Mass flow rate
Kg/s
P
bar
RELAP5 0.250 0.23116 0.707 0.23116
NSCHP 0.244 0.18455 0.712 0.18455

In case C, the comparison between RELAP5 and NSCHP with respect to the radial and axial
temperature distribution is shown in Figs. 10 and 11. In addition to the apparent good agreement
between RELAP5 and NSCHP, the results show that this case is worst than case B. Where increasing
the right channel cross section increases the overall channels cross section, the channels coolant
velocity and the heat transfer coefficient decreases. Therefore, the plate temperature distribution
attains higher values than that in case B. Also, because the mass flow rate in the left channel less than
that in the right channel (Table 5), the left channel coolant and plat surface axial temperature
distribution is greater than that in the right channel.

3. MTR Core Application :
Changing the overall pressure drop with the changing of channel thickness (previous cases B
and C, Tables 4 & 5) does not simulate the case in MTR research reactors. In MTR core, there are
hundreds of vertical parallel channels extended between lower and upper plenums, i.e. the core
pressure drop is controlled by a large number of channels not only by two channels. Therefore, the
core pressure drop remains constant in spit of one of the channels thickness increases or decreases.
0 20 40 60 80
Axial position (cm)
40
50
60
70
80
90
T
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e

(
C
)
RELAP5 right channel temp. (C)
NSCHP right channel temp. (C)
RELAP5 left channel temp. (C)
NSPC left channel temp. (5)
RELAP5 left surface temp. (C)
NSCHP left surface temp. (C)
RELAP5 Plate centerline temp. (C)
NSCHP plate centerline temp. (c)
RLAP5 right surface temp. (c)
NSCHP right surface temp. (C)

distribution in the heated plate and its cooling
channels (case C)

0 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.16
Radial distance (cm)
40
50
60
70
80
90
R
a
d
i
a
l

t
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e

(
C
)
RELAP plate temp. at 2 cm (C)

temperature distribution in the heated plate
(case C)
229

Therefore, the previous two cases (B & C) are reconsidered again in cases (B
& C
) with using
the channels pressure drop in case A (0.624 bar), in stead of the total flow rate, as a constraint during
the channels flow rate calculations. All the other parameters remain unchanged. The results of NSCHP
program regarding the mass flow rate is shown in Table 6.

Table 6 Mass flow rate and pressure drop in MTR cases

P
Bar
Left channel mass
flow rate (Kg/s)

Right channel mass
flow rate (Kg/s)

Total flow rate
Kg/s
Case B

0.624 0.47744 0.32038 0.79782
Case C

0.624 0.4810 1.3825 1.8635

The results of NSCHP regarding the axial temperature distribution in coolant and structure in
these two cases are illustrated in Figs. 12 and 13 respectively.

As shown in Figs 12 and 13, at constant core

pressure drop, the decreasing in channel thickness decreases the channel flow and increases the
coolant and structure temperature. On the other hand increasing the channel thickness increases the
channel flow and decreases the coolant and structure temperature.

To determine the minimum channel cross sectional area at which the clad surface temperature
not exceed the approved clad temperature limit (105
o
C), a number of runs are executed with gradual
decrease in the right channel thickness. The results show that at channel thickness larger than 17.5% of
the nominal channel thickness the clad surface temperature remains less than the authorized limit (105
o
C). These results are demonstrated in Table 7.
0 20 40 60 80
Axial Position (cm)
40
50
60
70
80
T
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e

(
C
)
Left channel temp. (c)
Left surface temp. (C)
Centerline temp. (C)
Right surface temp. (C)
Right channel temp. (C)

Fig. 12 NSCHP axial temperature
distribution in MTR channel (case B
)

0 20 40 60 80
Axial Position (cm)
40
50
60
70
80
T
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e

(
C
)
Left channel temp. (c)
Left surface temp. (C)
Centerline temp. (C)
Right surface temp. (C)
Right channel temp. (C)

Fig. 13 NSCHP axial temperature distribution in
MTR channel (case C
)

230

Table 7 The mass flow rate and pressure drop in MTR limiting case

Parameter Left channel Right channel
Channel thickness (cm) 0.135 0.0236
Mass flow rate (Kg/s) 0.4752 0.02756
Channel velocity (m/s) 5.0848 1.7051
Pressure drop (Bar) 0.624 0.624
Maximum clad temperature (
o
C) 83.4 105
Maximum coolant temperature (
o
C) 57 103.4

CONCLUSION

The thermal hydraulic analysis of heated plate under asymmetrical cooling condition is the point of
concern of this paper. This point has a safety significant in the accepted manufacturing uncertainties in
MTR fuel elements from the thermal hydraulic point of view. Therefore, Steady state, single phase and
one-dimensional thermal hydraulic FORTRAN program called NSCHP is built to analyze this
problem. The numerical finite difference technique in conjunction with Gauss Jordans method is used
to solve the governing equations. The program has the capability to predict the axial and radial
temperature distribution into the hot structure, the axial temperature distribution into the coolant, the
flow distribution between the channels, and the channel pressure drop. For verification purposes the
problem is modeled and analyzed using RELAP5 MOD 3.3 system code. The result analysis shows
that there is a good agreement between the NSCHP and RELAP5.

The analysis shows that, decreasing the thickness of any of the coolant channels in MTR
reactors negatively affect the mass flow rate through the channel. Therefore the temperature of the
coolant and plate surfaces related to this channel increases. From the thermal hydraulic point of view,
a reduction in channel cross section reaches to 82.5% of the nominal value does not cause violation for
the authorized clad temperature limit.

REFERENCES

[1] Adorni, M., Bousbia-Salah, A., Hamidouche, T., Maro, B.M., Pierrio, F., DAuria, F., Analysis of
partial and total flow blockage of a single fuel assembly of an MTR research reactor core, Annals
of Nuclear Energy 32 (2005), pp. 1679-1692.
[2] Qing Lu, Suizheng Qui, G.H.Su, Flow blockage analysis of a channel in a typical material test
reactor core, Nuclear Engineering and Design 239 (2009), pp. 45-50.
[3] Prasuhn, A.L., Fundamentals of Fluid Mechanics, prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, N.J., USA
[4] RELAP5/MOD3.3 Code Manual volume II Appendix A: Input requirements.
[5] Khedr, A., Thermal-Hydraulic FORTRAN program for steady state calculations of plate-type fuel
research reactors, Nuclear Technology & Radiation Protection, 1(2008), pp. 19-30.
[6] Necati, O., Finite Difference Methods in Heat Transfer, CRC press, Inc., 1994

Multi Channel

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Multi Channel

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Arab J ournal of Nuclear Science and Applications, 46(3), (219-230) 2013

= , mch = the channel mass flow rate (Kg/sec),

Potrebbero piacerti anche