Turbulent Heat Transfer to Heavy Liquid Metals in Circular Tubes

Abstract

The present paper gives a brief literature review on turbulent heat transfer in heavy liquid metals (HLM), especially liquid lead-bismuth eutectic (LBE). Some models available in the open literature on heat transfer and turbulent Prandtl number are assessed. In addition, CFD analysis is carried out for circular tube geometries. The effect of turbulence models, mesh structure and turbulent Prandtl number on the numerical results is studied. Application of ε-type turbulence models with scalable wall function shows less dependence of the numerical results on mesh structure than the ω-type turbulence models with automatic wall treatment. The turbulent Prandtl number affects strongly the heat transfer performance. Comparison between the CFD results, heat transfer correlations and heat transfer test data reveals a decrease in turbulent Prandtl number by increasing Reynolds number. Based on the results achieved, recommendations are made on correlations of heat transfer and turbulent Prandtl number for LBE flows.

CFD analysis of thermal–hydraulic behavior of heavy liquid metals in sub-channels

“…This agrees with the findings of other studies available in the open literature (Reynolds, 1975). However, compared to the results in circular tubes (Cheng et al, 2004), the present results indicate that the turbulent Prandtl number in rod bundles is smaller than that in circular tubes at the same Peclet number.…”

“…Generally, a much stronger effect of mesh structure is obtained by using the ω-type turbulence models than the ε-type models. This is also confirmed by CFD analysis in circular tube geometries (Cheng et al, 2004). Similar effect of mesh structures on the heat transfer behavior is also obtained in the square lattice.…”

“…As discussed in the previous publications (Reynolds, 1975;Cheng et al, 2004), both experimental and theoretical studies available in the open literature suggest a turbulent Prandtl number larger than 1.0 for liquid metal flows in circular tubes. Fig.…”

Demonstration of NEAMS Multiphysics Tools for Fast Reactor Applications

“…The conventional choice of Prt as a constant value of 0:85 to 0:9 is not valid for low-Prandtl number fluid flow. Both experimental and theoretical studies [Reynolds 1975] [Cheng 2004] available in the open literature suggest a turbulent Prandtl number larger than 1.0 for liquid metal flows.…”

Extension and Demonstration of NEAMS Multiphysics Tools to Lead-Cooled, Sodium-Cooled, and Molten Salt Fast Reactor Applications

“…Existing engineering turbulence models all use the Reynolds analogy for coupling temperature and velocity fields, which is not valid for Heavy Lead Metal (HLM) flow. Both experimental and theoretical studies [Reynolds 1975] [Cheng 2004] literature suggest a turbulent Prandtl number larger than 1.0 for liquid metal flows. Therefore, unlike for sodium flow, the selection of an appropriate turbulent Prandtl number is crucial for lead fluid simulation.…”