Comparison of swirl tube and hypervapotron for cooling of ITER divertor
Comparison of swirl tube and hypervapotron for cooling of ITER divertor
复制标题
DOI：
10.1109/fusion.1995.534199
复制
发表时间：
1995-09
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
C. Baxi
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
C. Baxi
ITER偏滤器的峰值稳态热通量为5 MW/m/sup 2/，热通量为15 MW/m/sup 2/，持续时间长达10 s。冷却将由水提供，入口温度为150/spl deg/C，压力为4 MPa。为了在合理的流速下获得足够的临界热通量裕度，需要采用传热强化技术。正在考虑将超蒸发管（KV）和旋流管（ST）作为增强方法。这两种装置之间存在许多根本差异，例如：（a）表面热通量与冷却剂通道热通量的比率，（B）每单位热通量面积的流动面积，（c）临界热通量（CHF）和（d）压降。本文提出了新的CHF ST和HV概念的相关性，并将其与现有的实验数据进行比较。ST的摩擦系数相关性是众所周知的。提出了一种新的基于现有数据的HV摩擦系数关联式。基于等热流面积的ITER条件下，两个概念进行了比较。比较表明，在相似的流动条件下，与ST相比，HV所需的泵浦功率略高（约10%），入射临界热流密度（ICHF）略低（8%）。这些差异足够小，数据的不确定性足够大，因此两种概念之间的选择应该基于其他考虑，例如：（1）成本和制造的容易性，（2）钎焊的容易性和（3）可用实验数据的数量和可靠性：这些考虑导致概念的选择将取决于特定应用的结论。对于ITER，这两个概念都可以用于偏滤器的不同区域。
The ITER divertor will have a peak steady state heat flux of 5 MW/m/sup 2/ and a heat flux of 15 MW/m/sup 2/ for up to 10 s duration. Cooling will be provided by water at an inlet temperature of 150/spl deg/C and a pressure of 4 MPa. A heat transfer enhancement technique is required in order to achieve a sufficient margin on critical heat flux at a reasonable flow velocity. Hypervapotron (KV) and swirl tube (ST) are under consideration as enhancement methods. There are many fundamental differences between these two devices, such as: (a) The ratio of surface heat flux to coolant channel heat flux, (b) the flow area per unit heat flux area, (c) critical heat flux (CHF) and (d) the pressure drop. This paper presents new CHF correlations for ST and HV concepts and compares them to the available experimental data. The friction factor correlation for ST is well known. A new friction factor correlation for HV based on existing data is presented. A comparison of the two concepts was performed for ITER conditions based on equal heat flux area. The comparison shows that the pumping power required for HV is slightly higher (about 10%) and the incident critical heat flux (ICHF) is slightly lower (8%) for HV compared to ST at similar flow conditions. These differences are small enough and uncertainties in data large enough so that the choice between the two concepts should be based on other considerations such as: (1) cost and ease of fabrication, (2) ease of brazing and (3) volume and reliability of available experimental data: These considerations lead to the conclusion that the choice of concept will depend on the particular application. For ITER, both of these concepts could be used in different areas of the divertor.