Energy From Thorium Discussion Forum

It is currently Jun 24, 2018 6:01 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Nov 23, 2012 6:09 am 
Offline

Joined: Jul 14, 2008 3:12 pm
Posts: 5048
ORNL 4541 has a graph with U233 fission product decay heat by time.

http://www.energyfromthorium.com/pdf/ORNL-4541.pdf

Fig. 6.4. Total afterheat production, p. 91 in document, p. 109 in Acrobat. Also compare table 3.11 on p. 57 in Acrobat.

Now this is something very different from the usual decay heat curves we're used to.

Code:
T (seconds) PMWt P%
1           86   3.8%
10          75   3.3%
100         55   2.4%
1000        33   1.5%
10000       17   0.8%
100000      10   0.4%
1000000      5   0.2%


There could be an error here. Perhaps the t=1 second is actually the t=100 seconds data point? This is what table 3.11 suggests, but figure 6.4 clearly states 10e0 seconds.


Last edited by Cyril R on Nov 23, 2012 8:21 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Nov 23, 2012 8:19 am 
Offline

Joined: Jul 14, 2008 3:12 pm
Posts: 5048
Ok, so the figure 6.4 apparently excludes the processing system, except at shutdown. Similar to table 3.11. That's 1.5 MW of FPs and 5 MW of Pa at shutdown.

So to get the figure for say a DMSR, with some FPs and Pa in the salt, add 6 MW medium term, later 5.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Nov 23, 2012 12:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Jul 28, 2008 10:44 pm
Posts: 3065
Figure 6.4 is for the decay heat in the drain tank. The paragraph that refers to it (pg 90) talks about the time (7 minutes) it takes to drain from the core to the drain tank and the maximum power being 50MWatts. From the common formula the expected total power would be 58MW at 100seconds and 37mW at 1000 seconds. A peaks of 50MW seems reasonable - if I use the common formula and assume a linear transfer rate from t=0 to t=420 seconds the peak in the drain tank is 43.8MW.

I don't understand why the figure shows a significantly lower initial heat load than LWRs. The major difference I think would be that we have 233Pa decay and they have 239U decay.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Nov 23, 2012 1:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Jul 14, 2008 3:12 pm
Posts: 5048
The drain tank, of course that makes sense, ORNL planned on having the brunt of offgas decay in the drain tank.

The lower initial heat load is indeed a mystery. Pa decay is only 5 MWt. U239 decay has to be lower than that. It doesn't explain the difference. I included Pa and the reprocessing system heat load (about 6.5 MW total) in the 86 MWt figure. So that's all we have, 3.8% of fullpower at 1 second after shutdown. In LWRs we expect around 6.5% at 1 second after shutdown.

Not that this matters much, everything below 10 seconds can just be ignored as the temp rise from that period is so small.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Nov 23, 2012 3:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Jul 28, 2008 10:44 pm
Posts: 3065
I'm thinking that they used 10 seconds after shutdown as "at shutdown". It takes a few seconds to shutdown the fission power so a 1 second after shutdown is not so meaningful either. But like you said, in the end it doesn't matter since the time is so short that only a modest amount of thermal energy gets deposited during this time.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group