Heat and Mass Transfer

, Volume 54, Issue 5, pp 1267–1279 | Cite as

Parametric analyses of DEMO Divertor using two dimensional transient thermal hydraulic modelling

  • Phani Domalapally
  • Marco Di Caro


Among the options considered for cooling of the Plasma facing components of the DEMO reactor, water cooling is a conservative option because of its high heat removal capability. In this work a two-dimensional transient thermal hydraulic code is developed to support the design of the divertor for the projected DEMO reactor with water as a coolant. The mathematical model accounts for transient 2D heat conduction in the divertor section. Temperature-dependent properties are used for more accurate analysis. Correlations for single phase flow forced convection, partially developed subcooled nucleate boiling, fully developed subcooled nucleate boiling and film boiling are used to calculate the heat transfer coefficients on the channel side considering the swirl flow, wherein different correlations found in the literature are compared against each other. Correlation for the Critical Heat Flux is used to estimate its limit for a given flow conditions. This paper then investigates the results of the parametric analysis performed, whereby flow velocity, diameter of the coolant channel, thickness of the coolant pipe, thickness of the armor material, inlet temperature and operating pressure affect the behavior of the divertor under steady or transient heat fluxes. This code will help in understanding the basic parameters´ effect on the behavior of the divertor, to achieve a better design from a thermal hydraulic point of view.



This work has been also supported by a grant no. MSMT-41274/2014-2 from the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports of the Czech Republic, for which the author is thankful. The author is also thankful to Ing. Karel Samec for reading the first draft of the paper and providing valuable suggestions.


  1. 1.
    Bachmann C, Aiello G, Albanese R, Ambrosino R, Arbeiter F, Aubert J, Boccaccini L, Carloni D, Federici G, Fischer U et al (2015) Initial DEMO tokamak design configuration studies. Fusion Eng Des 98-99:1423–1426CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Park JS, Kwon S, Im K, Kim K, Brown T, Neilson G (2015) Pre-conceptual design study on K-DEMO ceramic breeder blanket. Fusion Eng Des 100:159–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Yamada H, Kasada R, Ozaki A, Sakamoto R, Sakamoto Y, Takenaga H, Tanaka T, Tanigawa H, Okano K, Tobita K, Kaneko O (2016) Et.Al, Japanese endeavors to establish technological bases for DEMO. Fusion Eng Des 109–111:1318–1325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Merola M, Escourbiac F, Raffray AR, Chappuis P, Hirai T, Gicquel S (2015) Engineering challenges and development of the ITER blanket system and Divertor. Fusion Eng Des 96–97:34–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    You JH, Visca E, Bachmann C, Barrett T, Crescenzi F, Fursdon M, Greuner H, Guilhemf D, Languille P, Li M et al (2016) European Demo Divertor target: operational requirements and material-design interface. In Press, Nuclear Materials and Energy, pp 1–6Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chappuis P, Escourbiac F, Lipa M, Mitteau R, Schlosser J (1997) Possible Divertor solutions for a fusion reactor. Part 2. Technical aspects of a possible Divertor. Fusion Eng Des 36:109–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Domalapally PK, Entler S (2015) Comparison of schemes for cooling high heat flux components in fusion reactors. Acta Polytechnica 55:86–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    I. Smid, J. Schlosser, J. Boscary, F. Escourbiac, G. Vieider, comparison between various thermal hydraulic tube concepts for the ITER divertor, Fusion Technology 1996, 1997, 263–266Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Boscary J, Araki M, Schlosser J, Akiba M, Escourbiac F (1998) Dimensional analysis of critical heat flux in subcooled water flow under one-side heating conditions for fusion application. Fusion Eng Des 43:147–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Seki Y, Ezato K, Suzuki S, Yokoyama K, Mohri K, Hirai T, Escourbiac F, Kuznetsov V (2014) Development of tungsten monoblock technology for ITER full tungsten divertor in Japan, 25th fusion energy conference. Saint Petersburg, RussiaGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    K.Kleefeldt, Gordeev S. (2000) Preparation of a power plant conceptual study on plant availability, Report on subtask PPA 1.3.2, Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe GmbH, KarlsruheGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Domalapally P Assessment of Hypervapotron heat sink performance using CFD under DEMO relevant first wall conditions. Fusion Eng Des. 2016.03.044
  13. 13.
    Tong L S (1975) A phenomenological study of critical heat flux, ASME Paper, 75-HT-68Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Raffray AR, Schlosser J, Akiba M, Araki M, Chiocchio S, Driemeyer D, Escourbiac F, Grigoriev S, Merola M, Tivey R et al (1999) Critical heat flux analysis and R&D for the design of the ITER divertor. Fusion Eng Des 45:377–407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    LeVeque RJ Finite Difference Methods for Ordinary and Partial Differential Equations: Steady-State and Time-Dependent Problems, ISBN 978-0-898716-29-0Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Praprotnik M, Sterk M, Trobec R (2004) Inhomogeneous heat-conduction problems solved by a new explicit finite difference scheme. International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics 13:275–291MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gambill WR, Bundy RD, Wansbrough RW (1960) Heat transfer, burnout, and pressure drop for water in swirl flow through with internal twisted tapes, ORNL-2911Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    El-Din El-Morshedya S, Hassanein A (2010) Analysis, verification, and benchmarking of the transient thermal hydraulic ITERTHA code for the design of ITER divertor. Fusion Eng Des 85:687–693CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lopina RF, Bergles AE (1969) Heat transfer and pressure drop in tape-generated swirl flow of singlephase water. J Heat Transf 91:434–442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Koichi H, Nobuaki N (2007) Turbulent heat transfer for heating of water in a short vertical tube. Proceedings of the ICONE-15 (Revised) the 15th international conference on nuclear engineering, (p. 3174). Japan: Jpn Soc Mech EngGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Manglik RM, Bergles AE (1993) Heat transfer and pressure drop correlations for twisted tape inserts in isothermal tubes: part II-transition and turbulent flows. ASME Journal Heat Transfer 115:890–896CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Yin ST, Cardella A, Abdelmessih AH, Jin Z, Bromley BP (1994) Assessment of a heat transfer correlations package for water-cooled plasma-facing components in fusion reactors. Nucl Eng Des 146:311–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Araki M, Ogawa M, Kunugi T, Satoh K, Suzuki S (1996) Experiments on heat transfer of smooth and swirl tubes under one-sided heating conditions. Int J Heat Mass Transf 39:3045–3055CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Schlosser J, Boscary J (1993) Thermal-hydraulic tests at NET/ITER relevant conditions on divertor targets using swirl tubes. Proceedings NURETH 6:815–824Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Boscary J Heat transfer and critical heat flux in a helicoidal flow of an asymetrical heated tube, Thèse nouveau doctorat, 1995, 95 INPT 0096Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Inasak F, Nariai H (1998) Enhancement of subcooled flow boiling critical heat flux for water in tubes with internal twisted tapes under one-sided-heating conditions. Fusion Eng Des 39–40:347–354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Yin ST, Jin Z, Abdelmessih AH, Gierszewski PJ (1993) Prediction of highly subcooled flow boiling for cooling of high beat-flux components in fusion reactors. Proc NURETH 6:733–741Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Jens WH, Lottes PA (1951) Analysis of heat transfer, burnout, and pressure drop and density data for high pressure water, ANL-4627Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kandlikar SG, General Correlation A (1990) For saturated two-phase flow boiling heat transfer inside horizontal and vertical tubes. J Heat Transf 112:219–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Baxi CB (1995) Comparison of swirl tube and Hypervapotron for cooling of ITER Divertor. Proceedings of the 16th IEEE/NPSS symposium on fusion. Engineering 1:186–189Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Manglik RM, Bergles AE (1992) Heat transfer enhancement and pressure drop in viscous liquid flows in isothermal tubes with twisted-tape inserts. Wärme- und Stoffübertragung 27:249–257Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kim S, Mudawar I (2013) Universal approach to predicting two-phase frictional pressure drop for mini/micro-channel saturated flow boiling. Int J Heat Mass Transf 58:718–734CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Akhavan-Behabadi MA, Ravi Kumar M (2009) Jamali, investigation on heat transfer and pressure drop during swirl flow boiling of R-134a in a horizontal tube. Int J Heat Mass Transf 52:1918–1927CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Kanizawa FT, Hernandes RS, de Moraes AAU, Ribatski G (2011) A new correlation for single and two phase flow pressure drop in round tubes with twisted-tape inserts. J Braz Soc Mech Sci Eng 33:243–250Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Bergles AE, Rohsenow WM (1964) The determination of forced convection surface boiling heat transfer, trans. ASME J Heat Transfer 86:365–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    de Castro AJA, Maprelian E, Ting DKS (2001) Onset of nucleate boiling and onset of fully developed subcooled boiling using pressure transducers signals spectral analysis. J Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci 23:513–522CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Saha P, Zuber N (1974) Point of net vapor generation and vapor void fraction in subcooled boiling. ProcFifth Int Heat Transr Conf 4:175–179Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Fang X, Xu Y, Zhou Z (2011) New correlations of single-phase friction factor for turbulent pipe flow and evaluation of existing single-phase friction factor correlations. Nucl Eng Des 241:897–902CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Koski JA, Watson RD, Goranson PL, Hassanein AM, Salmonson JC (1991) Thermal- hydraulic design issues and analysis for the ITER Divertor, fusion. Technology 19:1729–1735Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Federici G, Raffray AR (1997) RACLETTE: a model for evaluating the thermal response of plasma facing components to slow high power plasma transients. Part II: analysis of ITER plasma facing components. J Nucl Mater 244:101–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Research Centre RezRezCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations