3.1. Explanation of the Investigated Debris Bed Models
Because the primary purpose of this research is to examine the capability of the CFD–DEM–MCN coupled solver among different heterogeneous bed configuration’s transformation processes during particle redistribution, the hypothetically intermediate states of the bed formation in prototype SFRs were prepared as the initial conditions of the investigated bed models for conducting bed safety assessments. The concept of the model settings is explained in this section.
Firstly, all the initial states of the investigated debris bed models in this research are located at the center of the in-vessel debris catcher in SFR’s lower plenum, assuming that all the model geometries are the typical conical shape [
24,
25] with the same initial bed size and slope angle. This research was not concerned with the simulating process of FCI and the falling of the fragmented particles; therefore, in order to initialize the transformation process of the heterogeneous bed configuration, the initial slope angle in this study was placed higher than the reposed angle to induce particle redistribution (based on the gravity-driven particle avalanching).
Subsequently, the sources used to provide different heterogeneous bed configuration transformations among the investigated debris bed models were from (1) the non-uniformity of the debris particles and (2) the initial distribution of these non-uniform particles. As in the primitive examination of this coupled solver on the bed safety assessment, the particle size, shape, and surface roughness were kept the same, and only the non-uniformity factor of the material between particles was selected in this research, realized by introducing binary mixture particles, including the Fuel particle (composed of MOX fuel) and the Structure particle (composed of stainless steel) shown in
Figure 4. Because the composite materials differ between Fuel and Structure particles, other accompanying non-uniformity factors, such as decay heat generating rate, particle density, and other relative physical properties, were also considered in this bed safety assessment.
This research’s first investigated heterogeneous model was prepared by randomly positioning Fuel particles and Structure particles within the debris bed as the initial heterogeneous configuration, named the “Mixed model”. On the other hand, considering the potential scenario in which the molten fuel, when not accompanying the molten structure, creates different discharge orders from the core area to the lower plenum [
2], the other investigated heterogeneous debris bed model, named the “Stratified model”, was also prepared in this research by settling Fuel particles on the bottom layer of the debris bed to create an initial stratified configuration, as shown in
Figure 4. In addition to the reference material used to compare the heterogeneous models, the “Homogeneous model”, composed of homogeneous particles, was also prepared in this study. It should be noted that all the investigated debris bed models in this research were assumed from the same discharged molten core materials with the same volume; hence, the homogeneous particles’ material composition and other related physical properties were derived from the volume-weighted average values of the total Fuel particles and Structure particles in either the Mixed or Stratified models. For example, the particle density of the Homogeneous particle (
) can be derived as below:
where
and
are the particle density of the Fuel particle and the Structure particle.
and
are the total particle volumes of Fuel particles and Structure particles in either the Mixed model or the Stratified model.
To sum up, the initial geometry of the conical particulate debris bed and also the summation of volume and the summation of the material composition in a bed were the same among the Homogeneous, Mixed, and Stratified models. In addition, the particle shape, size, and surface roughness were also appointed as fixed values among all the particles (including Homogeneous particles, Fuel particles, and Structure particles). The heterogeneity sources among the three debris models were from the non-uniform fissile material distributions between particles or within the bed, whose configuration transformations are induced via assigning an initial slope angle higher than the repose one. Through the setting described above, the effects of different heterogeneous configuration transformation processes on the debris bed safety assessments can be investigated, and further classified as the (1) particle-centralized fissile material effect, by comparing the results from the Mixed model with the Homogeneous model, and (2) the bed-centralized fissile material effect by comparing the results between the Mixed model and the Stratified model, respectively.
3.2. Simulation Settings
This section discusses the input parameters of three debris bed models (Homogeneous, Mixed, and Stratified models) used in the bed safety assessment via the CFD–DEM–MCN solver in this research. These models rely on the assumptions discussed in the previous section and the current understanding of stochastically occurring processes during severe accidents.
Following the explanation in
Section 3.1, the calculating domain in the CFD–DEM solver was set as a simplified three-dimensional cylindrical container referring to the prototype SFR’s lower plenum [
38]. The calculating domain contains the working fluid of the liquid sodium (continuous liquid phase in the CFD solver) for removing the decay heat generated from the particulate debris bed (discrete solid phase in DEM solver). The input parameters used to describe the liquid sodium’s physical properties in the CFD solver are summarized in
Table 1, and the polynomial function of the temperature is applied to the equation of the state in liquid sodium [
39]. The geometry parameters are presented in
Figure 5, and the origin of the coordinates was set at the bottom center of the calculating domain. On the top surface of the domain, four cold legs and an outlet were pertained. The inlet flowrates of these cold legs were settled to zero in the CFD solver; therefore, the mechanism of decay heat removal from the debris bed to the outlet (set as a constant pressure boundary of 1 atm) was mainly based on the natural circulation. In addition, the adiabatic condition was also assigned to the other surfaces of the calculating domain.
As for the preparation of the debris bed’s initial configurations among the three models, the particle injector in the DEM solver (provided by STAR-CCM+) was utilized to fill discrete solid particles in an assigned three-dimensional conical space within the calculating domain; thus, the parameters of the debris bed, such as the total mass of the debris bed, discrete particles’ shapes and size, and the geometry size of the assigned conical space, were the required information, and are summarized in
Table 2. Firstly, under the postulated severe accident in the prototype SFR, the total mass of the debris bed in this research was estimated based on the discharged molten core materials composed of the binary mixture materials of MOX fuel (as the molten fuel) and stainless steel (to simulate the molten structure). From the previous numerical analysis of the hypothetical severe accident (Unprotected Loss Of Flow, ULOF) in SFR, the results show that around 15% of the total molten core material will be discharged to the lower plenum [
3], and one third of the total molten core material leaked to the lower plenum in the prototype SFR is assumed here based on the conservative concern. Based on this conservative assumption, considering the referred parameters of the total MOX fuel inventory [
40] and the volume ratio of fuel-to-structure (0.64: 0.36 [
41]) in the prototype SFR, the MOX fuel and stainless steel mass of the debris bed in this research were estimated as 27,045.45 kg and 10,856.60 kg, and the total mass of the debris bed could also be derived from the summation of the previous two values. Subsequently, the total materials of the debris bed were discrete because of the simplified spherical particles used to fill in the assigned conical space in the calculating domain, with a postulated radius of 0.065 m referred from the DEFOR-A experiments [
17], which consider the potential phenomenon of agglomeration during the fragmentation of the molten core materials. Finally, the geometry size of the assigned conical space can be determined by the total volume of the MOX fuel and stainless steel in the debris bed, the average porosity of the debris bed, and the initial slope angle. The total volume of the MOX fuel and the stainless steel can be estimated by their densities (11,000 kg/m
3 for MOX fuel [
26], 7850 kg/m
3 for stainless steel [
42]) with their mass discussed above. An average porosity value of 0.59 is assumed here, referred from the FARO/THERMOS experimental results of spatial porosity distribution via injecting molten UO
2 into the liquid sodium [
20]. To the best of our knowledge, there are currently no data available on the slope angle needed to cause particle avalanching in the debris bed of the prototype SFR. Instead, research for Light Water Reactor (LWR) has shown that the slope angle to induce particle avalanching for the debris bed has a lower boundary of 22° [
22,
27,
28], and an initial slope angle of 30° was selected in this study. Therefore, the height (2.485 m) and the bottom radius (1.434 m) of the assigned conical space could be evaluated and utilized to set the initial bed configurations for this research.
Except for the initial geometry parameters, the input parameters for discerning different materials between particles (e.g., Fuel particles made of MOX fuel; Structure particles made of stainless steel) in the calculation are also necessary information for creating the different initial heterogeneous configurations of the debris bed models, as shown in
Figure 4. The input parameters of the physical properties of Fuel and Structure particles in the DEM solver are summarized in
Table 3. The Young’s modulus and Poisson’s ratio, relating to the particle–particle momentum exchange due to collision, are referenced to the physical properties of MOX fuel [
43] and stainless steel [
42], respectively. The parameters of either static friction coefficient or rolling resistance coefficient (also relating to the particle–particle collision calculation) are settled as the same number between Fuel and Structure particles based on the same surface roughness assumption between particles (discussed in
Section 3.1), and the values are the default numbers provided in STAR-CCM+. As for the heat capacity and thermal conductivity relating to the particle–particle energy exchange, the settled parameters in the Fuel particle and the Structure particle are also referred from the material properties of the MOX fuel [
44] and stainless steel [
42]. The decay heat generation rate settled for the Fuel particle in this research was referred from the hypothetical scenario of ULOF in an SFR, which implemented a fuel assembly with an inner duct structure (Fuel Assembly with Inner Duct Structure: FAIDUS). The previous studies suggest that the time from the start of core melting to the onset of FCI is about a few minutes, after which the debris bed is estimated to be piled up on the debris catcher of the lower plenum in around one minute, considering the debris falling rate [
1,
45]. Therefore, the decay heat generation rate of the debris bed in such a short time can be considered equivalent to the decay heat soon after the normal reactor shutdown (6–7% of operating power) [
46]. Based on conservative concern, the total decay heat generation rate of the debris bed in this research was estimated according to the assumption of one third of the total core molten fuel of the prototype SFR, maintaining at 7% of one third of its thermal operating power [
40]. The value of the heat generation rate for each Fuel particle is derived by dividing the total volume of the MOX fuel in the debris bed (without setting the heat source in Structure particles). Finally, the Homogeneous particle physical properties are based on the conception that the MOX fuel and stainless steel in the debris bed are evenly distributed to each particle. Hence, the input parameters of each Homogeneous particle can be derived using the volume-weighted average value of the total Fuel particles and Structures from either the Mixed model or the Stratified model (via the same approach as Equation (28), applying the volume ratio of MOX fuel to stainless steel in
Table 2). The results of the derived Homogeneous particle’s input parameters are also listed in
Table 3. Here, based on the information in
Table 2 and
Table 3, the initial configuration of the Homogeneous model can be created by randomly filling Homogeneous particles into the assigned conical space in the calculating domain, and the Mixed model’s initial configuration can be created by randomly filling all the Fuel and Structure particles into the exact geometry of the assigned conical space. For preparing the initial configuration of the Stratified model, the Fuel particles in the Mixed model are filled into the bottom layer of the same assigned conical space, and the Structure particles left in the Mixed model are also filled into the upper layer of the conical space.
A mesh-independent test for the CFD–DEM solver was also conducted via different structures of the computational meshes in the fluid region based on the Homogeneous model, as shown in
Figure 6.
The polyhedral meshes were utilized to discretize the fluid region. Based on the time discretization scheme of the implicit unsteadiness (timestep of 0.01 s in the CFD solver, five sub-steps in the DEM solver), at the time after 100 s of initializing the CFD–DEM solver in the Homogenous model, the temperature distribution of the liquid sodium due to the decay heat generated from the Homogeneous particles became stable. The different average temperatures of the liquid sodium in the calculating domain (
[K]) corresponding to different CFD mesh structures are also listed in
Table 4. In this study, it was noticed that refining the CFD meshes excessively to a certain number (53,149) did not have a significant impact on the deviation of
from the coarser mesh structure. As a result, the Mixed and Stratified models will be further investigated, employing the same mesh structure of the 53,149 mesh number.
In the MCN solver, the geometry setting of the calculating domain was the same as the one applied in the CFD–DEM solver, and the particle positions in the calculating domain were updated following the results calculated from the CFD–DEM solver. In addition, as well as the conception in the CFD–DEM solver, the Homogeneous particles, Fuel particles, and Structure particles were also discerned by assigning corresponding material compositions in the MCN solver, and the input parameters of the material compositions for different particles are summarized in
Table 5. The material composition of the Structure particle was referred from the stainless steel [
47]. In terms of the Fuel particle, the fresh MOX fuel composition, without accounting for the depletion process in SFRs, was utilized in this study for conservative concerns in the criticality safety assessment. Considering the transition stage from LWRs to SFRs, both types of reactors would be in service concurrently. This drives the possible scenario of supplying SFRs MOX fuel with transuranium (TRU) acquired from recycled LWR spent fuel [
40]. Therefore, the fresh MOX fuel composition in this study was referred from the TRU composition of recycled spent fuel from Advanced LWR (ALWR) based on the scenario that the waiting time for decay heat cooling was 40 years from the state of an average discharge burnup of 60 GWd/t [
40]. The contribution of the discharge boron materials from the backup CRGTs in prototype SFR is also considered in this research [
2]. As the same approach was used to derive input parameters of physical properties for Homogeneous particles in the CFD–DEM solver, the composition materials of each Homogeneous particle in the MCN solver were generated using the volume-weighted average value of the total Fuel particles and Structures in either the Mixed model or the Stratified model. This study employed the continuous cross-section data library of JENDL-4.0 [
48], setting the number of neutron histories and active batches as 10,000 and 220, respectively. In addition, the number of inactive batches excluded from statistical processing was set as 20. Based on these calculation conditions, the uncertainties of all the computed values of
in this research were below 0.035%.