Abstract
Coolant Boiling in Rod Arrays–Two Fluid (COBRA-TF), or CTF1 [1], is a nuclear thermal hydraulic subchannel code used throughout academia and industry. CTF’s fuel rod modeling is originally developed for VIPRE code [2]. Its methodology is based on GAPCON [3] and FRAP [4] fuel performance codes, and material properties are included from MATPRO handbook [5]. This work focuses on review of CTF’s fuel rod modeling to address shortcomings in CTF’s temperature
predictions. CTF is compared to FRAPCON which is U.S. NRC’s steady-state fuel performance code for light-water reactor fuel rods. FRAPCON calculates the changes in fuel rod variables and temperatures including the e ects of cladding hoop strain, cladding oxidation, hydriding, fuel irradiation swelling, densification, fission gas release and rod internal gas pressure. It uses fuel, clad and gap material properties from MATPRO. Additionally, it has its own models for fission gas release, cladding corrosion and cladding hydrogen pickup. It allows finite di erence or finite element approaches for its mechanical model.
In this study, FRAPCON-4.0 [6] is used as a reference fuel performance code. In comparison, Halden Reactor Data for IFA432 Rod 1 and Rod 3. CTF simulations are performed in two ways; informing CTF with gap conductance value from FRAPCON, and using CTF’s dynamic gap conductance model.
First case is chosen to show temperature is predicted correctly with CTF’s models for thermal and cladding conductivities once gap conductance is provided. Latter is to review CTF’s dynamic gap conductance model. These Halden test cases are selected to be representative of cases with and without any physical contact between fuel-pellet and clad while reviewing functionality of CTF’s dynamic gap conductance model. Improving the CTF’s dynamic gap conductance model will allow
prediction of fuel and cladding thermo-mechanical behavior under irradiation, and better temperature feedbacks from CTF in transient calculations.
