http://syeilendrapramuditya.wordpress.

com

NECTAR Code: A Sample Calculation

April 2011

http://syeilendrapramuditya.wordpress.com

This short article describes a sample calculation by using NECTAR code [1,2], a Sodium-based

thermal-hydraulic analysis code, applicable for Sodium-cooled Fast Nuclear Reactors (SFRs). The

code is freely available from Ref. 2.

The experimental data are taken from the work of Fontana et al. [3]. The characteristics of the test

bundle is as follow:

Table 1. Test bundle characteristics

Parameters
Fluid Sodium
Number of rods 19
Heated length [mm] 533.4
Rod diameter (D) [mm] 5.842
Interior pitch (P) [mm] 7.26
P/D 1.243
Edge pitch (W) [mm] 7.3914
W/D 1.265
Wire diameter [mm] 1.4224
Wire axial pitch (H) [mm] 304.8
H/D 52.17
Flat to flat distance [mm] 34.1
Axial power profile Uniform
Axial peaking factor 1.0
System pressure [Pa] 1.0132E+5
Inlet temperature [K] 588

The selected case to be simulated is Run number 22472. A summary of test condition for this run

number is shown as follow:

Table 2. Summary test condition

Run No. dT [K] Q [W] q′′ [W/m2] V [m3/s] m [kg/s]
22472 88.3 322525 1.7340E+6 3.4700E-3 2.8353E-0

1 of 5
 http://syeilendrapramuditya.wordpress.com

To perform the simulation, the test bundle is divided into 21 axial nodes, and there are 42 channels

in total.

Figure 1. Domain nodalization (21 axial nodes, 42 channels)

Note that since the code assumes there is no communication between channels, and since the power

profile in both axial and radial directions are uniform, actually just three channels would be enough

to carry out the simulation (Figure 2), since there are only three types of channels based on their

geometry (interior, edge, and corner channels). However, the simulation is carried out for full

bundle, just to demonstrate the capability of the code.

Figure 2. Interior, edge, and corner subchannels

2 of 5
 http://syeilendrapramuditya.wordpress.com

Comparison between simulated result and experimental data is made in term of normalized outlet

temperatures along corner-to-corner line, channels 42-39-40-33-29-21-16-9-3-2-1 in Figure 1.

Normalized outlet temperature is defined as:

Ti − Tin
Eq. 1 T* = .
Tout ,avg − Tin

where Ti, Tin, and Tout,avrg are outlet temperature of subchannel i, inlet temperature, and average

outlet temperature, respectively. Average outlet temperature is then calculated as follow:

∑T i ρi wi Ai
Eq. 2 Tout ,avg = i =1
N
.
∑ ρi wi Ai
i =1

The result is shown as follow:

Normalized Outlet Temperature

1.8

1.6
Normalized Temperature

1.4

1.2

1.0

0.8
Exp. data
0.6
Simulation
0.4
-20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20
Corner-to-Corner Distance [mm]

Figure 3. Comparison of simulation result and experimental data

As can be seen from Figure 3, the simulation result is very different from the experimental data, this

is due to the assumptions, approximations, and physical models employed in the code, as described

as follow:

3 of 5
 http://syeilendrapramuditya.wordpress.com

1. It is assumed that there is no physical communication whatsoever between channels. This is

a very rough approximation, since in reality, mass, momentum, and energy are transported

between adjacent channels.

2. Simple pressure drop models for pipe, as well as equivalent hydraulic diameter approach are

employed. It is well known that flows in a triangular channel behave very differently with

that inside a circular pipe. So that actually it is not really appropriate to use models

developed for circular pipe flows for this case.

This code is more appropriate to be used for a core-wide thermal hydraulic analysis of SFRs, in

which each fuel bundle is put inside a duct, so that there is no mass and momentum transfer in

radial direction, but there is still energy transfer.

To obtain a more realistic result, more appropriate methods should be employed, especially

methods which allow communication between channels, and hence, inter-channel transport of mass,

momentum, and energy. Among many methods, one method that quite suitable for this task and has

been widely used for many years is the Porous Media Approach, as described in detail in [4].

References

1. http://wp.me/p61TQ-wo. Thermal-Hydraulics of Single Phase Flow in Multi-Channel

Systems.

2. http://wp.me/p61TQ-zt. NECTAR Code – A Steady State Thermal Hydraulics Solver.

3. M.H. Fontana et al., Temperature distribution in the duct wall and at the exit of a 19-rod

simulated LMFBR fuel assembly (FFM Bundle 2A), Oak-Ridge National Laboratory Report,

ORNL-4852 (April 1973).

4. http://wp.me/p61TQ-C5. A Numerical Method for Thermo-Fluid-Dynamics Analyses of

Fast Nuclear Reactors Fuel Assemblies – Single-Phase Flow Formulation.

4 of 5
 http://syeilendrapramuditya.wordpress.com

Appendix

Input file to run the simulation

CARD 001 42 21
CARD 002 0.0254
CARD 003 3.0353E-3 1 5.3041E+3 6.8050E-6
2 3.9098E-3 1 1.5912E+4 1.8256E-5
3 3.0214E-3 1 1.5912E+4 8.6239E-6
4 3.9098E-3 1 1.5912E+4 1.8256E-5
5 3.9098E-3 1 1.5912E+4 1.8256E-5
6 3.0214E-3 1 1.5912E+4 8.6239E-6
7 3.0214E-3 1 1.5912E+4 8.6239E-6
8 3.9098E-3 1 1.5912E+4 1.8256E-5
9 3.0214E-3 1 1.5912E+4 8.6239E-6
10 3.0214E-3 1 1.5912E+4 8.6239E-6
11 3.0214E-3 1 1.5912E+4 8.6239E-6
12 3.0353E-3 1 5.3041E+3 6.8050E-6
13 3.0214E-3 1 1.5912E+4 8.6239E-6
14 3.0353E-3 1 5.3041E+3 6.8050E-6
15 3.0214E-3 1 1.5912E+4 8.6239E-6
16 3.0214E-3 1 1.5912E+4 8.6239E-6
17 3.0214E-3 1 1.5912E+4 8.6239E-6
18 3.9098E-3 1 1.5912E+4 1.8256E-5
19 3.9098E-3 1 1.5912E+4 1.8256E-5
20 3.0214E-3 1 1.5912E+4 8.6239E-6
21 3.0214E-3 1 1.5912E+4 8.6239E-6
22 3.0214E-3 1 1.5912E+4 8.6239E-6
23 3.9098E-3 1 1.5912E+4 1.8256E-5
24 3.0214E-3 1 1.5912E+4 8.6239E-6
25 3.9098E-3 1 1.5912E+4 1.8256E-5
26 3.0214E-3 1 1.5912E+4 8.6239E-6
27 3.0214E-3 1 1.5912E+4 8.6239E-6
28 3.0214E-3 1 1.5912E+4 8.6239E-6
29 3.0214E-3 1 1.5912E+4 8.6239E-6
30 3.0353E-3 1 5.3041E+3 6.8050E-6
31 3.0214E-3 1 1.5912E+4 8.6239E-6
32 3.0353E-3 1 5.3041E+3 6.8050E-6
33 3.0214E-3 1 1.5912E+4 8.6239E-6
34 3.0214E-3 1 1.5912E+4 8.6239E-6
35 3.0214E-3 1 1.5912E+4 8.6239E-6
36 3.0214E-3 1 1.5912E+4 8.6239E-6
37 3.9098E-3 1 1.5912E+4 1.8256E-5
38 3.9098E-3 1 1.5912E+4 1.8256E-5
39 3.9098E-3 1 1.5912E+4 1.8256E-5
40 3.0214E-3 1 1.5912E+4 8.6239E-6
41 3.9098E-3 1 1.5912E+4 1.8256E-5
42 3.0353E-3 1 5.3041E+3 6.8050E-6
CARD 004 2.8353
CARD 005 588.0
CARD 006 1.0132E+5

5 of 5