×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Better Heat Transfer in PWR

Better Heat Transfer in PWR

Better Heat Transfer in PWR

(OP)

RE: Better Heat Transfer in PWR

To the best of my knowledge, no operating reactor in the US uses nanotechnology in the heat transfer fluid.  Additionally, I haven't heard of any applicants for new construction who plan on using this technology.

In regard to whether it is "wise" to operate a reactor beyond conventional thermal limits:  It depends. ... in order for a reactor in the US to increase its thermal power level, it would need to get a license amendment (or a new license if it is a new plant) from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.  As part of getting that license, the applicant would have to provide extensive documentation to show the safety of the reactor operation.  Whether the NRC's review would be sufficient for it to be "wise" probably depends on who you ask.  There are some people who believe that the current thermal limits are "unwise" and unsafe.  There are others who will claim that the current thermal limits are overly conservative.  Still others will tell you that the NRC is extremely conservative or maybe it's "just a tool of the industry."

What all this boils down to is that wisdom, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder and is not a good measure to use to judge the scientific merit of a process.

Patricia Lougheed

Please see FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies for tips on how to make the best use of the Eng-Tips Forums.

RE: Better Heat Transfer in PWR

The brief patent summary suggests the use of carbon nano particles in the seconday heat transfer loop. I'm not sure the steam turbine vendor is anxious to find nano particles in the steam flowpath. And if they find their way into the environment and they are tracked back to a reactor, there will be a lot of public consternation.

RE: Better Heat Transfer in PWR

(OP)
The discussion is a little confusing but my understanding is to use nano particles on the primary side heat transfer.  Critical heat flux is the basis for thermal limits on the fuel rods and nothing to do with the turbine.

RE: Better Heat Transfer in PWR

The patent stream number 145 is clearly shown as the secondary loop. Maybe the patent figure is wrong- I did not read the full patent, but the sketch contained in the above link shows it as the secondary loop.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources