2007 International Nuclear Atlantic Conference - INAC 2007

Santos, SP, Brazil, September 30 to October 5, 2007

ASSOCIAO BRASILEIRA DE ENERGIA NUCLEAR - ABEN
ISBN: 978-85-99141-02-1

PRESSURE DROP OF FLOW THROUGH PERFORATED PLATES

Jos A. Barros Filho1, Moyss A. Navarro1, Felipe A. P. Magalhes2,
Andr A. Campagnole dos Santos2
1

Centro de Desenvolvimento da Tecnologia Nuclear (CDTN / CNEN - MG)

Rua. Professor Mrio Werneck, s/n Cidade Universitria
30123-970 Belo Horizonte, MG
jabf@cdtn.br
navarro@cdtn.br
2

Departamento de Engenharia Mecnica DEMEC

Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais - UFMG
Av. Antnio Carlos, 6627
31271-901 Belo Horizonte, MG
fapmbr@yahoo.com.br
acampagnole@yahoo.com.br

ABSTRACT
This paper presents the results of the first part of a research program devised to develop and validate a CFD
methodology to simulate the flow of water through perforated plates with geometry similar to the ones of the
bottom end piece of a Pressurized Water Reactor. This component drives the coolant into the core, promotes an
adequate mixing of dissolved substances and holds the fuel assembly mechanically. It accounts for a great part
of the pressure loss through the core. The experimental pressure losses of water flow through 5 different
perforated plates are presented here. The profile of the recovering of the pressure right downstream the plates
was also measured. The experimental results were compared with numerical modeling performed with the
commercial code CFX 10.0. Three different turbulence models of the two equation type were used in the
simulations. The analysis of the results shows that the agreement between calculations and experiments decrease
for flows with higher disturbance of the current.

1. INTRODUCTION
There is an increasing interest of the nuclear industry in the application of three dimensional
computational fluid dynamics (CFD) codes as a supplement to or in combination with system
codes. With further progress in safety analysis techniques, an increasing use of CFD codes
for nuclear applications is expected. At present, the main objective with respect to CFD codes
is generally to improve confidence in the available analysis tools and to achieve a more
reliable approach to safety relevant issues [1, 2, 3].
Aiming at these goals, the Thermohydraulics Laboratory of the Centro de Desenvolvimento
da Tecnologia Nuclear - CDTN started a research program to develop and validate a CFD
methodology to simulate the flow of water through components of a PWRs core. The first
component chosen for the program is the bottom end piece of the fuel element. This
component, consisting basically of a nozzle and a perforated plate, drives the coolant into the
core, promotes an adequate mixing of dissolved substances and holds the fuel assembly
mechanically. It accounts for a considerable amount of the cores pressure loss.
Perforated plates have also been studied as flow conditioners for measuring stations [4, 5] as

distillation trays to increase the heat and mass transfer between fluids [6] and as flow
controller emerging from diffuser [7]. The agreement between the pressure loss coefficients
obtained from some experiments [8] and the ones defined by Idelchik [9] are not always
acceptable.
Even though there is a considerable number of studies on numerical simulation of flow
through perforated plates [10, 11, 12] some issues related to turbulence models, near wall
treatment and refinement of the mesh have not been properly explained yet.
This work presents the results of the pressure loss of water flow through perforated plates
with geometry similar to the ones of the bottom end piece of a PWR fuel assembly. The
profile of the pressure recovering right downstream the plates was measured as well. It also
presents the numerical modeling of the tests, performed with the commercial CFD code CFX
10.0 [13].
2. EXPERIMENTAL SET UP AND MEASUREMENTS
A schematic of the facility used in the experiments is shown in Fig 1. Water, at room
temperature, is pumped from a storage tank through an orifice plate flow meter and into the
test section. Assembled in the flange of the inlet of the test section there is a perforated plate
flow conditioner with the purpose to decrease flow perturbation caused by pipe bends
upstream the section.
The test section is a square duct made of clear acrylic with internal side of 72.14 mm and a
total length of 3435.9 mm. The section is divided in two halves with flanges on both ends.
The perforated plates, also made of acrylic, were positioned in the middle of the section by
means of a holding flange.
Sixteen pressure taps were drilled along one wall of the test section. The upper and lower
ones were placed in the undisturbed region of the flow (see Fig 1), to measure the pressure
loss coefficient. The other fourteen were placed, very close to each other, right downstream
the plate, to determine the profile of the pressure in the recovering region. The absolute
pressure was taken on the opposite wall near the plate. The test temperature was measured at
the inlet of the section. The tests were performed at room temperature.
The perforated plates are 20 mm thick and have 25 identical holes in a square arrangement
with a pitch of 14.3 mm. Two distinct hole diameters were chosen so as to cover the range of
free flow area ratios most commonly found in bottom pieces of PWRs. Plates with straight
and chamfered hole inlets were tested. Table 1 lists the geometrical features of the plates
tested. In Fig. 1 there is a photo of a plate already assembled in the holding flange.
The signals from the transducers are sent to a data processing station which performs an error
analysis, converts them in engineering data and stores the results.
3. NUMERICAL METHODOLOGY
The simulations were performed with the commercial CFD code CFX 10.0 [13]. After some
simulations that showed that the flow at the inlet of the test section could be considered
symmetric, it was decided to perform the simulations with the 1/8 symmetry, since it

INAC 2007, Santos, SP, Brazil.

drastically reduces computing time. The level of turbulence is also requested as inlet
boundary condition. As long as there is a conditioner at the inlet of the section, the level of
turbulence was set to the maximum allowed by the code. Here again simulations with
different degrees of turbulence at the inlet were performed to check its influence on the
results, showing no relevant differences.

Figure 1. Schematic of experimental set up.

The mesh used was structured in three different regions. A finer mesh was used in the region
from 20 mm upstream to 30 mm downstream the plate. The characteristic dimension of this
part of the mesh was set to 0.5 mm. From 30 mm to 230 mm downstream the plate, a mesh
with a characteristic dimension of 1.5 mm was used. This is supposed to cover the region of
disturbed flow, where velocity and turbulence fields change abruptly. The rest of the test
section was covered by a coarser mesh with a characteristic dimension of 3 mm. Those values
were chosen after a mesh refinement study which showed that further refinement would
increase computational efforts and give no correspondent increase in the quality of the
results.
Near the walls, 10 layers of structured mesh with increasing thickness away from the wall
were used to capture the effects of the boundary layer in all simulations. An effort was made
to keep the value of the thickness of the first layer as small as possible (y+ less than 5) to take
best advantage of the near wall treatments of the code.

INAC 2007, Santos, SP, Brazil.

Table 1. Dimensions of the plates

Plate

1
2
3
4
5

Pitch
[mm]

Width
[mm]

Hole
diameter
[mm]

Free flow
area ratio

20

8.66
8.64
10.68
10.69
10.69

0.283
0.283
0.430
0.431
0.431

14.3

Characteristics of the
chamfer
Dimension l [mm]

Angle [degree]

0
1.792
0
1.445
1.170

0
60
0
60
30

Among the various turbulence models available in the code, the standard k-, k- and the
SST (Shear Stress Transport) were chosen for this work. These two equation turbulence
models fall into the category defined as eddy viscosity models. They were adopted in this
work mainly because of their numerical robustness and fast convergence.
4. RESULTS
The experimental results are summarized in Tab. 2. The evaluated uncertainties for the
measured parameters are: mass flow (qm): 0.023 kg/s; absolute pressure (P): 0.02 bar; test
temperature (T): 1 oC ; Reynolds number (Re): 1533 and differential pressure (DP): 0.1 mbar
A comparison between experimental and calculated results is shown in Table 3. The values of
DP were taken from pressure taps 0 and 15, in the flow regions undisturbed by the plate.
As can be easily noticed from Table 3, there is a good agreement between simulations with
the different turbulence models. The agreement between simulations and experiments,
however, indicates that, the more disturbed the flow, the worse is the result. The simulations
of the plates with sharp inlet holes gave discrepancies two times greater than those with inlet
chamfered, for the same hole diameter. Also, comparing only the plates with sharp inlet
holes, plate number 1, with a smaller free flow area ratio, has a greater discrepancy than plate
number 3. Plate number 5 has a chamfer angle that offers less resistance to the flow. It
therefore presents the best agreement between simulation and experiment.
Table 4 shows a comparison of the pressure loss coefficient K obtained in this work with the
values calculated with the Idelchik handbook [9]. This coefficient is given by the formula:
DP = (K v2)/2

(1)

Where is the density and v the velocity in the flow channel. DP is the pressure through the
plate. The comparison refers only to the plates with the sharp inlet because the handbook
does not account properly for chamfered inlets.
Figure 2 shows plots comparing the calculated and experimental recovering of the pressure
downstream the plates. The experimental points refer to the pressure taps 1 to 14. In the
figure, two vertical lines show the position of the plate

INAC 2007, Santos, SP, Brazil.

Table 2. Experimental results

Plate
qm [ kg/s]
P [bar]
Test
conditions
T [oC]
Re

3.318
0.880
31.9
60376

3.324
0.695
33.4
62365

3.322
0.690
28.7
56411

3.317
0.686
28.8
56493

3.321
0.691
30.9
59166

0-1

0.62

0.47

0.56

0.48

0.48

0-2

30.95

29.66

12.64

11.17

10.88

0-3

26.88

25.57

8.80

7.52

7.09

0-4

23.79

22.30

7.93

6.48

6.06

0-5

21.97

20.30

7.50

6.20

5.62

0-6

20.76

18.91

7.23

6.02

5.51

0-7

20.17

18.46

7.08

5.91

5.41

0-8

20.07

18.20

7.01

5.80

5.37

0-9

19.96

18.32

7.00

5.88

5.32

0-10

19.94

18.46

6.89

5.87

5.48

0-11

19.91

18.12

7.00

6.03

5.31

0-12

19.96

18.13

6.97

6.02

5.45

0-13

20.03

18.14

7.09

5.96

5.40

0-14

19.96

18.13

7.09

5.98

5.41

0-15

20.30

18.64

7.39

6.35

5.74

Tap
pressure
drops
[mbar]

Table 3. Comparison between experimental and calculated data

DP calculated [mbar]

DP experimental
[mbar]
(taps 0 and 15)

k-

Diff %

k-

Diff %

SST

Diff %

20.30

26.12

28.66

25.89

27.54

26.21

29.11

18.64

20.93

12.29

20.73

11.21

20.52

10.09

7.39

8.98

21.52

8.97

21.38

9.00

21.79

6.35

6.99

10.08

7.07

11.34

6.98

9.92

5.74

5.77

0.52

5.90

2.79

5.65

-1.60

Plate

Table 4. Comparison between experimental and Idelchik pressure loss coefficient.

Plate

K
experimental

K calculated
k-

Diff %

SST

Diff %

k-

Diff %

Idelchik

Diff %

9.36

12.22

30.56

12.26

30.98

25.89

27.54

10.44

11.53

3.00

3.78

26.00

3.78

26.00

8.97

21.38

3.16

5.33

INAC 2007, Santos, SP, Brazil.

50

40

Exp

Exp

K-e

32

SST

24

16

SST

K-w

DP [mbar]

K-w
DP [mbar]

K-e

40

30
20

10

Plate 02

Plate 01
0

0
-2

10

12

14

-2

16

Length [cm]

10

14

16

14

16

15

20

Exp

Exp

K-e

16

K- e

12

SST

K-w

DP [mbar]
[mbar]
DP

DP[mbar]
[mbar]
DP

12

Length [cm]

12

SST

K- w
9

Plate 03

Plate 04

0
-2

10

12

14

16

-2

Length
[cm]
Length [cm]

10

12

Length [cm]
Length
[cm]

15

Exp

K-e

DP
[mbar]
DP [mbar]

12

SST

K-w
9

Plate 05
0
-2

10

12

14

16

Length[cm]
[cm]
Length

Figure 2. Calculated and experimental pressure recovering

5. CONCLUSIONS
Experimental tests were performed where the pressure loss of water flow through perforated
plates was measured. The results were compared with simulations performed with the
commercial code CFX. The simulations were done with three different turbulence models,
the standard k-, k- and the SST. Although they presented very close results to each other,
there seems to be a direct correspondence between the degree of disturbance of the flow and
the discrepancy in the results. This fact seems to confirm other works reporting the
inadequacy of the standard k- model for flows in complex geometries with sudden area
change [14]. The k- and SST models, however, were expected to give better results, once
they incorporate improvements over the k- to model the separation of the current after
sudden expansions. It is important to stress here that those models were chosen among others
more advanced available in the code, because of their numerical robustness, fast convergence
and straightforward use. These features are expected in a calculation intended for licensing
purposes in the nuclear industry.
INAC 2007, Santos, SP, Brazil.

The results of the tests with plates 3, 4 and 5 also show the strong influence of the orifice
chamfer in the pressure loss.
In the sequence of the work initiated here, other turbulence models will be tested, along with
more structured meshes. Different types of perforated plates will also be tested.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors express their thanks to the Fundao de Amparo Pesquisa do Estado de Minas
Gerais - FAPEMIG, for the financial support.
REFERENCES
1
2
3

4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14

Yadigaroglu, G.. Andreani, M.. Dreier. J., Coddington. P., Trends and needs in
experimentation and numerical simulation for LWR safety, Nuclear Engineering and
Design, 221, pp 205223 (2003).
IAEA, Thermohydraulics Relationships for Advanced Water Cooled Reactors,
TECDOC-1203, (2001).
IAEA, Use of computational fluid dynamics codes for safety analysis of nuclear reactor
systems, Summary report of a technical meeting jointly organized by the International
Atomic Energy Agency and the Nuclear Energy Agency of the Organization for
Economic Co-operation and Development. Pisa. Italy. 1114, TECDOC-1379, (2002)
Schlter, Th. and Merzkirch, W., PIV measurements of the time-averaged flow velocity
downstream of flow conditioners in a pipeline, Flow Meas. Instrum., pp 7, 173-179
(1996).
Spearman, E. P., Sattary, J. A. and Reader-Harris, M. J., Comparison of velocity and
turbulence profiles downstream of perforated plate flow conditioners, Flow Meas.
Instrum., 7, 181-199 (1996).
Liu, R., Ting, D. S-K. e Rankin, G. W., On the generation of turbulence with a
perforated plate, Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science, 28, pp. 307-316 (2004)
Sahin, B. and Ward-Smith, A. J., The use of perforated plates to control the flow
emerging from a wide-angle diffuser with application to electrostatic precipitator
design, J. Heat Fluid Flow, 8, pp 124-131 (1987).
Gan, G. and Riffat, S. B., Pressure loss characteristics of orifice and perforated plates,
Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science, 14, pp 160-165 (1997).
Idelchik, I. E., Handbook of hydraulic resistance, third edition, CRC Press Inc., Boca
Raton, US (1960)
Erdal, A. and Andersson, H. J., Numerical aspects of flow computation through
orifices, Flow. Meas. Instrum., 5, pp 27-37 (1997).
Erdal, A., A numerical investigation of different parameters that affect the performance
of a flow conditioner, Flow. Meas. Instrum., 8, pp 93-102 (1997).
Frattolillo, A. and Massarotti, N., Flow conditioners efficiency a comparison based on
numerical approach, Flow Meas. Instrum., 13, pp 1-11.(2002).
CFX-10.0, User manual, ANSYS-CFX, (2006)
Tzanos, C. P., Performance of k- Turbulence Model in the Simulation of LWR Fuel
Bundle Flow, Trans. Am. Nucl. Soc., 84, 197-203 (2001).

INAC 2007, Santos, SP, Brazil.