1 / 22

Task II Status : Papers, Continued Research, Lessons Learned

Task II Status : Papers, Continued Research, Lessons Learned. N. Morley, S. Smolentsev, M-J Ni, R. Miraghaie, A. Ying, M. Abdou (UCLA) Ramakanth Munipalli (Hypercomp) J.C. Nave, S. Banerjee (UCSB) Robert Woolley (PPPL. Synopsis of Recent Work in Task II.

yen
Download Presentation

Task II Status : Papers, Continued Research, Lessons Learned

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Task II Status:Papers,Continued Research,Lessons Learned N. Morley, S. Smolentsev, M-J Ni, R. Miraghaie, A. Ying, M. Abdou (UCLA) Ramakanth Munipalli (Hypercomp) J.C. Nave, S. Banerjee (UCSB) Robert Woolley (PPPL

  2. Synopsis of Recent Work in Task II • Preparation of papers for FED special issue • Coordination of lab power upgrade for MTOR • J2 heat transfer experiment construction and magnet design • FLIHY surface turbulence experiments visualizing deformation cell size • Surface turbulence modeling with high deformation starting higher Re runs • Channel flow MHD instability modeling • Continued HIMAG development and debugging for parallel execution

  3. Task II Papers Completed and Submitted for Review “Thermofluid modeling and experiments for free surface flows of low-conductivity fluid in fusion systems” by S.Smolentsev, N. Morley, B. Freeze, R. Miraghaie, J-C Nave, S. Banerjee, A. Ying, and M. Abdou “Modeling of liquid metal free surface MHD flow for fusion liquid walls” by N. B. Morley, S. Smolentsev, R. Munipalli, M.-J. Ni, D. Gao, and M. Abdou Plus – contribution to an overview paper based on these two long papers has been given to Abdou, and input to Ying paper on MTOR experiments

  4. UCLA fusion lab 2.5MW power upgrade piggy-backed of Nanotech building project E1 building to be torn down Fusion Lab spur trench with 2.5 MW of 12.47 KVAC New E1 power trench

  5. J2 gap magnet design completed by PPPL • Designed to: • reach uniform 2T in 15 x 15 cm x 100 cm gap • allow access from top for visual diagnostics (LDV, PIV) • utilize existing Rapid Technologies power supply • have B  g for open channel flow experiments

  6. Surface turbulence studies for Flibe/Flinabe Liquid Walls Key conclusion Improvement of heat transfer is related to better mixing once the gravity effect is reduced Free surface images (gray scale) taken directly via high speed imaging (4000 fps) along with analyzed images (right pairs) using image processing technique for Q=5 liters/sec and inclination angle of3.5°.

  7. High surface deformation turbulence modeling pushing for higher Re • Cases being run now include Re ~1000 at various inclination angles • Need to finalize best cases for surface turbulence database Re = 600 surface view as a function of time

  8. a b c d e x / b Studies of MHD instability in closed channel LM flows Flow direction • Triggered by spatially varying fields • Looking at mixing promotion and threshold values • Similar events seen in open channel flow Distributions of basic quantities at Re=200, Rem=0.05, M=30, and =150: stream function (a), vorticity (b), velocity vectors (c), induced magnetic field (d), and near-wall vorticity (e). The white zones in the vorticity plot are the high vorticity regions with .

  9. HyPerComp Incompressible MHD solver for Arbitrary Geometry • Benchmarking and debugging of single processor level-set solution • Benchmarking and debugging of parallel interfacial flow, and MHD flow problems

  10. Modified level set technique to improve mass conservation Clockwise, from top left: (a) First order reinitialization performed each time step, (b) Performed every 5 steps, (c) Never performed, and (d) With Sussman-Fatemi source terms to reduce mass loss errors

  11. Validation against an unsteady free surface problem – Broken Dam The broken dam problem with test data from Martin & Moyce, comparison with HIMAG. Figure on left shows time history of the water column collapse

  12. Interfacial flowsimulation on multiple processors – Broken Dam Interface Position at t=1.8 for the broken dam problem of Martin & Moyce (1952) Black line: using 6 processors Green line: using 4 processors Pink line: using 2 processors Domain decomposition and computed result on 2,4,6 processors on the left

  13. Test problem : based on Sterl [1990] Density = 1, Viscosity μ= 0.4 – 1.e-5 σ = 1000 B = (0,By,0), Where By = 1/(1 + exp(-x/0.15)) Wall BCs on constant y and constant z boundaries, U profile at inflow at x = -4 is: U(y,z) = (9/4)*(1-y*y)*(1-z*z) Outflow (x=4) BCs: d(V)/dn = 0., p = fixed (zero) Pressure : d(p)/dn = (jXB)n = σ*Bz*d(φ)/dx at walls Electric Potential: d(φ)/dn = 0 at the walls, = 0 at inflow, d(φ)/dn = V x B at outflow.

  14. Sample grid with 8 partitions for Ha = 10,000 91x91 cells in the y-z plane, Total of 496,860 cells Solved on 8 processors

  15. Velocity carpet plot showing Hartmann layers and side-jets Note that the wall layers are extremely sharp, and also well resolved

  16. Pressure drop in high Ha flows

  17. M-shaped velocity profiles for Ha = 1,000 and 10,000 1-(10000)-1/2 1-(1000)-1/2 Good agreement with standard sidelayer 1/Ha scaling

  18. Inclusion of solution in conducting wall, Streamwise pressure drop Needs to be compared and evaluated closely for accuracy

  19. Benefits to complex problems such as: insulation with crack At high Hartmann numbers, to simulate cracks in insulating coatings, it is often desired to cluster an enormous numbers of cells in the crack and wall layer regions. This number can frequently run into several hundreds of thousand cells, and can approach a million cells even for relatively simple looking cases. Parallel processing is inevitable for such cases.

  20. Future Development of HIMAG at Hypercomp • Possible funding sources for the immediate future to continue the development of HIMAG: • Potential Phase-II SBIR activity: (starting June 2004 ? ) • Integration with ITER TBM program to ITER related work (effort to the level of about $ 100 K / year) • (c) Independent funding from DOE on super-computing initiatives,

  21. Proposed work over next ~6 months • Finalize papers based on reviews • Finish up experiments and DNS study of surface turbulence with high deformation (UCLA and UCSB) • Continue HIMAG benchmark (Hypercomp and UCLA) • Push high Hartmann no. limits in closed channels • Test against 3D interfacial MHD benchmark exps. • Application to MTOR NSTX exps and DIMES • Continue development of multi-material problems (including crack) • Apply k-e MHD model to more advanced closed channel flow geometries– 3D MHD pipe flow • Apply channel flow instability calculations to real cases, assess impact and prospect for continued work • Oversee MTOR upgrades and J2 magnet Blue indicates overlap into TBM program

  22. Lessons learned in task II • It takes a long time and dedication to do good (safe) experiments and develop and utilize sophisticated modeling codes • Coordination is needed in fielding and continueing experiments - guidance and input from modeling and design. • Not all experiments and codes end up working as planned (or when planned). Risk is an necessary element

More Related