% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded.  This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.

@ARTICLE{VijayaKumar:894830,
      author       = {Vijaya Kumar, G. and Cammiade, Liam M. F. and Kelm, Stephan
                      and Arul Prakash, K. and Groß, Eva M. and Allelein,
                      Hans-Josef and Kneer, Reinhold and Rohlfs, Wilko},
      title        = {{I}mplementation of a {CFD} model for wall condensation in
                      the presence of non-condensable gas mixtures},
      journal      = {Applied thermal engineering},
      volume       = {187},
      issn         = {1359-4311},
      address      = {Amsterdam [u.a.]},
      publisher    = {Elsevier Science},
      reportid     = {FZJ-2021-03414},
      pages        = {116546 -},
      year         = {2021},
      abstract     = {In this paper, we discuss a CFD model to predict vapor
                      condensation on walls in the presence of non-condensable
                      gases, with a specific focus on large scale applications,
                      such as accidental flows in a nuclear reactor containment.
                      It is conclusive from the previous works that the heat and
                      mass transport resistance due to the diffusion boundary
                      layer in the gas phase overwhelms the liquid film thermal
                      resistance. Therefore, the two-phase wall condensation
                      phenomenon is treated with a single-phase (gas) model. For
                      the numerical implementation, the containmentFOAM CFD
                      package, based on OpenFOAM is used. For the first time, the
                      model implementation is discussed for arbitrary
                      multi-component mixtures, and performances of two commonly
                      used approaches – Volumetric source terms and Face-fluxes
                      – are compared; the Face-flux model proved to be more
                      accurate, computationally cheaper, and less grid-dependent.
                      Concluding, the Face-flux approach was validated against the
                      experimental database for forced convection flows, obtained
                      at the SETCOM facility in Forschungzentrum Jülich, Germany.
                      The results demonstrate the model’s predictiveness and
                      robustness for a wide range of cases in the forced
                      convection regime.},
      cin          = {IEK-6},
      ddc          = {690},
      cid          = {I:(DE-Juel1)IEK-6-20101013},
      pnm          = {1422 - Beyond Design Basis Accidents and Emergency
                      Management (POF4-142)},
      pid          = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-1422},
      typ          = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
      UT           = {WOS:000635626600009},
      doi          = {10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2021.116546},
      url          = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/894830},
}