 Алина, Хосе, Наталья, Рассел, Пелумоми Синтя и Одма. Я, Алина, Хосе, Наталья, Рассел и Пелумоми Синтя и Одма. Это первая часть активиции. Это температура в филе СФР и ФАР. Мы используем эту формула. Я думаю, что все знают, что это такое. Что это значит? Эта формула есть в каждом из них. Это спецификация для пресса 300 ДФР реактора. Во-первых, мы должны найти, что это эффективность филе СФР. Это возможно? Мы должны найти формула для СФР. Мы не можем видеть на экране. Можно, пожалуйста, поделиться на экране? Мы должны... Да, прямо сейчас, но мы можем видеть. Я начну с начала. Спасибо большое. Это не работа. Это не работа. Это не работа. А, да. Во-вторых, мы должны найти эффективность филе СФР. У нас есть формула для пресса СФР, а также у нас есть формула. Если мы получим эту интеграцию, мы можем получить финальную эквесию для пресса СФР. И, по эквесии этих два, мы можем найти эту один эквесию. И мы можем вырезать эту эквесию в два, чтобы сделать эту грань. В этом слое я просто показала, что нужно делать интеграцию. И, по использованию этих два функции, мы можем найти эти два какими-то корбами. И в этом методике есть эффективность СФР. Это эффективность не активной корбами, а эффективность корбами для пресса СФР. Ок. И, по использованию этой корбами, мы можем найти эту эквесию для пресса СФР. Это выглядит как это. И что это максимум? И что этот эквесий здесь? Это мегаватт-фермитер. В reportedly, еще один эквесий. И, по использованию этой корбами, мы можем найти этот эквесий, который вattformый, когда нужно подсоткнуть и оборудовать. И, по использованию этим эквесия, мы можемförить этот эквес, этот эквес, который вырезает. И, по использованию этой корбами, Температура по файлу, как это. И потом, By using this formula, we can obtain the other temperature profile in a cladding outlet, in cladding inlet, in fuel outlet, in fuel center line. So these formulas are obtained from the Todry's textbook. Then by using that formula, we need to assume there should be a small gap, even though he didn't have any information on the gap. If you don't assume there is a gap, all temperature profile was overlapped with the cladding inlet temperature profile. So that's why we assumed there is a 0.1 millimeter gap between fuel and cladding. And for that cladding, we use the same thermal conductivity, which is given by Mr. Cherayu. And then we obtain this actual temperature profile for LFR fuel cell. So you can see the maximum fuel temperature is less than 11.90 Kelvin. And for the SFR reactor fuel cell, we use the same procedure, which I explained for the LFR. And these are all the specifications, which is given by Mr. Cherayu for us. And at first, we need to find the total mass flow of the reactor. This calculation is mainly, especially by Mr. and Ms. Natalia. Thank you. It's just a formula. And next one is we need to find actual and radial picking factors. So it's also obtained like this. Since we have what is the maximum, I mean the total power, what is the number of the fuel assembly and what is the number of the fuel rods for subassembly. And by using that, we can obtain these two. It's easy. And to find the effective height of the core is exactly the same procedure, which is already discussed. And then for this case, H effective of SFR is 1.33, 36. Then using that effective height, we can also get this axial power distribution. Or, and also, I have axial temperature for 5.4 in each domain. And the maximum one is less than 2,070 Kelvin. Okay. Next, Pelo will explain. Good morning, everyone. So on activity number two, we were given a module three to discuss. And so we had to do the learning objectives. And so the learning objectives of this module three, we decided that it's to describe the needs for technological and institutional innovation to improve the nuclear energy systems with the goal to achieve sustainable development and deployment. And another objective is to provide knowledge and practical skills about nuclear energy as part of environment of sustainable development with planning and modeling scenarios. And also to train nuclear personnel, the masters and doctoral students, professors, technicians in the workplace to adequately present to the public and policy makers innovations in the nuclear sector that contributes to the deployment of a sustainable world. And on the module three we were given, we were asked to do the main topics, the subtopics and the learning object, the outcomes. So the module three of innovations in nuclear energy sector in meeting sustainable energy development challenges. So we decided that the topic one, which is the main topic, will be nuclear and renewables for carbon and neural future. And the subtopics for life cycle assessment in comparing sustainable energy technologies, sustainable development goals. And this is to achieve green hydrogen production to reduce carbon footprint in the future. And topic two is environmental and developmental impact. This is a reviving growth and imaging environment and economic indecision making. So in summary is that development that is conceiving and enhancing the resource base to sustain a large number of people in living in poverty. And for the economic growth we are to meet basic human needs and to integration challenges with nuclear power and safety and non-proferrelations. This is for economic and social development that can and should be mutually reinforcing. The money that will be spent on education and health will rise human productivity and the economic development can accelerate social development by providing opportunities for underprivileged groups like for people living under poverty to improve their quality of life. And new technologies development in the nuclear area which is for new classes of advanced reactors and fuel. And the outcome of topic one will be a trace in sustainable energy path and the other is to present sustainable development goals and to include a dedicated energy to affordable, reliable and sustainable energy for all. And the other one is to show how nuclear power can provide electricity accessible to growing urban population. This is to meet the basic human needs. And also a nuclear power must be used executively for a purpose, as I said, around in safeguards measures including TITUDE IEA and areas I can't... Yes, so this is what we came up with. Oh, advanced nuclear technologies for the SMRs and the... And so the prerequisite for module three a person must possess a basic knowledge of mathematics, physics and nuclear power technologies and engineering background including a bachelor's degree in nuclear engineering will be advantageous. And a person must successfully complete the core modules, core module one and core module two, core module one which is energy planning and strategy for sustainable development and module two which is planning for nuclear energy sustainability of the model, curriculum or module or course with similar content. And the learning outcome is to explain the concept of innovations in nuclear energy sector in sustainable energy development challenges as deployed by the INPRO presented in the relevant IEA publications relate the INPRO concept of sustainable energy system to meet the sustainable energy development for achieving sustainable development goals the SDGs and to present sustainable developmental goals to the UN which include a dedicated goal on energy to ensure access to affordable and reliable sustainable and modern energy for all and also to meet in basic essential needs in part and achieving full growth potential and sustainable development to require economic growth in places where such needs are being met and thank you Okay, thank you very much Group one, now I'd like to ask Professor Kassilov who joined us to first him to make his comment and then I will ask Chiraya Batra to make his comment on the first part. Andrei, are you? Can you hear us? I'm here, yes, good morning everybody. First about activity number two which was presented right now I think it's good enough but from my point of view the group put too many attention to the general questions regarding the impact of the nuclear energy on the general issues of the electricity production and whatever and also it's quite clear from the objective learning outcomes that they if you can show this one Yeah, no, this is okay Okay, I can comment here just put the preposition slide with preposition of the topics the chat layout Next one, please Can you show the next slide? Oh, no, no, no, no I'm sorry, that before one more Okay, this one This one Here if you will go innovations in nuclear technology just model three if you go to the next level this is the main topics and economic growth, environmental and development pact and nuclear interview nuclear future this mainly associated with general approach in the nuclear energy systems that what I really expect that you will put more attention to the new technologies development in nuclear area and this was minimum of your attention just new cases but what advanced reactors here and other techniques could be also and how they will influence Generally, I understand your approach it's very good but again, if you refer to model one and model two that the first three main topics mainly addressed in model two it means that from this point of view it's kind of repetition repetition but nevertheless it's giving me the feeling that you're trying to assess the whole system and to see how the nuclear will help in the mine kind needs for energy and whatever then this is my comments that I expect a little bit more on new technology development in nuclear area and more specifically analysis of different technologies can help in meeting challenges for development of nuclear energy sector in the world. Thank you. Thank you very much, Professor Kassilov I am happy that you found some understanding reached some understanding on how to proceed. Now Chirayu, do you have any comments? Yeah just couple of comments Your answers are not matching mine so maybe mine are wrong but who knows let's see what other groups present because for me at least the H effective is coming out to be one and for you it was I think like one or three so you shouldn't tell now because we have another groups also but for the LFR it's okay merely yeah I mean at least for the other groups also they will not change the calculations now so it's too late to change the calculation but others are calculating but for you my answers are not matching and can you quickly tell me what was the mass flow maybe the problem comes from there H effective doesn't depend on mass flow but okay okay yeah so I think this is also different for me I'm just quickly gonna check mine if you give me a second but this is not a major difference this might be just some rounding error so this is more or less okay but yeah this is also okay but something is wrong with the H effective or mine is wrong we'll see but this is okay KZ is okay but H effective is not okay okay any other comments? KZ is 1.37 KZ is okay for me as well yeah but H effective somehow is not matching mine so we'll see what others have and I think that will also impact the other results probably after that because you need H effective for the future calculations so that's why my the graphs are also different for me that's it otherwise logic is fine I mean here this perfectly perfectly explained even found in this mistakes errors in the presentation I didn't put it on purpose it was from equation edit or something okay then thank you very much group 1 great job now I'd like to invite group number 2 to present the results so here we have Ashwita Adriana Roman Ivan Ekaterina and Uma Matbuva Please Do you hear me? So first of all our team want to say that we are so thankful and grateful for the opportunity to be there and to present this presentation and to be a part of this brilliant event of all thank you for all the organizers and of course for all the lecturers online and offline for this impressive, attractive presentation so our team was named BibiMu from the first letters of the list of our countries and what was our year of our presentation some brief, the main objectives of the group activity thermo-gizharovly calculations of the reactors as a calculation results comparison we decided to do a little bit more and to finish additional tasks also and activity number to map of the model topics and conclusions of course so the main objectives to understand the basic thermal hydraulic characteristics of the sodium and lead cold fast reactors to calculate the power profile, temperature profile to understand the reactor behavior to compare obtained calculation results to describe the needs for technological and institutional innovations and improvements in nuclear energy system with the goal to achieve sustainable development and deployment so I asked my colleague to okay, thank you Roman so this part will be, we'll start with the sodium fast reactor, the phoenix I'll present this and then Abila will present the lead fast reactor part okay so these are the input data that we received for the phoenix reactor so we started with the first question that is the total mass flow of the reactor so we went for a approach of delta T that we had as an input of 160 kelvin so we started with dividing by the total core power by the Cp and delta T so we we reached 2775 kilograms per second and the question 2 is we started the axle and radio picking factors so as we have the maximum power for the hottest fuel assembly we can compare it to the average to the average power of each fuel assembly dividing the total core power by the number of fuel assemblies so this ratio between those two we can find the K radio which is 1.179 18 and the KZ is just 1.62 divided by the KR so the defective height of the active core we went from having to integrate the Q linear the Q prime function so to find the Q prime we had to find Q prime max that was given by taking the max power fuel assembly multiplying by the KZ so we have the K prime max and integrating we and using an iterative process we found that the H effective is 0.99988 so we assumed 1 meter for the H effective value and with H effective value and the Q prime max we can plot the Q prime of Z function along the actual position this is our plot for the question number 4 question number 5 is regarding the temperature distribution profile across the most powerful subassembly so we used this formula which relates the bulk temperature as a function of Z and as inputs we have temperature inlet Q prime max for the fuel assembly and here we have this distribution and just to compare with the average fuel assembly we did reach the 160 Kelvin as a comparison just to check if our model for this part was correct and as expected the hottest fuel assembly has a higher delta T following for the bulk just plotting the cloud the cloud temperatures and the bulk temperatures to have a comparison visual comparison we used this equation which considers the convective heat transfer coefficient which we cannot obtain from the nozzle number and the nozzle number from the per clay number which is basically dependent on the flow velocity and geometry this is a similar array for the equivalent diameter we found the velocity the average velocity in that sub channel and then we found the the clay nozzle and H so we could also plot a temperature for cloud cloud outer temperature and the cloud inner temperature so this is for cloud outer temperature and and this I'm sorry yes I'm sorry and for the cloud inner temperature we used a conduction linear conduction model to find the temperature in the cloud inner and this is the results for the temperature in the fuel yes which we have here the cloud inner should be in the other line yes and for the maximum temperature inside the center line of the fuel we used this formula which they were all taken from the Todria's textbook and it's interesting to notice that the fuel temperature the fuel maximum temperature is only dependent on the the cube prime and not on the radius so this is a all the temperatures that we found you see there is a big gap between the fuel outer temperature in the cloud inner mostly because of the insulating properties of the gap we checked if everything was okay but I mean it's possibly the input data and this is the optional part of the exercise which asked us to increase the flow velocity to 9 meters per second and increase the thermal power of the core so first we set the velocity at 9 meters per second keeping the same core power then increasing to 600 megawatts 650 and 700 and in 700 this is offset I'm sorry and yes and as we calculated for 700 megawatts we saw that it was passing so we did an interpolation to find the temperature that would be at the limit of the failure mode of the fuel so we found to be around 690 megawatts and this is the the best reactor that we will carry on thank you so we use the same thermal hydraulic principle for this one also so the first objective was like we are given exercise input data and we had to find out the effective height of the active core axis linear power distribution across the most powerful assembly that's the objective for the last one quite similar one just go to the next slide so the effective height of the active core we did the same process we calculated the maximum power in the hot pin and we used it in this integration formula and we used the iterative process and we got h effective is equal to 1.5 to 75 meter next we calculated the axial linear power distribution across the most powerful assembly so we used the axial position against the heat temperature so we got the cosine function next we did the bulk temperature of the coolant and for this we use this formula using the inlet coolant temperature and with axial position we can see the from inlet to outlet the temperature difference and next we found out the cloud outside that came from this formula and we used the heat convection coefficient that we found out from the same process of the flow velocity to pecklet to nozzle to convection coefficient then we used it with the linear heat generation and from this formula we can see the legend and shown can be seen there we showed the difference between the cloud outer temperature to cloud inside temperature with the bulk temperature in this figure unfortunately this is okay so in this slide we calculated the full centerline temperature and full pellet outer temperature the yellow one is the full pellet outer temperature and there is no gap in this problem set so we calculated these two the blue one the centerline temperature is higher from the cloud outside and we used that T max minus Tf not formula for this okay next we presented all this at the same slide unfortunately the laser can be seen but the lowest one is the bulk temperature the blue one and then higher than the cloud outside that cloud inside and ultimately we get the maximum centerline temperature the light blue one upper one the next problem was to check our temperature profile with flow velocity so we used different velocity we actually found 0.8 m per second for the given input data set so we just increased 0.8 to 1.5 m per second then sorry 1.25 then 1.5 m per second and 2 m per second the highest for 2 m per second and we can see that as the flow velocity has increased the temperature of every m cloud in bulk and full centerline has decreased because larger flow velocity more heat transfer and the heat temperature has decreased with velocity so there is like a comparison between Phoenix and the Brest late cooled reactor and we had input data for both of them the total thermal power for Phoenix was 563 MW and Brest was 700 MW and activate for Phoenix it was 0.85 m and effective height was 1 m and for Brest the active height was 1.1 and the effective was 1.5 rounded the bulk delta T the hottest fuel assembly increase was for Phoenix it was 190 degrees Kelvin and for Brest it was 263 as we can see the Brest has more thermal power so we can understand why this is like larger bulk delta temperature in the hottest assembly and the exact cube prime the linear heat distribution in the hottest pin cell thus for Phoenix is 32.73 and for Brest it 22.41 a kilo watt per meter as we can see the effective height or the active height for Phoenix is smaller than the Brest so it's unstable why the linear heat generation for Phoenix is more and last the highest fuel centerline temperature for Phoenix it was 250 Kelvin and for Brest is 132 Kelvin the cooling properties of different coolant so we found this from values and the conclusion was okay there is like a thermal calculation carried successfully and we cross checked from different formulas and we also tried to find out the average bulk temperature to see if we have formulas for maximum bulk temperature is going well so we cross checked multiple times and for Phoenix maximum temperature do not pass the limiting condition for fuel or cladding because the limiting temperature condition was 270 2700°C but we found much lower than that and to reach Phoenix fuel temperature limit would have to be operated up to 690 MW at 9 m per second coolant velocity there was the fixed coolant velocity 9 m per second how much we can reach so it was like 690 MW we can safely operate the reactor and the differences in Brest are only temperatures are lower than Phoenix as we said before and the Brest present significantly lower temperature during operation at limit velocity of 2 m per second higher the velocity higher the heat temperature transfer and lower the final temperature okay thank you and next up we will be presented okay so this is our exercise about this Model 3 as used and in pro in pro material and in pro material as used as organized this work as organized and by map of the model topics and which model 3 innovations and nuclear engineering energy sector and meeting sustainable energy development changers and top keys top 1 motivation engine for reactor and innovation models SME or challenges assignment models so this motivation is energy energy mix that is present for innovations in nuclear energy so the next the second topic, second main topic will be generation 4 reactors and innovative models in which the sub topics will be different reactor models which are VHRT, MSR super cold reactors supercritical water cold reactors and gas cold fast reactors and lead cold fast reactors from which the learning outcome would be to explain the characteristics, advantages challenges and areas of opportunities of the proposed models and the third topic third main topic which was selected was SMRs in which the sub topics will be concepts, different designs of SMRs, the hybrid systems and the applications from which the learning outcomes would be to demonstrate the simplification by modularizing the nuclear systems the second outcome would be to describe the possibilities and benefits of hybridizing SMRs with other energy technologies and the fourth topic which we selected was the challenges in which the sub topics would be regulatory, revive designs, financial challenges and environmental challenges the learning outcome will be to develop an understanding of the possible opportunities for refining the growth of nuclear energy and the last topic main topic was assessment models in which the sub topics will be heuristic techniques, landed PTGVL, S2R28 the learning outcome from this will be to illustrate the performance importance of various assessment models to perform the exercises on modeling and simulators of nuclear energy systems so we came up with the main objective which was to familiarize the students with innovative approaches to reach the goal of sustainability in nuclear energy systems by understanding the models and to teach them the ways to put the knowledge in practice and the prerequisites for the course would be they need basic knowledge of maths and physics of nuclear science design and analytical engineering background and the second prerequisite which we forgot to mention here was the knowledge of completion of module 1 and module 2 and the conclusion of this exercise was the educational system is very important to motivate the students to find innovative solutions for the current nuclear systems and the practical knowledge of GEN for reactors would help the students to build a better model for the future of nuclear energy systems one final and the most important conclusion it doesn't matter SMR or SFR safety is first so this is our motto we are BBM and we are researching for you thank you for your kind attention ok, thank you very much group 2 very good team work again i'd like to ask professor Kassilov to comment on the presentation maybe we can show the slides again oh it's fine it's not necessary i'm quite happy the group understood really the way and requirements what was suggested and it's quite good knowledge map and topics quite deep the general question which i have can group make estimation if it will be university course what do you think will be how many hours what will be one semester, two semester how many hours lecture semester or total hours will be located because you put very holistic approach and decided to cover important and very different topics what will be your suggestions about the volume of this course who will be answering but generally i'm quite happy this what was done in short time yeah i didn't catch your question could you repeat what will be the number of educational hours we can say like this to complete this course to present this course, to teach this course maybe 14 to 15 hours 15 hours 14 to 15 15 hours may suffice 15 hours 15 hours lectures yeah i think not enough definitely not enough okay, that's sorry, only one semester but generally i can say i'm quite happy what was reached for this short period of time, thank you very much okay, thank you and now i'd like to ask Mr.Cherayu Batra to provide his comments yeah again brief comments your calculations are matching mine so probably now it's like two groups matching so two set of calculations are matching but i also like how you compared it with the breast, yeah this was very useful also probably i don't know what more insights i can think from this because the operating parameters are quite different but was also useful to see the comparison between Leidenman but overall the calculations are matching my calculations so for the breast no maybe mine Phoenix it matches okay, that's a good try okay, thank you very much group 2 now we have a group 3 please i made a photo already group 3 oh my god okay but thank you for saving our time and actually i can tell you that was not a competition that was a teamwork and this first two groups really demonstrated good teamwork which i had doubts because of this also conditions not very perfect to study maybe okay, it's better than august when you guys all will be swimming outside but weather help it a lot to complete at least for two groups and also that was not competition we will not decide the winner because Nicolo ICTP doesn't provide money for the awards that was you know non non-financial competition okay, this is voluntary non-financial competition okay, now we have we can actually start already do we have certificates Nicolo because and before we go for this i would like to ask our online now we have prof