Open Access
Issue
EPJ Web Conf.
Volume 355, 2026
4th International Conference on Sustainable Technologies and Advances in Automation, Aerospace and Robotics (STAAAR 2025)
Article Number 04012
Number of page(s) 9
Section Thermofluids, Aerodynamics and CFD Simulation
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/epjconf/202635504012
Published online 03 March 2026
  1. Branislav Vrban et. al., Perspectives on the future of nuclear energy in Slovakia, Energy Systems, (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12667-023-00630-y. [Google Scholar]
  2. Guan Heng Yeoh, Thermal hydraulic considerations of nuclear reactor systems: Past, present and future challenges, Experimental and Computational Multiphase Flow, vol. 1, No. 1, 2019, 3–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42757-019-0002-5. [Google Scholar]
  3. Wang M., Wang Y., Tian W., Qiu S., Su G.H., Recent progress of CFD applications in PWR thermal hydraulics study and future directions. Annals of Nuclear Energy (oxford), 150, vp., (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2020.107836. [Google Scholar]
  4. Akhmadov Kh.S., Shadmanov I.U., Akramov A.S., Iskandarov Z.S., Sobirov M.M. The thermal efficiency of the heat receiving panels of solar collectors and CFD analysis of a screw duct collector. E3S Web of Conferences, Volume 583, 25 October 2024. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202458304001. [Google Scholar]
  5. Akhmadov, K.S., Akhatov, J.S. & Xin, L. Geometric Optimization of a CeO2-Based Solar Thermochemical Reactor for Hydrogen Production: Temperature Distribution Analysis under 2 kW Concentrated Solar Power. Appl. Sol. Energy 61, 102–115 (2025). https://doi.org/10.3103/S0003701X25600729. [Google Scholar]
  6. Lach L., Svyetlichnyy D., Advances in Numerical Modeling for Heat Transfer and Thermal Management: A Review of Computational Approaches and Environmental Impacts. Energies 2025, 18, 1302. https://doi.org/10.3390/en18051302. [Google Scholar]
  7. Böttcher M, Bernard O, Mas A, Sanchez V, Nop R, Belaunde F, et al. CFD analysis of coolant mixing in VVER-1000/V320 reactor pressure vessel. Ann Nucl Energy. 2024; 197:110274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2023.110274. [Google Scholar]
  8. Paffumi E, Nilsson K-F, Szaraz Z. Experimental and numerical assessment of thermal fatigue in 316 austenitic steel pipes. Eng Fail Anal. 2015; 47:312–27. [Google Scholar]
  9. Huang H, Chen C, Liu L, Liu Y, Li L, Yu H, et al. Study on flow boiling characteristics in rectangle channel after formation of blisters. Front Energy Res. 2021; 9:676586. [Google Scholar]
  10. Höhne, T.; Kliem, S. Numerical Analysis Related to the ROCOM Pressurized Thermal Shock Benchmark. Fluids 2023, 8, 4. https://doi.org/10.3390/fluids8010004. [Google Scholar]
  11. Son S.M. et. al., Validation and Application of CFD Methodology for Core Inlet Flow Distribution in APR1000 Reactor. Energies 2025, 18, 512. https://doi.org/10.3390/en18030512. [Google Scholar]
  12. Z. Dong, Z. Wen, F. Zhao et al., Scale-up of micro-and milli-reactors: An overview of strategies, design principles and applications Chemical Engineering Science: X 10 (2021) 100097. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cesx.2021.100097. [Google Scholar]
  13. Al-Ttowi A., Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) Investigation of NREL Phase VI Wind Turbine Performance Using Various Turbulence Models. Processes 2024, 12, 1994. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr12091994. [Google Scholar]
  14. Puragliesi R, Zhou L, Zerkak O, Pautz A. Steady-state CFD simulations of an EPRTM reactor pressure vessel: a validation study based on the JULIETTE experiments. Nuclear Engineering and Design. 2016; 300:41–56. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.