34
1 Introduction
129. Nedderman, R.M., and U. Tüzün. 1979. A kinematic model for the flow of granular materials.
Powder Technology 22 (2): 243–253.
130. Kim, Song Hyun, Hong-Chul Kim, Jong Kyung Kim, and Jea Man Noh. 2013. A study on
evaluation of pebble flow velocity with modification of the kinematic model for pebble bed
reactor. Annals of Nuclear Energy 55: 322–330.
131. Li, Yanjie, Xu Yong, and Colin Thornton. 2005. A comparison of discrete element simulations
and experiments for “sandpiles” composed of spherical particles. Powder Technology 160 (3):
219–228.
132. Albaraki, Saeed, and S. Joseph Antony. 2014. How does internal angle of hoppers affect granular flow? experimental studies using digital particle image velocimetry. Powder Technology
268 (1): 253–260.
133. Jia, Xinlong, Xingtuan Yang, Yu. Nan Gui, Jiyuan Tu Li, and Shengyao Jiang. 2015. Experimental and numerical study of stagnant zones in pebble bed. Science & Technology of Nuclear
Installations 2014 (8–10): 1–10.
134. Goda, Tibor J., and Fritz Ebert. 2005. Three-dimensional discrete element simulations in
hoppers and silos. Powder Technology 158 (1): 58–68.
135. Gui, N., X. Yang, J. Tu, and S. Jiang. 2014. Effect of bed configuration on pebble flow
uniformity and stagnation in the pebble bed reactor. Nuclear Engineering & Design 270 (5):
295–301.
136. Jiang, S.Y., X.T. Yang, Z.W. Tang, W.J. Wang, J.Y. Tu, Z.Y. Liu, and J. Li. 2012. Experimental
and numerical validation of a two-region-designed pebble bed reactor with dynamic core.
Nuclear Engineering and Design 246: 277–285.
137. Shams, A., F. Roelofs, E.M.J. Komen, and E. Baglietto. 2012. Optimization of a pebble
bed configuration for quasi-direct numerical simulation. Nuclear Engineering & Design 242:
331–340.
138. Shams, A., F. Roelofs, E.M.J. Komen, and E. Baglietto. 2013. Quasi-direct numerical simulation of a pebble bed configuration, Part-ii: Temperature field analysis. Nuclear Engineering
& Design 263 (2): 490–499.
139. Shams, A., F. Roelofs, E.M.J. Komen, and E. Baglietto. 2013. Large eddy simulation of a
nuclear pebble bed configuration. Nuclear Engineering & Design 261 (8): 10–19.
140. Shams, A., F. Roelofs, E.M.J. Komen, and E. Baglietto. 2013. Numerical simulations of a
pebble bed configuration using hybrid (rans-les) methods. Nuclear Engineering & Design
261 (8): 201–211.
141. Yuh Ming Ferng and Kun Yueh Lin. 2013. Investigating effects of bcc and fcc arrangements
on flow and heat transfer characteristics in pebbles through cfd methodology. Nuclear Engineering & Design 258 (2): 66–75.
142. González-Montellano, C., E. Gallego, Á. Ramírez-Gómez, and F. Ayuga. 2012. Three dimensional discrete element models for simulating the filling and emptying of silos: Analysis of
numerical results. Computers & Chemical Engineering 40 (40): 22–32.
143. Hidalgo, R.C., C. Lozano, I. Zuriguel, and A. Garcimartín. 2013. Force analysis of clogging
arches in a silo. Granular Matter 15 (6): 841–848.
144. González-Montellano, C., F. Ayuga, and J.Y. Ooi. 2011. Discrete element modelling of grain
flow in a planar silo: Influence of simulation parameters. Granular Matter 13 (2): 149–158.
145. Li, Y., N. Gui, X.T. Yang, and J.Y. Tu. 2013. Experimental research and dem simulations on
stagnant region in pebble bed reactor. In International Conference on Nuclear Engineering,
pp. 395–402.
146. Gong, Baoping, Yongjin Feng, Hongbin Liao, Liu Yang, Xiaoyu Wang, and Kaiming Feng.
2017. Discrete element modeling of pebble bed packing structures for hccb tbm. Fusion
Engineering & Design 121: 256–264.
147. Hongli Chen, Shuang Wang, Cheng Jin, Shuai Wang, and Qing Qing Xu. 2017. Theoretical
and experimental study on effective thermal conductivity of pebble bed for fusion blanket.
Fusion Engineering and Design 124: 792–796. Proceedings of the 29th Symposium on Fusion
Technology (SOFT-29) Prague, Czech Republic, September 5–9, 2016.
1 Introduction
129. Nedderman, R.M., and U. Tüzün. 1979. A kinematic model for the flow of granular materials.
Powder Technology 22 (2): 243–253.
130. Kim, Song Hyun, Hong-Chul Kim, Jong Kyung Kim, and Jea Man Noh. 2013. A study on
evaluation of pebble flow velocity with modification of the kinematic model for pebble bed
reactor. Annals of Nuclear Energy 55: 322–330.
131. Li, Yanjie, Xu Yong, and Colin Thornton. 2005. A comparison of discrete element simulations
and experiments for “sandpiles” composed of spherical particles. Powder Technology 160 (3):
219–228.
132. Albaraki, Saeed, and S. Joseph Antony. 2014. How does internal angle of hoppers affect granular flow? experimental studies using digital particle image velocimetry. Powder Technology
268 (1): 253–260.
133. Jia, Xinlong, Xingtuan Yang, Yu. Nan Gui, Jiyuan Tu Li, and Shengyao Jiang. 2015. Experimental and numerical study of stagnant zones in pebble bed. Science & Technology of Nuclear
Installations 2014 (8–10): 1–10.
134. Goda, Tibor J., and Fritz Ebert. 2005. Three-dimensional discrete element simulations in
hoppers and silos. Powder Technology 158 (1): 58–68.
135. Gui, N., X. Yang, J. Tu, and S. Jiang. 2014. Effect of bed configuration on pebble flow
uniformity and stagnation in the pebble bed reactor. Nuclear Engineering & Design 270 (5):
295–301.
136. Jiang, S.Y., X.T. Yang, Z.W. Tang, W.J. Wang, J.Y. Tu, Z.Y. Liu, and J. Li. 2012. Experimental
and numerical validation of a two-region-designed pebble bed reactor with dynamic core.
Nuclear Engineering and Design 246: 277–285.
137. Shams, A., F. Roelofs, E.M.J. Komen, and E. Baglietto. 2012. Optimization of a pebble
bed configuration for quasi-direct numerical simulation. Nuclear Engineering & Design 242:
331–340.
138. Shams, A., F. Roelofs, E.M.J. Komen, and E. Baglietto. 2013. Quasi-direct numerical simulation of a pebble bed configuration, Part-ii: Temperature field analysis. Nuclear Engineering
& Design 263 (2): 490–499.
139. Shams, A., F. Roelofs, E.M.J. Komen, and E. Baglietto. 2013. Large eddy simulation of a
nuclear pebble bed configuration. Nuclear Engineering & Design 261 (8): 10–19.
140. Shams, A., F. Roelofs, E.M.J. Komen, and E. Baglietto. 2013. Numerical simulations of a
pebble bed configuration using hybrid (rans-les) methods. Nuclear Engineering & Design
261 (8): 201–211.
141. Yuh Ming Ferng and Kun Yueh Lin. 2013. Investigating effects of bcc and fcc arrangements
on flow and heat transfer characteristics in pebbles through cfd methodology. Nuclear Engineering & Design 258 (2): 66–75.
142. González-Montellano, C., E. Gallego, Á. Ramírez-Gómez, and F. Ayuga. 2012. Three dimensional discrete element models for simulating the filling and emptying of silos: Analysis of
numerical results. Computers & Chemical Engineering 40 (40): 22–32.
143. Hidalgo, R.C., C. Lozano, I. Zuriguel, and A. Garcimartín. 2013. Force analysis of clogging
arches in a silo. Granular Matter 15 (6): 841–848.
144. González-Montellano, C., F. Ayuga, and J.Y. Ooi. 2011. Discrete element modelling of grain
flow in a planar silo: Influence of simulation parameters. Granular Matter 13 (2): 149–158.
145. Li, Y., N. Gui, X.T. Yang, and J.Y. Tu. 2013. Experimental research and dem simulations on
stagnant region in pebble bed reactor. In International Conference on Nuclear Engineering,
pp. 395–402.
146. Gong, Baoping, Yongjin Feng, Hongbin Liao, Liu Yang, Xiaoyu Wang, and Kaiming Feng.
2017. Discrete element modeling of pebble bed packing structures for hccb tbm. Fusion
Engineering & Design 121: 256–264.
147. Hongli Chen, Shuang Wang, Cheng Jin, Shuai Wang, and Qing Qing Xu. 2017. Theoretical
and experimental study on effective thermal conductivity of pebble bed for fusion blanket.
Fusion Engineering and Design 124: 792–796. Proceedings of the 29th Symposium on Fusion
Technology (SOFT-29) Prague, Czech Republic, September 5–9, 2016.