Enhanced Materials and Design Parameters for Reducing the Cost of Hydrogen Storage Tanks P.I. KEVIN L. SIMMONS Pacific Northwest National Laboratory June 17, 2014 Project ID # ST101 Project ID # ST101 This presentation does not contain any proprietary, confidential, or otherwise restricted information May 14, 2014 1
Overview Timeline Barriers Barriers addressed Start date: Jan 2012 Reduce the cost of manufacturing End date: Sept 2015 high-pressure hydrogen storage tanks Percent complete: 50% Improved material properties to reduce carbon fiber use Alternative tank operating parameters provides wider operating envelope of pressure and volume Budget Strategic alternative fiber types and fiber placement for cost reduction • FY13 DOE Funding: $382K Partners • Planned FY14 DOE Funding: $600K • Project Lead - PNNL • Collaborating Team Members • Total project funding • Hexagon Lincoln – DOE share: $2,100K • Toray CFA – Contractor share: $525K (20%) • AOC, LLC • Ford Motor Company 2
Relevance System Cost Analysis Study 2013 AMR Presentation - Strategic Analysis 3
Relevance Strategic Analysis Cost Study – High Volume - based on the 2013 AMR reference projections Onboard automotive hydrogen storage system cost targets: • 2017 - $12/kWh of useable H 2 • Ultimate - $8/kWh of useable H 2 Materials make up 63% of the tank cost.
Project Approach Improvement of the individual constituents for synergistically enhanced tank performance and cost reduction Reduced tank costs and mass through engineered material properties for efficient use of carbon fiber 5
Updated Milestones Date Go/No-Go Decision Status Go/No-Go: "PNNL, with partners Toray Carbon Fibers America, AOC Inc., Lincoln Composites, and Ford Motor Company, will develop a feasible pathway to achieve at Completed 3/31/2013 least a 10% ($1.5/kWh) cost reduction, compared to a 2010 projected high-volume baseline cost of $15/kWh for compressed H 2 storage tank through detailed cost modeling and specific individual technical approaches.” PNNL, with partners Toray Carbon Fibers America, AOC Inc., Hexagon Lincoln, and Ford Motor Company, will develop a feasible pathway through cold gas enhanced operating conditions to achieve at least an additional 20% ($3.4/Kwh) cost (mass reduction of 18.7 kg composite or 13.3 kg carbon fiber) reduction for compressed hydrogen storage tank above the 15% (13.5 kg composite, 9.6 kg carbon fiber) In progress 6/30/2014 accomplished in FY13 through resin modification and fiber placement. This will be demonstrated through detailed cost modeling of specific low cost thermal insulating approaches. Percent improvements are based on a 2013 projected high-volume baseline (composite mass 93.6 kg, carbon fiber mass 66.3 kg) cost of $17/kWh for 70MPa compressed H2 storage tanks. 6
Project Approach Task 1.0 Project Management and Planning Task 2.0 Task 7.0 Enhanced Operating Baseline Cost Analysis Conditions Evaluate Progress and Load Translation Repeat Efficiency Improvements Task 3.0 Low Cost Resin Alternatives Task 7.0 Modified Cost Analysis H 2 Storage Tank Requirements Task 4.0 Resin Matrix Modifications Task 8.0 Sub-scale Tank Prototype Design & Build Task 5.0 CF Surface Modifications Task 6.0 Alternate Fibers and Fiber Placement Flow chart illustrates the approach of the project and 7 inner relationship of each task (task leads are indicated)
Project Approach Baseline Cost analysis Baseline cost model for an on-board vehicle tank was considered a critical element for the project in order to evaluate the starting point and progress. Cost factors: Carbon Fiber Options: material and usage Insulation Concepts: vacuum, ultra-insulations Design Alternatives: resin, fibers, liner, processing Compare with prior DOE cost studies by TIAX and Strategic Analysis (SA). Cost model will allow for trade-off studies to be performed in order for the team to focus on the most promising concepts. Desire to use a simplified estimator tool for predicting storage system parameters and cost without extensive CAE modeling. 8
Technical Accomplishment - Cost Analysis Reduction Opportunities 70 MPa H2 Type 4 Tank Cost Analysis Projections 5.6 kg useable H2 (baseline system cost based on DOE’s 2013 700 bar storage system cost record) $18.0 $17.0 $0.5 $0.7 $0.8 1 st Year Target Savings 10% $3.5 $16.0 Cost in $/kWhr of Hydrogen 2 nd Year Target Savings 20% $14.0 $0.8 $11.9 $12.0 Estimated Target System $10.0 30% Cost Savings Cost Savings 30% $8.0 DOE 2017 System Cost $6.0 Insulation Targets $12/kWh $4.0 Cost delta $2.0 $- Baseline Tank Low Cost Resin Matrix Fiber Material Enhanced Resize PNNL Project Cost Alternatives Modifications and Winding Op Condition Enhanced Target (resin Improvements 50 MPa & 200K Op Tank to 5.6 reinforcement) kg useable Currently identified additional cost reduction opportunities through cold gas storage to achieve a 30% system cost savings and projected path to target May 14, 2014 9
Technical Accomplishment - Spider Chart 700 Bar Type IV Single Tank System Compared Against 2017 Targets 700 Bar Type IV Single Tank System Compared Against 2017 Targets 700 Bar Type IV Single Tank System Compared Against 2017 Targets 700 Bar Type IV Single Tank System Compared Against 2017 Targets Gravimetric Density Ambient Temperature Start Time to Full Flow 100% Min. Delivery Temp. (20°C) Fill Time (5kg H2) Max Delivery Temp. 80% Start Time to Full Flow Min. Delivery Pressure 60% (-20°C) 40% Transient Response Max. Operating Temp. 20% Low Cost CF Tank Fuel Purity Min. Operating Temp. 0% DOE Baseline Tank Performance Wells-to-Power Plant Max. Delivery Pressure Efficency Loss of Useable H2 Min. Full Flow Rate Fuel Cost System Cost Cycle Life (1/4 - full) Onboard Efficiency Volumetric Density May 14, 2014 10
Technical Accomplishment – Nanoscale Resin Additives Nanoscale additives strengthen resin PNNL validating multiple types Mechanical testing Viscosity measurements Initial down selection – UTS, viscosity, cost Nano Graphite Graphene SNF Nano Clay CNF CNF MWNT MWNT May 14, 2014 11
Technical Accomplishment – Matrix Modifications: testing of nanoscale additives in alternate resins neat resin nano-filled resin Tensile testing nano-filled resin Tensile samples fabricated from vinyl ester resins with nanoscale additives Testing shows significantly enhanced UTS and Elongation at break with nano-additives Std Dev. Unfilled Average Additional testing with different cure recipes is needed and at cryogenic temperatures Fractured edge/nanofibers Based on cost and performance, nanoclays and nanoplatelets are top candidates at $3-10/lb 1 μ m May 14, 2014 12
Technical Accomplishment – Matrix Modifications: Rheology of nanoscale additives in alternate resins SNF – high shear mixed A rheology study was performed on top performing nano-additives XV-3175 T015 High-shear mixing required 1% 2% 5% 1% 2% 5% Higher concentrations tried Noticed some issues with gelling (after sonication) of CNF in T015 – SNF – separation after 24h removed from list XV-3175 T015 XV-3175 has higher viscosity – allows for longer dispersion working time 1% 2% 5% 1% 2% 5% than T015 Indicates daily mixing may be required May 14, 2014 13
Technical Accomplishment – Matrix Modifications: Rheology of nanoscale additives in alternate resins (part 2) XV-3175 PNNL prepared new nano additive 25000 resins and AOC tested using standard Shear Stress (D/cm 2 ) 20000 procedures 15000 Evaluated higher concentrations for 10000 5000 larger effects on properties 0 0 200 400 600 800 Resin Additive v(cps) Shear Rate (1/sec) Neat 922 XV-3175 2wt% N307 XV-3175 Neat XV-3175 1wt% CNF XV-3175 2wt% CNF XV-3175 1wt% SNF XV-3175 2wt% SNF 1wt% CNF 1200 XV-3175 5wt% SNF XV-3175 1wt% 20A XV-3175 2wt% 20A 1wt% SNF 1096 XV-3175 1wt% N307 2wt% SNF 1260 XV-3175 T015 1wt% 20A 1226 2wt% 20A 1213 8000 Shear Stress (D/cm 2 ) 1wt% N307 1101 6000 2wt% N307 1129 4000 Neat 356 1wt% SNF 406 2000 2wt% SNF 418 0 5wt% SNF 673 0 200 400 600 800 T015 1wt% 20A 493 Shear Rate (1/sec) T015 2wt% N307 T015 Neat T015 1wt% SNF 2wt% 20A 551 T015 2wt% SNF T015 5wt% SNF T015 1wt% 20A 5wt% 20A 829 T015 2wt% 20A T015 5wt% 20A T015 1wt% N307 1wt% N307 466 T015 Resin system viscosity in 2wt% N307 485 May 14, 2014 14 range for filament winding
Technical Accomplishment - Matrix Modifications: Catalyst and Filler Interactions T015 5%Asbury – wrinkling, XV-3175 1%cloisite – T015 1%Asbury – small white XV-3175 5%cloisite – white defects over large area nonuniform? defects nonuniform edge issue? T015 1%cloisite – complete T015 5%cloisite – looks ok XV-3175 1%CNF – white XV-3175 1%SNF – looks ok separation defects? XV-3175 1%Asbury – cracking, XV-3175 5%Asbury – cracking, T015 1%SNF – looks ok T015 2%SNF – looks ok white defects white defects 15
Recommend
More recommend
