real-world hydrogen technology validation

NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC.

Real-World HydrogenTechnology Validation

ICHS 2011: T5 #217

S. Sprik, J. Kurtz, K. Wipke, T. Ramsden, C. Ainscough, L. Eudy, G. Saur

September 12-14, 2011

NATIONAL RENEWABLE ENERGY LABORATORY

Contents

2

NREL Hydrogen Technology Validation

Overview of Tech Val Projects

Selected Composite Data Products (CDPs) including Safety and Maintenance


NREL Tech Val – Who We Are, What We Do

Within NREL’s Hydrogen Technologies and Systems Center, the Technology Validation group works on confirming that technical targets have been achieved for components and systems under “Real World” conditions.

CollectionAnalysisCollaborationReporting on Real World

Operation Data from the Field and State of the Art Performance Data from the Lab


Energy Systems Integration Facility - ESIF

Rendering courtesy of Smith Group

(This is a rendering. Building completion expected in 2012)


CDPs

DDPs

Composite Data Products (CDPs) • Aggregated data across multiple systems, sites, and teams• Publish analysis results without revealing proprietary data every 6 months2

Detailed Data Products (DDPs) • Individual data analyses• Identify individual contribution to CDPs• Only shared with partner who supplied data every 6 months1

1) Data exchange may happen more frequently based on data, analysis, & collaboration2) Results published via NREL Tech Val website, conferences, and reports

Data Flow Supports both DOE/Public as Well as Fuel Cell Developers

Results

Internal analysis completed quarterly

Bundled data (operation & maintenance/safety) delivered to NREL quarterly


•Code developed at NREL •Started out just for fuel cell cars and their infrastructure•Added other applications as they came along•Allows for batch processing•Select which analyses to perform and which projects to go into a CDP•Updated continuously

Analysis Tool


0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

FCB FCEV MHE BU

Num

ber o

f Sys

tem

s

HSDC - Fuel Cell Systems

ExpectedOperatingRetired

NREL cdp_comb_01Created: 04/06/2011 9:16 AM

Technology ValidationDemonstrations are essential for validating the performance of technologies in integrated systems, under real-world conditions.

8


Cross Application Usage

49,272

114,290

450,251

218

Hours614,031

Total Hours:

547,653

2,872,533

MilesTotal Miles:3,420,186 4,541

28,230

75,364

Hydrogen Fills

Total H2 Fills:108,135

96,286

90,865

39,477

32

Hydrogen Amount

Total H2 kgs:226,660

NREL cdp_comb_02Created: 04/13/2011 4:27 PM


Fueling Rates by Application


Funding from DOE

FC Learning Demo


FCEV Learning Demonstration Teams

12

Teams through end of 2009

Teams through 2011


Two Sets of CDPs Through 2009Q4 After 2009Q4

80 Spring 2010 Results

•Most comprehensive set we ever published•Includes durability, range, fuel economy•Covers data from all 4 Learning Demo teams + CHIP project over 5-year period•Majority of these are now static, serving as a historical record of Gen 1 & Gen 2 comparisons.

23 Results

• 5 new CDPs, and updated 18 previously published CDPs with data from last 12 months

• Results on most recent durability, range, fuel economy, not yet possible to publish until more data accumulated (end of 2011)

• Covers data from 2 Learning Demo OEMs + CHIP project

• Emphasized changes observed between older data and the newer data

Spring 2011


Technology Validation FCEVThe Learning Demonstration has Exceeded Technical Goals

for Driving Range and Fuel Cell Durability

DOE Vehicle/Infrastructure Demonstration Four teams in 50/50 cost-shared projects with

DOE Fuel Cell Technologies Program

• 155 fuel cell vehicles and 25 fueling stations demonstrated• More than 3 million miles traveled• More than 147,000 kg of hydrogen produced or dispensed*• Analysis by NREL shows:

• Efficiency: 53 – 59% (>2x higher than gasoline internal combustion engines)

• Range: ~196 – 254 miles • Fuel Cell System Durability:

~ 2,500 hrs (~75,000 miles at 30 mph avg. speed)

*includes hydrogen not used in the Program’s demonstration vehicles

14


Status: Out of 25 Project Stations, 13 Are Still Operational (3/5 outside of DOE project)

Mar-31-2011

2 Online3 Future

54 Online15 Future

6 Online

SF Bay Area

DC to New York

4 Online

Detroit Area

Los Angeles Area

17 Online11 Future

3 mile radius

6 mile radius

6

9

9

0

5

10

15

20

25

Num

ber o

f Sta

tions

Reporting Period

Cumulative Stations

Continuing Outside of Project

Retired Stations

Current Project Stations

NREL cdp_fcev_31Created Mar-14-11 9:52 AM

9

6

9

**

** Funded by state of CA or others, outside of this project

* CDP station status is as of 12/31/10


Vehicle Deployment Over Time

4

83

45

23

-

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

Cum

ulat

ive

Vehi

cles

Dep

loye

d/R

etire

d1

Vehicle Deployment by On-Board Hydrogen Storage Type

700 bar on-road350 bar on-roadLiquid H2 on-road700 bar retired350 bar retiredLiquid H2 retired

(1) Retired vehicles have left DOE fleet and are no longer providing data to NREL(2) Two project teams concluded in Fall/Winter 2009Created Mar-10-11 3:37 PM

155

NREL cdp_fcev_25

(2)


Number of Stations Over Time

6

9

9

0

5

10

15

20

25

Num

ber o

f Sta

tions

Reporting Period

Cumulative Stations

Continuing Outside of Project

Retired Stations

Current Project Stations

NREL cdp_fcev_31Created Mar-14-11 9:52 AM


Station Types in FCEV Learning Demo

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

Delivered Compressed H2

Natural Gas On-Site Reforming

On-Site Electrolysis Delivered Liquid H2

# of

Sta

tions

Station Type

Learning Demonstration Hydrogen Stations By Type

Operating Outside of ProjectOperating Within ProjectHistorical 2005-2009

NREL cdp_fcev_32Created Mar-10-11 4:18 PM

*

*Some project teams concluded Fall/Winter 2009. Markers show the cumulative stations operated during the 2005-2009 period


Safety Reports for FCEV Learning Demo

0

1

2

3

Num

ber o

f Rep

orts

Safety Reports - Vehicle Operation

Tank ScratchTraffic AccidentH2 Leak - During FuelingH2 Alarm - Fuel SystemH2 Alarm - Passenger Compartment

Created: Feb-18-11 2:32 PMNREL cdp_fcev_09

Created: Feb-18-11 2:32 PMNREL cdp_fcev_09

13 events•4 traffic accidents•4 leaks during fueling


Definitions for Safety ReportingAn incident is defined as an event that results in any of the following:

• A lost-time accident and/or injury to personnel• Damage/unplanned downtime for project equipment,

facilities, or property• Impact to the public or environment• Any hydrogen release that unintentionally ignites or is

sufficient to sustain a flame if ignited• Release of any volatile, hydrogen-containing compound

(other than the hydrocarbons used as common fuels)A near miss is defined as:

• An event that, under slightly different circumstances, could have become an incident

• An unplanned hydrogen release insufficient to sustain a flame


Safety Reports for FCEV Infrastructure

0

10

20

30

40

50

Num

ber o

f Rep

orts

Type of Infrastructure Safety Reports by Quarter Through 2010 Q4

IncidentNear MissNon-EventAvg # Reports/Station

NREL cdp_fcev_36Created: Mar-14-11 11:18 AM

Reporting PeriodAn INCIDENT is an event that results in: - a lost time accident and/or injury to personnel - damage/unplanned downtime for project equipment, facilities or property - impact to the public or environment - any hydrogen release that unintentionally ignites or is sufficient to sustain a flame if ignited - release of any volatile, hydrogen containing compound (other than the hydrocarbons used as common fuels)A NEAR-MISS is: - an event that under slightly different circumstances could have become an incident - unplanned H2 release insufficient to sustain a flame

5 incidents


Safety Reports by Type

0 50 100 150 200 250 300

Non-Event

Near Miss

Incident

Number of Reports

Seve

rity

Total Infrastructure Safety Reports by Severityand Report Type Through 2009 Q4

Alarms OnlyAutomatic System ShutdownElectrical IssueEquipment MalfunctionFalse Alarm/MischiefH2 Release - Minor, NO IgnitionH2 Release - Significant, NO IgnitionManual System ShutdownNon-H2 ReleaseSite Power OutageStructural IssueSystem Trouble, not Alarm

NREL CDP20Created: Mar-11-10 2:45 PM

An INCIDENT is an event that results in: - a lost time accident and/or injury to personnel - damage/unplanned downtime for project equipment, facilities or property - impact to the public or environment - any hydrogen release that unintentionally ignites or is sufficient to sustain a flame if ignited - release of any volatile, hydrogen containing compound (other than the hydrocarbons used as common fuels)A NEAR-MISS is: - an event that under slightly different circumstances could have become an incident - unplanned H2 release insufficient to sustain a flame

Equipment malfunctionsSignificant H2 Release

Leaks


Safety Reports Primary Factors

0 50 100 150 200 250 300

Non-Event

Near Miss

Incident

Number of Reports

Seve

rity

Primary Factors of Infrastructure Safety ReportsThrough 2009 Q4

Calibration/Settings/ Software ControlsDesign FlawElectrical Power to SiteEnvironment (Weather, Power Disruption, Other)False AlarmInadequate Training, Protocol, SOPInadequate/ Non-working EquipmentMaintenance RequiredMischief, Vandalism, SabotageNew Equipment MaterialsNot Yet DeterminedOperator/Personnel ErrorSystem Manually Shutdown



Controls issue2 operator error2 design flaws


Funding from DOE-ARRA, DLA

Backup Power, Material Handling Equipment


Early Market Locations

FC Unit Locations - Early Market Applications

0

25

50

75

100

125

Material Handling Equipment (13 Sites and 618 FC Units)Backup Power (90 Sites and 219 FC Units)Stationary (2 Sites and 12 FC Units)APU (1 Sites and 1 FC Units)Bus (1 Sites and 1 FC Units)

NREL cdp_em_03Created: Feb-09-11 10:26 AM

Number of FCUnits in

State/Site


Early Market Applications


Summary of FC MHE Operation - ARRA

27

*Through December 2010

FCMHE operating at end user facilities, accumulating many hours and hydrogen fills safely, and already showing productivity improvements.

Sites 5 CDPARRA-MHE-#

Units in Operation(60 Class 1, 76 Class 2, 172 Class 3)

308* 01

Hours Accumulated 307,433 hrs* 11

FC Systems > 2360 hrs 25%* 02

Hydrogen Dispensed 18,597 kg* 04

Hydrogen Fills 38,863* 03

Average Fill Amount 0.48 kg/fill* 10

Average Fill Time 1.8 min/fill* 06


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Star

ts

Starts by Month

07/09

08/09

09/09

10/09

11/09

12/09

01/10

02/10

03/10

04/10

05/10

06/10

07/10

08/10

09/10

10/10

11/10

12/10

Calendar Month

408 of 409 Starts Successful (99.8%)59% Conditioning Starts

StartsConditioning1 StartSuccessful Start

0

20

40

Rep

ortin

g FC

Sys

tem

s

NREL cdp_bu_04Created: Mar-16-11 12:59 PM 1) FC system conditioning is an automated operation for regular

system checks; activitated after long periods of no operation.

Summary of Backup Power System Operation

* Through December 201028

Sites 85 CDP-BU-#

Deployed Systems 189* 01

Total Successful Starts 408 (99.8%)* 04

Total Run Time 218 hours* 05

Total Hydrogen 32.3 kg* 06

Key Performance Metrics

ReliabilityLow Emissions

Low NoiseEase of Use

Remote Monitoring


ARRA Deployment

2010 Q1 2010 Q2 2010 Q3 2010 Q40

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

14

122

35

40

131

35

40

131

60

76

172

136

206 206

308

Cum

ulat

ive

Syst

ems1,

2 Dep

loye

dFuel Cell Units Deployed - ARRA

Class IIIClass IIClass I

NREL cdparra_mhe_01

Created: Mar-10-11 2:18 PM

>750


Fuel Cell Deployments for DLA

2009 Q1 2009 Q2 2009 Q3 2009 Q4 2010 Q1 2010 Q2 2010 Q3 2010 Q40

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

40 40 40

60 60 60 60 60

Cum

ulat

ive

Syst

ems

1,2 D

eplo

yed

Fuel Cell Units Deployed - DLA

Class IIIClass IIClass I

NREL cdpdla_mhe_01

Created: Mar-24-11 10:54 AM

~75


Fueling by Quarter for ARRA

2009Q1 2009Q2 2009Q3 2009Q4 2010Q1 2010Q2 2010Q3 2010Q40

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000Fueling Events By Quarter - ARRA

Num

ber o

f Fill

s

Cumulative Fuelings = 38,863

0

5

10

15

20

25

Cum

ulat

ive

Fuel

ings

[100

0]

All Sites By QuarterCumulative By Site

NREL cdparra_mhe_03



Fueling by Quarter for DLA

2009Q1 2009Q2 2009Q3 2009Q4 2010Q1 2010Q2 2010Q3 2010Q40

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

Hydrogen Dispensed to Material Handling Equipment By Quarter - DLAH

ydro

gen

Dis

pens

ed [k

g]

Cumulative Hydrogen Dispensed = 20,880 kg

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

Cum

ulat

ive

Am

ount

[100

0 kg

]

All Sites By QuarterCumulative By Site

NREL cdpdla_mhe_04



MHE Infrastructure Maintenance By Category

9%

10%

13%23%

31%

Number of EventsTotal Events = 363

87% were unscheduled

8%

8%

10%

13% 35%

20%

Labor HoursTotal Hours = 2427

87% were unscheduledH2 production unit

compressor

preventative maintenance

dispenser

system control & safety

valves & piping

MISC

NREL cdp_mhe_18Created: Mar-18-11 9:20 AM

Infrastructure Maintenance By CategoryAll Sites Thru 2010Q4

MISC includes the following categories:Data collection

electricalother

storage


ARRA FC System maintenance

10%10%

11%

12%

14%



6%

9%

11%11%

22%

6%

13%



THERMAL MANAGEMENT

SENSORS

ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM

PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE

ELECTRICAL

FUEL SYSTEM

CONTROL ELECTRONICS

UPGRADE

SOFTWARE

OTHER

AIR SYSTEM

MISC

NREL cdparra_mhe_12


Fuel Cell System Maintenance By Category - ARRAAll ARRA Sites Thru 2010Q4

MISC includes the following categories:FC STACK

MANUFACTURING DEFECTVALVES

ACTUATORSSERVICE

OPERATOR PROTOCOL


DLA FC System Maintenance by Category

8%

9%11%

16%

20%



4%

7% 10%

13%

5%

15%

9%



ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM

PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE

OPERATOR PROTOCOL

OTHER

UPGRADE

THERMAL MANAGEMENT

CONTROL ELECTRONICS

FUEL SYSTEM

SENSORS

ELECTRICAL

MISC

NREL cdpdla_mhe_12


Fuel Cell System Maintenance By Category - DLAAll DLA Sites Thru 2010Q4

MISC includes the following categories:VALVESSERVICESAFETY

SOFTWAREAIR SYSTEMFC STACK


MHE Infrastructure Safety Reports

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

Incident

Near Miss

Number of Reports

Seve

rity

Infrastructure Safety Reports by Severity - All Sites and Report Type 2010Q4

Alarms OnlyEquipment MalfunctionH2 Release - Minor, NO IgnitionNon-H2 ReleaseOther 1 (user defined)Structural Issue

NREL cdp_mhe_41



Most incidents were dispenser hose break-away


ARRA FC System Safety Reports

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Incident

Near Miss

Number of Reports

Seve

rity

Fuel Cell System Safety Reports by Severity - ARRA and Report Type 2010Q4

Electrical IssueH2 Release - Minor, NO IgnitionH2 Release - Significant, NO Ignition

NREL cdparra_mhe_27




DLA FC System Safety Reports

0 5 10 15 20 25

Incident

Near Miss

Number of Reports

Seve

rity

Fuel Cell System Safety Reports by Severity - All Sites and Report Type 2010Q4

H2 Release - Minor, NO IgnitionNon-H2 FireStructural IssueWater discharge

NREL cdpdla_mhe_27



Possible static dischargeShort from power washing


FCMHE 42 CDPs

39

Results include• Units deployed, operation hours, & fuel cell operation trends• Hydrogen fill count, amount, time, & rate • Tank level at fill & downtime from fill• Fuel cell durability & reliability• Fuel cell and infrastructure maintenance events & safety reports


Funding from DOE and DOT Federal Transit Administration

FC Bus


Technology Validation FCBFC Buses Are Demonstrating Long Life and Superior Fuel

Economy Compared to their Diesel and CNG Baselines

Traveled: >547,000 milesDispensed: >96,000 kg H2

Fuel economy results: 41% to 132% better than diesel and CNG buses

41


Bus Safety

•Break-away not functioning as intended•Tanks on top of bus increase height/center of gravity


Specific Safety Reports

•Car accident•Vibrating machinery (cold)•Fire at a Fueling Station•Breakaways not operating as intended•FL water spill•FL fire power washing•FL evap pad caught on fire


Lessons learned from Safety Reports

•First responders may need training more often or when new to area•Need to prevent drive-offs with hose still attached•Need systems to prevent incidents or near misses getting worse because of cascading events•Want technology to be transparent to user but there are differences that user needs to be aware of

• Power washing of fuel cell forklift•Routine inspections are necessary to catch problems early•Make sure alarms are appropriate to the event to prevent over reaction.•Redundant checks to make sure maintenance is done properly•Fail-safe systems are working as intended

NATIONAL RENEWABLE ENERGY LABORATORY 45

Preventing drive offs


New CDPs Coming Soon

In the next round of CDPs (Oct 2011)

Performance More detailed durability CDPs

Safety and Maintenance Hydrogen leaks by equipment category Hydrogen compressor failure modes Mean time between safety events Equipment category of safety events


Summary

•Safety data collected from teams•Safety data reported in CDPs and available on NREL’s website•Incidents reported to H2Incidents.org when possible•Tech Val has seen a good safety record


Daimler F-Cell at NREL

48

NREL’s Renewable H2 Station, storingover 250 kg H2 and dispensing at 350 bar


Kia Borrego Fuel Cell at NREL


Ford Hydrogen Shuttle at NREL


Proterra Bus at NREL


Questions and Discussion

Contact: Sam Sprik, National Renewable Energy Lab 303.275.4431 [email protected]

All public Learning Demo, FC Bus, and Early Market papers and presentations are available online at www.nrel.gov/hydrogen/proj_tech_validation.html

NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC. 53


FC Durability Target of 2000 Hours Met By Gen 2 Projections (2010)

Gen1 Gen2 Gen1 Gen2 Gen1 Gen20200400600800

1000120014001600180020002200240026002800

2006 Target

2009 Target

Actual Operating Hours Accumulated To-Date Projected Hours to 10% Voltage Degradation

Tim

e (H

ours

)

DOE Learning Demonstration Fuel Cell Stack Durability:Based on Data Through 2009 Q2

Max Hrs Accumulated1,2 Avg Hrs Accumulated1,3 Projection to 10% Voltage Degradation4,5,6

Max ProjectionAvg Projection

NREL CDP01Created: Mar-23-10 10:39 AM

(1) Range bars created using one data point for each OEM. Some stacks have accumulated hours beyond 10% voltage degradation.(2) Range (highest and lowest) of the maximum operating hours accumulated to-date of any OEM's individual stack in "real-world" operation.(3) Range (highest and lowest) of the average operating hours accumulated to-date of all stacks in each OEM's fleet.(4) Projection using on-road data -- degradation calculated at high stack current. This criterion is used for assessing progress against DOE targets, may differ from OEM's end-of-life criterion, and does not address "catastrophic" failure modes, such as membrane failure.(5) Using one nominal projection per OEM: "Max Projection" = highest nominal projection, "Avg Projection" = average nominal projection. The shaded projection bars represents an engineering judgment of the uncertainty on the "Avg Projection" due to data and methodology limitations. Projections will change as additional data are accumulated.(6) Projection method was modified beginning with 2009 Q2 data, includes an upper projection limit based on demonstrated op hours.

*

Durability is defined by DOE as projected hours to 10% voltage degradation* Spring 2010


Dyno Range (2) Window-Sticker Range (3) On-Road Range (4)(5)0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Vehi

cle

Ran

ge (m

iles)

Vehicle Range1

2015 Target2009 Target Gen 1 Gen 2


(1) Range is based on fuel economy and usable hydrogen on-board the vehicle. One data point for each make/model.(2) Fuel economy from unadjusted combined City/Hwy per DRAFT SAE J2572.(3) Fuel economy from EPA Adjusted combined City/Hwy (0.78 x Hwy, 0.9 x City).(4) Excludes trips < 1 mile. One data point for on-road fleet average of each make/model.(5) Fuel economy calculated from on-road fuel cell stack current or mass flow readings.

Vehicle Range Achieved 2009 Target of 250 Miles with Gen 2 Adjusted Fuel Economy


Factors Affecting Fuel Economy Show Large Spread in Data

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

Effect of Average Trip Length on Fuel Economy

1 Fuel

Eco

nom

y [n

orm

aliz

ed]

Trip Length [miles]

Average of Fleet Medians25th to 75th Percentile


(1) Data after 2009Q4. The data has been normalized to the max of the median curve for each fleet. Data binned every 5 miles for calculating median and percentiles.

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 550

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

Effect of Average Trip Speed on Fuel Economy

1 Fuel

Eco

nom

y [n

orm

aliz

ed]

Avg Trip Speed [miles/hour]

Average of Fleet Medians25th to 75th Percentile


(1) Data after 2009Q4. The data has been normalized to the max of the median curve for each fleet. Data binned every 5 mph for calculating median and percentiles.

Fuel economy relatively insensitive to average trip length, except for very short trips

Factor of 2X observed for fuel economy as a function of average trip speed


Fuel Cell System Reliability Analysis

57

1. The New Weibull Handbook, 5th ed., Robert Abernethy, (2007)2. IEC 61164:2004, Reliability Growth – Statistical Estimation Methods, International Electrotechnical Commission, (2004)

• Failure events (i.e. unscheduled maintenance records) are tracked per unit and per fleet

• Crow-AMSAA analysis method1,2

• Study failure rates (e.g Shape Parameter > 1 is an increasing failure rate)• Highlight common failures per category and unit• Tracks progress and reliability predictions

real-world hydrogen technology validation

Documents

department of energy

sustainable energy

data providers

national laboratory

detailed data analysis

art performance data

office of energy efficiency

real world operation