Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Hecht, Ethan S.

Publications and source records attributed to Hecht, Ethan S..

Turboexpander for Direct Cooling in Hydrogen Vehicle Fueling Infrastructure

Hydrogen fuel cell electric vehicles (FCEVs) have been identified as one of a few options for zero carbon emissions transportation. A major advantage of FCEVs is that they can fuel quickly and follow a familiar fueling behavior to hydrocarbon-fueled vehicles. Whether light duty or heavy duty, the goal for a hydrogen dispenser is to fuel a vehicle in the same amount of time as the fossil fuel equivalent. When hydrogen is dispensed into the vehicle storage system, however, the temperature rises due to the Joule-Thomson effect and the heat of compression. Typically, vehicles store the compressed hydrogen in composite overwrapped pressure vessels that have a polymer liner with an operational temperature limit of 85°C. This temperature limit can be exceeded during fast fueling if hydrogen is not precooled. Precooling allows for a dispenser to fuel a vehicle at a faster flow rate by preventing the storage tank on the vehicle from overheating. Fueling protocols and requirements are presented in SAE J2601 Fueling Protocols for Light Duty Gaseous Hydrogen Surface Vehicles [1]. A heavy-duty equivalent is under development with similar requirements for precooling. Currently, conventional precooling for light-duty vehicle refueling uses a heat exchanger and chiller to cool the hydrogen gas to -40°C before entering the vehicle. The precooling system represents a significant part of the station capital and operating costs, so if the cost of the precooling system can be reduced by improving its efficiency, the overall station capital and operating cost can be reduced. In this project, National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) and Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) researchers teamed up to investigate the turboexpander precooling application. A turboexpander is a device that places a turbine in a flow path where a pressure differential can be attained. This expansion device will extract work and lower the temperature of the fluid as the pressure reduces. While initial calculations based on established principles showed potential for a turboexpander to generate cooled gas, much work needs to be done to prove the concept. Turboexpanders typically work best under steady state conditions, while the dispenser is a very dynamic flow system. Dynamic turboexpander systems have been proven, such as a turbocharger on a gasoline vehicle. The inlet pressure at a dispenser is also much higher than any other known turboexpander system but should behave similarly to higher density fluids at lower pressures. Having both performed initial calculations, NREL and SNL researchers teamed up to investigate the turboexpander precooling application further. A project was soon built around the idea with SNL performing system modeling using previously proven capabilities and NREL performing hardware characterization with established station capabilities. Creare LLC was contracted as the turbomachinery expert to design and build the concept device. Part way through the project, however, contracting issues with the funding partner caused the project to terminate early before building and characterizing the concept device. While the project could not continue, many key findings were already learned. This paper is a summary of those findings.

08 HYDROGEN↗

Physics model validation of propane and methane for Hydrogen Plus Other Alternative Fuels Risk Assessment Models (HyRAM+)

HyRAM+ is a toolkit that includes fast-running models for the unconstrained (i.e., no wall interactions) dispersion and flames for non-premixed fuels. The models were developed for use with hydrogen, but the toolkit was expanded to include propane and methane in a recent release. Here, in this work we validate the dispersion and flame models for these additional fuels, based on reported literature data. The validation efforts spanned a range of release conditions, from subsonic to underexpanded jets and flames for a range of mass flow rates. In general, the dispersion model works well for both propane and methane although the width of the jet/plume is predicted to be wider than observed in some cases. The flame model tends to over-predict the induced buoyancy for low-momentum flames, while the radiative heat flux agrees with the experimental data reasonably well, for both fuels. The models could be improved but give acceptable predictions for propane and methane behavior for the purposes of risk assessment.

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗

Simulations for Planning of Liquid Hydrogen Spill Test

In order to better understand the complex pooling and vaporization of a liquid hydrogen spill, Sandia National Laboratories is conducting a highly instrumented, controlled experiment inside their Shock Tube Facility. Simulations were run before the experiment to help with the planning of experimental conditions, including sensor placement and cross wind velocity. This paper describes the modeling used in this planning process and its main conclusions. Sierra Suite’s Fuego, an in-house computational fluid dynamics code, was used to simulate a RANS model of a liquid hydrogen spill with five crosswind velocities: 0.45, 0.89, 1.34, 1.79, and 2.24 m/s. Two pool sizes were considered: a diameter of 0.85 m and a diameter of 1.7. A grid resolution study was completed on the smaller pool size with a 1.34 m/s crosswind. A comparison of the length and height of the plume of flammable hydrogen vaporizing from the pool shows that the plume becomes longer and remains closer to the ground with increasing wind speed. The plume reaches the top of the facility only in the 0.45 m/s case. From these results, we concluded that it will be best for the spacing and location of the concentration sensors to be reconfigured for each wind speed during the experiment.

08 HYDROGEN↗

Technical Justifications for Liquid Hydrogen Exposure Distances

The previous separation distances in the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Hydrogen Technologies Code (NFPA 2, 2020 Edition) for bulk liquid hydrogen systems lack a well-documented basis and can be onerous. This report describes the technical justifications for revisions of the bulk liquid hydrogen storage setback distances in NFPA 2, 2023 Edition. Distances are calculated based on a leak area that is 5% of the nominal pipe flow area. Models from the open source HyRAM+ toolkit are used to justify the leak size as well as calculate consequence-based separation distances from that leak size. Validation and verification of the numerical models is provided, as well as justification for the harm criteria used for the determination of the setback distances for each exposure type. This report also reviews mitigations that could result in setback distance reduction. The resulting updates to the liquid hydrogen separation distances are well-documented, retrievable, repeatable, revisable, independently verified, and use experimental results to verify the models.

08 HYDROGEN↗

Hydrogen Plus Other Alternative Fuels Risk Assessment Models (HyRAM+) Version 5.0 Technical Reference Manual

The HyRAM+ software toolkit provides a basis for conducting quantitative risk assessment and consequence modeling for hydrogen, natural gas, and autogas systems. HyRAM+ is designed to facilitate the use of state-of-the-art models to conduct robust, repeatable assessments of safety, hazards, and risk. HyRAM+ integrates deterministic and probabilistic models for quantifying leak sizes and rates, predicting physical effects, characterizing hazards (thermal effects from jet fires, overpressure effects from delayed ignition), and assessing impacts on people. HyRAM+ is developed at Sandia National Laboratories to support the development and revision of national and international codes and standards, and to provide developed models in a publicly-accessible toolkit usable by all stakeholders. This document provides a description of the methodology and models contained in HyRAM+ version 5.0. The most significant change for HyRAM+ version 5.0 from HyRAM+ version 4.1 is the ability to model blends of different fuels. HyRAM+ was previously only suitable for use with hydrogen, methane, or propane, with users having the ability to use methane as a proxy for natural gas and propane as a proxy for autogas/liquefied petroleum gas. In version 5.0, real natural gas or autogas compositions can be modeled as the fuel, or even blends of natural gas with hydrogen. These blends can be used in the standalone physics models, but not yet in the quantitative risk assessment mode of HyRAM+.

03 NATURAL GAS↗