Detailed herein are the results of a validation comparison. The experiment involved a 2 meter diameter liquid pool of Jet-A fuel in a 13 m/s crosswind. The scenario included a large cylindrical blocking object just down-stream of the fire. It also included seven smaller calorimeters and extensive instrumentation. The experiments were simulated with Fuego. The model included several conduction regions to model the response of the calorimeters, the floor, and the large cylindrical blocking object. A blind comparison was used to compare the simulation predictions with the experimental data. The more upstream data compared very well with the simulation predictions. The more downstream data did not compare very well with the simulation predictions. Further investigation suggests that features omitted from the original model contributed to the discrepancies. Observations are made with respect to the scenario that are aimed at helping an analyst approach a comparable problem in a way that may help improve the potential for quantitative accuracy. 3 AcknowledgementsThe experimental work described herein is a result of funding through the Weapon System Engineering Certification Program (C6).The experiments were performed thanks to an extensive effort by Elizabeth Weckman at the University of Waterloo, and her team of scientists including Cecilia Lam, Eerik Randsalu, Jennifer Weisinger, Chad Young, Gord Hitchman, Mike Hitchman, and Andy Barber. We gratefully acknowledge the hard work and long hours invested by the team to ensure the successful completion of the cross-wind fire experiments. We also acknowledge the help provided by Chuck Hanks setting up the tests and the data acquisition, and Richard Simpson. Richard provided data acquisition, photographic, and experimental design expertise. His blood and sweat are appreciated.The calculations are a result of an extensive effort that goes beyond the authors of this report. The Fuego development team, including Stefan Domino, Greg Wagner, and James Sutherland has been very helpful in reviewing code input and providing suggestions on how to design the tests. They are also responsible for maintaining and verifying the code, which has been performed remarkably well. Sheldon Tieszen and Amalia Black have also provided useful suggestions on modeling methods and general use of the Fuego code.Mary White and Michael Borden contributed to the generation of calculation meshes. Their contributions were important to the success of the project.ACS funding of this endeavor is gratefully acknowledged through the Advanced Deployment program.4
Executive SummaryThis report summarizes a parametric analysis performed to determine the effect of varying the percent on-cell reformation (OCR) of methane on the thermal, electrical, and mechanical performance for a generic, planar solid oxide fuel cell (SOFC) stack design. OCR of methane can be beneficial to an SOFC stack because the reaction (steam-methane reformation) is endothermic and can remove excess heat generated by the electrochemical reactions directly from the cell. The heat removed is proportional to the amount of methane reformed on the cell. Rapid reaction kinetics provided by the high-temperature SOFC operation and excess steam over the nickel-based anode catalyst ensure complete methane conversion. Thus, the thermal load varies with methane concentration entering the stack. The endotherm due to the fast reformation reaction can cause a temperature depression on the anode near the fuel inlet, resulting in large thermal stresses. This effect depends on factors that include inflowing methane concentration, local temperature, and stack geometry.The analysis assumed the fuel would be partially to fully pre-reformed in an external reformer such that the desired fuel compositions would be delivered to the stack, where the remaining percentage of the reformation reaction would be completed on-cell. Simulations were performed using an SOFC stack modeling tool developed at PNNL and validated for the prediction of fuel use, on-cell methane reforming, and distribution of temperature. The study was performed using three-dimensional stack model geometries. Cross-flow, co-flow, and counter-flow configuration stacks of 10x10-and 20x20-cm cell sizes were examined. Thermal performance was evaluated based on the predicted maximum temperature difference on the anode. Electrical performance was based on the predicted power output. Mechanical performance was based on the maximum principal stress on the anode. Fuel utilization was established at 75%. The effect of cathode air cooling was included in the study by examination of 30% and 15% air utilizations.The analysis showed for the counter-flow and cross-flow stacks of 10x10-cm size the stress and temperature difference would be minimized when between 40 and 50% of the reformation reaction occurred on the anode. Gross electrical power density was virtually unaffected by %OCR. For all stack configurations and sizes the inflow temperature increased with %OCR as the subsequent heat load decreased. Cooling provided by the cathode airflow associated with 30% air utilization was not substantially improved upon by 15% air use for the smaller (10x10-cm) stack size. The increased airflow associated with 15% air utilization was needed for cooling the larger (20x20-cm) stacks. The co-flow stack exhibited the largest benefit from the additional cathode air cooling and had the lowest anode stresses of the 20x20-cm stacks. For the conditions and particular generic stacks of this study, the results suggest 40 to 50% OCR should be considered for cross-flow and counter-flow stacks, ...
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.