A Comparison of the Effects of Sodium Borohydride-Based Hydrogen Storage System and Compressed Hydrogen Storage Tank on the Fuel Cell Vehicle PerformanceSource: Journal of Energy Resources Technology:;2021:;volume( 143 ):;issue: 012::page 0120909-1DOI: 10.1115/1.4052163Publisher: The American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)
Abstract: Thanks to its features such as being harmless to the environment, not creating noise pollution, and reducing oil dependence, many countries have started promoting the use of fuel cell vehicles (FCVs) and making plans on enhancing their hydrogen infrastructure. One of the main challenges with the FCVs is the selection of an effective hydrogen storage unit. Compressed gas tanks are mostly used as the hydrogen storage in the FCVs produced to date. However, the high amount of energy spent on the compression process and the manufacturing cost of high-safety composite tanks are the main problems to be overcome. Among different storage alternatives, boron compounds, which can be easily hydrolyzed at ambient temperature and pressure to produce hydrogen, are promising hydrogen storage materials. In this study, a 700-bar compressed gas tank and a sodium borohydride (NaBH4)-based hydrogen storage system are compared for a passenger fuel cell vehicle in terms of the range of the vehicle. The energy storage and production system of the FCV were modeled in matlabsimulink® environment coupling the modeling equations of each component after finding the power requirement of the vehicle through vehicle dynamics. Then, the simulations were performed using the speed profile of the New European Drive Cycle (NEDC) and the acceleration requirements. According to the simulation results, the NaBH4-based hydrogen storage system provided a 4.42% more range than the compressed gas tank.
|
Collections
Show full item record
contributor author | Yüksel Alpaydın, Ceren | |
contributor author | Colpan, C. Ozgur | |
contributor author | Karaoğlan, Mustafa Umut | |
contributor author | Karahan Gülbay, Senem | |
date accessioned | 2022-02-06T05:39:01Z | |
date available | 2022-02-06T05:39:01Z | |
date copyright | 9/3/2021 12:00:00 AM | |
date issued | 2021 | |
identifier issn | 0195-0738 | |
identifier other | jert_143_12_120909.pdf | |
identifier uri | http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4278474 | |
description abstract | Thanks to its features such as being harmless to the environment, not creating noise pollution, and reducing oil dependence, many countries have started promoting the use of fuel cell vehicles (FCVs) and making plans on enhancing their hydrogen infrastructure. One of the main challenges with the FCVs is the selection of an effective hydrogen storage unit. Compressed gas tanks are mostly used as the hydrogen storage in the FCVs produced to date. However, the high amount of energy spent on the compression process and the manufacturing cost of high-safety composite tanks are the main problems to be overcome. Among different storage alternatives, boron compounds, which can be easily hydrolyzed at ambient temperature and pressure to produce hydrogen, are promising hydrogen storage materials. In this study, a 700-bar compressed gas tank and a sodium borohydride (NaBH4)-based hydrogen storage system are compared for a passenger fuel cell vehicle in terms of the range of the vehicle. The energy storage and production system of the FCV were modeled in matlabsimulink® environment coupling the modeling equations of each component after finding the power requirement of the vehicle through vehicle dynamics. Then, the simulations were performed using the speed profile of the New European Drive Cycle (NEDC) and the acceleration requirements. According to the simulation results, the NaBH4-based hydrogen storage system provided a 4.42% more range than the compressed gas tank. | |
publisher | The American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) | |
title | A Comparison of the Effects of Sodium Borohydride-Based Hydrogen Storage System and Compressed Hydrogen Storage Tank on the Fuel Cell Vehicle Performance | |
type | Journal Paper | |
journal volume | 143 | |
journal issue | 12 | |
journal title | Journal of Energy Resources Technology | |
identifier doi | 10.1115/1.4052163 | |
journal fristpage | 0120909-1 | |
journal lastpage | 0120909-11 | |
page | 11 | |
tree | Journal of Energy Resources Technology:;2021:;volume( 143 ):;issue: 012 | |
contenttype | Fulltext |