Post on 10-May-2018
Applied Research LaboratoryP. O. Box 30State College, PA 16804-0030
AUV Power and Endurance24 April 2002
ARL
Presented by:Dr. Thomas G. HughesHead, Energy Systems Division
Presented to:Fifth International SymposiumTechnology and the Mine Problem
21” Diameter 38” Diameter
26.5” Diameter
Representative AUVs
Volume To Surface Area Ratio
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
1.60
1.80
2.00
21 36 48 60 72 84 96
UUV DIAMETER [IN]
CU
BIC
FE
ET
PE
R S
QU
AR
E F
OO
T
P
d 7 d d
Representative Propulsors
Inlet GuideVane (IGV)
Weed Guard
Control Fin
Rotor
Shroud
TVPJ
Motor
Motor RingMounts
PCIU(7x7x7)
NC Interfacennnector andlkhead (notpictured)
Aft Hull InletGuide Vanes
StatorShroud
ControlFin
“A” Cable HullConnector
Actuator
Drive Train WithShaft, Bearingsand Seawater Seal
LoadButton
Rotor
Fwd Hull
Power vs Speed (38" dia. UUV)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
UUV SPEED [KTS]
PO
WE
R [
KW
]
Propulsion
Hotel
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
UUV SPEED [KTS]
RA
NG
E [
NM
]Range versus Speed
(38" dia. UUV with 500 W Hotel Load)
The Optimum AUV Power System
Performance to Complete Mission Affordable Cost
Speed
Weight
Stealth
Volume
Simple to Refuel
Exerciseability
EnvironmentallyBenign
Easy Turnaround
Direct Costs
Range
BatteriesFuel cells
Heat enginesThermoelectrics
Molecular Structure Definesthe Available Energy
H
Li
1
3
1.007
Hydrogen
Lithium
6.94
1
1
20.26814.025.0699
1s'
1s' 2s'
1615453.7
.53 Al26.9815
Aluminum
32793
933.252.70
[Ne] 3s2p1
O15.999
Oxygen
-290.1850.351.429
1s22s2p4
F18.998
Fluorine
-184.9553.481.696
1s22s2p5
Reactant Energy Density and Specific Energy
JP5/
LOX
Li/SF6
Al/H2O
LH2/LOX
Li/H2O
JP5/
atm
hp hr/ft^3
hp hr/100 lb
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
hp
hr
per
ft^
3 o
r 10
0 lb
m
Reactants
Fission U 235
JP5 in air (free)
Nuclear versus Chemical
lbmhrhp
10~ 7 ◊◊◊◊
lbmhrhp
10~◊◊◊◊
Grids21.50%
Top Lead4.70%
Container, lid, vent-
plugs, separators
10.30%
Electrolyte27.50%
Active Materials
36.00%
Batteries
Single Cell
Theoretical and Actual Capacity of Batteries
Handbook of Batteries & Fuel Cells, David Linden, ed., McGraw-Hill, Inc. 1984
Wat
t-h
ou
rs/k
ilog
ram
NOO Vehicle Batteries• Batteries mounted in 12”
aluminum cylinders.• Batteries arranged in pucks of
48 D-cells, 8 pucks in parallelper group, 4 groups per series (2groups per can).
• Room for 9 pucks per group, allpucks individually fused.
• With new batteries, open circuitvoltage ~288V; 230V underload.
• Intelligent interface boardmonitors temperature, groupcurrent, puck voltages, leak.
• Testing indicates batterycapacity is well aboverequirement for 300 nmi.
AAAARRRRLLLL
• Configurable – Can be ordered with different number of cells• Fairly quick delivery • Reasonable packaging effort required• Relatively cost effective
Texeco Ovonic GMO-090085 Ahr Nickel Metal Hydride Battery
Weight: 39.25 lbs for 11 cell battery
Volume: 453 cu. In for 11 cell battery
Estimate: 35.6 lbs for 10 cell battery 17.8 lbs for 5 cell battery
Nominal Capacity 1 85 AhrNominal Energy 1 1.2 KwhrSpecific Energy 1 67 Whr/kgEnergy Density 1 160 Whr/lPeak Specific Power 2 190 W/kgPeak Power Density 2 465 W/lCycle Life >500Discharge Rate 0 to 200A
1 – Based on a 30 A rate discharge to 1 volt/cell at 70∞F and a
90% manufacturing conformance level of initially achieving atleast 90% of specified value
2 – Based on calculation from 30 second constant currentdischarge of 300 amps at 70 ∞F
GMO-0900 Battery SpecificationsQuoted from manufacturer’s manual
AAAARRRRLLLL
-
+
+
+
+
-
-
--
+
+
+
+
-
-
--
+
+
+
+
-
-
--
+
+
+
+
-
-
--
+
+
+
+
-
-
--
+
+
+
+
-
-
--
+
+
+
+
-
-
--
+
+
+
+
-
-
--
+
+
+
+
-
-
--
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
LELFAS NiMH Battery Module
Configuration:
• 10 Rows of batteries• Each row:
• 2-Ten cell & 2-Five cell batteries• Total:
• 20 – Ten cell batteries (12V)• 20 – Five cell batteries (6V)
• Battery configurations allow for “finetuning” the total voltage and weight.
• 300 cells at nominal 1.2V = 360V• Total Battery Weight: 1070 lbs• Batteries will be operated and charged
in the “vent-up” orientation
AAAARRRRLLLL
• Total energy: ~ 35kW-hr• Usable energy will be less due to voltage and current
limitations
Battery Charging:
• Pre-run top off is needed, NiMH batteries are expected to lose up to 2%per day at 70∞∞∞∞F; 4% per day at 100∞∞∞∞F. (Back of a truck or deck of a
ship in summer)
• Low rate charging will be implemented through the umbilical. It willbe isolated before launch.
• Cyclic charging between runs accomplished with external powersupply. Control TBD.
• Shells will be vertically oriented for charging.
AAAARRRRLLLL
Fuel Cells
Schematic
System Testing
Load
e
H2O (uuuu),
N2, O2
ExcessHydrogen
H+
Hydrogen(fuel)
Air
Cathode
Proton ExchangeMembrane (PEM)
Anode
Stack
Fuel Storage
Reformeror
H2 Storage
Hydrogen Separator/Conditioner
FuelCell
StackPump
HeatExchanger
OxygenStorage/
Generator
OxygenConditioner
ExcessWater
and CO2
Fuel Cell System Schematic
48.2%29.7%173.84,653.23226,7772/1/1995Air Force934th Airlift
55.1%33.9%167.84,507.21826,85910/6/1995MarinesNaval HospitalMCB Camp
50.7%31.9%157.24,256.53227,0759/12/1995ArmyFort Eustis
63.0%31.5%171.64,872.37128,39311/17/1995ArmyUS MilitaryAcademy
77.3%31.4%142.64,117.73528,87510/29/1997ArmyWatervliet Arsenal
62.4%30.9%165.95,316.29132,05310/11/1995ArmyPicatinny Arsenal
61.2%31.2%165.26,379.23538,6081/27/1995ArmyU.S. Army SoldierSystems Center
76.1%30.2%150.76,387.53742,3751/23/1995NavyNaval StationNewport
MODEL B UNITS
AVAIL.ELEC.EFF.
AVGKW
MWHRSOUTPUT
OPER.HOURS
STARTDATE
SERVICESITE NAME
Site Performance Summary TableThrough January 31, 2002
98%27.0%92.337,2882,8601/18/2002Watervliet Arsenal/Manufacturing Facility
98%27.2%90.297,2072,8521/18/2002WatervlietArsenal/Research Facility
95%26.4%128.819,9653,9211/15/2002Watervliet Arsenal/Officer’s Quarters
Mar 6, 2002Geiger Field
Oct 2002*Patuxent River NAS
Oct 2002*Patuxent River NAS
Dec 2002*Barksdale AFB
Dec 2002*Ft. Jackson
Dec 2002*Ft. Bragg
Dec 2002*MCB Kaneohe Bay
Dec 2002*Brooks AFB
May 2002*Sierra Army Depot
Avail.Electri
EfficiencyInput Fuel
(MMBTU)
kWh
Output
Oper.
HoursFUEL CELLSTART-UP
SITE NAME
Site Performance Summary TableData through February, 2002
* Projected Fuel Cell Installation Date
O2(3000psiagas) H2O2(70%)
O2(6000psiagas) H2O2(90%)
NaClO3O2(liquid)
LiClO4
lbm O2/ft^3
lbm sub/ft^3
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
lbm
/ft^
3
Source
Oxygen Storage
H2(3000psia) FeTiHx
H2 LiquidCarbon
SWNT's ReformingAl(+H2O)
lbm H2/ft^3
lbm sub/ft^3
0.0
50.0
100.0
150.0
200.0
250.0
lbm
/ft^
3
Source
Hydrogen Storage
ckombustor
FuelTank
StirlingEngine
lternator
Balancer
Status:
3 kW Design, Prototype @ 2.2 kW
44% Efficiency Design, Prototype @35%
Prototype Engine Operated 100-hours
Heat Engine SystemsAAAARRRRLLLL
Stirling Engine
Schematic
Hot End
GasAlternator
Mover
Gas
DisplacerPiston
Gas
ColdEnd
REGENERATOR
AAAARRRRLLLL
Stirling HeaterTubes
PorousCombustorStructure
EnhancedSurfaceArea
Fuel FeedArteries
OxidantInjector
Trap / HeatShield
DifferentialPressureMembrane
Start /RestartModule
Fuel
Products
Flame
Wick Combustor8Li + SF6 6LiF + Li2 S
AAAARRRRLLLL
Compact Turbine/Alternators
1ST Generation
2ND Generation
3RD Generation
AAAARRRRLLLL
Isosurface is 12% liquid waterContours are diluent mass fraction
Max power - Max depth
5000.004375.003750.003125.002500.001875.001250.00625.00
0.00
Temperature
CombustorsC1 0 H1 9 + 14.75 O2 + 70 H2O 10 CO2 + 9.5 H2O + 70 H2OÆ
Fuel
Oxygen
Oxygen
Diluent
Diluent
MixedProducts
AAAARRRRLLLL
Thermo-photovoltaics/Thermoelectrics
(from Scientific American)
Thermal Radiator (ARL)
TPV Assembly (KAPL)
Converter Weights and Volumes
350 Hp Turbine _ Hp Stirling 1 Hp Fuel Cell
30 lbs.5 ft
355 lbs.25 ft
3
16 lbs.15 ft
3
Generating Electricity
3 Kw Alternator
3 Kw Alternator
.8 Kw Fuel Cell
3 lbs17 in
3
24lbs137 in
3 16 lbs248 in
3
.35 Kw Alternator
6 lbs38 in
3
Range vs Speed for SEAHORSE UUV(with various power systems)
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Speed [knots]
Ran
ge
[nm
]
Wick/Stirling
Wick/Rankine
Lithium Battery (Primary)
Fuel Cell (Cryo)
JP5-3000 psi O2 (Rankine)
JP5 – H2O2 (Rankine)
Lithium Battery (Secondary)
Silver – Zinc Battery (Seconda
Summary
• No energy system is optimum for allapplications; most are for some.
• Performance varies by an order-of-magnitude among the candidates.
• Cost and performance tend to varyinversely.
• Expect about a twofold improvement inemerging technologies in the next decade.