U.S. Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle Demonstration Project …class 600 800 1000 1200 1400 Time (H 2006...

DEM43-1

U.S. Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle Demonstration Project 2010 Status Updatej p

Keith Wipke, Sam Sprik, Jennifer Kurtz, Todd RamsdenRamsden

October 21, 2010

Fuel Cell SeminarSan Antonio, TX

/NREL/PR-5600-49639

This presentation does not contain any proprietary, confidential, or otherwise restricted information

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.

Outline

• Project GoalsV hi l d H2 St ti D l t St t• Vehicle and H2 Station Deployment Status

• Performance Compared to Targets• Highlights of Latest Vehicle and Infrastructure• Highlights of Latest Vehicle and Infrastructure

Analysis Results and Progress• Conclusions and Future work

National Renewable Energy Laboratory 2 Innovation for Our Energy Future

Two Teams Concluded Their Projects in 2009, Three are Continuing through 2011g g

Ford/BP and Chevron/Hyundai-Kia Concluded in 2009

Gen 1 & 2Gen 1 Gen 2

Daimler, GM, and Air Products Continue to DemonstrateVehicles/Stations within Project through 2011

G 1

Gen 1

j g

Gen 1

Gen 2Gen 2


(CHIP)

Vehicle Status: All 350 bar Vehicles Retired, Only 700 bar Vehicles Continuingy g

160

ed1

Vehicle Deployment by On-Board Hydrogen Storage Type

700 b d152

22 vehicles on road130 retired

43

22

120

140

oyed

/Ret

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

60

80

100

icle

s D

eplo Liquid H2 retired

83

20

40

60

ulat

ive

Veh

4-Cum

u

(2)


(1) Retired vehicles have left DOE fleet and are no longer providing data to NREL(2) Two project teams concluded in Fall/Winter 2009Created Sep-07-2010 8:43 AM

NREL CDP25 Total of ~40 project vehicles expected on road in 2011,for total of ~170 deployed

Fueling Station Status: Stations that Continue to Operate are Mostly Delivered Compressed Hydrogen

10

Learning Demonstration Hydrogen Stations By Type

7

8

9

10

4

5

6

7

tatio

ns Operating Outside of ProjectOperating Within ProjectHistorical 2005-2009*

1

2

3

4

# of

St Historical 2005 2009

0

1

Delivered Compressed H2

Natural Gas On-Site Reforming

On-Site Electrolysis Delivered Liquid H2

St ti T


Station TypeNREL CDP32

Created Aug-24-10 4:05pm *Some project teams concluded Fall/Winter 2009. Markers show the cumulative stations operated during the 2005-2009 period

Out of 24 Project Stations, 15 Are Still Operational (2/3 outside of DOE project)

SF Bay Area Detroit Area

10

20

25

ons

Cumulative Stations

Continuing Outside of ProjectRetired StationsCurrent Project Stations 10

55

9

0

5

10

15

Num

ber o

f Sta

tio

9

5

3

C

Reporting PeriodNREL CDP31Created Aug-24-10 4:05pm

58

DC to New YorkLos Angeles Area

8

National Renewable Energy Laboratory 7 Innovation for Our Energy FutureAug-10-2010

815

Evaluation Against 3 Primary Metrics

Vehicle Performance Metrics Gen 1 Vehicle Gen 2 Vehicle 2009 Target

Fuel Cell Stack Durability 2000 hours

Max Team Projected Hours to 10% Voltage Degradation 1807 hours 2521 hours

Average Fuel Cell Durability Projection 821 hours 1062 hoursMax Hours of Operation 2375 h 1261 hp

by a Single FC Stack to Date 2375 hours 1261 hours

Driving Range 103-190 miles 196-254 miles 250 miles

Fuel Economy (Window Sticker) 42 – 57 mi/kg 43 – 58 mi/kg no target

Fuel Cell Efficiency at ¼ Power 51 - 58% 53 - 59% 60%

Fuel Cell Efficiency at Full Power 30 - 54% 42 - 53% 50%

Infrastructure Performance Metrics 2009 Targetg

H2 Cost at Station (early market)On-site natural gas

reformation$7.70 - $10.30

On-site Electrolysis

$10.00 - $12.90$3/gge

Average H Fueling Rate 0 77 kg/min 1 0 kg/min


Average H2 Fueling Rate 0.77 kg/min 1.0 kg/min

Outside of this project, DOE independent panels concluded at 500 replicate stations/year:Distributed natural gas reformation at 1500 kg/day: $2.75-$3.50/kg (2006)

Distributed electrolysis at 1500kg/day: $4.90-$5.70 (2009)

Outside reviewpanel

What are the Differences Between the Spring 2010 and Fall 2010 Results?p g

80 Spring 2010 Results

• Most comprehensive set we ever published• Includes durability range fuel economy etc

16 Fall 2010 Results

• No “new” CDPs, but we updated 16 previously published CDPs with data from last 6 months• Includes durability, range, fuel economy, etc.

• Covers data from all 4 Learning Demo teams + CHIP project over 5 year period

• Majority of these will now stay static, serving as a historical record of Gen 1 & Gen 2

published CDPs with data from last 6 months• Results on most recent durability, range, fuel

economy, not yet possible to publish until more data accumulated (in 2011)

• Covers data from 2 Learning Demo OEMs + CHIP


as a historical record of Gen 1 & Gen 2 comparisons.

gproject

• Emphasized changes observed in last 6 months through use of gray (old) and colors (new)

Quantified Gen 2 Fuel Cell System Durability* Improvement from Gen 1p

26002800 Actual Operating Hours Accumulated To-Date Projected Hours to 10% Voltage Degradation

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

*Si ifi t

16001800200022002400

2009 Target

ours

)

One Gen 1 stack accumulated almost 2400 hours without

maintenance

Significant improvement

of best-in-class

600800

100012001400

2006 TargetTim

e (H

o

Gen1 Gen2 Gen1 Gen2 Gen1 Gen20200400600

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

Max ProjectionAvg Projection

(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


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

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*

Fuel Cell Stack Operation Hours Histograms Show Differences Between Gen 1 and Gen 2

40Fuel Cell Stack Operation Hours: Gen1

Gen1 In Op1

R ti d2

40Fuel Cell Stack Operation Hours: Gen2

Gen2 In Op1

R ti d2

30

35

24% of stacks in operation

Retired2

Other3

30

35

34% of stacks in operation

Retired2

Other3

20

25

Stac

k C

ount

20

25

Stac

k C

ount

Only 2 Gen 2

10

15

S

10

15

S Only 2 Gen 2 stacks removed

for low performance

0

5

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

0

5

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000


Gen1 Hours Gen2 HoursNREL CDP67

Created: Mar-23-10 10:39 AM

1) Stack currently accumulating hours2) Stack removed for low performance3) Stack not currently accumulating hours, but not removed because of low performance. Some project teams concluded in Fall/Winter 2009

Completed Final Analysis of Gen 1 Fuel Cell System Power Degradation

110

120

130Max Fuel Cell Power Loss vs Op Hours: Gen1

Gen1 Data Range25th & 75th PercentilesGroup MedianOutlier

y g

Need ~1000 hours to have higher

60

70

80

90

100

% P

ower

(1)

Note that degradation

to have higher confidence in

slope of degradation

30

40

50

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 10001100120013001400150016001700180019002000Stack Op Hour Segments(2)

1) Normalized by fleet median value at 200 hours.2) Each segment point is median FC power (+-50 hrs) Max Fuel Cell Power Loss vs Op Hours: Gen2

gflattens out after

~200 hoursAll vehicles continuing in the project will be Gen 2 vehicles

2) Each segment point is median FC power (+-50 hrs). Box not drawn if fewer than 3 points in segment.NREL CDP69


90

100

110

120

130

r(1)

Gen2 Data Range25th & 75th PercentilesGroup MedianOutlier

?

40

50

60

70

80

% P

ower

From limited Gen 2 data received so far, trend of

flattening after 200 hours appears similar

Gen 2 results have larger degree of uncertainty projected against

2000 hour target


30 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 10001100120013001400150016001700180019002000Stack Op Hour Segments(2)

1) Normalized by fleet median value at 200 hours.2) Each segment point is median FC power (+-50 hrs). Box not drawn if fewer than 3 points in segment.NREL CDP70


Developed Methodology for Tracking FC System Voltage Transientsy g

1) Define a voltage transient cycle 2) Find voltage transient cyclesEcoCars Trip Fuel Cell Voltage

dV1

dV2

dT dTss

dVss

tage

Cycle Definition:dV >= 10% Nom Stack V 540

560

580

600

gge in

Trip

time

volt dV 10% Nom Stack V

dTss >= 10 secdVss <= 5% Nom Stack V

480

500

520

g

FC V

olta

g600

620EcoCars Trip Fuel Cell Voltage

FC VoltTransient Pt

50 100 150 200 250460

d t t

3) Categorize and collect voltage transient cycle details

480

500

520

540

560

580

volta

ge

C V

olta

ge in

Trip

volta

ge

y

Cycle Categories


0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500440

460

data pt

Created: Mar-01-10 3:33 PM

FC

(a) (b) (c) (d) (e)

v

time

Quantified Transient Cycle Reduction Between Gen 1 and Gen 2 FC Systems

15

20

%]

Number of Cycles1 per Trip Mile

50

60

%]

Number of Cycles1 per Trip Minute

5

10

15

Trip

Fre

quen

cy [%

20

30

40

Trip

Fre

quen

cy [%

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 200

Cycle Per Mile

T

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 200

10

Cycle Per Min

T

Range of Fleet Average Cycle1 per Mile Range of Fleet Average Cycle1 per Min

20

30

40

er M

ile

Range of Fleet Average Cycle per Mile

4

5

6

7

per M

in

Range of Fleet Average Cycle per Min

Significant reduction in transients

b d

G 1 G 20

10

20

Cyc

le p

e

G 1 G 21

2

3

4C

ycle

pobserved


Gen1 Gen2 Gen1 Gen2NREL CDP74

Created: Mar-22-10 4:46 PM 1) A fuel cell voltage transient cycle has a decrease and increase with a minimum delta of 5% max stack voltage.

Characterized Fuel Cell Transient Rates by Cycle Category

30

35Transient Cycle1 Count by Category2

25

30DownUp Cycle1 dV/dT

40

50SlowUp Cycle1 dV/dT

y g y

10

15

20

25

Freq

uenc

y [%

]

10

15

20

Freq

uenc

y [%

]

10

20

30

Freq

uenc

y [%

]

0

5

DownUpSlowUp

SlowDownSlowDownUp

DownSSUp 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 400

5

dV/dt0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

0

10

dV/dt

SlowDown Cycle1 dV/dT SlowDownUp Cycle1 dV/dT DownSSUp Cycle1 dV/dT

Type: The slow down,

fast up are the most common

30

40

50

ncy

[%]

SlowDown Cycle dV/dT

30

40

50

60

ncy

[%]

SlowDownUp Cycle dV/dT

60

80

100

ncy

[%]

DownSSUp Cycle dV/dT

This characterization of transients ill be

most common transients

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 400

10

20

Freq

uen

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 400

10

20

30

Freq

uen

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 400

20

40

Freq

uen of transients will be

used in future multivariate analysis


0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40dV/dt

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40dV/dt

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40dV/dtNREL CDP76

Created: Mar-22-10 4:46 PM1) A fuel cell voltage transient cycle has a decrease and increase with a minimum delta of 5% max stack voltage.2) Cycle categories based on cycle up and down times. A slow up or down transient has a time change >= 5 seconds. SS = Steady State, where the time change is >= 10 seconds and the voltage change is <= 2.5% max stack voltage.

Average Hydrogen Per Fill Has Increased 24%, But Based on Much Smaller Sample, p

900

1000

Histogram of Fueling AmountsVehicle and Infrastructure

Through 2009Q4 After 2009Q4

700

800

900

ts Need more data after

500

600

of F

uelin

g Ev

ent

Average = 2.13 kg

Need more data after 2009Q4 to be able to identify whether there

is a solid trend on fueling data

25,464 fills

300

400

Num

ber o

g g

1 730 fill

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 70

100

200

Average = 2.65 kg

1,730 fills


0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7Amount Fueled (kg)NREL cdp_fcev_39

Created: Sep-15-10 9:35 AM

Fueling Times Also Increased: +28%

3500

Histogram of Fueling TimesVehicle and Infrastructure

2006 MYPP Tech Val Milestone (5 kg in 5 min) 2012 MYPP Tech Val Milestone (5 kg in 3 min)Th h 2009Q4

2500

3000

ts


2000

of F

uelin

g Ev

ent

Average = 3.26 min86% <5 min

1000

1500

Num

ber o

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100

500

Average = 4.17 min77% <5 min


0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10Time (min)NREL cdp_fcev_38


Putting Those Together: Average Refueling Rate Decreased 14%g g

1800

Histogram of Fueling RatesVehicle and Infrastructure

2006 MYPP Tech Val Milestone 2012 MYPP Tech Val MilestoneTh h 2009Q4

1200

1400

1600

ts 5 kg in


800

1000

1200

of F

uelin

g Ev

ent 5 kg in

5 minutes

25464 EventsAverage = 0.77 kg/min

23% >1 kg/min

400

600

800

Num

ber o

5 kg in3 minutes

1730 EventsAverage = 0.66 kg/min

3% >1 kg/min

0 0 2 0 4 0 6 0 8 1 1 2 1 4 1 6 1 8 20

200

400

g


0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2Avg Fuel Rate (kg/min)NREL cdp_fcev_18


Real-World Driving Range Between Refuelings Continues to Improve as Demonstration Progresses

Distance Driven Between Refuelings: All OEMs

Gen1Gen2 Gen1

10

elin

gs

Gen2After 2009Q4 Refuelings1 = 18941

Median distance between refuelings = 56 Miles Gen2 Refuelings1 = 6870 Median distance between refuelings = 81 Miles +45% improvement

enta

ge o

f Ref

ue

Refuelings after 2009Q41 = 3185 Median distance between refuelings = 91 Miles

+63% improvement

5

Perc

e

0 50 100 150 200 250 3000

Distance between refuelings [Miles]2

“window-sticker” range


NREL cdp_fcev_80

1. Some refueling events are not detected/reported due to data noise or incompleteness.2. Distance driven between refuelings is indicative of driver behavior and does not represent the full range of the vehicle.


gfrom adjusted dyno

tests is 196-254 miles

Rate of Mileage Accumulation Has Decreased in the Last Year, But Vehicles Still Added 550,000 Miles

Cumulative Vehicle Miles: All OEMs, Gen 1 and Gen 2Through 2010 Q2

2,872,533

2 000 0002,250,000 2,500,000 2,750,000 3,000,000

eled

1 000 0001,250,000 1,500,000 1,750,000 2,000,000

le M

iles

Trav

250,000 500,000 750,000

1,000,000

Vehi

cl

-

NREL CDP24


Created: Sep-07-10 10:10 AMNREL CDP24

Based on Limited Number of Fuelings in Last 6 Months, Higher Level of Tank at Refueling Observed

Tank Levels: DOE Fleet

Through 2009Q4

Median Tank Level (At Fill) = 42% Total refuelings1 = 27113Total refuelings1 = 3196Median Tank Level (At Fill) = 48%

After 2009Q414% 13%

FE

1. Some refueling events not recorded/detected due to data noise or incompleteness.2. The outer arc is set at 20% total refuelings.


NREL cdp_fcev_40

g3. If tank level at fill was not available, a complete fill up was assumed.

Created: Sep-02-10 12:47 PM

Driving Behavior in Last 6 Months Much More Similar to National Average

Driving by Time of Day

12Total Driving3 Events = 295222% of driving trips b/t 6 AM & 6 PM: 85.3%

Total Drive3 Events = 10646% of driving trips b/t 6 AM & 6 PM: 77 1%

g

9%

12% of NHTS trips b/t 6 AM & 6 PM: 81.5%

Through 2009Q4

Total Drive3 Events = 10646% of driving trips b/t 6 AM & 6 PM: 77.1%

39

After 2009Q4NHTS

7%

61. Driving trips between 6 AM & 6 PM

2. The outer arc is set at 12 % total Driving.

3. Some events not recorded/detected due to data noise or incompleteness.

AM PM

2001 NHTS Data Includes Car, Truck, Van, & SUV day trips ASCII S htt // ht l /d l d ht l#2001


NREL cdp_fcev_44Created: Sep-02-10 12:48 PM

ASCII.csv Source: http://nhts.ornl.gov/download.shtml#2001

More Weekend Driving Observed in Last Six Months – Still Much Less than National Avg.

25Driving by Day of Week

Through 2009Q4After 2009Q4NHTS

g

20

NHTS

15

Trip

s in

a D

ay

10

% o

f T

S M T W d Th F i S t0

5


Sun Mon Tues Wed Thur Fri SatDayNREL cdp_fcev_45

Created: Sep-01-10 1:52 PM

2001 NHTS Data Includes Car, Truck, Van, & SUV day tripsASCII.csv Source: http://nhts.ornl.gov/download.shtml#2001

Summary

• Project has completed >5 full years of operation• Vehicle operation: 114 000 hours 2 87 million milesVehicle operation: 114,000 hours, 2.87 million miles,

436,000 trips• H2 station operation: 134,000 kg produced or dispensed,

27,000 refuelings• DOE Key Technical Targets Met: FC Durability and Range• Two of the OEMs will be continuing operation of Gen 2• Two of the OEMs will be continuing operation of Gen 2

vehicles through end of 2011; progress will be tracked• Future work: Additional collaboration with remaining auto g

OEM teams to make analyses useful for technology evolution and preparation for 2014-2015 market entryNew CA fueling stations planned for inclusion in future


• New CA fueling stations planned for inclusion in future results as they come online

Questions and Discussion

P j t C t t K ith Wi k N ti l R bl E L bProject Contact: Keith Wipke, National Renewable Energy Lab303.275.4451 keith.wipke nrel.gov

All public Learning Demo papers and presentations are available

@


All public Learning Demo papers and presentations are available online at http://www.nrel.gov/hydrogen/proj_tech_validation.html

U.S. Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle Demonstration Project …class 600 800 1000 1200 1400 Time (H 2006...

Documents

Transcript of U.S. Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle Demonstration Project …class 600 800 1000 1200 1400 Time (H 2006...