Thermochemical Fuel Reforming For Ice

Arnold Schwarzenegger Governor
THERMOCHEMICAL FUEL REFORMING FOR RECIPROCATING INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINES
Prepared For:
California Energy Commission

Public Interest Energy Research Program
Prepared By: Gas Technology Institute
January 2011 CEC-500-2009-011
PIER FINAL PROJECT REPORT
Prepared By: Gas Technology Institute Project Manager: John Pratapas Des Plaines, IL 60018 Commission Contract No. 500-02-014
Prepared For: Public Interest Energy Research (PIER) Program
California Energy Commission

Jennifer Allen Contract Manager
Arthur Soinski, Ph.D. Program Area Lead Environmentally Preferred Advanced Generation
Kenneth Koyama Office Manager Energy Generation And Research Office
Laurie ten Hope Deputy Director ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT DIVISION Melissa Jones Executive Director
DISCLAIMER
This report was prepared as the result of work sponsored by the California Energy Commission. It does not necessarily represent the views of the Energy Commission, its employees or the State of California. The Energy Commission, the State of California, its employees, contractors and subcontractors make no warrant, express or implied, and assume no legal liability for the information in this report; nor does any party represent that the uses of this information will not infringe upon privately owned rights. This report has not been approved or disapproved by the California Energy Commission nor has the California Energy Commission passed upon the accuracy or adequacy of the information in this report.
Acknowledgements
ThisreportdescribesresearchsponsoredbytheElectricPowerResearchInstitute(EPRI), CaliforniaEnergyCommission,UtilizationTechnologyDevelopmentNFP,andtheGas TechnologyInstitute. JohnM.Pratapas,GasTechnologyInstituteProjectManager PrincipalInvestigators: Dr.AleksandrKozlov,GasTechnologyInstitute MarkKhinkis,GasTechnologyInstitute Dr.GregoryAronchik,GasTechnologyInstitute Dr.DanielMather,DigitalEngines,LLC AntonKozlovsky,DigitalEngines,LLC EPRIProjectManager: D.Thimsen Pleasecitethisreportasfollows: Pratapas,John.2009.ThermochemicalFuelReformingForReciprocatingInternalCombustion Engines.CaliforniaEnergyCommission,PIEREnvironmentallyPreferredAdvanced Generation.CEC5002009011.
ii
Preface
TheCaliforniaEnergyCommissionsPublicInterestEnergyResearch(PIER)Programsupports publicinterestenergyresearchanddevelopmentthatwillhelpimprovethequalityoflifein Californiabybringingenvironmentallysafe,affordable,andreliableenergyservicesand productstothemarketplace. ThePIERProgram,conductspublicinterestresearch,development,anddemonstration(RD&D) projectstobenefitCalifornia. ThePIERProgramstrivestoconductthemostpromisingpublicinterestenergyresearchby partneringwithRD&Dentities,includingindividuals,businesses,utilities,andpublicor privateresearchinstitutions. PIERfundingeffortsarefocusedonthefollowingRD&Dprogramareas:

BuildingsEndUseEnergyEfficiency EnergyInnovationsSmallGrants EnergyRelatedEnvironmentalResearch EnvironmentallyPreferredAdvancedGeneration EnergySystemsIntegration Industrial/Agricultural/WaterEndUseEnergyEfficiency RenewableEnergyTechnologies Transportation
ThermochemicalFuelReformingforReciprocatingInternalCombustionEnginesisthefinalreportfor theThermochemicalFuelReformingforReciprocatingInternalCombustionEnginesproject (contractNumber50002014,workauthorizationnumber124)conductedbytheElectricPower ResearchInstituteandGasTechnologyInstitute.Theinformationfromthisprojectcontributes totheEnvironmentallyPreferredAdvancedGenerationProgram. FormoreinformationaboutthePIERProgram,pleasevisittheEnergyCommissionswebsiteat www.energy.ca.gov/researchorcontacttheEnergyCommissionat9166544878.
iii
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements....................................................................................................................................i Preface ii i TableofContents...................................................................................................................................... v i 1.0 IntroductionandBackground.....................................................................................................5 iv
ListofFigures..........................................................................................................................................vii ListofTables..............................................................................................................................................ix Abstract......................................................................................................................................................xi ExecutiveSummary...................................................................................................................................1 Acronym....................................................................................................................................................71 Definition...................................................................................................................................................71 1.0 1.1. IntroductionandBackground.....................................................................................................5 InternalCombustionEngineHeatRecoveryTechnologies................................................5
1.1.1. CombinedCooling,Heating,andPower(CCHP)...........................................................6 1.1.2. TurboCompounding..........................................................................................................6 . 1.1.3. RankineBottomingCycles..................................................................................................8 1.1.4. ThermochemicalRecuperation(TCR)................................................................................9 1.2. ProjectObjectives ...................................................................................................................11 .
1.2.1. DesignandLaboratoryEvaluationandValidationof3to5kWeResearchScale RecuperativeReformingReactor.....................................................................................11 1.2.2. ReformateFueledInternalCombustionEnginePerformance....................................11 1.3. 1.4. 2.0 2.1. TechnicalApproach...............................................................................................................12 ReportOrganization ..............................................................................................................12 . SummaryofPreviousGTIThermochemicalFuelReformingInvestigations....................13 HydrogenEnrichedFuelfromThermochemicalFuelReforming..................................13 .
. 2.1.1. Hydrogen(H2)EnrichedCombustion ............................................................................13 2.1.2. TCFRSystemforSupplyingHydrogentoFuelBlend..................................................15 2.1.3. EngineAnalysis..................................................................................................................16 2.1.4. PerformanceGoals/CriteriaforDesignofTCRS...........................................................18 2.1.5. EngineSimulationofTCRReformedFuel.....................................................................18 2.1.6. BiogasandLandfillGas....................................................................................................23 .
iv
2.1.7. Summaryof1kWeLaboratoryScaleTCFRTests..........................................................25 2.2. TCFRRICECostEstimation.................................................................................................30 .
2.2.1. Approach.............................................................................................................................30 2.2.2. KeyAssumptions...............................................................................................................30 2.2.3. TCRSystemCost................................................................................................................32 3.0 3.1. 3.2. 3.3. 4.0 4.1. 4.2. 4.3. 4.4. 5.0 5.1. 5.2. SummaryofThermochemicalFuelReformingTechnologyandScaleUpApproach.....35 . ThermochemicalFuelReformingTechnologyStatusSummary.....................................35 PerformanceGoals/CriteriaforDesignofTCRSystem....................................................39 ConceptualDesignofRecuperativeReformer...................................................................40 LaboratoryScaleTestingofRecuperativeReformingforSimulatedExhaustfrom CumminsQSK19GNaturalGasFueledReciprocatingEngine...........................................43 LaboratoryStudiesofRecuperativeReformingReactor..................................................43 RecuperativeReformer..........................................................................................................46 TestPlan...................................................................................................................................48 AnalysisofExperimentalData.............................................................................................49 Operationof50kWeResearchEnginewithReformedFuelfromTCRTestRig...............55 GoalandObjectives ...............................................................................................................55 . TestPlan...................................................................................................................................55
4.4.1. Catalyticreformingtestresults........................................................................................49
5.2.1. TestMatrix..........................................................................................................................57 5.2.2. TestProcedures...................................................................................................................58 5.2.3. EngineDASMeasurementsandMethods......................................................................59 5.2.4. DataAnalysisProcedure...................................................................................................60 5.2.5. QualityAssuranceProcedures.........................................................................................60 5.2.6. DataResults(July1718,2007andJuly29,2007) ..........................................................60 . 5.3. 5.4. 6.0 6.1. 6.2. 6.3. 7.0 ComputerSimulationofHCCIwithReformulatedFuel .................................................67 . Conclusions.............................................................................................................................68 ConclusionsandRecommendations........................................................................................69 CommercializationPotential................................................................................................69 . Recommendations..................................................................................................................70 BenefitstoCalifornia..............................................................................................................70 Glossary........................................................................................................................................71
AppendixA:ConceptualDesignoftheRecuperativeReformerfortheCummins1400kW QSK60GEngine........................................................................................................................................73 AppendixB:BillofMaterialsforTCRSRICEQSK60G....................................................................76 AppendixC:PreliminaryAnalysisofTCRforLandfillGasandBiogasApplications................77 AppendixD:PhotographsofReformedFuelDeliverySystemComponentsforHCCIResearch EngineTests............................................................................................................................................833
vi
List of Figures
Figure1.Energybalanceofleanburngasengineattypicaloperatingconditions ........................5 . Figure2.ConceptualschematicflowdiagramofaCCHPsystem....................................................6 Figure3.Potentialnetturbocompressorpoweravailable..................................................................7 Figure4.Typicalturbocompoundingconfiguration(indistributedgeneration applicationsthepowertrainisanelectricgenerator)...............................................................8 Figure5.Thermochemicalrecuperationsystemschematic..............................................................10 Figure6.SchematicofasimplifiedTCFRsystem..............................................................................15 Figure7.SchematicoftheCumminsQSK60GgasengineequippedwiththeTCRsystem........17 Figure8.ProcessflowdiagramoftheCumminsQSK60Ggasengineequippedwiththe TCRsystem......................................................................................................................................19 . Figure9.Normalizedsystemefficiencyversusexcessairratio()fornaturalgasand TCRreformedfuel ..........................................................................................................................20 . Figure10a.ComparisonofnormalizedsystemefficiencyversusnormalizedNOx emissionsfornaturalgasandTCRreformedfuel......................................................................21 Figure11.NormalizedUHCemissionsversusexcessairratio()fornaturalgasand TCRreformedfuel ..........................................................................................................................22 . Figure12.Turbochargerexhaustoutlettemperatureasafunctionofexcessairratio()...........22 Figure13.Laboratorysetuplowtemperaturemethanereforming(recuperative reformingforreciprocatingengine).............................................................................................26 Figure14.CH4conversionsversustemperatureforprereformingcatalyst..................................26 Figure15.SchematicoftheGTIRRexperimentaltestunit..............................................................27 Figure16.GTIlaboratoryscalerecuperativereformertestcell.......................................................28 Figure17.TCRSsystemassemblyandcomponentsforcostestimation........................................32 Figure18.SimplifiedflowdiagramforCumminsQSK19Gleanburnenginewithout TCR....................................................................................................................................................37 Figure19.SankeydiagramofQSK19GleanburnenginewithoutTCR.........................................37 Figure20.SimplifiedflowdiagramofCumminsQSK19Gleanburnenginewith recuperativereformerafterturbocharger....................................................................................38 Figure21.SankeydiagramforQSK19leanburnenginewithsteam/naturalgas reforming(reformerafterturbocharger) .....................................................................................39 . Figure22.ConceptualdesignofthermochemicalrecuperationsystemforQSK19G engine................................................................................................................................................41 Figure23.ConceptualdesignofrecuperativereformerforQSK19Gengine.................................41 Figure24.Schematicoflaboratorysetupfor250SCFHTCRtestrig..............................................44
vii
Figure25.Photographoflaboratorysetupfor250SCFHTCRtestrig...........................................45 Figure26.DrawingofeclipserecuperatorsinstalledonTCRtestrig.............................................46 Figure27.Eclipserecuperator(recuperativereformer)withcatalyticinsertsinstalled...............46 Figure28.PhotographsofcatalyticinsertsevaluatedinTCRtestrig.............................................47 Figure29.Photographofanindividualnickeloxidecatalystdisc..................................................48 Figure30.Equilibriumcompositionfornaturalgas/steamreforming(steam/carbon=2)............50 Figure31.Methaneconversionratebyequilibrium..........................................................................51 Figure32.Reformingprocesscompletenessvs.spacevelocity(atstandard)................................52 Figure33.Measuredhydrogenvolumeconcentrationinreformedfuelcomparedto equilibriumpredictions..................................................................................................................53 Figure34:SimplifiedFlowDiagramoftheReformedFuelDeliverySystem................................56 Figure35.HCCIH2/Naturalgasenginetestbenchsetupforflowcontrolanddata measurement/acquisitionsystem..................................................................................................56 Figure36.Enginemapoftestpointscompleted................................................................................67 Figure37.SimulatedandtheexperimentalpressureforthelastrunconditionofTable 25........................................................................................................................................................68 FigureA1.Alternativereformertubedesigns...................................................................................74 FigureA2.Recuperativereformerfor60literengine.......................................................................75 FigureC1.FlowdiagramforlandfillgasleanburnQSK19engine...............................................79 . FigureC2.SankeydiagramforlandfillgasleanburnQSK19engine ...........................................80 . FigureC3.FlowdiagramforlandfillgasleanburnQSK19enginewithTCR.............................81 . FigureD1.Fuelcompressorwithfilter..............................................................................................83 FigureD2.Cooler/condenser(blackverticaltube)............................................................................83 FigureD3.Reformedfuelline(yellow)connectiontotheengine...................................................84 FigureD4.Naturalgaslinewithflowcontroller,pressuregauge,andvalves............................84 FigureD5.ComparisonofflamesgeneratedbysupplementalburnerforTCRtesting (a)combustingofneatnaturalgasand(b)combustingreformedfuelfromTCRtestrig...........85 FigureD6.Absorbertube(intheforeground)forsulfurremovalfromnaturalgassuppliedto TCRtestrig...............................................................................................................................................85
viii
List of Tables
Table1.AdvantagesanddisadvantagesofH2enrichednaturalgascombustion........................13 Table2.ThermodynamicequilibriumcalculationforsimplifiedTCRFsystem............................16 Table3.SpecificationofCumminsQSK60Gleanburngasengine.................................................16 Table4.USDOEARESgoals................................................................................................................17 Table5.CompositionsofnaturalgasandHYSYScalculatedreformedfuel(mol%)..................19 Table6.Reformedbiogasfuelproperties Table7.Reformedlandfillgasproperties...........23 Table8.Engineperformanceandemissionscomparisonlandfillgas............................................24 Table9.Engineperformanceandemissionscomparisonbiogas....................................................24 Table10.Experimentaltestconditions................................................................................................29 Table11.Experimentalreformateflow(testconditionsinTable10)..............................................30 Table12.TCRScostestimatesforCumminsQSK60Ggeneratorset...............................................33 Table13.Referencenaturalgascompositionforengine/reformermodeling................................35 Table14.QSK19leanburnenginecharacteristicswithoutTCR(ratedspeed1800rpm)............36 Table15.PreliminaryTestPlanMatrix ...............................................................................................49 . Table16.Hydrogencontent(%volume,drybasis)inreformedfuel.............................................53 Table17.OperatingconditionsforHCCItestengine........................................................................57 Table18.Predictedcompositionsandreformedfuelflowratesofreformedfuelat differentreformertemperatures(steamtocarbon=2)................................................................58 Table19.ProposedtestmatrixfortheHCCIenginewithreformedfuel.......................................58 Table20.Datatakenonlinenaturalgas..............................................................................................61 Table21.Dataat2.0bar,2.4%hydrogen.............................................................................................62 Table22.Dataat2.0bar,15%hydrogen..............................................................................................63 Table23.Dataat2.0bar,7.5%hydrogeninreformedfuel...............................................................64 Table24.Dataat2.0bar,25%hydrogeninreformedfuel................................................................65 Table25.Dataat2.5bar.........................................................................................................................66 TableA1.Temperatureandpressuredropsforalternativecatalysts............................................74 TableC1.Engineparametersfornaturalgasandlandfillgasengines..........................................78 TableC2.Heatbalance(modeling).....................................................................................................79 TableC3.ParametersofengineandTCR...........................................................................................80 TableC4.PredictedparametersofenginewithTCR.......................................................................81 TableC5.Predictedparametersatcharacteristicpointsinsystemflowdiagram.......................82 .
ix
TableC6.HeatbalanceofenginewithTCR(HYSYSmodeling)....................................................82
Abstract
Thermochemicalrecuperationmaybeconsideredasanalternativetocombinedheatandpower asameasuretoincreasetheefficiencyofanengine.Exhaustheatfromaninternalcombustion engine,alongwithacatalyst,isusedtoreformfuelsuchasnaturalgasintoafuelstreamwitha significantconcentrationofhydrogenandahighercaloricvalue.Thistechniqueofrecyclingthe engineexhaustheatandconvertingittochemicalenergyinthefuelstreamcanreduceengine fueluse.Inaddition,thecombustionofhydrogenenhancedfuelallowstheenginetooperateat anairtofuelratiothatresultsinverylowproductionofnitrogenoxides. IncludedinthisreportisasummaryofpriorresearchanddevelopmentbytheGasTechnology Instituteonthetechnologyofthermochemicalrecuperationforreciprocatinggasenginesused indistributedgeneration;apreliminaryconceptualdesignofarecuperativereformerfora commerciallyavailable331kilowattenginegeneratingsetofferedbyCummins,Inc.;a descriptionoflaboratoryscaleexperiments;updatedperformancepredictions;andtheresults fromoperatinga50kilowattresearchengineonthermochemicallyreformedfuelversusnatural gas.Projectresultssupportrecommendationsforthescaleup(anincreaseaccordingtoafixed ratio)andcontinueddevelopment,demonstration,andcommercializationofthermochemical fuelreformingforreciprocatinginternalcombustionengines. Athermochemicalfuelreformingsystemcouldreasonablyresultinfuelsavingsofabout$1.1 millionperyearbythefifthyearofcommercialization.ThisaddressestheCaliforniaEnergy Commissionsgoalsofenhancingenergyefficiency,diversifyingelectricitysuppliesby investinginrenewableandothercleanenergytechnologies,strengtheningCaliforniasenergy infrastructure. Keywords:Thermochemicalfuelreforming,thermochemicalrecuperation,recuperative reformingreactor,distributedgeneration,combinedheatandpower,hydrogenenhanced combustion,naturalgas,biogas,reciprocatinginternalcombustionengine
xi
xii
Executive Summary
Introduction Thermochemicalrecuperationusesengineexhaustinaninnovativewaytoincreaseefficiency andloweremissionsofreciprocatinginternalcombustionengines.Availablewasteheatfrom theengineexhaustisusedtothermallyconvertnaturalgasintoafuelstreamwitha concentrationofhydrogenandahighercaloricvalue.Acatalystisusedtospeedupthefuel conversions.Thewasteheatsthermalenergyisrecuperatedaschemicalenergyinthefuel stream. Themajorequipmentusedforthermochemicalrecuperationincludesheatexchangers,a recuperativereformingreactor,andaheatrecoverysteamgenerator.Therecuperative reformingreactorusesthewasteheattoreformthenaturalgas.Becausethewasteheatisata relativelylowtemperature,catalystsareusedinthereformingreactortospeedupthereaction andachievetargetconversionsinashortertime.Thesteamandexhaustgasesprovidethe waterandheatrequiredtosupportthereformingreactions. Overall,thereformingreactionsrequiretheadditionofenergy(endothermic)forthereactionto goforward.Inathermochemicalreformingsystem,theenergytodrivethereactionsis providedbyheattransferedfromthehotengineexhaust.Efficiencyincreaseswiththeamount ofexhaustheatthatcanbesuccessfullyusedtodrivetheendothermicreformingreactions. Thehydrogenproducedbythermochemicalreformingoffersmanyadvantagesasaprimary fuelorinafuelgasmixture.Peakflametemperaturescanbemoderatedbyusingmoreairthan isrequiredforcompletecombustionofthefuelorbyrecirculatingaportionofanengines exhaustgasbacktotheengine(exhaustgasrecirculation).Thisresultsinlowernitrogenoxides emissions.Hydrogenenrichedcombustionhasbeenshown,inlaboratorytesting,toextendthe toleranceforexhaustgasrecirculationofnaturalgasengines.Thenetbenefitofthermochemical reformingisthatlessnaturalgasisrequiredtogenerateagivenenginepoweroutput. Purpose Thiscollaborativeprojectdevelopedanddemonstrated,atlaboratoryscale,thermochemical fuelreformingforachievingultralowemissionslevelsrequiredforcleandistributedgeneration inCalifornia.Theresearchincludedexperimentstoconfirmthatwasteheatfromreciprocating internalcombustionenginescouldbeusedforreformingnaturalgassuppliedtotheengine.It wasalsotheintenttovalidatethatthehighhydrogencontentofthereformedfuelwouldallow combustionintheenginetobeoptimizedforultralowemissionsofnitrogenoxides,carbon monoxide,andunburnedhydrocarbons.Theresearchwouldalsoshowedthattheincreasein systemefficiencyreducesnaturalgasconsumptioncomparedtothebaselineengineoperated onunreformednaturalgas.
ProjectObjectives
Developadetailedengineeringdesignofarecuperativereformingreactortoconvert naturalgasandyieldhydrogeninamountscorrespondingtofuelflowandexhaust conditionsfora50kilowattgasengineinthelaboratory. Operatea50kilowattlaboratoryscaleengineonreformedfuelproducedfroma thermochemicalrecuperationlaboratorytestrig.Thistestingwillconfirmsatisfactory operationwithingenerallyaccepteddesignparametersforreciprocatinginternal combustionengines,anddocumentfuelsavingsandemissions(andemission reductions)ofnitrogenoxides,carbonmonoxide,andvolatileorganiccompounds. Developthebasisforanengineeringdesigntoscaleup(increaseaccordingtoafixed ratio)thelaboratoryscalethermochemicalrecuperationtechnologyinsubsequent developmentanddemonstrationprojects.
ProjectOutcomes
Thisprojectresultedinscaleupofarecuperative,catalyticreformingreactorfroma naturalgasflowrateof50tomorethan250standardcubicfeetperhour.A commerciallyavailabletubeandshelldesignedgastogasrecuperatorwasmodified toincludeprovisionsforaddingthecatalystinsidethetubeswherethenaturalgasand steammixtureflow.HeattransferandprocessmodelsdevelopedbyGasTechnology Instituteprovidedpredictionsofperformanceoftherecuperativereformer.These predictionswereconfirmedexperimentallyonthelaboratoryunit. Thescaleduprecuperativereformerwasoperatedatexhaustgastemperaturesand conditionssimulatingtheCumminsQSK19Gleanburnengineandproducedenough reformedfueltooperatea50kilowattresearchengine.Engineperformanceand emissionsoftheengineoperatedonreformedfuelweremeasuredandcomparedto operationoftheengineonpipelinequalitynaturalgas. Theresearchteampreparedapreliminaryconceptualdesignofarecuperativereformer fortheCumminsQSK19Gengineconfigurationevaluatedinthisproject.Thisdesign providesaperspectiveonitspotentialphysicalsizeandoperatingtemperaturesand flowratesatthecurrentstateofdevelopmentforthermochemicalfuelreforming.
Conclusions
Thetestingofthelaboratoryscalerecuperativereformingreactorattemperaturesthat simulatedexhaustfromreciprocatingengine(operatedunderleanburnconditionson naturalgas)suggeststhatanickelrhodiumreformingcatalystprovidedthehighest conversionofnaturalgas/steammixtureatsteamtocarbonratioof2.Theresidence times(timespentinsidethesystem)requiredtoachievedifferentlevelsofreforming (measuredbyhydrogenyield)couldbeexperimentallydeterminedforusein developingadesignmodelofthermochemicalrecuperation. The50kilowattlaboratoryscaleengine(configuredforhomogeneouscharge compressionignition[aformofinternalcombustioninwhichwellmixedfueland
oxidizerarecompressedtothepointofautoignition]insteadofsparkignition[the initiationofthecombustionprocessoftheairfuelmixtureisignitedwithinthe combustionchamberbyasparkfromasparkplug]configuration)wasoperatedon reformedfuelproducedinthelaboratorythermochemicalrecuperatortestrigand providedsufficientdatatocomparekeyperformanceparametersandemissionsversus conventionalengineoperation(alsowithhomogeneouschargecompressionignition andoperatedonpipelinenaturalgas).Testingsuggestedthatthethermochemical recuperationtestrig,ascurrentlyoperated,wouldnotproducesufficientreformedfuel toenableoperationofthetestengineinasparkignitionconfiguration.Itwasnotwithin thescopeofthetasktooptimizetheenginesoperationonreformedfuel.Nevertheless, thedataobtainedfromtestingsupportsthetechnicalfeasibilitythatthermochemical recuperationonareciprocatingenginecouldbeusedtoincreaseoverallsystem efficiency.Thelimitedtestingsuggestedthatforthehomogeneouschargecompression ignitionconfiguration,theengineefficiency(brakethermal)onreformedfuelwas comparabletothealreadyhighbaselineefficiencyonnaturalgas.Engineoperationwith homogeneouschargecompressionignitiononreformedfuelresultedinlower hydrocarbonemissionscomparedtotheemissionsforthesameengineoperatedwith unreformednaturalgas.Becauseoftheextremelyleancombustionassociatedwith homogeneouschargecompressionignition,thebaselinenitrogenoxidesemissionson naturalgaswerealreadyverylow.Insomecasesthereformedfuelresultedinslightly highernitrogenoxides.Furtheroptimizationbetweennitrogenoxidesandcarbon monoxidetradeoffiswarranted.
Theresearchteamdevelopedaconceptualdesignofatubularrecuperativereformerfor theCumminsQSK19Greciprocatinginternalcombustionengine.Thisdesignprovides anindicationoftheoveralldimensionsoftherecuperativereformerforthe331kilowatt engine.
Recommendations
Basedupontheresultsoftheworkreportedinthisproject,theresearchteam recommendsdevelopmentofathermochemicalrecuperationsystemforreciprocating internalcombustionenginesbecontinued. Becauseoftheextensiveamountofthermochemicalrecuperationprocessmodeling performedtodatethatisbasedupontheCumminsQSK19engineconfigurations(thatis leanburnandstoichiometric,naturalgasandbiogas),theresearchteamrecommends continuingthermochemicalrecuperationdevelopmentanddemonstrationwith Cummins.
BenefitstoCalifornia
ThisprojectaddressesthePublicInterestEnergyResearchProgramsgoalsofenhancing energyefficiency,diversifyingelectricitysuppliesbyinvestinginrenewableandother cleanenergytechnologies,strengtheningCaliforniasenergyinfrastructuretoprovide forreliability,andcontinuingCaliforniasenvironmentalstewardship.
Athermochemicalfuelreformingsystemcouldreasonablyresultina5%reductionin overallsystemheatratecomparedtothecurrentlyavailableenginegeneratorset.Ata 5%reductioninfuelpurchaseandanassumedCaliforniamarketpenetrationrateof about50megawattsbythefifthyearofcommercialization,theprojectedfuelsavingsare estimatedatabout$1.1millionperyear(atapriceof$7permillionBritishthermalunits fornaturalgas). Becausethermochemicalfuelreformingproduceshydrogenenrichedfuelthathasbeen documentedtoextendthelimitsofareciprocatinginternalcombustionengineto operateinleancombustionmode,onecouldpotentiallyusethermochemical recuperationforsignificantreductionofnitrogenoxideswithoutexacerbatingemissions ofcarbonmonoxideandunburnedhydrocarbons. Preliminarymodelinganalysessuggestthatthermochemicalfuelreformingcanalsobe appliedtoincreaseefficiencyandreduceemissionsfromenginesfueledwithbiogasor landfillgas.ThissupportsattainmentoftheCaliforniaEnergyCommissionPublic InterestEnergyResearchgoalofdiversifyingelectricitysuppliesbyinvestingin renewableandothercleanenergytechnology. TheCaliforniaAirResourcesBoard2007emissionlimitsfordistributedgeneration couldprecludeafuturemarketforreciprocatinginternalcombustionenginesystems unlesstheycandemonstratethecapabilitytocosteffectivelymeettheselimits. Thermochemicalfuelreformingmayprovideameansforcontinueduseofreciprocating internalcombustionenginesasprimemoversfordistributedgenerationinSouthern California. Increasingelectricpowergenerationefficiencyandminimizingthecostofcomplying withtheCaliforniaAirResourcesBoard2007emissionslimitsfordistributedgeneration willcontributetoamorecostcompetitiveCaliforniaeconomy.
1.0 Introduction and Background

1.1. Internal Combustion Engine Heat Recovery Technologies
Thenaturalgasfiredreciprocatingenginehasbeentheprimemoverofchoiceforthemajority ofrecentdistributedgeneration(DG)installationsinthe1,000kilowattelectric(kWe)to10,000 kWeoutputrange.Reciprocatingenginesalsodriveasignificantshareoftheexistingcapacity ofcompressorsfornaturalgastransmission. Regulatorscontinuetoreducetheallowableemissionofoxidesofnitrogen(NOx)fromgas engines.InCalifornia,Texas,NewJersey,andinotherserioustosevereozonenonattainment areas,singledigitpartspermillionNOxlimitsareleadingtoincreasedinstallationsofselective catalyticreduction(SCR)atsignificantcost.Thisishavingasubstantialimpactontheoperating economicsofDG.Whilecombinedheatandpower(CHP)canincreasefuelutilization efficienciestoaround80%,notallapplicationsfordistributedenergycantakeadvantageof CHP.Therefore,aneedexiststoincreasetheefficiency,whilealsoloweringtheemissionsof naturalgasreciprocatingenginesusedinDGandpipelinetransmissionsystems. Figure1showsatypicalenergybalanceofthemodernnaturalgasreciprocatingengine.About 32%oftheenergyinput(higherheatingvalue)isavailableintheexhaustgasesfromtheengine. Thetemperatureofthisexhaustcanbegreaterthan500C.Recoveringandutilizingthisenergy wouldimproveefficiencyandreduceemissionsperunitoutput.Adescriptionofseveral strategiesforutilizingthisexhaustheatisdescribedbelow.
Aftercooler 7% In-Cylinder Heat Losses 19% Exhaust Heat Losses 32%
Other 7% Net Power 35%
Figure 1. Energy balance of lean-burn gas engine at typical operating conditions

Source: Gas Technology Institute
1.1.1. Combined Cooling, Heating, and Power (CCHP)1

CCHPisanintegratedsystemlocatedatornearabuildingorfacilitywheretheheatco producedbytheelectric(orshaft)powergenerationequipmentprovidesheating,cooling, and/ordehumidificationtoabuildingand/orindustrialprocesses.Aconceptualdiagramof CCHPisshowninFigure2.ThemajorCHPcomponentsareprimemovertechnologies,heat recoverytechnologies,andthermallyactivatedtechnologies.
Figure 2.
Conceptual schematic flow diagram of a CCHP system
Key factors for CCHP financial attractiveness:
Coincidenceofelectricloadsandthermalloadsthemoreafacilityneedselectricityand atthesametimeitneedsthermalenergy(heating,cooling,ordehumidification),the greaterthedutycycleoftheCCHPinstallationandthemoreattractivethesavingsany paybackassociatedwithCCHP. SparkSpreadthehigherthedifferentialbetweenthecostofbuyingelectricpower fromthegridandthecostofnaturalgas,themoreattractivethesavingsandpayback associatedwithCCHP. InstalledCostDifferentialthelowerthedifferentialbetweentheinstalledcostsofthe CCHPsystemandthatofaconventionalheating/coolingsystem,themoreattractivethe savingsandpaybackassociatedwithCCHP.
1.1.2. Turbo-Compounding
Turbocompoundingusesgasturbinetechnologytoconvertthermalenergytomechanical powerwhichinturndrivesanelectricalgeneratortoproduceelectricalpower.Turbogenerator technologyisusedtoextractpowerfromtheexhaustofareciprocatinginternalcombustion engine.Theexhaustexitstheenginecylindersathightemperatureandpressureandcarriesas muchas3035%oftheenergyinthefuelouttoatmosphere.Theturbogeneratoractsasa bottomingcyclefortheengineinafashionsimilartothatofasteamgeneratoronacombined cyclegasturbineplant.
1.CombinedHeatandPowerResourceGuide,September2003,USDOE
Turbocompressorscommonlyusedtoincreasespecificpoweroutputofaninternalcombustion engineemployturbineswithoutputmatchedtothecompressorpowerrequiredtoachievethe desiredincreaseinmassofair/fuelenteringthecylinder.Figure3showsanexampleofthe powerthatmightbegeneratedbyanoptimizedexhaustturbinecomparedwiththecompressor load2.Turbocompoundingtakesadvantageofthispowersurplus.Figure4providesa conceptualdepictionofthecompleteelectricalturbocompoundingsystem. BowmanPowerGroup(BPG)3hasidentifiedthreecoretechnologiesnecessarytosupportthe useofturbogenerators:

Compact,simple,lowcostturbomachinery. Highspeedelectricalgeneratorswhichareextremelyefficient(98%)andsmallenough tocoupledirectlytotheshaftofturbomachinery. Softwarecontrolledpowerelectronicstomanageelectricalpowerquality(power conditioners).
available
Source: Caterpillar
Figure 3.
Potential net turbocompressor power
2.DieselEngineWasteHeatRecoveryUtilizingElectricTurboCompoundTechnology,Ulrich HopmannCaterpillarInc.,2002DieselEngineEmissionReductionConference.August2529,2002,San Diego,California. 3.http://www.bowmanpower.co.uk/Turbocompounding.html11/21/08
Figure 4. Typical turbo-compounding configuration (in distributed generation applications the powertrain is an electric generator)
Source: Caterpillar
Initsimplementationofthesetechnologies,BPGclaimsthatpowerisboostedbyupto30% andfueleconomyimprovedby10to15%.Theelectricalpowergeneratedcanbeusedto powerelectricalloadsortodirectlydrivetheenginecrankshaft.BPGhasdevelopedsystemsto covertherange25kWto165kW,withsystemsupto2,000kWeplannedforfuture development.
1.1.3. Rankine Bottoming Cycles

SteamRankineBottomingCyclesoperatebestatrelativelyhighworkingtemperaturesand pressures.Exhaustgastemperaturesfromreciprocatingenginesaregenerallynotsufficiently highforeconomicalsteambasedbottomingcycles.However,byusingcertainorganicfluids, typicallyrefrigerants,powercanbeeconomicallygeneratedusinglowerworkingpressuresand temperatures.BottomingsystemsthatusethesefluidsarecommonlyreferredtoasOrganic RankineCycles(ORC).Heatfromtheengineexhaustisusedtoraisethetemperatureofand boilthepressurizedworkingfluidinanevaporator.Theresultingvaporflowsthrougha turbinetoproduceworkbeforeitiscondensedatlowpressureinthecondenserandthen repressurizedandrecycled. SystemeconomicsofORCswillbeinfluencedbytheworkingtemperaturesandpressures,cost ofthefluid,heatexchangerdesign,andrequirementsforintegratingthesystematthe application.UTCPowerismarketingapackagedORCbrandedPureCyclesuitableforuse withreciprocatinginternalcombustionengines4.ThePureCyclesystememploysofftheshelf refrigerationsystemcomponentsandusesarefrigerantastheworkingfluid.Thisbottoming cyclecanincreasetheelectricaloutputofa3,000kWegasfiredICEgeneratorbyapproximately 200kW.ThereareseveralothervendorsofORCsystemsandfurtherdevelopmentsare underway.
4.http://www.utcfuelcells.com/fs/com/bin/fs_com_Page/0,11491,0167,00.html9/26/08
1.1.4. Thermochemical Recuperation5(TCR)

TCRsystems(employingengineexhaustgasrecuperation)offeraninnovativemeansforboth increasingefficiencywhileloweringemissionsofreciprocatinginternalcombustionengines (RICE)usedforpowergenerationandpipelinetransmission.TCRsystemsforreciprocating enginescouldconceivablyincluderecoveryofwasteheatenergyfromtheenginecooling, lubricating,andexhaustsystems.Availablewasteheatisthermochemicallyrecuperatedas chemicalenergyinthefuelstream. AsimplifieddepictionofaTCRsystememployingsteammethanereformingisprovidedin Figure5.Themajorequipmentitemsincludeheatexchangers,arecuperativereformingreactor, andaheatrecoverysteamgenerator.Becauseoftherelativelylowtemperatureofenginewaste heat,acatalyticreformingreactorisusedtoachievetargetconversions.Thesteamorproducts ofcombustionprovideoxidantrequiredtosupportthereformingreactions. ThemainreactionschemesoftheTCRreformingareasfollows:
m C n H m + H 2 O nCO + n + H 2 (H o > 0) 298 2
(1) (2) (3)
CH 4 + H 2 O CO + 3 H 2 (H o > 206.2 kJ/kmol) 298
CO + H 2 O CO 2 + H 2 H o > - 41.2 kJ/kmol 298

C n H m n C(s ) +

m H2 2
(4)
Reaction(1)isahighlyendothermicirreversiblereaction,whichincreasesthetotalfuel gasvolume.Allhigherhydrocarbons(n>1)areconvertedtoC1components. Reaction(2)isanendothermicinversemethanationreaction,whichisanequilibrium reactionthatdeterminesthefinalcompositionofthereformedfuel. Reaction(3)isanexothermicwatergasshift(WGS)reaction,whichisalsoan equilibriumreactionthatdeterminesthefinalcompositionofthereformedfuel. Reaction(4)isanirreversiblereactionthatoccursintheabsenceofsufficientsteamor CO2toprovidesufficientlocaloxygentoconvertthecarbontoCO.
5.ThermochemicalRecuperationSystems(TCRS)forIncreasedEfficiencyandReducedEmissionsfrom StationaryReciprocatingICEngines.NaturalGasTechnologiesIIIConferenceProceedings.GTIT05153. Orlando,FL.February2005.
Reformed Fuel Steam/Natural Gas Oxidant Cooler/ Heater Natural Gas Steam
Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engine (RICE) Engine Cooling Heat Recovery
Exhaust Gas
Thermochemical Exhaust Recuperative Gas Reformer

Steam/Water Water Feed Water
Heat Recovery Steam Generator
Exhaust Gas
Pump
Figure 5. Thermochemical recuperation system schematic

Overall,thereformingreactionsareendothermic.InaTCRsystem,theheattodrivethe reactionsisprovidedbyheattransferfromthehotengineexhaust.Powercycleefficiency increasesbytheamountofexhaustheatthatcanbesuccessfullyincorporatedinthe endothermicreactions. ThethreemajorcontrolparametersfortheTCRreformingreactionsaresteam/carbonratio (S/CR),reformertemperature,andreformerpressure.TheS/CRcontrolsH2yield;thus,thereis aneedtofindanoptimumS/CRforreciprocatinginternalcombustionengineapplications.The reformertemperaturecontrolsthereformingrateandfinalcomposition;thus,italsocontrols theH2yield.Thereformerpressurealsocontrolsthereformingrateandcomposition;andthe reformingrateisalmostproportionaltothepartialpressureofCH4(i.e.reformerpressure).The reformertemperatureandpressurearecriticalparametersinsizingareformerasisthetypeof catalyst.IntypicalICenginesystems,thetemperatureavailableforthereformerisrelatively lowcomparedtoindustrialapplicationsandcaremustbetakentomaximizetheuseofthe rejectedthermalenergyandtominimizethereformersizewhileachievingmaximumattainable H2yield. ResearchhasshownthatH2enhancedcombustioncansignificantlyreduceNOxemissionsfrom sparkignitedenginesbyextendingtheleanlimit.6Mostofthepriorartforinsitu hydrogenproductionforreciprocatingenginesinvolvesmixingsomefractionoftheexhaust gaseswithfueltosupportautothermalreformingreactions.Excessoxygenintheexhaustgases ofleanburnenginesresultsinexothermicoxidationoffuelthusincreasingfuelconsumption.
6.Heywood,J.B.,Ivanic,Z.,et.al.,EffectsofHydrogenEnhancementonEfficiencyandEmissionsof LeanandEGRdilutedMixturesinaSparkIgnitedEngineSAEPaper2005010253,April2005.
10
Thisfuelconsumptionpenaltyaffectsthepotentialoverallsystemefficiencyandeconomics. TCRusesonlyexhaustheatrecuperationtosupporttheendothermicreformingreactions, therebyofferingdirectimprovementinoverallsystemefficiencyplushydrogenenrichedfuel forcombustion.Acriticalfactorforcommercialsuccessistheintegrationofthisrecuperation andenergyconversionprocessinacosteffectiveandreliablepackagewiththeengine generatorset.
1.2.
Project Objectives
Developadetailedengineeringdesignofarecuperativereformingreactorforlaboratory validationofnaturalgasconversionandhydrogenyieldscorrespondingtofuelflow andexhaustconditionsfora50kWegasengine. Operatea50kWelaboratoryscaleengineonreformedfuelproducedfroma thermochemicalrecuperationlaboratorytestrigtoconfirmsatisfactoryoperationwithin generallyaccepteddesignparametersforreciprocatinginternalcombustionengines. ThistestingwilldocumentfuelsavingsandNOx,CO,andVOCemissionsandemission reduction. DeveloptheengineeringdesignbasistoscaleupTCRtechnologyinasubsequent developmentanddemonstrationproject.
Theprojectobjectiveswereto:
1.2.1. Design and Laboratory Evaluation and Validation of 3 to 5 kWe Research Scale Recuperative Reforming Reactor
Apreliminarythermochemicalfuelreformer(TCFR)systemanalysisatanominal331kWe naturalgasfueled,sparkignitedinternalcombustionenginewasprepared.Byextrapolating theresultsfornaturalgas,ananalysisofthepotentialbenefitsofusingTCFRforageneric biogasfuelcomposedof50%methaneand50%carbondioxidewasalsobecompleted.Usinga conceptualfullscaledesignofarecuperativereformerforthestudyengine,specificationswere preparedforfabricatingarecuperativereformingreactorscaledandsizedforgasflows equivalenttoa3to5kWeengine.ThisisthereactorthatwastestedintheGTIlaboratory. Adetailedengineeringdesignofarecuperativereformingreactorcorrespondingtofuelflow andexhaustconditionsfora3to5kWegasenginewasprepared.Thisreactorwasusedfor laboratoryvalidationofnaturalgasconversionandhydrogenyields.Testingwasconductedto evaluatetheperformanceoftherecuperativereformingreactoraskeyengineandprocess parametersarevaried.Forexample,itwasimportanttomeasuretheeffectofchangesin exhaustgastemperaturesasafunctionofengineloads.Thetestingalsoincludedvariationof processvariablessuchasthesteamtomethaneratioforreforming.
1.2.2. Reformate-Fueled Internal Combustion Engine Performance

Afuelblendthatsimulatesthecompositionofproductsfromtherecuperativereformerwas usedtofuela50kWeresearchengine.Hydrogenwassuppliedfrombottlesandasteam generatorwasusedtomatchthewatercontentinthecooledreformedfuelfromtheTCFR
11
process.Themaximumtemperatureofsimulatedreformedfuelneededtosatisfythe specificationsfortheengine.Testingwasconductedtomeasuretheeffectoftheblendedfuel compositiononengineperformanceandemissions.
1.3.
Technical Approach
TheresearchinthisprojectisbuildinguponpriorlaboratoryscaleR&DperformedbyGTIand supportedbytheUtilizationTechnologyDevelopment(UTD)andtheGasResearchInstitute. ResultsofthisworkaresummarizedinElectricPowerResearchInstituteinterimreport1012774 ThermochemicalFuelReformerDevelopmentProjectHigherEfficiencyandLowerEmissions forReciprocatingEnginesUsedinDistributedGenerationApplications. CumminsandUTDprovidedmatchfundingfortheprojectreviewedinthisreport.Cummins wasparticularlyinterestedinasystemanalysisofTCRfortheirQSK19engineandpreparation ofaconceptualdesignofarecuperativereformerforthatengine. Thesequenceofactivitiestomeetobjectivenumberoneabove(developdetailedengineering designofrecuperativereformer),canreasonablybesummarizedasfollows: 1. DesignandfabricatelaboratoryscaleexperimentaltestrigforTCRtests. 2. Developtestplan,conducttesting,andanalyzedata. 3. Usedataobtainedtodeveloporvalidateanalyticaltoolsforsystemanalysisand designofrecuperativereformers. AfterassemblingaworkingTCRtestrig,theprojectteamconfirmedwhetheritwouldbe possibletosupplysufficientreformedfueltotheGTIsinglecylinderengine(configuredatthe timeforHomogenousChargeCompressionIgnitioncombustion)toenablecomparisons betweenoperationandperformanceonnaturalgasversusreformedfuel.Therewasnot sufficientbudgetavailabletoreconfiguretheenginetooperatewithsparkignition. ThefinaltaskwastouseresultsandexperienceobtainedforsystemanalysisofTCRand prepareaconceptualdesignofrecuperativereformerfortheQSK19Gengine.
1.4.
Report Organization
Followingthisintroduction,Section3summarizespreviousR&DworkatGTIwithTCRfor reciprocatinginternalcombustionengines.Section4isasummaryofTCFRtechnology developmentandscaleupapproach.Section5reviewsthelaboratoryscalesetupand experimentsrunontheTCRtestrigoperatedtosimulateexhaustgasconditionsfora reciprocatingenginefueledwithnaturalgas.Section6reportsontheexperimentalsetupand resultsfromoperatinganominal50kWeresearchengineonreformedfuelproducedintheTCR testrig.Thelastsectionofthereportincludesconclusions,recommendationsandprojected benefitsfromcontinueddevelopment,demonstrationandcommercializationofTCRforthe QSK19GenginefordistributedgenerationapplicationsinCalifornia.AppendixAincludesthe conceptualdesignforaTCFRsizedtothe1,400kWegenset.AppendixBincludesaBillof MaterialsandcostestimatesfortheTCFRsizedtothe1,400kWegenset.AppendixCisthe preliminaryanalysisofTCRforlandfillgasandbiogasapplications.AppendixDincludes photographsofthereformedfuelconditioninganddeliverysystemforthe50kWeenginetests.
12
2.0 Summary of Previous GTI Thermochemical Fuel Reforming Investigations

ThecurrentprojectisacontinuationofpreviousworkundertakenatGTIandreported elsewhere.Thepreviousworkconsistedofthermochemicalfuelreformerprocessdesign,a preliminarydesignofacompletesystemfora1,400kWenginegenerator,preliminary performanceandcostestimatesforacompletesystem,andlabscaleinvestigationsofcatalyst performanceinthisapplication.WorkbyothersandthepreviousGTIworkisabstractedbelow.
2.1.
Hydrogen-Enriched Fuel from Thermochemical Fuel Reforming
2.1.1. Hydrogen (H2) Enriched Combustion

H2enrichedcombustionisaprovenwaytoextendtheleanlimitofnaturalgasengines.H2 offersmanyadvantagesasaprimaryfuelorinfuelgasmixture.Table1listsadvantagesand disadvantagesofusingH2enrichednaturalgas.Higherpeakflametemperaturescanbe mitigatedusingleanercombustionand/orexhaustgasrecovery.H2enrichedfuelcanbereadily usedinsparkignitionengineswithsomemodificationsinthesystemssuchasfuelhandling andairhandlingsystems.
Table 1. Advantages and disadvantages of H2-enriched natural gas combustion Advantages Increases flame speed Improves combustion quality Increases engine performance Reduces unburned hydrocarbon emissions Increases methane number (MN) Widens flammability limits Lowers minimum ignition energy Improves EGR tolerance Shortens quenching distance
Source: Gas Technology Insitute
Disadvantages Increases peak flame temperature Increases fuel system cost
Tunestal7,etal.usedasinglecylinder1.6liternaturalgasenginetoextendtheleanburnlimit ofanaturalgasenginebyadditionofH2totheprimaryfuel.H2concentrationsusedinthe studywere0,5,10,and15%byvolume.Theyoperatedtheengineatthreeoperatingpoints: idle,partload(5barindicatedmeaneffectivepressure),andsimulatedturbocharging(13bar indicatedmeaneffectivepressure).Theairfuelratio(A/F)wasvariedbetweenstoichiometric andtheleanlimit.TheresultsshowedthatH2enrichedcombustionincreasedtheburnrateand extendedtheleanlimit.H2additionloweredHCemissionsandincreasedNOxemissionsfor
7.TunestlP.,ChristensenM.,EinewallP.,AndersonT.,andJohanssonB.,HydrogenAdditionfor ImprovedLeanBurnCapabilityofSlowandFastBurningNaturalGasCombustionChambers,SAE 2002012686,2002.
13
constantairexcessratio()andignitiontiming.Increasedburnrateallowedretardedignition timing,whichresultedinlowerheatlossesandhigherefficiency.Retardedignitiontimingalso ledtolowermaximumtemperatureandthuslowerNOxemissions.TheeffectofH2additionat wideopenthrottlewasmostprominentclosetotheleanlimit. Jensen8etal.investigatedtheeffectofadditionalproducergasonthecombustionprocessand theengineoutemissionsbyfuelinganaturallyaspiratedfourcylindergasenginewithnatural gasandmixturesofnaturalgasandH2containingproducergas.Theproducergaswasa syntheticgas(orsyngas)withthesamecompositionasafuelproducedbythermalgasification ofbiomassinatwostagegasifier.Theproducergasconsistedof33.9%H2,19.1%CO,1.3%CH4, 14.9%CO2,and30.8%N2involume.Themixtureswere75%naturalgasand25%producergas (byvolume),and50%naturalgasand50%producergas(byvolume),respectively.Theresults showedthattheNOxemissionswerenotaffectedbyadditionofproducergas.Thismightbe dueto45.7%byvolumeofinertgasesintheproducergas.Unburnedhydrocarbons(UHC) emissionsdecreasedupto50%onlyatexcessairratioabove=1.4.COemissionsdecreasedand formaldehyde(CH2O)emissionwasdecreasedsignificantlywiththeadditionofproducergas. AlthoughH2hasmanyadvantagesininternalcombustionengines,thesourceofH2hastobe considered.SupplyingpureH2fromprocessplantstoengineinstallationshasassociated transportation,storage,anddeliverysystemcosts.Extendedresearchanddevelopmenthas beenconductedtoevaluatethemeansforonboardfuelreformingsystemsformobilefuel cellapplications.Thesefuelreformingtechnologiesincludeautothermalreforming,partial oxidationreforming,steamreforming,andexhaustgasrecoveryreformingbypartiallyorfully reformingaprimaryfuel,usuallynaturalgas. AndreattaandDibbleuseda1986Pontiacfourcylinderinlineturbochargedengine.Thiswas convertedfromagasolinetoagaseousfuelenginetoinvestigatetheeffectofairreformed(or autothermalreformed)fuelonsparkignitionengines.Theyusedcylinderbottlegasesto formulatethecompositionofairreformedfuel.TheH2inthereformedfuelallowedtheengine torunleanerascomparedtonaturalgas,particularlyathigherfractionsofreformedfuel.With fullyreformedfuel,theenginecouldrunatequivalenceratioof0.25(=4).Leanercombustion reducedNOxemissionssignificantly.COandHCemissionswerenotsignificantlyaffectedby thereformedfuelovertheequivalenceratiosstudied.However,therewasanexceptionnearthe leanlimit,wherethepresenceofH2stabilizedcombustionandreducedCOandHCemissions foragivenequivalenceratio.Enginepeakoutputandthermalefficiencywasdependenton equivalenceratio,notthereformedfuelconcentration,exceptneartheleanlimit. Sgaard9etal.usedasmallscaleadiabaticcatalyticreactorasasteamreformertoproduce reformednaturalgas.Inthisapplication,therequiredthermalenergywasprovidedfrom
8.JensenT.K.,SchrammJ.,NarusawaK.,andHoriS.,HydrocarbonEmissionfromCombustionof MixturesofNaturalGasandHydrogenContainingProducerGasinaSIEngine,SAE2001013532, 2001. 9.SgaardC.,SchrammJ.,andJensenT.K.,ReductionofUHCemissionsfromNaturalGasFiredSI engineProductionandApplicationofSteamReformedNaturalGas,SAE2000012823,2000.
14
externalsources.Theirmaingoalwastoreduceunburnedhydrocarbonemissionsandincrease engineefficiencyusingreformednaturalgasinastationaryinternalcombustionengine.They alsoperformedtheoreticalstudies,whichshowedapotentialforvaryingtheH2content between8and30vol%.Thestudiesalsoshowedconsiderableincreaseinmethanenumberby reformingnaturalgas.Ahighermethanenumberwillallowtheuseofhighercompressionratio engines,whichwillleadtohigherengineBrakeMeanEffectivePressure(BMEP)andthermal efficiency.Thereformednaturalgascompositionwasalmostinsensitivetothenaturalgas composition,i.e.thecontentofhigherhydrocarbons.Theuseofreformednaturalgasreduced unburnedhydrocarbonsandCOemissionsandincreasedenginepowerandthermalefficiency. However,NOemissionwasincreasedduetoimprovedcombustionquality(thus,higher cylindertemperature).Theflamedevelopmentduration(startofignitionto10%fuelburn)and rapidburnduration(10~90%fuelburn)weresignificantlyshortenedwiththeuseofthe reformednaturalgasfuel.
2.1.2. TCFR System for Supplying Hydrogen to Fuel Blend10

QuantitativeevaluationsofthepotentialbenefitsofusingaTCFRsystemforsupplying hydrogenforimprovingtheperformanceandreducingtheemissionsofreciprocatingengine applicationsbeganwithasimpleenginecycleanalysis.Thethermodynamicequilibrium analysisusedtheLagrangeUndeterminedMultiplierMethodforthesimplifiedpreliminary designshowninFigure6.Preliminaryresultsindicatedthat,underidealizedconditions,overall efficiency(netengineminuscombustionandexhaustlosses)ispredictedtoincreaseby approximately18%19%.Thisiswhentheengineoperateswiththereformedfuelatthe stoichiometricoperatingconditionsforthecasesconsideredinTable2.
EGR Reformed Fuel Gas Fuel/Steam Gas Fuel Steam Air Reformed Fuel/Air Hot Exhaust Cold Exhaust Heat Exchanger RICE
TCR
Generator
Heat Exchanger
Cooling Water
Hot Water/Steam
system
Figure 6.
Schematic of a simplified TCFR
10.TechnicalandEconomicFeasibilityofThermochemicallyRecuperatedReciprocatingInternalCombustion Engine.FinalReport.GTIProject20013.NYSERDAReport7885.August2006.
15
Thissimplified,idealizedmodelcouldnotresolvepredictionsofemissionsfromtheengine.In ordertodeveloprealisticestimatesfortechnicalandeconomicfeasibilityemployingaTCFR systemforefficiencygainandemissionsbenefits,acombinationofcommercialcodesforengine andprocessmodelingwasemployed.RicardosWAVEv5.2wasusedtomodelthenaturalgas engine,andtheHyprotechsHYSYSmodelwasusedfortheTCRreformerandtheheat recoverysteamgeneratorsystem.ProjectparticipantCumminsrecommendeditsQSK60G engineforthemodelingandprovidedthenecessaryinformationtoconstructaWAVEmodel. Cumminsalsoprovidedactualtestdatasothemodelcouldbecalibrated.

Table 2. Thermodynamic equilibrium calculation for simplified TCRF system Peak Efficiency Adiabatic Flame Steam Cylinder Temperature Net Loss in Loss in /Carbon Ratio Pressure [C] Engine(%) Combustion(%) Exhaust(%) [atmospheric] 0 158.5 2877.4 ~ 53.15 ~ 16.93 ~ 29.93 1.68 116.8 2972.6 ~ 62.92 ~ 12.20 ~ 24.88 2.0 114.5 2925.6 ~ 63.21 ~ 12.04 ~ 24.75
2.1.3. Engine Analysis

KeyspecificationsoftheQSK60GenginearelistedinTable3below.Thematchinggeneration setmodel1400GQKAhasanelectricalratingof1,400kWeat60Hz(1800rpm).Theengineis watercooled,turbochargedwithanaftercooler.TheQSK60Gisleanburn,designedforspark ignitednaturalgascombustion.TheQSKGseriesengineisalsotheCumminsplatformfortheir AdvancedReciprocatingEngineSystem(ARES)collaborationwiththeU.S.Departmentof Energy(DOE).TheARESprogramgoalsaresummarizedinTable4. AschematicoftheCumminsQSK60GengineequippedwiththeTCRreformerisshownin Figure7.ThisengineisnotacommercialversionofQSK60Gengines.Itwasbuiltandtestedby CumminsforR&Dpurposes.
Table 3. Specification of Cummins QSK60G lean-burn gas engine No. of Cylinders 16 Strokes per Cycle 4 Engine Type Spark Ignition, Lean Burn No. of Intake Valves per Cylinder 2 No. of Exhaust Valves per Cylinder 2 Compression Ratio 11.4:1 Displacement 60 liters Bore/Stroke 158.75 mm/190 mm Connecting Rod Length 320.96 mm Piston Pin Offset None TDC Combustion Chamber Volume 0.0003616 m3 Clearance Height 0.9 mm
16
Spark Timing Turbocharger No. of Turbocharger Waste gate

18~20 bTDC Holset 2 None
Table 4. US DOE ARES goals A Commercial Engine by 2010 with: High Efficiency Fuel-to-electricity conversion efficiency of at least 50% Environmental Superiority NOx < 0.1 g/hp-hr (natural gas) Reduced Cost of Power Energy costs, including O&M, at least 10% less than current state-of-the-art engines Fuel Flexibility Adaptable to future firing with dual fuel capabilities, include further adaptation to hydrogen Reliability and Maintainability Equivalent to current state-of-the-art engines
Source: U.S. Department of Energy
18
LEGEND
CC
QSK60G GAS ENGINE
HX 2
CI CO HX 1
17
CRF T1
14 13
8
Steam
CV NG
16
HRF
15 6
Control Valve ES EST
AF C1
HT LT
TCR R
HRSG
AC TP
AB
C2
T2 CD
12
AF
10
11
WW
HW /S
AB - AIR BOX AC - AFTERCOOLER AF - AIR FILTER CC - CONDENSATES COLLECTOR CD - CONDENSATES CI - COOLANT IN C1 - COM PRESSOR 1 CO - COOLANT OUT CRF - COOLED REFORM ED FUEL C2 - COM PRESSOR 2 CV - CONTROL VALVE ES - EXCESS STEAM EST - EXHAUST ST ACK FW - FEED WATER HRSG - HEAT RECOVERY STEAM GENERATOR HRF - HOT REFORM ED FUEL HT - HIG H TEM PERATURE HX1 - HEAT EXCHANGER 1 HX2 - HEAT EXCHANGER 2 HW - HOT W ATER LT - LOW TEM PERAT URE M W - M AKEUP WATER NG - NATURAL G AS P - PUM P RW - RECYCLED WATER S - STEAM TCR R - TCR REFORM ER T1 - TURBINE 1 T2 - TURBINE 2 TP - T HROTTLE PLATE WR - WATER RESERVE WTS - W ATER TREATM ENT SYSTEM WW - WARM WATER
FW RW WR P
19
W TS
P MW
Figure 7. system
Schematic of the Cummins QSK60G gas engine equipped with the TCR
Theenginesystemhastwobanks,theleftbank(LB)andrightbank(RB),andhasa turbochargerinstalledineachbank.Intheanalyses,theTCRreformerislocatedjust downstreamoftheturbochargers.Theseturbochargershavenowastegate.Aheatrecovery steamgeneratorislocateddownstreamoftheTCRreformer.Thereformedfuelishotandhasa
17
largequantityofwatervapor.Twoheatexchangersinseriesareusedtoreducethereformed fueltemperature;watervaporiscondensedasthereformedfueliscooled.Thereformedfuel temperatureiscontrolledtomaintainthemaximumenginemanifoldtemperaturebelow55C. Justenoughsteamisgeneratedtosupplythereformer.
2.1.4. Performance Goals/Criteria for Design of TCRS

Targetheatratereduction(fromthermochemicalreformersystem)of>10%. Assumestartupon100%naturalgasandtransitiontoreformedfuel. Intakemanifoldtemperaturenottoexceed55C. ZerosupplementalfuelconsumedtosupportTCRreformingreactions. Hydrogencontentofreformednaturalgasmixturedeliveredaheadofaircompressors between2030%byvolume. TCRtobeinstalleddownstreamofturbochargertoavoidpotentialneedtoredesign turbochargers. SteamtocarbonratioofRecuperativeReformernottoexceed2to1. Exhaustgastemperaturedownstreamofturbochargersapproximately553Catfullload Designfor8000hoursperyearcapacityfactor. Theengineshallbecapableofachievingratedpoweratthefollowingconditions:
o o o o o o o o
Ambienttemperature:upto32C Altitude:upto1000meters Fuel:Pipelinequalitynaturalgas FuelminimumMN:75 Inletrestriction:upto50mbar Exhaustrestriction:upto100mbar Relativehumidity:upto100% Jacketwaterinlettemperature:95C
Naturalgassupplysystempressurerangebetween0.25to3.9bar(g).
2.1.5. Engine Simulation of TCR Reformed Fuel

AsimplifiedprocessflowdiagramoftheTCRSanalyzedwiththeHYSYSmodelisprovidedin Figure8.
18
Engine Exhaust
Air
ENGINE
Reformer Out
Catalyst
Natural Gas Exhaust Cooling Water Hot Water

E-4
Reformer Feed
E-5
Pre Heat
Steam
Reformer Out C
P-18
Water Supply
Cool Exhaust Condenser
Reformed Fuel
Pump
P-25
Condensate
Figure 8. Process flow diagram of the Cummins QSK60G gas engine equipped with the TCR system
Fortheconditionsreportedabove,theHYSYSmodelpredictedareformedfuelcomposition fromtheTCFRreactorasreportedinTable5.Thiscompositionwasusedinthecalibrated WAVEmodeltopredicttheCumminsQSK60Gengineperformanceandemissions.TheWAVE modelwasadjustedtoaccountfortheshortenedcombustiondurationwiththeuseoftheH2 enrichedfuel.

Table 5. Compositions of natural gas and HYSYS-calculated reformed fuel (mol %) Component Methane Ethane Propane i-Butane n-Butane i-Pentane n-Pentane n-Hexane Hydrogen Water Vapor Carbon Monoxide Carbon Dioxide Nitrogen Total Natural Gas 94.37 2.82 0.42 0.05 0.06 0.02 0.02 0.03 0 0 0 0.94 1.27 100 Reformed Fuel 59.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28.11 3.67 0.13 8.25 0.83 100
19
Asimulationwasperformedat50%loadinordertopermitevaluationofabroadrangeofthe excessairratio.Operationonnaturalgaswascomparedtoreformedfuelonlyatoneoperating point,i.e.,anexperimentalpointavailablefromactualtestsbyCumminsonnaturalgas.For thissimulation,theengineBMEPwasmaintainedat8.07barforbothnaturalgasandreformed fuel,whichisthesameastheexperimentalBMEPatthisload. ThevolumetriccalorificheatingvalueoftheTCRreformedfuelisapproximately22%lessthan thatofthenaturalgas.Thisis,however,morethancompensatedforbytheincreasedvolume producedbythereformingreactionssothatcalorificvalueenteringtheenginepermoleof naturalgasconsumedactuallyincreases.Therefore,inadditiontoBrakeThermalEfficiency, whichistheefficiencybasedonthefuelconsumedbytheengine,theconceptofsystemthermal efficiencyneedstobeintroduced.Thesystemefficiencyisbasedonthefuelfedintothe engine/TCRsystem(i.e.naturalgas). AsshowninFigure9,thesystemefficiencyoftheengine/TCRsystemwasincreasedbyabout 8.5%relativetothenaturalgasengineat50%load.Thisefficiencyincreaseisdirectly attributabletothereductionofthenaturalgasfuelconsumptionusingtheTCRreformer. Naturalgasfuelconsumptionoftheengine/TCRsystemwasreducedbyabout8.5%relativeto thenaturalgasenginewithouttheTCRsystem.Themaximumengineefficiencywasobserved atexcessairratio=1.8.Aswasincreasedfurther,thesystemefficiencystartedtodecrease.
1.150 1.125
Normalized System Efficiency
1.100 1.075 1.050 1.025 1.000 0.975 0.950 0.925 0.900 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3
50% load @1800 rpm Reformed Fuel Natural Gas
Excess Air Ratio,
Excess Air Ratio,

Figure 9. Normalized system efficiency versus excess air ratio () for natural gas and TCR reformed fuel
Figure10ashowsthenormalizedsystemefficiencyversusthenormalizedNOxemissions.NOx emissionslinearlydecreasedasthesystemefficiencyincreaseduptocertain(i.e.1.8inthis
20
case).Whenwasabove1.8,thesystemefficiencyincreasedrapidlyastheNOxemissions increased.Thisfigureshowsthattheengine/TCRsystemcansimultaneouslyachievesignificant improvementsinbothefficiencyandNOxemissionsbyoperatingtheengineinleaner combustion.

Figure10bshowsnormalizedNOxemissionswithrespectto.NOxemissionsexponentially decreasedaswasincreasedfrom1.4to2.2.Atthesame,thereformedfuelshowedhigher NOxemissionsthanthenaturalgas.ThisisbecausetheH2enrichedcombustionincreased cylindertemperaturecomparedtonaturalgas.However,theH2inthereformedfuelallowsthe extensionoftheleanlimittoabove=2.Thisresultsinmorethan62%reductioninpredicted NOxemissions.Asmentionedearlier,thereareotherstrategiestofurtherreduceNOx emissionsthathavenotbeenexaminedyetinthisstudy.
1.12 1.10 1.08 1.06 1.04 1.02 1.00 0.98 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Normalized NOx Emissions 50% Load @ 1800 rpm Reformed Fuel Natural Gas
7 6
Normalized System Efficiency
Leaner Combustion
Normalized NOx Emissions
5 4 3 2 1 0 1.3
50% load @1800 rpm Reformed Fuel Natural Gas
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
2.0
2.1
2.2
2.3
Excess Air Ratio,
Figure 10a. Comparison of normalized system efficiency versus normalized NOx emissions for natural gas and TCR reformed fuel
Figure 10b. Normalized NOx emissions versus excess air ratio () for natural gas and TCR reformed fuel
Figure11showsnormalizedUHCemissionsforthetwodifferentfuelsasafunctionofexcess airratio.BecausetheWAVEoverpredictedUHCemissionsat50%load,theexperimentdata wasalsoincludedforcomparisoninthefigure.Predictedunburnedhydrocarbonemissions increasedabout41%.
21
Figure 11.
3.00 2.75 2.50
Normalized UHC emissions versus excess air ratio
Normalized UHC Emissions
2.25 2.00 1.75 1.50 1.25 1.00 0.75 0.50 0.25 0.00 1.3
50% load @1800 rpm Reformed Fuel Natural Gas (WAVE) Natural Gas (Experiment)
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
2.0
2.1
2.2
2.3
Excess Air Ratio,
() for natural gas and TCR reformed fuel

Figure 12.
750 725
Turbocharger exhaust outlet temperature as a
Turbine Out Temperature [degree C]
700 675 650 625 600 575 550 525 500 475 450 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7
50% load @1800 rpm Reformed Fuel Natural Gas (WAVE)
1.8
1.9
2.0
2.1
2.2
2.3
Excess Air Ratio,
function of excess air ratio ()

Turbochargerturbineouttemperature(i.e.theTCRreformerinlettemperature)isshownwith respecttotheexcessairratio()inFigure12.Thepredictedturbineouttemperatureofthe naturalgaswasslightlylowerthanthatofthepredictedreformedfuel.Thereformedfuel maintaineda489C(912F)turbineouttemperatureevenat=2.2.Thishightemperaturegives
22
positiveresultstotheTCRreformer,whosereformingrateisalmostproportionaltoreformer inlettemperature,atleastinthetemperaturerangesofinternalcombustionengines.
2.1.6. Biogas and Landfill Gas

Sincefuelreformingincreasesthemethanenumber(MN)ofafuel,itisbelievedthatthe applicationofTCFRtoenginesusinglandfillgasorbiogascouldprovidecombustionand performanceimprovements.ToquantifythesebenefitsfortheQSK60Gengine,calibrated WAVEandHYSYSsimulationswereruntocalculatechangesinsystemefficiencyandengine powerwithandwithoutthermochemicalrecuperationsystems. Thesecomparisonsbeganbydefiningrepresentativecompositionsandheatingvaluesfor landfillgasandbiogas.TheWAVEmodelwasrunfortheQSK60Gengine(calibratedfor naturalgas)witheachofthesealternativefuelstocalculatebaselineestimatesofengine efficiencyandperformance,aswellasengineexhaustcharacteristics.Theengineexhaustresults wereusedintheHYSYSmodeltopredicttheproductgasesfromtherecuperativereformer. TheWAVEmodelwasrunwiththehydrogenenrichednaturalgastopredictTCFRefficiency andemissions. ThereformedfuelpropertiesforbiogasandlandfillgaspredictedbyHYSYSmodelingare listedinTables6and7,respectively.Inbothcases,thereformedfuelfromTCRScontained about18%hydrogenbyvolume. SomekeyfindingsfromtheWAVEmodelinganalysisforlandfillgaswithandwithoutTCRS aresummarizedinTable8.ThebiogasandlandfillgasTCFRwasmodeledat50%loadwhile holdingtorqueandexcessairratioconstantforreformedandunreformedcases.At50%load andconstantexcessairratioof1.59,abouta0.77%decreaseinsystemheatratewaspredicted. Undersimilarconditionsadecreaseinsystemheatrateofabout8.5%wascalculatedfornatural gasfueling.However,theWAVEmodelingpredictedthattheNOxemissionsfuelingwith reformedlandfillgaswouldbeabout40%lowerthanfuelingwithrawlandfillgas.
Table 6. Reformed biogas fuel properties landfill gas properties Table 7. Reformed
Mole Fraction Type

Mole Fraction (CO) Mole Fraction (CO2) Mole Fraction (H2O) Mole Fraction (Hydrogen) Mole Fraction (Methane) Mole Fraction (Nitrogen) Mole Fraction (Oxygen) Lower Calorific Value (kcal/kgmole)
Value
0.0026 0.3000 0.0416 0.1865 0.4632 0.0046 0.0015 99,800
Mole Fraction Type

Mole Fraction (CO) Mole Fraction (CO2) Mole Fraction (H2O) Mole Fraction (Hydrogen) Mole Fraction (Methane) Mole Fraction (Nitrogen) Mole Fraction (Oxygen) Lower Calorific Value (kcal/kgmole)
Value
0.0011 0.0818 0.0416 0.1786 0.4326 0.2402 0.0241 93,400
23
ComparableWAVEmodelingresultsforreformedbiogasaresummarizedinTable9.Inthis case,useofTCFRresultsinabouta1.33%reductioninheatrateat50%loadandconstantexcess airratio().ThemodeldoesnotpredictmuchchangeintheNOxemissionsatconstantexcess airratio().

Table 8. Engine performance and emissions comparison-landfill gas
Parameter Brake Thermal Efficiency System Thermal Efficiency Brake Torque Brake Power Brake Specific Fuel Consumption System Specific Fuel Consumption Brake NOx Exhaust NOx Exhaust CO Brake Specific UHC Exhaust UHC
Units % % N-m kW kg/kWh kg/kWh g/kWh ppmv ppmv g/kWh ppmv
Landfill Gas 1.59 32.9 32.9 3862 728 0.4618 0.4618 3.077 311 233 9.0 1290
Reformed landfill Gas 1.59 32.8 33.2 3862 728 0.5318 0.4582 1.944 189 152 11.9 1429
Remark Constant 0.77% Constant
Table 9.
Engine performance and emissions comparison-biogas
Parameter Brake Thermal Efficiency System Thermal Efficiency Brake Torque Brake Power Brake Specific Fuel Consumption System Specific Fuel Consumption Brake NOx Exhaust NOx Exhaust CO Brake Specific UHC Exhaust UHC
Units % % N-m kW kg/kWh kg/kWh g/kWh ppmv ppmv g/kWh ppmv
Biogas 1.59 32.7 32.7 3865 729 0.4618 0.5223 1.370 131 144 9.7 1672
Reformed Biogas 1.59 32.5 33.2 3862 728 0.5830 0.5142 1.357 129 142 11.8 1792
Remark Constant 0.77% Constant
LaboratoryStudiesofRecuperativeReformingReactors11
11.RecuperativeReformerforHighEfficiencyandUltraLowEmissionsDGwithReciprocatingEngines,Final Report:August2004March2006.April2006.GTIProject20094
24
2.1.7. Summary of 1kWe Laboratory-Scale TCFR Tests

Concurrentwiththeperformancemodelingdescribedabove,laboratoryinvestigationswere beguntosupportthedesignoftherecuperativereformingreactor.Theobjectivewastodesign, build,andtestalabscalethermochemicalrecuperativereformer(RR)forreciprocatinggas engines.Therecuperativereformerwastestedonabenchundersimulatedgasengineoperating conditionstomeasureandcompareheattransferandreformingefficienciesrelativeto predictedvalues.Targetswerederivedfromresultsofthetechnicalandeconomicfeasibility studyofTCRforthe1,400kWereciprocatingengine. ThepreliminaryconceptualRRdesignwasbasedonatubeandshellgeometryratherthan plateandframe.Twoconceptualdesignsforrecuperativereformersforreciprocatingenginesin the1,000kWeto1,500kWesizerangewereprepared. Abenchscalerecuperativereformingreactor,scaledtoequivalentgasflowsfroma1kWe engine,wasdesigned,fabricated,andtested.Usingsimulatedengineexhaustconditionsthat werescaledfromthefullscalemodelingstudiesfortheCumminsQSK60Gengine,the preliminarytestsconfirmedthetechnicalviabilityoftheRRconcept.Specifically,thetesting confirmsthepotentialtoachieveatargethydrogenyieldofabout25%byvolumefroma recuperativereformerrecoveringwasteheatfromengineexhaustandusingsteammethane reformingatasteamtocarbonratioof2:1. Laboratorytestresultswerethenusedtovalidateanengineeringdesigntoolforfuturescaleup andlaboratorytestingofanimprovedRRforanaturalgasengines.Theimprovementswill largelybedirectedtowardreducinglossesandimprovingheatrecovery.Thisistoleadtomore efficientandcosteffectivedesignoftherecuperativereformer. TheexperimentaldesigndepictedinFigure13wasusedtoconfirmthefundamentalfeasibility oftherecuperativereformersubsystem.ThepreviousHYSYSprocesssimulationsofTCR appliedtotheCumminsQSK60Genginewerebasedonthewasteheatfromanengineexhaust, downstreamoftheturbocharger.Thisresultsinalowtemperaturewastestream,around 550C. Proofofreformingtestswerecompletedutilizingacommercialprereformingcatalyst.As showninFigure14,theofftheshelfprereformingcatalystdataverifiesthatconversions consistentwiththeprocesssimulationswereobtainableacrossawiderangeofspacevelocities. Testresultsconfirmthatexhaustgasheatcanbeusedfromanengine,downstreamofa turbocharger,atabout520C.Thewasteheatcanbeusedtoprereformnaturalgasandproduce arawreformatewith10to15%H2.Whenthewateriscondensedoutat30C,afuelinputtothe internalcombustionengineofabout25%H2results.
25

Figure 13. Laboratory set-up low temperature methane reforming (recuperative reforming for reciprocating engine)
40
35
Test Conditions Catalyst: C11-PR-3 (4.4 mm x 4.7 mm) Bed Diameter:0.93 in Bed Height:6 in Bed Volume:66.8 cm S/C:2.0 SV:4,314 hr
-1 3
30
CH 4 Conversion, %
25
20
15
10
0 320
340
360
380
400
420
440
460
480
500
520
540
560
Average Bed Temperature, oC
Figure 14. catalyst
CH4 conversions versus temperature for pre-reforming
26
Furthertestingwasconductedusingthelaboratoryscaleunitshownbyschematicand photographinFigures15and16,respectively.
Figure 15. Schematic of the GTI RR experimental test unit

27
Figure 16. GTI laboratory-scale recuperative reformer test cell

ThetestunitrepresentstherecuperativereformerinaTCRSystem.Thetestunitshownin Figure15schematiccontainstwosectionsacombustionchamberandareformingreactor.The combustionchamberconsistsofaninsulated6inch316SStubewithinletconnectionsfor naturalgas,deionizedwater,primaryair,andsecondaryair.Anaturalgasburnerfiresdown intoainchdiameter316SScoiledtubeheatexchangerwherenaturalgasandwaterare heatedtosupplythereformerfeed.Thereformerfeedisamixtureofnaturalgasandsteam correspondingtoasteamtocarbon(S/C)ratioof2.Thefeedispreheatedto245Cbeforeits partialconversiontohydrogen,carbonmonoxide,carbondioxide,andwatervaporinthe catalystbed.Thehotengineexhaustat550Craisesthereformercatalystbedtemperatureto about380Cbyheattransfer. Thetestunitwassizedtosimulatetheequivalentflowofa1kWeengine.Theprocess conditionsareshowninTable10.TestconditionsarecomparabletothosesetintheHYSYS processmodelingsimulationoftheRRforaCumminsQSK60Genginesystem.Thetopand bottomofthereformingreactorwasfilledwithknitted316SSwiremeshtoenhancetheheatup ofthecatalystbedbythehotsimulatedengineexhaustgasesviaheattransfer.Thereforming reactorispackedwith18inchofC11PRprereformingcatalystsuppliedbySdChemie,Inc. Theeffectivenessofthisprereformingcatalystwasdemonstratedpreviouslyinlabscale reformingexperiments.Athermowellwiththreethermocoupleswasinstalledintothe reformingreactortomeasurethegastemperaturesjustabovetheinlet,middle,andexitofthe catalystbed.Inaddition,thermocoupleswerealsoinsertedtomeasuretheinletandoutlet
28
temperaturesofthereformerflueandreformergas.Pressuredifferencesandpressureswere alsomeasuredbypressuregauges. Thetestresults,includingtemperaturesandpressuresatvariouslocationsintheunitduring thetest,areshowninTable11.Aproductgasanalysiswascarriedoutusingagas chromatographtodeterminenaturalgasconversionintherecuperativereformer.Theresultsin Table11indicatethatthenaturalgasconversionlevelof7%inthereformeriscomparableto thelevelpredictedbyHYSYSmodelsimulation.However,thedrypercentageofhydrogenin theproductsofreformingwasonly69%ofwhatwasexpectedfromtheHYSYSsimulation(18 versus26%).Thiswasduetoalowerreformerbedtemperatureof324C(averageofthethree thermocouplereadingsinthecatalystbed)comparedto382Cemployedforthesimulation study.ThissuggestedthatfutureRRdesignconfigurationsneedtoaddresstheoptimizationof heattransferintheRRsystemtoattainahigheranduniformtemperaturedistributioninthe reformercatalystbedforhighernaturalgastohydrogenconversionlevels.Overall,thetest successfullydemonstratedtheviabilityoftheRRconcept.
Table 10. Experimental test conditions
Refo rme r Re actor L en gth 49.53 D iam ete r 3.048 V olu me 361 Cata lyst: T yp e S ize W eig ht C11-P R 4.7x4.7 287.4 cm cm cm 3 Expe rim ental Refo rme r Gas F low s Na tura l Ga s to Refo rme r 6.0 SLPM W ate r to Refo rme r 9. 15 g /m Expe rim ental F lue Gas F low s Na tura l Ga s to Burne r 6.0 SLPM Pri ma ry A ir to Burn er 16.9 SLPM Se co nd ary Air 137.4 SLPM T ota l Fe ed Natural Gas Co mp ositi on Com po ne nt mo l% Me tha ne 90.7 N2 4. 65 Etha ne 3. 35 CO2 0. 92 P ropa ne 0. 28 n -Bu tan e 0. 05 i -Butane 0. 03 n -Pe nta ne 0. 02 T ota l 100.00 160.3 SLPM
mm g
29
Table 11.
Experimental reformate flow (test conditions in Table 10)
2.2.
TCFR RICE Cost Estimation
2.2.1. Approach
ThesimulationandmodelingresultsreviewedabovewereusedtorefinetheTCFRconceptual designandtoprovideguidanceforapreliminaryengineeringdesignofaTCRRICEsystem. ThepreliminarydesignwasbasedupontheuseofaCumminsQSK60Ggasenginegenerator setproducing1,400kWelectricaloutput.Abillofmaterialswasgenerated.Thesimulation modelswereusedtodefinethekeyperformanceandsizingparametersfornewcomponentsof theTCFRsystem.Theseperformancespecificationswereusedtogeneratequotationsand engineeringestimatesforthekeycomponents.Thecostofothercomponentsandmaterialsin thebillofmaterialswereestimatedbaseduponcatalogpricesandengineeringestimates.An economiccostmodelwasdevelopedusinganExcelspreadsheet.Theeconomicmodel consideredfuelconsumptionsavings,TCRoperationandmaintenancecosts,TCR manufacturingcosts,andinstallationcosts.Themodelcalculatedapaybackperiod.The economicmodelwassetuptoalloweasychangesoftheinputassumptionssothatsensitivity analysescouldbeconducted.
2.2.2. Key Assumptions

TheTCFRRICEsystemequipmentlayoutthatservedasthebasisforthecostanalysisisshown inFigure17.ItwasassumedthattheTCFRsystemwouldbepackagedonaseparatemounting platformtoalloweasyinstallation(onsite)nexttotheengineandgeneratorset.Theitems withinthedashedlineboxoftheschematicarethosecomponentsthatmakeuptheTCFR system.ThedesignoftherecuperativereformingreactorisgiveninAppendixA.
30
Otherkeyassumptionsarelistedbelow: Enginebrakeandelectricaloutput(i.e.generatorefficiency)fromCumminsbrochure 10/02CPGQSK60G/C. Naturalgaslowerheatingvalue(LHV)of33.44MJ/Nm3. QSK60GbrakethermalefficiencyasreportedbyAxelzurLoyeinpresentationreport titledARESTechnologyDevelopmentforQSK60NaturalGasEnginedatedMarch15, 2005. FuelcostisspotpriceattheHenryHubtakenfromNaturalGasWeeklyUpdatefor24 March2005www.eia.doe.gov. Brakethermalefficiency=actualfuelconsumption(Btu/kWhr)dividedby3412 (Btu/kWhr). ElectricitycostfromNewYorkStateEnergyResearchandDevelopmentAuthority2004. Operationandmaintenancecostincludesmaintenancereserveforoverhaul. Facilitiescapitalcostofmoneycalculationassumestotalgensetpurchasepricewith TCRis$600,000(approx.$428/kWinstalledprice). 30Cmaximumreformategastemperaturehigherallowablereformategas temperaturewilllowercostofcertainTCRcomponents. 91%availability.
31
TCR Assembly
Quad Turbochargers
Left Bank Compressors Right Bank Turbines T6 P3 By-Pass Control Valve
Condenser
P2 Gas Flow Meter Gas/Steam Mixer
Gas Flow Meter Control Valve
Fuel/Air Mixer Air Filter
Heat Exchanger
T5
Control Valve Steam Flow Meter
Sulfur Removal System T3 P1
Regulated Natural Gas Supply
Right Bank Compressors
Left Bank Turbines
T1
T2
Charge Air Cooler
Throttle Valve
Exhaust Outlet
Recuperative Reformer Engine driven CAC pump Condensate return Oil Cooler Water filter
Heat Recovery Steam Generator T4
Make up water
Auto level controller

Thermostat
Cummins QSK60G
Steam water feed tank
Engine Driven J/W Pump Expansion tank J/W Expansion Tank Fan Radiator Steam Water Pump, Electric Motor driven
Thermostat
Condenser expansion tank
Condenser cooling water pump, electric motor driven
Thermostat
Fan
J/W Radiator
Condenser Radiator
Thermal Chemical Recuperator RICE System Schematic 21 April 2005
Figure 17.
TCRS system assembly and components for cost estimation
2.2.3. TCR System Cost

ItwasassumedthattheTCRsystemwouldbepreassembledatamanufacturingfacilityand pretestedwithahotgastestrig.Siteinstallationandenginehookupcostswereestimated.It wasassumedthattheengineelectroniccontrollerwouldhavethecapabilitytoperformthe additionalcontrolfunctionsrequiredoftheTCR.Anincrementaladditionalcostfortheengine controllerwasincluded. Theincrementalinstalledcostof$100,883fortheTCRsystemincludesallitemslistedintheBill ofMaterialsprovidedinAppendixB.Therecuperativereformeraccountsformorethan40%of theestimateforthetotalinstalledcostofaTCRSfortheCumminsQSK60Gengine.Thisis importanttohighlightbecausethisisonlyabudgetaryestimate(generallyassumedtobe accuratewithin25%).Suppliersindicatedthattheybelievedtherecuperativereformercost estimatewasconservativelyhighforaoneofakindhardwareitem. Baseduponfindingsreportedearlier,theprimaryoperatingbenefitisan8.5%system efficiencyincreasefromtheTCRS.Thisefficiencygainwasusedtoestimateannualfuelcost
32
savingstocalculateapaybackperiodfortheincrementalcapitalinvestmentforTCRS.Table12 summarizestheresults.Theassumptionsreportedresultinasimplepaybackofabout1.9years. AnnualmaintenancecostsincreasefortheTCFRcase.Theprimarydriveristherecuperative reformer.Itwasbeenassumedthattherecuperativereformerwillneedtobeinspected,cleaned andrefurbishedevery16,000hours.Thecostofthisactionisannualizedforthepayback calculation.Itisexpectedthatastherecuperativereformertechnologymaturesandmore experienceisobtained,thefrequencyofthismaintenanceactionmaybeextended.

Table 12. TCRS cost estimates for Cummins QSK60G generator set
Element Electrical rating (kW) Operating hours/year Annual fuel cost without TCR Annual fuel cost with TCR Incremental O&M costs with TCR Net annual savings TCR cost TCR payback period (years) TCR installed cost ($/kW)
Value 1,400 8,000 $734,336 $671,917 $9,093 $53,325 $100,883 1.9 $72
33
34
3.0 Summary of Thermochemical Fuel Reforming Technology and Scale-Up Approach

3.1. Thermochemical Fuel Reforming Technology Status Summary
TheCumminsQSK19Gengineservedasthebasisforthesystemanalysisandconceptual designofarecuperativereformerbecauseCumminsexpectstouseitforfuturehighefficiency, lowemissionsdevelopmentwork.Asimplifiedengineperformancemodelwasdevelopedin HYSYSandusedtoestimatepotentialimprovementsinengineefficiencybyapplyingaTCR system.Themodelallowedpredictionofenginepoweroutput,heatlossesincylinders,and heatlosseswithexhaustgasforvariousintakemassflowratesandchemicalcompositions.The modelwasverifiedbasedonbaselinedataprovidedbyCummins.Thechemicalcomposition fornaturalgasusedintheanalysesisshowninTable13.Thebaselinecharacteristicsof QSK19Gengineat100%loadarelistedinTable14alongwithHYSYScalculationresults.
Table 13. Reference natural gas composition for engine/reformer modeling Natural Gas Composition (Mole Fractions): CH4 CO2 H2O CO O2 N2 H2 C2H6 C3H8 C4H10 0.888 0.0218 0 0 0 0.0283 0 0.048 0.011 0.0029
35
Table 14.
QSK19 lean burn engine characteristics without TCR (rated speed 1800 rpm)
Cummins Technical Data Power Output, kW: Heat Input, kW: Mechanical efficiency, %: Intake Air Flow, kg/s: Exhaust Gas Flow, kg/s: Fuel Consumption, kg/s: Excess air, %: Peak Temperature, 0C Peak Pressure, kPa Chemical composition (Mole Fractions): CH4 CO2 H2O CO O2 N2 H2 C2H6 C3H8 Gas Temperature, 0C: After Compressor After engine After turbine
HYSYS Simulation Results 351 1,019 34.4 0.548 0.569 0.0215 57.5 1,864 12,430 Air/Fuel mixture 0.059 0.0005 0 0 0.197 0.742 0 0.0017 0.00027 Exhaust 0 0.063 0.124 0.00018 0.072 0.741 0 0 0
351 1,023 34.4 0.547 0.569 0.0215 57.5
101 700 536 534
36
Figure18isasimplifiedflowdiagramfortheCumminsQSK19GenginewithoutTCRsystem (baselineconditions).Figure19isaSankeydiagramthatprovidesavisualenergybalancefor thebaselineenginesystem.
Figure 18. Simplified flow diagram for Cummins QSK19G lean burn engine without TCR
Source: Gas Technology Institute Heat losses
t u p n I y g r e n E l e u F
298 kW 1019 kW 370 kW 351 kW Power Output
Exhaust heat losses
Figure 19. TCR
Sankey diagram of QSK19G lean burn engine without
AsimplifiedengineperformancemodelintegratedwiththeHYSYSprocessmodelwasusedto predicttheefficiencyimprovementforTCRontheQSK19Gengine.Usingengineperformance andoperatinginformationprovidedbyCummins,preliminaryestimatesofpotentialgainsin systemefficiencywerecalculated.Theseresultswereusedtohelpguidethetestplanfor
37
subsequentexperimentalworkontheTCRtestrigdescribedlaterinSection5.The experimentalresultswereusedtocalibratetheanalyticaltools. PriorresearchbytheprojectteamonTCRRICEhadsuggestedthattheengineexhaustgas temperaturecouldsignificantlyaffectthepercentcompletenessoftheendothermic(reforming) reactions.Accordingly,thepreferredlocationoftherecuperativereformerisasclosetothe engineexhaustmanifoldaspossible.Likemanyoftodaysstationarygasengines,theQSK19G isturbocharged.TheTCRanalysiswasrunundertwocases:1)theRRislocatedonthehigh pressuresideofthegasturbineand2)theRRislocatedafterthegasturbine.Becauseitwas outsidethescopeofthisprojecttodeterminewhetherCase1waspracticalfromthestandpoint ofmatchingengineandturbochargingrequirementswithoutadditionalturbocharger development,Case2resultswereusedfordevelopingaconceptualdesignoftherecuperative reformer.
Figures20and21showsimplifiedprocessflowandSankeydiagramsforCumminsQSK19G enginewhentheTCRsystemlocatestherecuperativereformeraftertheturbocharger. ComparingefficienciesinFigures18and20,thesystemthermalefficiencyisincreasedfrom 34.4%to36.2%becauseofTCR.Thereformedfuelcontains55.4%hydrogen.TheSankey diagramsgiveavisualrepresentationofenergytransferintheengine.
Figure 20. Simplified flow diagram of Cummins QSK19G lean burn engine with recuperative reformer after turbocharger
38
Heat losses
t u p n I y g r e n E l e u F
425 kW 968 kW 351 kW 192 kW
Power Output
TCR, 76 kw
Exhaust heat losses
Figure 21. Sankey diagram for QSK19 lean burn engine with steam/natural gas reforming (reformer after turbocharger)
3.2.

Performance Goals/Criteria for Design of TCR System

Targetenergygain(fromthermochemicalreformersystem)of>5%. Assumeenginestartupon100%naturalgasandtransitiontoreformedfuel. Intakemanifoldtemperaturenottoexceed55C. ZerosupplementalfuelconsumedtosupportTCRreformingreactions. 2030%byvolumehydrogencontentforreformednaturalgasmixturedeliveredahead ofaircompressor. TCRpreferredlocationisdownstreamofturbochargertoavoidpotentialneedto redesignturbochargers. Steamtocarbonratioofrecuperativereformernottoexceed2. Exhaustgastemperaturedownstreamofturbochargersapproximately553Catfullload. Designfor8000hoursperyearcapacityfactor. Theengineshouldbecapableofachievingratedpoweratthefollowingconditions:
o o o o o o
Ambienttemperature:upto32C Altitude:upto1000meters Fuel:pipelinequalitynaturalgas FuelminimumMN:75 Inletrestriction:upto50mbar Exhaustrestriction:upto100mbar
39
o o
Relativehumidity:upto100% Jacketwaterinlettemperature:95C
Naturalgassupplysystempressurerangebetween0.25to3.9bar(g).
3.3.
Conceptual Design of Recuperative Reformer
Apreliminaryconceptualdesignoftherecuperativereformerfortheengineapplicationbeing evaluatedinthisprojectwaspreparedtoprovidesomeperspectiveonitspotentialsize.The followingpointsaresignificant: Therecuperativereformerdimensionsinthisconceptualdesignwereestimatedbasedonshell andtubetypeheatexchanger.Anotherdesignsuchasplateandframeshouldalsobe considered. Heatlosses,bothatthereformerandalongpiping,havebeenincludedinthemodelingand designcalculations.Theywereassumedtoequal~20%. Conservativeassumptionsforthereformingtemperaturewereusedinthemodeling calculations.Thereappearstobesufficientheatavailableintheexhaustgastodesignfora50C 100Chigherreformingtemperature.Ahigherreformingtemperaturewouldaffecttheresults positively. Additionalanalysiskeyparameterswouldberequired(steam/naturalgasratio,reforming temperature,air/fuelratio)tooptimizetheTCRsystemandachievethehighestincreasein engineefficiency.
Figures22and23representconceptualdesignsoftheTCRsystemandrecuperativereformer forQSK19Gengine.Preheatingzoneinthereformer(Figure23)consistsoffinnedtubeswithout catalystandisrequiredtoraisenaturalgas/steammixturetemperaturetothelevelwhere reformingreactionshavehighrates.Thereformersizecanbereducedifaplatetypedesignis considered.
40
Reformed fuel to engine
Gas/Steam Mixture
Figure 22. QSK19G engine
Conceptual design of thermochemical recuperation system for
0.
Reformed fuel
Figure 23.
Conceptual design of recuperative reformer for QSK19G engine
41
0.6 m
Steam
42
4.0 Laboratory-Scale Testing of Recuperative Reforming for Simulated Exhaust from Cummins QSK19G Natural GasFueled Reciprocating Engine
4.1. Laboratory Studies of Recuperative Reforming Reactor
BeginningwithbaselineengineoperatingandperformancedataprovidedfortheCummins QSK19Gleanburnengine,aconceptualdesignofarecuperativereformingreactorwasscaled andsizedforsimulatingexhaustgascomposition,temperature,andflows.Thereactorwas designedtofacilitatetestingofdifferentreformingcatalysts,aswellasvaryingreforming temperature;meanswerealsoprovidedtovaryresidencetimeandsteamtocarbonratios withinthereactor.Thisreactorwasusedforlaboratoryvalidationofnaturalgasconversionand hydrogenyields.Thetestplanwasdesignedandexecutedtoparametricallyevaluatehowthe performanceofrecuperativereformingwasaffectedaskeyprocessparameterswerevaried.For example,theimpactofexhaustgastemperatureonperformanceoftherecuperativereforming reactionswasexamined.Exhaustgastemperaturewouldbeexpectedtovaryasafunctionof engineloadandwhethertheexhaustgaswasdirectedthroughtherecuperativereformer upstreamordownstreamoftheturbochargerturbine.Thesteamtomethaneratioforreforming wasexpectedtoaffecthydrogenyield,andaminimumrequirementtoavoidpotentialcoking wouldneedtobeestablishedatlowreformingtemperature. Laboratoryinvestigationswerealsoplannedinsuchawayastosupportvalidationofanalytical toolsthatbeingdevelopedandusedforsystemanalysisaswellasdesignandscaleupofthe recuperativereformingreactor(RRR).Thedecisionwasmadetodesign,build,andtestalab scalethermochemicalRRRlargeenoughtorepresentameaningfulscaleupfromprior experiments12andcapableofreformingenoughfuelforpossibleoperationofalaboratory engine.Therecuperativereformerwastestedundersimulatedgasengineexhaustgas conditionstomeasureandcompareheattransferandreformingefficienciesrelativeto predictedvalues. ThepreliminarydesignselectedfortestingintheTCRtestrigwasatubeandshellgeometry. However,aplateandframeconfigurationcouldoffercostsavingsbecauseofitsmorecompact size. AnexistingfurnacewithtwoUtubeburners(combustors)wasmodifiedtosupportthetesting. TwocommerciallyavailablerecuperatorswereinstalledontheexhaustendofoneoftheUtube burnersandwereusedtosimulateengineexhaustconditionsduringrecuperativereforming tests.ReferringtoFigure24below,Combustor#1simulatestheengineexhaustflow.This exhaustgaswasusedasaheatcarrierforrecuperativereformingreactionsoccurringinthe reformer.Naturalgasandsteamweremeteredandmixedpriortoapreheater(Recuperator1). 12.RecuperativeReformerforHighEfficiencyandUltralowEmissionsDGwithReciprocatingEngines,Final
Report:August2004March2006.April2006.GTIProject20094
43
Thepreheatedmixturewassenttotherecuperativereformer(Recuperator2).Catalystis installedintubeswithintherecuperativereformer(wherenaturalgasandsteamflow).The initialdesignwassuchthatthereformedfuelcouldbeanalyzedandthenburnedincombustor #2.Anelectricalsteamgeneratorwasusedtoproducesuperheatedsteam.Asulfurremoval systemwasalsousedtodesulfurizethenaturalgaspriortoreforming.Sulfurremovalwould alsoberequiredforcommercialsystems.
Figure 24. Schematic of laboratory setup for 250 SCFH TCR test rig
44
Figure25showsaphotographoftheheattreatfurnacemodifiedtosupportexperimentsofTCR forsimulatedengineexhaust.TheendviewoftheEclipserecuperatormodifiedtoserveasa recuperativereformedisindicatedbyanarrow.TheinsulatedductworkandpipinginFigure 25waspartoftheTCRtestrigalongwiththermocouples,steamandfuelsupplylinesand controlvalves.Bottledgasissuppliedtoanalyticalequipmentusedduringthetesting.
Figure 25.
Photograph of laboratory setup for 250 SCFH TCR test rig
45
4.2.
Recuperative Reformer
AshopdrawingofthecommerciallyavailableEclipserecuperatorthatwasmodifiedandused asarecuperativereformerontheTCRtestrigisprovidedinFigure26.
Figure 26.
Source: ?
Drawing of eclipse recuperators installed on TCR test rig
Becauseoftherelativelylowtemperatureofthesimulatedengineexhaustgases,the recuperativereformerwasdesignedsothatcatalyticinsertscouldbeplacedintoeachofthefive tubesshowninthesideviewofSectionAAofFigure26.Aphotographoftherecuperatorend viewwithcatalyticinsertsinstalledinthetubesisprovidedinFigure27.
Figure 27. Eclipse recuperator (recuperative reformer) with catalytic inserts installed
46
PriorliteraturesearchesanddiscussionswithGTIresearchersworkinginfuelprocessing resultedintheidentificationofthreecandidatereformingcatalystsuppliersfortheinserts requiredforthetestunit:1)aNiRhcatalystwasavailablefromCatacelCorporation;2)aRh catalystwasdepositedoninsertsthroughasuppliertoMiratech;and3)commerciallyavailable nickeloxidediscswereavailablethroughtheGTIfuelprocessinggroup.Figure28showsthe threefabricatedcatalyticinsertsthatweretestedintheexperimentalunit.Catacelsupplied inserta,MiratechappliedRhoninsertbandinsertcfabricatedbyGTI.Figure29providesa viewofafresh,individualnickeloxidediscusedinconfigurationc.
(a)
(b)
(c) Figure 28. Photographs of catalytic inserts evaluated in TCR
test rig
47
oxide catalyst disc
Figure 29.
Photograph of an individual nickel
4.3.
Test Plan
Theexperimentsweredesignedtoobtaincriticaldataneededtovalidatemodelingtoolsfor designingrecuperativereformersforTCRsystemsintegratedwiththeCumminsQSK19Glean burnengine.Cumminsprovidedacompletesetofperformanceanddesigndataforthisengine includingexhaustgastemperatures,compositionsandflowratesunderdifferentloads.This informationwasusedforsystemanalysisofTCRintegratedwiththeQSK19Gleanburnengine. Laboratoryexperimentsweredesignedtoproviderequireddatatovalidatemodeling assumptionsthataffectpredictionsoftheimpactofTCRonsystemperformance.Thesekey variablesinclude: Reformingtemperature:

Steamtocarbonratioforreformingtotargethydrogencomposition. Gasflowrate(residencetime)withinthereactor. Combustor#1firingrate:15kWt100kWt. Combustor#2firingrate:15kWt45kWt. Fuelmassflowrate(naturalgas):0.3g/sec1g/sec. Fuelvolumetricflowrate:0.4liter/sec1.2liter/sec. Air/fuelratio(bymass):upto30. Exhaustgastemperatureatthereformerinlet:670K1400K. Reformedfueloutlettemperature:530K850K. Steamtemperature:500K600K. Steam/fuelmolarratio:0.52.0.
Plannedexperimentalconditions:

Reformerparameters:

48
Parameters to be measured in the test plan:

Airflowrateforbothcombustors. Naturalgasflowrateforbothcombustors. Steamflowrate. Temperatures.(SeeFigure24forthermocoupleslocations.) Naturalgas,exhaustandreformedgascompositions.(SeeFigure24foranalyzerports locations.)Watervaporcontentinreformedfuelwouldbecalculatedfromotherdata measurements.
ThepreliminarytestplanmatrixisprovidedinTable15below.
Table 15. Preliminary Test Plan Matrix Regime No. Combustor #1 firing rate, kW Exhaust gas temperature, K Fuel flow rate, gram/sec
1 15 670 0.3 2 30 1000 0.3 3 45 1400 0.3 4 15 670 1 5 30 1000 1 6 45 1400 1 7 15 670 1 8 30 1000 1 9 45 1400 1 10 45 1000 0.3
Athermowellwiththreethermocoupleswasinstalledintoeachofthereformingreactortubes tomeasurethegastemperaturesatinlet,middle,andexitofthecatalystbed.Inaddition, thermocoupleswerealsoinsertedtomeasuretheinletandoutlettemperaturesofthereformer flueandreformergas.Pressuredifferencesandpressureswerealsomeasuredbypressure gauges.
4.4.
Analysis of Experimental Data
4.4.1. Catalytic Reforming Test Results

Oneofthetestobjectiveswastomeasureandcompareconversionefficiencyofthechosen catalystsforreformingofnaturalgaswithsteam.Anotherobjectivewastoexperimentally specifymechanismofcatalyticreformingandprovideatheoreticalmodelwiththismechanism. Inordertospecifythemechanismofcatalyticreformingexperimentaldatawascomparedwith theoreticalpredictionbasedonchemicalequilibriumatchosennaturalgas/steamcomposition andreformingtemperature.Naturalgascompositionwasrepeatedlymeasuredduringthetests; averagenumbers(byvolume)formeasuredcomponentsareshownbelow:

H2=0.10% N2=1.16% CH4=94.83% CO2=1.02% C2H4=0.001% C2H6=2.36% C3H8=0.33%
49
iC4H10=0.06% nC4H10=0.06%
Ascanbeseenfromthecomposition,themaincomponentofnaturalgasismethane(CH4), whichis94.83%(byvolume).Equilibriummethaneconversionrateatcertaintemperature wouldbeabasetocomparewithmeasuredmethaneconversionrate. Naturalgasforreformingwasmixedwithsteaminsuchproportionthatsteamtocarbonmole ratiowouldbeapproximately2:1.Themixturecomposition(byvolume)isshownbelow:

H2=0.033% N2=0.382% CH4=31.2% CO2=0.336% C2H4=0.0003% C2H6=0.776% C3H8=0.109%

iC4H10=0.002% nC4H10=0.002%
H2O=67.1%
Figure30showscalculatedequilibriumcompositionsofnaturalgas/steammixtureatdifferent reformingtemperatures.ThesecompositionswereestimatedusingCHEMKINsoftware.
0.7 0.6 Mole Fraction 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 700 CO2 CO 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 CH4 H2 H2O
Reforming Temperature, F
Figure 30. Equilibrium composition for natural gas/steam reforming (steam/carbon=2)
50
Methaneconversionrateisestimatedas
Methane Conversion Rate = 1 -
(outlet mass concentration of methane) (inlet mass concentration of methane)
(5)
CalculatedmethaneconversionrateatdifferentreformingtemperaturesisshowninFigure31.
Methane Conversion Rate
1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 700
800
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
Reforming Temperature, F
Figure 31.
Methane conversion rate by equilibrium
Reformingprocesscompletenesswouldbemoreuniversalparametertogeneralize experimentaldataandthenusethedatatodevelopthetheoreticalmodelforcatalytic reforming. Reformingprocesscompletenesscanbeestimatedas:
Process Completeness =
(calculated equilibrium Methane Conversion Rate )
(measured Methane Conversion Rate)
(6)
Figure32showsgeneralizeddataforthereformingprocesscompletenessfornoncatalyticand catalyticreforming.
Spacevelocityofnaturalgas/steammixtureinthefigureisestimatedas:
Space Velocity =
(reforming fuel standard volume flow rate) , [hr-1] (reformer volume )

51
(7)
Herethereformervolumeiscalculateddifferentlyfornoncatalyticandcatalyticreforming.In thecaseofthenoncatalyticreforming,thevolumeisestimatedastotalvolumeofthereformer partwithreformingfuelflow.Incaseofthecatalyticreforming,thevolumeisestimatedasheat exchangetubesvolumewithcatalystinsidethetubes. AscanbeseenfromtheFigure32,theNiRhcatalystoncorrugatedfoiliscalculatedtobemore efficientincomparisonwithtwoothertestedcatalysts.Thiscatalysthasthehighestspace velocity(~3500hr1)whentheprocesscompletenessiscloseto1(Figure32).Noncatalytic reformingcanbeusedatverylowspacevelocities(<500hr1).
120%
No catalyst
Reforming Process Completeness, %
100%
Ni-Rd catalyst on corrugated foil Ni catalyst on ceramic Rd catalyst on metal rod
80%
60%
40%
20%
0% 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000
Space Velocity (at standard), 1/hr
Figure 32. standard)
Reforming process completeness vs. space velocity (at
52
Figure33showsmeasuredhydrogenvolumeconcentrationinthereformedfuelagainst equilibriumpredictionvs.spacevelocity.
120%
100%
No catalyst Ni-Rd catalyst on corrugated foil
Measured/Equilibrium H2 (dry), %
80%
60%
40%
20%
0% 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000
Space Velocity (at standard), 1/hr
Figure 33. Measured hydrogen volume concentration in reformed fuel compared to equilibrium predictions
Measuredhydrogenvolumeconcentrationinthereformedfuelagainstequilibriumprediction isestimatedas:
Measured/EquilibriumH2=
(Measured hydrogen volume outlet concentration ) (Equilibriumhydrogenvolumeconcentration )
(8)
Table16showshydrogencontentinthereformedfuelversusreformeroutlettemperatureand naturalgasflowratefornoncatalyticreformingandthreecatalysts.Upto62%ofhydrogen contentinthereformedfuel(drybasis)canresultfromthereformingattestedconditions.

Table 16. Hydrogen content (% volume, dry basis) in reformed fuel 100 0.54 33.4 41.2 ~60 780 150 0.15 15.5 18 35.4 330 0 3.2 4.5 15.4 950 100 330 8.8 10.2 12.6 34 1050 100 22.6 Reformer outlet temperature, F Natural gas flow rate for reforming, SCFH No catalyst Rh catalyst on metal rod Ceramic discs with nickel oxide catalyst Ni-Rh catalyst on corrugated foil
62
53
54
5.0 Operation of 50 kWe Research Engine with Reformed Fuel from TCR Test Rig
5.1. Goal and Objectives
Thegoalwastooperatea50kWeHCCIresearchenginewithreformulatedfuelproducedby thethermochemicalrecuperationtestrig.AsecondarygoalwastodetermineiftheTCRrig couldbeusedtosupplytheenginewithfuelifconfiguredforsparkignitedtesting. Asstatedearlierinthisreport,aprimarydesignrequirementfortherecuperativereformeristo recoverasmuchaspossibleofthewasteheatintheexhaustgasesanduseittoproduceafuel mixturewithhighhydrogencontentfromnaturalgas.Theamountofpublisheddataon hydrogenenhancedcombustioninreciprocatingengineshasincreaseddramaticallyinrecent years.Concurrentwiththisproject,GTIwascompletingastudyontheeffectsofusing hydrogentocontrolthestartofcombustioninanengineconfiguredforhomogeneouscharge compressionignition13.Accordingly,itwasproposedtousetheavailablesinglecylinderengine, alreadyconfiguredtofireblendsofnaturalgasandbottledhydrogen,totestoperationon reformedfuelproducedbytheTCRtestrig.Inthisway,enginemapsanddataalready acquiredtestingHCCIwithneatnaturalgasandblendsofnaturalgasandhydrogencouldbe comparedtooperationonreformedfuelthatwouldresultfromapplicationofTCRunder simulatedengineexhaustgasconditions.
5.2.
Test Plan
ExperimentalSetup:Thereformedfuelflowrateandcompositionsenttotheenginewere limitedbymaximumnaturalgasflowrateandtemperatureofreformingintheTCRtestrig describedintheprevioussectionofthisreport.Figure34isasimplifiedflowdiagramforthe experimentsetup.TheTCRtestrigproducedsteamreformedfuelthatwassuppliedtothe50 kWeresearchengine.ThereformedfuelproducedintheTCRtestrighadtobecooledand compressedtodeliverittotheenginethatwaslocatedabout30feetaway.Watervaporinthe reformedfuelwascondensedandcollectedbeforedeliverytotheengine.Ifmorereformedfuel wasproducedthantheenginecouldconsume,thefuelcouldbedivertedtoasupplemental burnerforcombustion.ThesinglecylinderHCCIenginewasoperatedonreformedfuel suppliedfromtheTCRtestrig. Figure35isaschematicthatdepictshowtheHCCIenginetestbenchwasconfiguredpriorto supplyingreformednaturalgasfromtheTCRtestrig.ExceptforthebottledH2/DMEfuel deliverysystemandtheminidilutionsamplingsystem,theremainderoftheexperimentalset upwasusedforthetestinginthisproject.
13.EvaluationofTechnicalFeasibilityofHomogeneousChargeCompressionIgnition(HCCI)EngineFueledwith Hydrogen,NaturalGas,andDMEDEFC2604NT42236FinalReport,March2008.
55
Figure 34: Simplified Flow Diagram of the Reformed Fuel Delivery System
To Exhaust Stack Hydrogen Fuel Train TSI SMPS Filter Holder Compressed Air DME Fuel Train Flow Meter Ambient Air Compressor Natural Gas Conditioning Unit Control Valve Filter Flow Meter Control Valve Control Valve Flow Meter Control Valve Pump Mini Dilution Tunnel Horiba MEXA-7000FC Emissions Benches
(CO2, CO, NOx, CH4, O2, THC)
Single-cylinder HCCI Control Valve In-line Electric Micro Motion Heater Intake Surge Tank Mixing Chamber Exhaust Throttle Valve Exhaust Surge Tank
To Exhaust Stack
DAC
~
Figure 35. HCCI H2/Natural gas engine test bench-setup for flow control and data measurement/acquisition system
56
Rationale:Thistestwasproposedtoobtaindataontheperformanceandemissionsfrom operatingareciprocatinginternalcombustionengineontheresultantfuelblendfrom thermochemicalrecuperation.TheresearchengineiscurrentlyconfiguredforHCCI,andthe enginehasbeenrecentlymappedforbothneatnaturalgasaswellasblendsofnaturalgasand hydrogen.Havingmappedtheenginewiththesefuelsprovidesanexcellentbaselinefor comparisontoreformedfueloperation.Testresultswouldbeanalyzedtodeterminewhether HCCIoperationonpartiallyreformedfuelfromTCRimprovesperformanceoremissions. PredictedPerformance:DataobtainedwhileoperatingtheHCCIengineonnaturalgasand naturalgas/hydrogenblendswasavailablefromaDOEsponsoredproject.Performance impactsfromhydrogeninthefuelincludechangesinpeakcylinderpressureandignition timingcomparedtoneatnaturalgas.TheDOEprojectdatawasusedtoselecttheproposedtest matrixincludedlaterinthisplan. TestObjectivesandTechnicalApproach:Theobjectivefortheproposedtestwastooperatean HCCItestenginewithafuelblendderivedfromthermochemicalrecuperationforsimulated exhaustgasconditionsforaleanburnstationarygasengine.TheHCCIenginewasmappedon thisreformedfuelblendtocompareperformanceandemissionstotestdataforsimilar operatingconditions(load,airtofuelratio,timing,boostpressure,andinletairtemperature).
ThetechnicalapproachwastooperatetheTCRtestrigforsteamreformingofnaturalgas. Naturalgasandsteamflowratestotherecuperativereformerwerechosentogenerate sufficientreformedfueltoenabletheHCCIenginetoreachaloadcomparabletothatachieved whentheHCCIenginewasfueledwithneatnaturalgasandnaturalgas/bottledhydrogen blends.
5.2.1. Test Matrix

UnderaprojectsponsoredbytheUSDOEandGTI,theresearchenginesconfiguredforHCCI wasrunsteadystateat1,800rpmovertherangeofoperatingconditionsshowninTable17.
Table 17. Operating conditions for HCCI test engine
IntheDOEproject,hydrogenwassuppliedfrombottles.Detailedengineperformanceand emissionsdatawererecorded.ForthetestsproposedforHCCIoperationonsteamreformed naturalgasproducedintheTCRrig,compositionsandflowrateswerepredictedforthe reformedfuelasprovidedinTable18below:
57
Table 18. Predicted compositions and reformed fuel flow rates of reformed fuel at different reformer temperatures (steam to carbon=2) Reforming temperature (theoretical), F H2, vol % N2, vol % CH4, vol % CO, vol % CO2, vol % C2H4, vol % 60* 0.1 1.3 94.8 0 1.1 600 18.0 0.9 74.3 1.5 4.0 700 30.0 0.8 57.6 3.0 7.0 0.1 1.3 0.2 633.0 13.1 5.7 6.46 2187 62.7 1.8 800 42.0 0.7 44.0 4.0 8.0 0.1 1.1 0.1 533.0 21.7 6.4 5.40 2187 63.8 3.5 900 53.0 0.5 31.4 5.0 9.0 0.0 1.0 0.1 445.0 32.6 7.3 4.37 2187 65.2 5.8
Reformed fuel major components
0 0.1 C2H6, vol % 2.4 1.0 C3H8, vol % 0.3 0.2 914 729 Reformed fuel Low Heating Value Btu/scf 0 7.0 H2 energy content in reformed fuel % 4.6 5.2 kg/hr Fuel flow rate Stochiometric air fuel volume ratio (scfh air)/(scfh fuel) 9.50 7.53 Stochiometric air flow rate scfh 2187 2187 Reformed fuel energy kW 61.6 62.1 0 0.7 % Fuel energy gain against natural gas * natural gas
The proposed test matrix for HCCI engine testing with reformed fuel is provided below in Table 19.
Table 19. RUN Proposed test matrix for the HCCI engine with reformed fuel Excess Air Ratio 3.3 2.9 2.5 2.9 2.9 3.3 3.3 H2 Content % Energy 0 10 20 25 10 20 30 Pressureinlet Bar, absolute 2 1.6 3.5 2.8 1.6 3.5 3.5 Temperatureinlet K 469 463 433 438 463 436 463 Timing of Peak Cylinder Pressure CA ATDC 15 10 15 10 10 15 15
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
5.2.2. Test Procedures

ForthetestingofHCCIcombustionwithreformedfuel,thefollowingprocedureswere followed.TheTCRtestrigwasoperatedtoachievesteadystatereformedfuelcomposition withdefinedhydrogencontentaccordingtothetestmatrixinTable19.Thetargetreformed fuelflowratewasinitiallysetslightlyhigher(perhaps5%10%)thanwhatwascalledforinthe testmatrixandthentrimmedasrequired.Reformedfuelwaspumpedwiththefuelcompressor topressurizethefueldeliverylineupto40psig.Whilethereformingprocesswasstabilizing, allreformedfuelwasburnedoutinthesmallburnerafterthecompressor.Athreewayvalve wasinstalledinthefueldeliverysystemattheengineinlet.Itpermittedswitchingtheengine
58
operationfromnaturalgastoreformedfuel.Thevalvesettingthatallowsreformedfueltobe deliveredtotheenginewasopenedwhenhydrogencontentinthereformedfuelisstableand correspondstospecifiedvalueaccordingtothetestmatrix.Reformedfuelflowratetothe enginecylinderswascontrolledandkeptconstant,andexcessreformedfuelwasburnedoutin thesmallburner. Theenginespeedwassetat1,800rpmusingthemotoringdynamometerontheenginetestcell. Theexhaustbackpressurewassetto1.5bar.Theoilandcoolanttemperaturesweresetto 100C.Theintakepressurewassettomatchthetestcase.Theinlettemperaturewassetto slightlylowerthanthetemperaturepredictedbyDigitalEnginessimulations.Oncetheintake temperaturehasstabilized,theairmassflowratewasnoted.Knowingthestochiometricairto fuelratioforthedesiredblendofreformedfuel,thefuelingratewassettomatchtheexcessair ratioforthetestcase.Thefuelwasaddedslowly,andtheeffectsweremonitored.Ifthe combustionoccurredtooquickly,ordidnotoccuratall,thefuelwasshutoff,andtheintake temperatureadjusted.Theoptimizationoffuelrateandintaketemperaturesettingswas repeateduntilstablecombustion(withatimingofpeakcylinderpressurenearthatofthetest case)occurred.Oncestablecombustionoccurred,theintaketemperaturewasraisedorlowered slightlytoadvanceorretardthetimingofpeakcylinderpressuretothelocationspecifiedbythe testcase.Oncestablecombustionwiththecorrecttimingwasreached,dataacquisitionwas performed. Naturalgasandsteamtemperature/flowratetothereformerintheTCRtestrigwascontrolled tomatchrequiredtestconditions.HydrogencontentinthereformedfuelproducedintheTCR rigwasmonitoredwithagaschromatographandcontrolledbyreformingtemperature.The reformingtemperaturewasadjustedbychangingfiringratefortheburnerthatsimulatesthe engineexhaust.Reformedfuelpressureindeliverylinetothetestenginewascontrolledbya reliefvalvesetto40psig. FortheHCCItestengine,enginespeedwascontrolledbyamotoringdynamometer.Intake pressureandtemperaturewerevariedasperthetestplan.Anelectricheaterwasusedtovary intaketemperature.FuelflowratetotheenginewasneedlevalvecontrolledbyanMTSAdapt PICcontroller.Thenumberofparametersmeasuredbytheenginedataacquisitionsystem (DAS)istoogreattolist.However,someofthecriticalonesandmeansareincludedbelow:
5.2.3. Engine DAS Measurements and Methods

EnginespeedBEIopticalshaftencoder EnginetorqueInlinetorqueflangetorquetransducer AirmassflowrateMicroMotionflowsensor IntakepressurePressuretransducer IntaketemperatureThermocouple ExhaustpressurePressuretransducer ExhausttemperatureThermocouple CoolingwaterinlettemperatureThermocouple
59
CoolingwateroutlettemperatureThermocouple EngineoilinlettemperatureThermocouple FuelmassflowratetotheengineMicroMotionflowsensor Fuelpressurepressuretransducer FueltemperatureThermocouple IncylinderpressuretraceAVLincylinderpressuretransducerandBEIopticalshaft encoderfedintoMTSCASsystem HeatreleasedataMTSCASsystem EmissionsdataHoribaMEXA7100measuring,CO,CO2,O2,NOX,THCandCH4
5.2.4. Data Analysis Procedure

Fromthereformedfuelcomposition,thefuelheatingvalueandstochiometricairflowratewere estimated.Fromtheenginedatataken,thepower,brakemeaneffectivepressure(BMEP),and indicatedmeaneffectivepressure(IMEP)werecalculated.Fromthefuelingrateandenergy contentinthefuel,thethermalefficiencywascalculated.Foragivenexperimentalrun,an overallsystemefficiencywascalculatedbasedupontheflowrateandlowerheatingvaluefor thenaturalgasfedintotheTCRrigandthebrakepowermeasuredattheengine.Brakespecific emissionsnumberswerecalculatedusingtheHoribaemissionsdataandthecalculatedengine power.Brakespecificfuelconsumptionnumberswerecalculatedbaseduponthereformulated fuelconsumedbytheengineandthenaturalgasflowingintotheTCRrig. TheBMEP,efficiency,heatrelease,andpressuretracedatawerecomparedtothedatagathered operatingtheengineonstraightnaturalgasandnaturalgas/bottledhydrogenblends.
5.2.5. Quality Assurance Procedures

Toensurethatthedatacollectedisasaccurateaspossible,thelaboratoryequipmentis maintainedandcalibratedonaregularbasis.Keydataacquisitionequipmentwasthoroughly checkedandcalibratedbeforetheDOEHCCItesting.TheHoribabenchwaszeroedand spanneddailyduringtestrunstoensurethemostaccurateemissionsdata.Samplesoftheline naturalgasweretakenandanalyzedtoconfirmcomposition.Thereformedfuelgeneratedin theTCRrigwasmonitoredusinggaschromatographytoverifyitscomposition.Inaddition, thedatawasrevieweddailyandcomparedwithcomputationalsimulationresults.
5.2.6. Data Results (July 17-18, 2007, and July 29, 2007)
Alldatareportedweretakenatatimingofpeakcylinderpressureof10degreesATDC.Table 20showsdatatakenonlinenaturalgas.Thisdata,alongwithpreviouslyrecordeddata,served asabaselineforthereformedfueldata.
60
Table 20.
Data taken on line natural gas Line NG 164.153244 338.641327 99.977051 10.310057 97.585045 1798.473511 5.993353 17.883614 71.124352 3.335642 3.335642 186.5194585 150.10389 41.695525 45 150.10389 41.695525 42.89095293 3.662881936 42.89095293 0.235323 341.870605 2.914466 1643.54895 0.04376 14.71506 0.914927 1876.973999 0.012431 9.167571 2.006266 Line NG 180.747421 297.384644 107.817894 9.529058 88.125496 1799.491699 4.118842 12.482165 48.879139 2.606653 1 2.606653 208.8301989 117.299385 32.5831625 45 117.299385 32.5831625 38.30862336 4.53122 38.30862336 0.140481 842.368469 2.143247 1531.812988 0.00534 15.85713 -6.150763 1647.212036 -0.114326 11.018735 1.989751
% Hydrogen Intake Manifold Temp (deg C) Exhaust Manifold Temp (deg C) Coolant Out Temp (deg C) Peak Cylinder Pressure (deg ATDC) Peak Cylinder Pressure (bar) Speed (rpm) BMEP (bar) Power (kW) Torque (ft-lbs) Engine Gas Flow Rate(kg/hr) Fuel Flow Fate Factor Natural gas flow rate (kg/hr) BSFC (g/kwh) NG energy flow rate (mJ/hr) NG energy flow rate (kW) LHV, mix Energy flow rate, engine (MJ/hr) Energy flow rate, engine (kw) Thermal Efficiency, system Excess Air Ratio actual Engine Efficiency CO(H)(%) CO(L)(ppm) CO2(%) CH4(ppm) CO2(%) O2(%) NOx(ppm) THC(ppm) Brake Specific NOx - AVL(g/kWh) Brake Specific HC - AVL(g/kWh) Air/Fuel Intake Manifold Pressure(bar)
61
ThedatainTable21wastakenwith2.4%hydrogeninthereformedfuel.Systemefficienciesrange from35.7%ataexcessairratioof4.6,to44.0%ataexcessairratioof2.7.Thedataindicates1% increaseinsystemefficiencyoverengineefficiency.Theoverallandengineefficiencyislowerthan thatrecordedonlinenaturalgas.Thisisattributedtolackofknowledgeastotheprecisemakeupof thereformulatedfuel,whichwasknowntovaryduringthetesting.

Table 21.
% Hydrogen Intake Manifold Temp (deg C) Exhaust Manifold Temp (deg C) Coolant Out Temp (deg C) Peak Cylinder Pressure (deg ATDC) Peak Cylinder Pressure (bar) Speed (rpm) BMEP (bar) Power (kW) Torque (ft-lbs) Engine Gas Flow Rate(kg/hr) Fuel Flow Fate Factor Natural gas flow rate (kg/hr) BSFC (g/kwh) NG energy flow rate (mJ/hr) NG energy flow rate (kW) LHV, mix Energy flow rate, engine (MJ/hr) Energy flow rate, engine (kw) Thermal Efficiency, system Excess Air Ratio actual Engine Efficiency CO(H)(%) CO(L)(ppm) CO2(%) CH4(ppm) CO2(%) O2(%) NOx(ppm) THC(ppm) Brake Specific NOx - AVL(g/kWh) Brake Specific HC - AVL(g/kWh) Air/Fuel Intake Pressure(bar) 9.528 100.527 1798.635 6.060 18.361 71.916 3.490 1 3.490 190.067 157.037 43.622 45.6 159.131 44.203 42.090 3.469 41.537 0.115 322.052 2.776 1603.588 0.041 14.840 -1.183 1805.842 -0.015 8.439 1.988 10.241 97.864 1798.602 5.992 18.152 71.109 3.477 1 3.477 191.576 156.485 43.468 45.6 158.572 44.048 41.759 3.489 41.209 0.119 325.432 2.810 1616.082 0.054 14.910 0.092 1810.628 0.001 8.640 1.991 9.668 108.037 1798.662 7.222 21.841 85.700 3.970 1 3.970 181.759 178.643 49.623 45.6 181.025 50.285 44.014 3.065 43.435 0.126 244.009 3.260 1698.518 0.091 13.699 2.629 1905.834 0.029 7.546 1.991 9.491 109.557 1798.588 7.164 21.684 85.021 3.960 1 3.960 182.649 178.222 49.506 45.6 180.599 50.166 43.800 3.109 43.224 0.128 238.016 3.271 1731.756 0.095 13.682 2.577 1936.153 0.029 7.810 2.006 10.632 114.464 1798.662 8.222 24.827 97.575 4.511 1 4.511 181.711 203.011 56.392 45.6 205.718 57.144 44.026 2.730 43.447 0.137 232.688 3.722 1747.418 0.106 12.711 18.921 2022.847 0.187 7.188 2.003 10.604 103.967 1798.608 6.969 21.088 82.703 3.839 1 3.839 182.051 172.760 47.989 45.6 175.063 48.629 43.944 3.219 43.366 0.147 269.067 3.190 1714.640 0.114 13.903 0.647 1923.650 0.007 8.003 2.013 10.080 94.554 1798.622 5.320 16.104 63.131 3.103 1 3.103 192.687 139.637 38.788 45.6 141.499 39.305 41.518 3.922 40.972 0.173 497.019 2.566 1530.300 0.118 15.371 -2.154 1746.473 -0.032 9.341 2.004 9.914 86.337 1798.635 3.980 12.054 47.229 2.655 1 2.655 220.236 119.461 33.184 45.6 121.054 33.626 36.325 4.498 35.847 0.219 979.624 2.208 1473.942 0.121 16.113 -2.701 1707.357 -0.052 11.951 1.990 10.342 84.501 1798.588 3.882 11.756 46.066 2.636 1 2.636 224.210 118.608 32.947 45.6 120.189 33.386 35.681 4.583 35.211 0.276 1545.732 2.104 1578.718 0.122 16.263 -2.801 1801.943 -0.058 13.364 2.004 2.40 162.009 332.973 99.408 2.40 161.358 336.793 99.329
Data at 2.0 bar, 2.4% hydrogen

2.40 155.181 359.504 99.458 2.40 155.251 360.328 98.107 2.40 145.739 389.257 99.126 2.40 154.986 360.087 97.686 2.40 167.261 319.208 97.682 2.40 175.539 297.796 98.962 2.40 174.204 291.761 99.191
62
ThedatainTable22wastakenwithapproximately15%hydrogeninthereformedfuelby volume.Engineefficienciesarecloseto,ifnotslightlybetterthan,datatakenonstraight naturalgas.Thesystemefficienciesareover1%higherthantheengineefficiencies.Again,the compositionofthereformedfuelvariedslightlyduringthesetests.

Table 22. Data at 2.0 bar, 15% hydrogen 13.5 158.218 333.136 100.813 10.165 98.987 1799.485 6.113 18.511 72.544 3.622 0.930 3.369 181.973 151.583 42.106 42.3 153.213 42.559 43.962 3.619 43.495 0.086 334.422 2.779 1700.548 0.043 14.500 0.062 1766.833 0.001 8.252 2.001 12.0 153.024 356.023 99.129 10.257 104.536 1799.546 6.996 21.182 83.027 3.994 0.940 3.754 177.226 168.930 46.925 43 171.726 47.702 45.140 3.265 44.405 0.074 262.160 3.119 1806.837 0.066 13.777 3.202 1873.081 0.037 7.737 1.999 13.0 144.185 378.048 103.299 10.140 111.501 1799.478 8.057 24.326 95.609 4.498 0.930 4.183 171.944 188.224 52.284 42.6 191.597 53.221 46.527 2.921 45.707 0.072 243.542 3.523 1846.340 0.078 12.840 12.153 1934.771 0.122 6.965 1.991 14.0 142.818 384.666 99.390 10.620 111.863 1799.485 8.354 25.279 99.145 4.648 0.928 4.314 170.645 194.118 53.922 42.5 197.558 54.877 46.881 2.857 46.065 0.076 252.637 3.608 1854.300 0.082 12.598 12.416 1942.682 0.120 6.757 2.001 15.3 141.920 387.546 98.607 10.321 114.168 1799.492 8.376 25.333 99.400 4.697 0.928 4.359 172.049 196.137 54.482 42.5 199.612 55.448 46.498 2.832 45.689 0.074 247.769 3.626 1848.615 0.085 12.630 16.209 1940.385 0.157 6.740 2.007
% Hydrogen Intake Manifold Temp (deg C) Exhaust Manifold Temp (deg C) Coolant Out Temp (deg C) Peak Cylinder Pressure (deg ATDC) Peak Cylinder Pressure (bar) Speed (rpm) BMEP (bar) Power (kW) Torque (ft-lbs) Engine Gas Flow Rate(kg/hr) Fuel Flow Fate Factor Natural gas flow rate (kg/hr) BSFC (g/kwh) NG energy flow rate (mJ/hr) NG energy flow rate (kW) LHV, mix Energy flow rate, engine (MJ/hr) Energy flow rate, engine (kw) Thermal Efficiency, system Excess Air Ratio actual Engine Efficiency CO(H)(%) CO(L)(ppm) CO2(%) CH4(ppm) CO2(%) O2(%) NOx(ppm) THC(ppm) Brake Specific NOx - AVL(g/kWh) Brake Specific HC - AVL(g/kWh) Air/Fuel Intake Pressure(bar)
63
ThedatainTable23wastakenwithapproximately7.5%hydrogenbyvolumeinthereformed fuel.Engineefficienciesareverycloseto,orslightlylowerthan,datatakenonstraightnatural gas.Thesystemefficienciesareapproximately1%higherthantheengineefficiencies.

Table 23.
% Hydrogen Intake Manifold Temp (deg C) Exhaust Manifold Temp (deg C) Coolant Out Temp (deg C) Peak Cylinder Pressure (deg ATDC) Peak Cylinder Pressure (bar) Speed (rpm) BMEP (bar) Power (kW) Torque (ft-lbs) Engine Gas Flow Rate(kg/hr) Fuel Flow Fate Factor Natural gas flow rate (kg/hr) BSFC (g/kwh) NG energy flow rate (mJ/hr) NG energy flow rate (kW) LHV, mix Energy flow rate, engine (MJ/hr) Energy flow rate, engine (kw) Thermal Efficiency, system Excess Air Ratio actual Engine Efficiency CO(H)(%) CO(L)(ppm) CO2(%) CH4(ppm) CO2(%) O2(%) NOx(ppm) THC(ppm) Brake Specific NOx - AVL(g/kWh) Brake Specific HC - AVL(g/kWh) Air/Fuel Intake Pressure(bar) Source: Gas Technology Institute
Data at 2.0 bar, 7.5% hydrogen in reformed fuel

7.30 159.279 336.671 99.794 10.823 96.962 1799.478 6.055 18.361 71.853 3.542 0.947 3.354 182.661 150.926 41.924 43.1 152.643 42.401 43.797 3.675 43.304 0.103 383.342 2.813 1826.874 0.030 14.449 2.144 1864.757 0.029 8.994 2.005 7.00 162.079 328.796 97.453 10.450 97.314 1799.519 5.948 18.035 70.582 3.436 0.972 3.340 185.172 150.284 41.745 44.1 151.520 42.089 43.203 3.679 42.850 0.085 392.832 2.731 1765.960 0.065 14.709 2.147 1830.792 0.029 8.838 2.003 7.00 162.054 329.488 97.724 10.364 96.857 1799.546 5.915 17.936 70.190 3.425 0.972 3.330 185.631 149.828 41.619 44.1 151.061 41.961 43.096 3.684 42.744 0.083 376.201 2.752 1750.500 0.066 14.722 1.375 1838.220 0.019 8.921 2.000 6.61 161.936 329.979 98.000 10.814 94.620 1799.768 5.923 17.960 70.286 3.433 0.972 3.337 185.774 150.145 41.707 44.1 151.380 42.050 43.063 3.657 42.712 0.080 376.181 2.747 1748.600 0.068 14.682 1.669 1839.063 0.023 8.929 1.995 7.42 154.088 355.264 94.316 10.341 104.830 1799.525 7.000 21.220 83.072 3.907 0.973 3.802 179.161 171.085 47.524 44.2 172.706 47.974 44.653 3.229 44.233 0.061 267.223 3.133 1800.455 0.089 13.822 4.169 1915.814 0.048 7.875 2.002 7.41 154.197 356.874 97.787 9.638 106.682 1799.478 6.882 20.862 81.671 3.915 0.972 3.806 182.422 171.259 47.572 44.2 173.060 48.072 43.854 3.217 43.398 0.062 259.095 3.141 1797.043 0.090 13.800 4.527 1897.188 0.053 7.940 2.003 7.11 142.512 392.734 101.299 10.821 112.507 1799.492 8.254 24.980 97.951 4.537 0.973 4.414 176.723 198.650 55.181 44.3 200.987 55.830 45.269 2.773 44.742 0.058 238.205 3.693 1887.323 0.099 12.428 19.217 2036.447 0.188 7.165 1.993
64
ThedatainTable24wastakenwithapproximately25%hydrogeninthefuelbyvolume. Engineefficienciesareslightlylowerthandatatakenonstraightnaturalgas.Thesystem efficienciesare3%higherthantheengineefficienciesandshowapproximatelya2.5%gainover operationonlinenaturalgas.

Table 24.
% Hydrogen Intake Manifold Temp (deg C) Exhaust Manifold Temp (deg C) Coolant Out Temp (deg C) Peak Cylinder Pressure (deg ATDC) Peak Cylinder Pressure (bar) Speed (rpm) BMEP (bar) Power (kW) Torque (ft-lbs) Engine Gas Flow Rate(kg/hr) Fuel Flow Fate Factor Natural gas flow rate (kg/hr) BSFC (g/kwh) NG energy flow rate (mJ/hr) NG energy flow rate (kW) LHV, mix Energy flow rate, engine (MJ/hr) Energy flow rate, engine (kw) Thermal Efficiency, system Excess Air Ratio actual Engine Efficiency CO(H)(%) CO(L)(ppm) CO2(%) CH4(ppm) CO2(%) O2(%) NOx(ppm) THC(ppm) Brake Specific NOx - AVL(g/kWh) Brake Specific HC - AVL(g/kWh) Air/Fuel Intake Pressure(bar) Source: Gas Technology Institute
Data at 2.0 bar, 25% hydrogen in reformed fuel

25.9 148.391 321.849 101.449 10.924 93.519 1799.512 5.755 17.452 68.299 3.695 0.872 3.222 184.614 144.984 40.273 40.2 148.531 41.259 43.334 3.844 42.299 0.005 18.228 0.061 0.159 0.016 -0.038 0.131 -1.456 0.002 -0.007 1.999 24.9 148.616 330.392 98.897 10.113 99.218 1799.505 6.138 18.608 72.842 3.836 0.880 3.376 181.401 151.899 42.194 40.6 155.735 43.260 44.101 3.660 43.015 0.076 427.997 2.727 1642.976 0.036 14.606 2.447 1698.291 0.032 8.004 2.005 24.9 148.825 331.798 99.015 10.590 96.891 1799.519 6.102 18.499 72.410 3.829 0.880 3.370 182.160 151.637 42.121 40.6 155.466 43.185 43.917 3.632 42.836 0.073 400.143 2.746 1613.615 0.040 14.495 2.980 1698.708 0.039 7.978 1.989 24.9 148.658 331.764 99.026 10.384 97.939 1799.498 6.107 18.516 72.479 3.827 0.880 3.367 181.860 151.532 42.092 40.6 155.358 43.155 43.990 3.649 42.906 0.076 415.877 2.742 1645.741 0.043 14.482 2.440 1705.947 0.032 8.150 1.998 29.8 141.706 348.393 101.819 9.653 105.557 1799.512 6.942 21.040 82.381 4.365 0.848 3.702 175.941 166.583 46.273 39.2 171.123 47.534 45.470 3.338 44.263 0.070 329.207 3.020 1641.386 0.083 13.888 3.474 1692.785 0.040 7.077 2.008 27.3 135.111 375.476 104.611 10.843 107.264 1799.519 7.853 23.789 93.193 4.810 0.864 4.156 174.688 187.007 51.946 39.9 191.913 53.309 45.796 2.969 44.625 0.070 291.410 3.432 1754.591 0.093 13.002 14.332 1768.761 0.148 6.567 2.004
65
ThedatainTable25wastakenatanintakepressureof2.5bar.Richerexcessairratioswerenot possibleduetoinabilitytosupplytherequiredfuelfraction.Bothbaselineefficienciesand gainsinefficiencieswerehigherthanthe2.0barcases.

Table 25.
% Hydrogen Intake Manifold Temp (deg C) Exhaust Manifold Temp (deg C) Coolant Out Temp (deg C) Peak Cylinder Pressure (deg ATDC) Peak Cylinder Pressure (bar) Speed (rpm) BMEP (bar) Power (kW) Torque (ft-lbs) Engine Gas Flow Rate(kg/hr) Fuel Flow Fate Factor Natural gas flow rate (kg/hr) BSFC (g/kwh) NG energy flow rate (mJ/hr) NG energy flow rate (kW) LHV, mix Energy flow rate, engine (MJ/hr) Energy flow rate, engine (kw) Thermal Efficiency, system Excess Air Ratio actual Engine Efficiency CO(H)(%) CO(L)(ppm) CO2(%) CH4(ppm) CO2(%) O2(%) NOx(ppm) THC(ppm) Brake Specific NOx - AVL(g/kWh) Brake Specific HC - AVL(g/kWh) Air/Fuel Intake Pressure(bar) 2.40 154.723 284.805 93.658 10.233 115.532 1798.642 7.146 21.569 84.802 3.666 1 3.666 169.957 164.961 45.822 45.6 167.160 46.433 47.071 4.329 46.451 0.214 602.218 2.404 1425.594 0.097 15.367 -1.588 1634.854 -0.023 8.564 2.508 2.40 160.086 274.513 97.807 9.460 113.880 1798.649 6.413 19.364 76.101 3.380 1 3.380 174.548 152.096 42.249 45.6 154.124 42.812 45.833 4.615 45.230 0.229 619.838 2.269 1304.432 0.090 16.193 -2.418 1519.640 -0.039 8.730 2.491
Data at 2.5 bar

15.6 142.466 314.991 96.955 9.973 127.840 1799.471 8.983 27.184 106.597 4.693 0.917 4.303 158.294 193.637 53.788 42 197.086 54.746 50.539 3.691 49.654 0.084 304.555 2.795 1553.337 0.042 14.413 0.244 1670.080 0.003 6.919 2.508 15.6 142.114 316.937 97.600 9.651 128.820 1799.512 9.058 27.369 107.493 4.711 0.917 4.320 157.832 194.386 53.996 42 197.848 54.958 50.687 3.652 49.800 0.085 296.236 2.835 1595.638 0.038 14.219 0.588 1681.076 0.007 6.869 2.495 5.40 143.302 315.155 98.231 10.581 124.541 1799.519 8.904 26.984 105.671 4.451 0.976 4.345 161.005 195.505 54.307 44.4 197.641 54.900 49.688 3.654 49.151 0.065 350.055 2.774 1669.201 0.094 14.644 3.563 1749.861 0.041 7.289 2.503 5.40 143.037 315.660 98.219 10.488 124.590 1799.492 8.887 26.933 105.461 4.455 0.976 4.348 161.434 195.655 54.349 44.4 197.793 54.943 49.556 3.651 49.020 0.067 356.799 2.781 1687.356 0.094 14.509 3.506 1760.489 0.041 7.348 2.504 32.0 137.044 299.264 104.667 9.796 122.460 1799.505 8.222 24.907 97.567 4.782 0.833 3.983 159.926 179.246 49.791 38.6 184.578 51.272 50.023 3.947 48.578 0.084 471.755 2.501 1457.725 0.103 14.997 1.742 1470.121 0.022 6.645 2.495 32.0 136.131 299.468 103.008 10.632 119.089 1799.498 8.137 24.646 96.566 4.756 0.833 3.961 160.728 178.260 49.517 38.6 183.562 50.990 49.774 3.982 48.336 0.089 510.937 2.508 1433.140 0.102 15.129 1.795 1483.095 0.023 6.741 2.501
66
NoteonthecalculationofExcessAirRatio:Theexcessairratio,,iscalculatedusinga stoichiometricair/fuelratioof14.5.ThesourceofthisnumberisInternalCombustionEngine FundamentalsbyHeywood.Whentheanalysisresultsofthenaturalgassampleareavailable, thestoichiometricair/fuelratioandthesubsequentexcessairratiosmaychangeslightly. ThechartshowninFigure36showstherangeofIMEPandexcessairratiosperformed.Greater IMEPvalueswouldrequirehigherintakepressureorricherexcessairratios(notpossiblewith theavailablefuel).Dataathigherexcessairratioscanbetakeneasily,butthelowBMEPvalues achievedwithveryleancombustionmakethedatavaluableonlyformodelvalidation.
Reformulated Fuel Map at 1800 rpm

20 18 16 14 12 IMEP 10 8 6 4 2 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Excess Air Ratio
Figure 36. Engine map of test points completed
25% H2 HCCI 7.5% H2 HCCI 15% H2 HCCI 2.4% H2 HCCI
5.3.
Computer Simulation of HCCI with Reformulated Fuel
DigitalEnginesperformedHCCIsimulationsforalloftheoperatingpointstested.The objectiveofthesesimulationsistotesttherunconditionsbeforeperformingtheexperimentto verifythattheexperimentalsetupwillnotbedamagedbyexceedingthepeakcylinderpressure fortheengine.TheresultshowninFigure37isarepeatedsimulationwiththeactualfuel compositionmeasuredduringtheexperiments.ThepresentHCCIsimulationsconsiderthe combustionchamberasasingleuniformsystemandneglecttheinhomogeneityoftheactual combustionchamber.Theeffectofthissimplificationontheresultsisthatthesimulatedpeak cylinderpressureisalwayshigherthantheexperimentallyobservedpeakcylinderpressurefor
67
thesameoperatingcondition.Thisisacceptablefortheintendeduseofthesimulationsto insuresafeoperationofthelaboratory.
Figure 37. Simulated and the experimental pressure for the last run condition of Table 25
5.4.
Conclusions
The following trends, considering the difficulties encountered producing a steady composition from the TCR, for operating the single-cylinder research engine configured as an HCCI engine were observed: Increased hydrogen content reduced the engines efficiency, typically by one-half of a percent. The system efficiency increases through heat recovery via TCR. The largest gains are at the higher hydrogen contents. Adding interstitial baseline natural gas testing to the recuperated fuel test procedure avoids uncertainty comparing data.
TheflowratefromtheTCRwouldneedtoincreasesignificantlyinordertomeetthefuelneeds forfuturestoichiometric,sparkignitedcombustion.Currently,themaximumcapacityofthe TCRallowsforoperationat=2.5.Theflammabilitylimitofmethaneisaround=2.2.The currentsetupwouldnotallowforoperationoftheenginewithTCRfuelandsparkignition.
68
6.0 Conclusions and Recommendations

Alaboratoryscaleupofarecuperativereformingreactorwasfabricatedandusedtomeasure naturalgasconversionandhydrogenyieldswhenthermochemicalrecuperationwasapplied forwasteheatrecoveryfromnaturalgascombustiongasesattemperaturesthatsimulated exhaustproductsfromleanburnnaturalgasreciprocatingengines.Threedifferentreforming catalystswereevaluated(nickel,rhodium,andNiRh)atcarbontosteamratioofabout2,and theNiRhcatalystprovidedthehighestconversions.Theresidencetimesrequiredtoachieve differentlevelsofreforming(measuredbyhydrogenyield)wereexperimentallydeterminedfor useinadesignmodelofrecuperativereforming. A50kWelaboratoryscaleenginewasoperatedonreformedfuelproducedina thermochemicalrecuperationlaboratorytestrig.Testingconfirmedthetechnicalfeasibilityof satisfactoryoperationofthetestengineonreformedfuelproducedbyTCR.Dataobtainedfrom testingconfirmedthetechnicalfeasibilitytouseTCRonareciprocatingenginetorealizegains inoverallsystemefficiency.Theoperationofthetestengine,configuredforhomogeneous chargecompressionignition,wascomparedtooperationonpipelinequalitynaturalgas.The limitedtestingsuggeststhatfortheHCCIconfiguration,theenginebrakethermalefficiencyon reformedfuelcouldbecomparabletooperationonnaturalgas.Whileitwasnotwithinthe scopeoftheteststooptimizeoperationonreformedfuel,theengineemissionsweremeasured andcomparedtonaturalgasoperation.Operationonreformedfuelresultedinlower hydrocarbonemissionscomparedtotheemissionsfornaturalgasoperation.Becauseofthe extremelyleancombustionassociatedwithHCCI,thebaselineNOxemissionsonnaturalgas werealreadyverylow.Forthesameexcessairratio,insomecasesthereformedfuelresultedin slightlyhigherNOx.FurtheroptimizationbetweenNOxandCOtradeoffiswarranted.Testing alsoconfirmedthattheTCRtestrigascurrentlyoperatedwouldnotproducesufficient reformedfueltoenableoperationofthetestengineinasparkignitionconfiguration. AconceptualdesignofatubularrecuperativereformerfortheCumminsQSK19Genginewas developed.Topreparethedesign,thecommerciallylicensedHYSYScodewasusedtoconstruct asimplifiedenginemodelintegratedwithaprocessmodelofTCR.Theconceptualdesign providedanindicationoftheoveralldimensionsoftherecuperativereformerforthe331kWe engine. Basedupontheresultsofdescribedabove,itisrecommendedthatdevelopmentofTCRsystem fortheQSK19GenginebecontinuedwithsupportfromCumminsConclusionsand Recommendations.
6.1.
Commercialization Potential
Twoprimarymarketopportunitiesareidentifiedatthistime:1)Newenginesusedinpower generationapplicationswhereemissionslimitsareCaliforniaAirResourcesBoard2007 requirementsforDG;and2)Existingrichburnenginesusedatcompressorstations.
69
6.2.
Recommendations
Basedupontheresultsoftheworkreportedinthisproject,itisrecommendedthatdevelopment ofaTCRsystemforreciprocatinginternalcombustionenginescontinue. BecauseoftheextensiveamountofTCRprocessmodelingperformedtodatethatisbasedupon theCumminsQSK19engineconfigurations(i.e.,leanburnandstoichiometric,naturalgasand biogas),itwouldbehighlydesirabletocontinueTCRdevelopmentanddemonstrationwith Cummins.
6.3.
Benefits to California
ThisprojectaddressesthePIERProgramgoalsofenhancingenergyefficiency,diversifying electricitysuppliesbyinvestinginrenewableandothercleanenergytechnologies, strengtheningCaliforniasenergyinfrastructuretoprovideforreliability,andcontinuing Californiasenvironmentalstewardship.ATCFRsystemcouldreasonablyresultina5% reductioninoverallsystemheatratecomparedtothecurrentlyavailableenginegeneratorset. Ata5%reductioninfueluse,andanassumedCaliforniamarketpenetrationrateofabout50 MWbythefifthyearofcommercialization,theprojectedfuelsavingsat$7perMMBtugasare estimatedatabout$1.1millionperyear.BecauseTCFRproduceshydrogenenrichedfuelthat hasbeendocumentedtoextendtheleanlimitsofcombustioninreciprocatingICengines,the potentialexiststouseTCRforsignificantreductionofNOxwithoutexacerbatingemissionsof COandunburnedhydrocarbons. PreliminarymodelinganalysessuggestthatTCFRcanalsobeappliedtoincreaseefficiencyand reduceemissionsfromenginesfueledwithbiogasatlandfillsanddairyfarms.Byreducing NOxemissions,TCFRhaspotentialtohelpthesefacilitiesobtainairqualitypermits,hence, meetingthegoalsofthe2011BioenergyActionPlantoincreasecaptureandbeneficialuseof biomethanecurrentlybeingflaredatwastewatertreatmentplantsandlandfills14.This supportsattainmentofEnergyCommissionPIERProgramgoalofdiversifyingelectricity suppliesbyinvestinginrenewableandothercleanenergytechnology. TCFRmayprovideameansforcontinueduseofreciprocatingICenginesasprimemoversfor DGinSouthernCalifornia.TheARB2007emissionlimitsfordistributedgenerationcould precludeafuturemarketforthesesystemsunlesstheycandemonstratethecapabilitytocost effectivelymeettheselimits.Increasingelectricpowergenerationefficiencyandminimizing thecostofcomplyingwiththeARB2007emissionslimitsforDGwillcontributetoamorecost competitiveCaliforniaeconomy.
14.ONeill,Garry,JohnNuffer.2011.Draft2011BioenergyActionPlan.CaliforniaEnergyCommission, EfficiencyandRenewablesDivison.Publicationnumber:CEC3002010012SD,p.16.
70
7.0 Glossary
Acronym
A/F ARES CO DG EGR GTI HC HCCI HYSYS IMEP LHV NOx RICE RR RRR S/CR SI TC TCFR TCR
Definition
Air fuel ratio Advanced reciprocating engine system Carbon monoxide Distributed generation Exhaust gas recirculation Gas Technology Institute Hydrocarbon Homogeneous charge compression ignition Process model licensed by Aspen Technology, Inc. Indicated mean effective pressure Lambda: Excess air ratio (weight air / weight stoichiometric air) Lower heating value Nitrogen oxides Reciprocating internal combustion engines Recuperative reformer Recuperative reformer reactor Steam/carbon ratio Spark ignition Thermocouple Thermochemical fuel reforming Thermochemical recuperation
71
72
Appendix A: Conceptual Design of the Recuperative Reformer for the Cummins 1400 kW QSK60G Engine.
TherelevantCumminsQSK60engineparametersinclude:

ElectricPower:1.457MWe Exhaustgastemperature(afterturbocharger):553C ExhaustgasflowratewithoutTCR:8703kg/hr ExhaustgasflowratewithTCR:7720kg/hr NaturalgasflowratewithoutTCR:286kg/hr NaturalgasflowratewithTCR:254kg/hr AirflowratewithoutTCR:8417kg/hr AirflowratewithTCR:7466kg/hr
Therecuperativereformerparametersconsideredwere:

Pressure:103kPa Reforminggasflowrate:849kg/hr Steamflowrate:595kg/hr Reforminggasinlettemperature:245C Reformedgastemperature(outlet):416C Exhaustgastemperature(reformerinlet):525C(takingintoaccount5%heatlossesat exhaustpipe) Exhaustgasoutlettemperature:459C Heatexchangeaveragetubetemperature:404C Heatlossesatthereformer:5%
Specifiedtargetswere:

Methaneconversionrate:7% Hydrogencontent(afterwaterremovalfromreformedfuel):25% Heatofreaction(absorption):40% Reformedgastemperatureatequilibrium:382C
Twodifferentconceptsforheatexchangetubewithcatalystwereconsideredandevaluated. ThesearedepictedinA1.Calculatedparametersoftherecuperativereformerforthetwo catalystdesignsareshowninTableA2.ConceptAwasselectedforitslowfuelgasside pressuredrop.TheresultingoverallreformerdesignisshowninFigureA2.
73
Figure A-1.
Alternative reformer tube designs
Table A-1.
Temperature and pressure drops for alternative catalysts (Tin)exhaust (Tout)exhaust C 459 461 (Tin)RG C 245 245 (Tout)RG C 416 410 dPexhaust in. WC 3 3 dPRG in. WC 7 3600 C 525 525
Concept A. Catalytic elements B. Packed bed

74
Reform ed Gas Outlet 416C
R eform ing Gas Inlet 849kg/hr 245C
Exhaust Gas Inlet

0.98m
Exhaust Gas Outlet 459C
8703kg/hr, 525C
81m m
70m m 0.92m
50m m
Recuperative Reform er for Cum mins QSK60G Engine (1.457 M W e)
Figure A-2. Recuperative reformer for 60 liter engine

Heatexchangerdimensionsinclude:

Tubeoutsidediameter:50mm Tubelength:0.98m Numberoftubes:156 Finheight:12mm Finthickness:1.5mm Numberoffinspermeter:275
75
Appendix B: Bill of Materials for TCRS RICE-QSK60G

TCR RICE Incremental First Cost Cummins QSK60 Installation Bill of Materials Purchased Raw Labor Labor Labor Rate $/hr Finished Material $ Standard Hours Classification * * Labor $ Material $ $1,500.00 24.0 Welder/machinist $76.50 $1,836.00 $1,200.00 $43,063.00 $300.00 $4,000.00 $550.00 $3,500.00 $3,500.00 $1,000.00 $1,278.50 $250.00 $1,084.00 $1,278.50 $4,000.00 $500.00 $300.00 $1,100.00 $2,675.00 $700.00 $1,200.00 $1,735.00 $400.00 $600.00 $800.00 $1,200.00 $497.00 $287.00 $49.00 $50.00 $50.00 $100.00 16.0 Assembler/tester 8.0 Assembler/tester 32.0 Installer $63.75 $1,020.00 $63.75 $510.00 $51.00 $1,632.00
ID # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33
Description Frame and skid, TCR subassembly Exhaust subassembly, turbo to TCR Recuperative reformer (RR) Exhaust connection, RR to HRSG Heat recovery steam generator (HRSG) Exhaust outlet, HRSG Heat exchanger, natural gas/reformate Condenser, reformate Gas manifold, TCR subassembly Water pump, electric motor driven, steam water circuit Steam water tank, condensate return Auto level controller, steam water tank Water pump, electric motor driven, condenser cooling water Radiator, condenser cooling water, 2nd section integrated in J/W radiator Expansion tank, condenser cooling water Water manifold, condenser cooling water Control valve, gas supply Flow sensor, gas supply Mixing valve, gas/steam Control valve, steam Flow sensor, steam By-pass valve, natural gas Water/steam manifold I/O cards and controller modification Wiring harness
Quantity 1 1 1 1 1
Total $ Basis of Estimate $3,336.00 Engineering estimate $1,200.00 Engineering estimate $43,063.00 Quotation from Miratec $300.00 Engineering estimate $4,000.00 Engineering estimate $0.00 Engineering estimate $3,500.00 Engineering estimate $3,500.00 Engineering estimate $1,000.00 Engineering estimate $1,278.50 McMaster-Carr Catalog $250.00 Engineering estimate $1,084.00 McMaster-Carr Catalog $1,278.50 McMaster-Carr Catalog $4,000.00 Engineering estimate $500.00 Engineering estimate $300.00 Engineering estimate $1,100.00 $5,350.00 Cole-Parmer Catalog p $700.00 $1,200.00 $1,735.00 Cole-Parmer Catalog p $400.00 Engineering estimate $600.00 Engineering estimate $800.00 Engineering estimate $1,200.00 Engineering estimate $994.00 Transcat catalog page $287.00 Transcat catalog page $294.00 Transcat catalog page 4 $1,070.00 Engineering estimate $560.00 Engineering estimate $1,732.00 Engineering estimate $0.00 $0.00 $2,100.00 Engineering estimate $3,000.00 Engineering estimate $91,712.00 $9,171.20 $100,883.20
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Pressure transducers, intrinsically safe Pressure transducers Temperature sensors TCR assembly & painting TCR subassembly test TCR system site installation Filtration system, make-up water Sulfur removal system, fuel gas, (zinc34 oxide) 33 Odorant Removal System 34 ORS Adsorbent Total cost less margin = Margin (@ 10%) = Total cost plus margin =
$2,100.00 $3,000.00
76
Appendix C: Preliminary Analysis of TCR for Landfill Gas and Biogas Applications
BiogasandLandfillGas
BecauseTCRincreasesthevolumetriccalorificheatingvalueofthereformedfuel,andbecause thefuelgasalsocontainshydrogen,itwashypothesizedthattheapplicationofTCRtoengines usinglandfillgasorbiogascouldresultincombustionandperformanceimprovements.To predictthesechangesfortheQSK19Gengine,asimplifiedengineperformancemodel developedbyGTIwithinHYSYSwasusedtocalculatechangesinsystemefficiencyandengine powerwithandwithoutTCR. Representativecompositionsandheatingvaluesforlandfillgasandbiogasweredeveloped. TheHYSYSmodelwasrunfortheQSK19Gengine(calibratedfornaturalgas)withthebiogas compositiontocalculateestimatesofengineefficiencyandperformance,aswellasengine exhaustcharacteristics.
ModelingofLandfillGasEngineQSK19GwithTCR
LandfillGasReforming
InitialcompositionofLandfillGas(percentvolume):

45%CH4 35%CO2 20%N2
Engineperformancemodel Asimplifiedengineperformancemodelhasbeendevelopedtoestimatepotentialimprovement ofengineefficiencydeterminedbyTCRsystem. Themodelallowspredictionofenginepoweroutput,heatlossesincylinders,andheatlosses withexhaustgasforvariousintakemassflowratesandchemicalcompositions. BaselineEnginecharacteristicswithoutTCR TheperformancemodelwasverifiedforaLeanBurnEngineQSK19GNaturalGasEngine usingtheTechnicalDataSetprovidedbyCummins.Theseparameterswouldusedtoestimate baselinecharacteristicsoftheLandfillGasEnginewithandwithoutaTCRsystem.The calculatedbaselineLandfillGasconsumptionwaschosentoproducethesamepoweroutput valueoftheNaturalGasEngineatthecomparableexcessair.
77

Table C-1. Parameters Power Output, kW: Heat Input, kW: Mechanical efficiency, %: Intake Air Flow, kg/s: Exhaust Gas Flow, kg/s: Fuel Consumption, kg/s: Excess air, %: Peak Temperature, 0C Peak Pressure, kPa Chemical composition (Mole Fractions): CH4 CO2 H2O CO O2 N2 H2 Temperature, 0C: Before engine (after turbocharger) After engine After turbine 536 50* 689 486 Engine parameters for natural gas and landfill gas engines Technical Data for Natural Gas Engine 351 1023 34.4 0.547 0.569 0.0215 57.5 Simulation with HYSYS of Landfill Gas Engine 351 1030 34.1 0.553 0.630 0.077 57.5 1704 12,570 Air/Fuel mixture 0.059 0.059 0 0 0.185 0.697 0 Exhaust 0 0.118 0.118 0 0.067 0.697 0
*Assumed temperature
78
TheflowdiagramforbaselinecaseisshowninFigureC1.Acoolerbeforetheenginehasbeen assumedinallcasesconsideredinthisreport.
Flow Diagram for Landfill Gas Lean Burn QSK19 Engine (Baseline simulated)
Landfill Gas Landfill Gas ccomposition (mole fractions): CH4- 0.5 CO2- 0.5 Air 0.553 kg/s 0.077 kg/s Exhaust composition (mole fractions): CO2 - 0.118 H2O - 0.118 O2 - 0.067 N2 - 0.697 689 0C Engine 351 kW output 34.1% efficiency 486 0C Exhaust
Cooling water
Cooler
50 0C
0.630 kg/s
Compressor
Turbine
Figure C-1 Figure C-1. Flow diagram for landfill gas lean burn QSK19 engine
TheengineheatbalanceisshowedinthetableandintheSankeydiagrambelow.
Table C-2. Heat input* Power output Heat losses Exhaust Heat balance (modeling) kW 1030 351 312 366 % 100 34 30 36
*Percentage of heat input without TCR

79
Figure C-2. Sankey diagram for landfill gas lean burn QSK19 engine
Modeling of Landfill Gas Engine QSK19G with TCR

Forreformerlocatedaftertheturbine,themaximumavailablefuelreformingtemperaturehas beenchosenascalculatedexhaustgastemperatureaftertheturbineminusavalueof T for heatexchangerofabout500C. Thereformedfuelisassumedtobecooledinheatexchangers(coolers)bycoldfuelflowin ordertoreduceenergyconsumptionbyturbocharger. Heatlossesinheatexchangersareassumedtobe5%ofheatloads. Sincereformedfuelaffectspeakincylindertemperature,excessairwasadjustedtoobtainthe same(calculated)peaktemperatureastheenginewithoutTCR.
Table C-3. Parameters of engine and TCR 62.5% 430 0C (806 0F) Excess air: Temperature of Reforming:
FuelReformerAftertheTurbine
Thiscasehasbeenrunforreformerlocatedaftertheturbineandreformingtemperatureof 4300C(approximately500Clessthanthetemperatureaftertheturbine).Increasedexcessair reducesincylinderpeaktemperaturetovalueobtainedforbaselineengine.Predicted parametersofenginewithTCRareshowedinTableC4.
80
Table C-4. Parameters
Predicted parameters of engine with TCR Values 430 0C (806 0F) 62.5% 351 1008 34.8 0.559 0.634 0.075 1703 12,640 Increase/decrease relative to baseline, % (+8.7%)
Temperature of Reforming: Excess air: Power Output, kW: Heat Input, kW: Mechanical efficiency, %: Intake Air Flow, kg/s: Exhaust Gas Flow, kg/s: Fuel Consumption, kg/s: Peak Temperature, 0C Peak Pressure, kPa
(+2.1%)
(-2.6%)
Calculatedmechanicalefficiencyincreaseandfuelconsumptiondecreasecorrespondtolower heatingvaluerelativeincreaseofabout2.1%atassumedreformingtemperature,430C(see FigureC3). TheflowdiagramforthecaseisshowninFigureC3.

Flow Diagram for Landfill Gas Lean Burn QSK19 Engine with TCR (Reformer is located after the turbine)
73 0C Reformed Fuel composition (mole fractions): CH4- 0.442 CO2- 0.422 H2O- 0.021 CO - 0.078 H2 - 0.037 Air 0.559 kg/s Landfill Gas Exhaust composition (mole fractions): CO2 - 0.115 H2O - 0.115 O2 - 0.071 N2 - 0.699
Reformed Fuel Cooler
Cooling circuit 380 0C

Intercooler
430 0C 50 0C Engine 351 kW output 34.8% efficiency 0.075 kg/s 688 0C 479 0C 440 0C Exhaust
0.634 kg/s
Compressor
Turbine
Landfill Gas composition (mole fractions): CH4- 0.5 CO2- 0.5
Figure C-3. Flow diagram for landfill gas lean burn QSK19 engine with TCR
81
ParametersatcharacteristicpointsinsystemflowdiagramareshowedinTableC5below.
Table C-5. Predicted parameters at characteristic points in system flow diagram Reformed Fuel after Reformer 430 0.075 0.442* 0.422 0.021 0.078 0 0 0.037 Reformed Fuel after Cooler 73 Air/Fuel mixture 28 0.634 0.054 0.051 0.002 0.009 0.185 0.695 0.004 0 0.115 0.115 0 0.071 0.699 0 Before Engine 50 Exhaust after Engine 688 Exhaust after Turbine 479 Exhaust after Reformer 440
Temperature, 0C Mass flow rate, kg/s Mole Fractions: CH4 CO2 H2O CO O2 N2 H2
*Methane conversion is 11.4%

TheengineheatbalanceisshowedinTableC6.
Table C-6. Heat balance of engine with TCR (HYSYS modeling) kW 1008 351 328 329 28 % 100 35 33 32 2.7*
Heat input Power output Heat losses Exhaust Reversed Heat to Engine from Exhaust
82
Appendix D: Photographs of Reformed Fuel Delivery System Components for HCCI Research Engine Tests
Figure D-1.
Fuel compressor with filter
Figure D-2. Cooler/condenser (black vertical tube)

83
Figure D-3. Reformed fuel line (yellow) connection to the engine

Figure D-4. valves
Natural gas line with flow controller, pressure gauge, and
84
(a)
(b)
Figure D-5. Comparison of flames generated by supplemental burner in Figure 3-1 (main report) (a) combusting of neat natural gas and (b) combusting reformed fuel from TCR test rig
Figure D-6. Absorber tube (in the foreground) for sulfur removal from natural gas supplied to TCR test rig
85

Thermochemical Fuel Reforming For Ice

Încărcat de

Informații document

Descriere originală:

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Thermochemical Fuel Reforming For Ice

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Arnold Schwarzenegger Governor

THERMOCHEMICAL FUEL REFORMING FOR RECIPROCATING INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINES

California Energy Commission

Prepared By: Gas Technology Institute

January 2011 CEC-500-2009-011

PIER FINAL PROJECT REPORT

Prepared For: Public Interest Energy Research (PIER) Program

California Energy Commission

Kenneth Koyama Office Manager Energy Generation And Research Office

BuildingsEndUseEnergyEfficiency EnergyInnovationsSmallGrants EnergyRelatedEnvironmentalResearch EnvironmentallyPreferredAdvancedGeneration EnergySystemsIntegration Industrial/Agricultural/WaterEndUseEnergyEfficiency RenewableEnergyTechnologies Transportation

2.1.7. Summaryof1kWeLaboratoryScaleTCFRTests..........................................................25 2.2. TCFRRICECostEstimation.................................................................................................30 .

Theresearchteamdevelopedaconceptualdesignofatubularrecuperativereformerfor theCumminsQSK19Greciprocatinginternalcombustionengine.Thisdesignprovides anindicationoftheoveralldimensionsoftherecuperativereformerforthe331kilowatt engine.

ThisprojectaddressesthePublicInterestEnergyResearchProgramsgoalsofenhancing energyefficiency,diversifyingelectricitysuppliesbyinvestinginrenewableandother cleanenergytechnologies,strengtheningCaliforniasenergyinfrastructuretoprovide forreliability,andcontinuingCaliforniasenvironmentalstewardship.

1.0 Introduction and Background

Other 7% Net Power 35%

Figure 1. Energy balance of lean-burn gas engine at typical operating conditions

1.1.1. Combined Cooling, Heating, and Power (CCHP)1

Conceptual schematic flow diagram of a CCHP system

Source: Gas Technology Institute

Key factors for CCHP financial attractiveness:

Compact,simple,lowcostturbomachinery. Highspeedelectricalgeneratorswhichareextremelyefficient(98%)andsmallenough tocoupledirectlytotheshaftofturbomachinery. Softwarecontrolledpowerelectronicstomanageelectricalpowerquality(power conditioners).

Potential net turbocompressor power

2.DieselEngineWasteHeatRecoveryUtilizingElectricTurboCompoundTechnology,Ulrich HopmannCaterpillarInc.,2002DieselEngineEmissionReductionConference.August2529,2002,San Diego,California. 3.http://www.bowmanpower.co.uk/Turbocompounding.html11/21/08

1.1.3. Rankine Bottoming Cycles

1.1.4. Thermochemical Recuperation5(TCR)

m C n H m + H 2 O nCO + n + H 2 (H o > 0) 298 2

(1) (2) (3)

CH 4 + H 2 O CO + 3 H 2 (H o > 206.2 kJ/kmol) 298

CO + H 2 O CO 2 + H 2 H o > - 41.2 kJ/kmol 298

5.ThermochemicalRecuperationSystems(TCRS)forIncreasedEfficiencyandReducedEmissionsfrom StationaryReciprocatingICEngines.NaturalGasTechnologiesIIIConferenceProceedings.GTIT05153. Orlando,FL.February2005.

Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engine (RICE) Engine Cooling Heat Recovery

Thermochemical Exhaust Recuperative Gas Reformer

Heat Recovery Steam Generator

Figure 5. Thermochemical recuperation system schematic

1.2.2. Reformate-Fueled Internal Combustion Engine Performance

process.Themaximumtemperatureofsimulatedreformedfuelneededtosatisfythe specificationsfortheengine.Testingwasconductedtomeasuretheeffectoftheblendedfuel compositiononengineperformanceandemissions.

2.0 Summary of Previous GTI Thermochemical Fuel Reforming Investigations

Hydrogen-Enriched Fuel from Thermochemical Fuel Reforming

2.1.1. Hydrogen (H2) Enriched Combustion

Disadvantages Increases peak flame temperature Increases fuel system cost

7.TunestlP.,ChristensenM.,EinewallP.,AndersonT.,andJohanssonB.,HydrogenAdditionfor ImprovedLeanBurnCapabilityofSlowandFastBurningNaturalGasCombustionChambers,SAE 2002012686,2002.

2.1.2. TCFR System for Supplying Hydrogen to Fuel Blend10

Schematic of a simplified TCFR

Source: Gas Technology Institute

2.1.3. Engine Analysis

Spark Timing Turbocharger No. of Turbocharger Waste gate

18~20 bTDC Holset 2 None

QSK60G GAS ENGINE

Control Valve ES EST

Source: Gas Technology Institute

Theenginesystemhastwobanks,theleftbank(LB)andrightbank(RB),andhasa turbochargerinstalledineachbank.Intheanalyses,theTCRreformerislocatedjust downstreamoftheturbochargers.Theseturbochargershavenowastegate.Aheatrecovery steamgeneratorislocateddownstreamoftheTCRreformer.Thereformedfuelishotandhasa

largequantityofwatervapor.Twoheatexchangersinseriesareusedtoreducethereformed fueltemperature;watervaporiscondensedasthereformedfueliscooled.Thereformedfuel temperatureiscontrolledtomaintainthemaximumenginemanifoldtemperaturebelow55C. Justenoughsteamisgeneratedtosupplythereformer.

2.1.4. Performance Goals/Criteria for Design of TCRS

Ambienttemperature:upto32C Altitude:upto1000meters Fuel:Pipelinequalitynaturalgas FuelminimumMN:75 Inletrestriction:upto50mbar Exhaustrestriction:upto100mbar Relativehumidity:upto100% Jacketwaterinlettemperature:95C

2.1.5. Engine Simulation of TCR Reformed Fuel

Natural Gas Exhaust Cooling Water Hot Water

Cool Exhaust Condenser

Source: Gas Technology Institute

Normalized System Efficiency

50% load @1800 rpm Reformed Fuel Natural Gas

Excess Air Ratio,

Excess Air Ratio,