Abstract

A successful transition to global clean energy hinges on meeting the world’s growing demand for power, while at the same time reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Achieving this will require significant growth in electricity generation from clean and carbon-free energy sources. Several energy providers (Acar and Dincer, 2019, “Review and Evaluation of Hydrogen Production Options for Better Environment,” J. Cleaner Prod., 218, pp. 835–849 and Nagashima, M., 2024, “Japan’s Hydrogen Strategy and Its Economic and Geopolitical Implications,” Afficher la page d’accueil du site) have already begun the transition from traditional carbon-based fuels to cleaner alternatives, such as hydrogen (H2) and hydrogen-enriched natural gas (HENG). However, there are still many technical questions/challenges that must be addressed when applying these fuels in gas turbines. The application of H2 or H2/natural gas (NG) blends to advanced-class gas turbines, which have higher operating pressures and temperatures, has raised concerns about the potential for leakages or fuel sequencing operations where flammable mixtures of fuel and air could auto-ignite. Public information on the auto-ignition of H2 in the air at atmospheric pressure shows an auto-ignition temperature (AIT) between 520 and 585 °C (U.S. Department of Energy, 2024, “U.S. Department of Energy Hydrogen Program Plan,” U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, DC; Georgia Power, 2022, “Georgia Power, Mitsubishi Power, EPRI Complete World’s Largest Hydrogen Fuel Blending at Plant McDonough-Atkinson,” Georgia Power, Atlanta, GA; and gepower-v2, 2024, “New York Power Authority: GE Vernova,” gepower-v2, Cambridge, MA). Such data show AIT of H2 is ∼100 °C lower than that of methane (CH4) which has a minimum AIT of around 600 °C (Huth, M., and Heilos, A., 2013, “Fuel Flexibility in Gas Turbine Systems: Impact on Burner Design and Performance,” Modern Gas Turbine Systems, Sawston, UK, pp. 635–684). Studies also show that as pressure increases, methane’s AIT decreases significantly to around 390 °C (Loving, C., Mastantuono, G., Terracciano, A. C., Vasu, S. S., Pigon, T., Hernandez, A., and Cloyd, S., 2023, “Auto-Ignition Test Results of Hydrogen and Natural Gas Fuels at Atmospheric and Elevated Pressures for Gas Turbine Safety,” ASME Paper No. GT2023-102674). However, there was insufficient information in the published literature to characterize the influence of pressure on the AIT of H2 and HENG fuels. At atmospheric conditions, H2 has a wider flammability range of equivalence ratios that ignition can occur compared to methane. H2’s flammability ranges from 4% to 75% molar (volume) fuel concentration, which is an equivalence ratio range of 0.137–2.57. Methane’s flammability limit ranges from 5% to 15% molar (volume) or an equivalence ratio between 0.53 and 1.58 (National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 1997, Safety Standard for Hydrogen and Hydrogen Systems: Guidelines for Hydrogen System Design, Materials Selection, Operations, Storage, and Transportation, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Office of Safety and Mission Assurance; National Technical Information Service, Distributor, Washington, DC, Springfield, VA). Previous research has also been done to determine the effect of longer hydrocarbons present in natural gas mixtures. The presence of ethane (C2H6) and propane (C3H8) has been shown to reduce the AIT of natural gas, especially at elevated pressures (The Association, 1994, NFPA 49: Hazardous Chemicals Data, The Association, Quincy, MA). These longer hydrocarbons also tend to promote ignition in richer conditions, whereas methane tends to ignite easier in slightly lean conditions (National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 1997, Safety Standard for Hydrogen and Hydrogen Systems: Guidelines for Hydrogen System Design, Materials Selection, Operations, Storage, and Transportation, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Office of Safety and Mission Assurance; National Technical Information Service, Distributor, Washington, DC, Springfield, VA). Numerous variables besides the pressure, fuel, and equivalence ratio can affect the AIT including chamber volume size, chamber materials, presence of diluents, and other factors (Standards Australia International, 2000, Electrical Apparatus for Explosive Gas Atmospheres. Part 20, Data for Flammable Gases and Vapours, Relating to the Use of Electrical Apparatus, Standards Australia International; Standards New Zealand, Strathfield, NSW, Wellington, NZ). This study describes the test methodology used to evaluate conditions where auto-ignition occurs for various fuel–air mixtures operating at different pressures (1–30 atm) and temperatures. Testing was completed with 100% H2 and multiple H2/NG blends at various equivalence ratios (ER) between 0.2 and 2.5. Testing was similarly performed for 100% NG to validate the test and data collection methods cited in prior published literature. Results indicate that, at atmospheric pressures, an increase in H2 concentration results in a reduced AIT. However, at 30 atm, the increased presence of H2 increased the AIT. At elevated pressures above 10 atm, increased equivalence ratio resulted in reduced AIT for all mixtures with NG having the greatest sensitivity to equivalence ratio. Variations of auto-ignition delay times (AIDT) were also observed during the testing and are compared to modeling predictions, providing insight into auto-ignition characteristics.

References

1.
Acar
,
C.
, and
Dincer
,
I.
,
2019
, “
Review and Evaluation of Hydrogen Production Options for Better Environment
,”
J. Cleaner Prod.
,
218
, pp.
835
849
.10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.02.046
2.
Nagashima
,
M.
,
2024
, “
Japan's Hydrogen Strategy and Its Economic and Geopolitical Implications
,” Afficher la page d'accueil du site, Paris, France, accessed Sept. 12, 2024, https://www.ifri.org/en/studies/japans-hydrogen-strategy-and-its-economic-and-geopolitical-implications#:~:text=Japan's%20Strategy%20rests%20on%20the,sectors%20while%20strengthening%20energy%20security.
3.
U.S. Department of Energy
,
2024
, “
U.S. Department of Energy Hydrogen Program Plan
,” U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, DC, accessed Sept. 12, 2024, https://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/docs/hydrogenprogramlibraries/pdfs/hydrogen-program-plan-2020.pdf?Status=Master
4.
Georgia Power
,
2022
, “
Georgia Power, Mitsubishi Power, EPRI Complete World's Largest Hydrogen Fuel Blending at Plant McDonough-Atkinson
,” Georgia Power, Atlanta, GA, accessed June 10, 2022, https://www.georgiapower.com/company/news-hub/company-news/georgia-power-mitsubishi-power-epri-complete-worlds-largest-hydrogen-fuel-blending-at-plant-mcdonough-atkinson.html
5.
gepower-v2
,
2024
, “
New York Power Authority: GE Vernova
,” gepower-v2, Cambridge, MA, accessed Sept. 12, 2024, https://www.gevernova.com/gas-power/resources/case-studies/nypa-green-hydrogen-demonstration-project
6.
Huth
,
M.
, and
Heilos
,
A.
,
2013
, “
Fuel Flexibility in Gas Turbine Systems: Impact on Burner Design and Performance
,”
Modern Gas Turbine Systems
, Sawston, UK, pp.
635
–6
84
.10.1533/9780857096067.3.635
7.
Loving
,
C.
,
Mastantuono
,
G.
,
Terracciano
,
A. C.
,
Vasu
,
S. S.
,
Pigon
,
T.
,
Hernandez
,
A.
, and
Cloyd
,
S.
,
2023
, “
Auto-Ignition Test Results of Hydrogen and Natural Gas Fuels at Atmospheric and Elevated Pressures for Gas Turbine Safety
,”
ASME
Paper No. GT2023-102674.10.1115/GT2023-102674
8.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
,
1997
,
Safety Standard for Hydrogen and Hydrogen Systems: Guidelines for Hydrogen System Design, Materials Selection, Operations, Storage, and Transportation
,
National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Office of Safety and Mission Assurance; National Technical Information Service, Distributor
,
Washington, DC, Springfield, VA
.
9.
The Association
,
1994
,
NFPA 49: Hazardous Chemicals Data
,
The Association
,
Quincy, MA
.
10.
Standards Australia International
,
2000
,
Electrical Apparatus for Explosive Gas Atmospheres. Part 20, Data for Flammable Gases and Vapours, Relating to the Use of Electrical Apparatus
,
Standards Australia International; Standards New Zealand
,
Strathfield, NSW, Wellington, NZ
.
11.
Robinson
,
C.
, and
Smith
,
D. B.
,
1984
, “
The Auto-Ignition Temperature of Methane
,”
J. Hazard. Mater.
,
8
(
3
), pp.
199
203
.10.1016/0304-3894(84)85001-3
12.
Glassman
,
I.
,
1996
,
Combustion
, 3rd ed.,
Academic Press
,
San Diego, CA
.
13.
Beerer
,
D. J.
, and
McDonell
,
V. G.
,
2011
, “
An Experimental and Kinetic Study of Alkane Autoignition at High Pressures and Intermediate Temperatures
,”
Proc. Combust. Inst.
,
33
(
1
), pp.
301
307
.10.1016/j.proci.2010.05.015
14.
Martinez
,
S.
,
Baigmohammadi
,
M.
,
Patel
,
V.
,
Panigrahy
,
S.
,
Sahu
,
A. B.
,
Nagaraja
,
S.
,
Ramalingam
,
A.
,
Heufer
,
K. A.
,
Pekalski
,
A.
, and
Curran
,
H. J.
,
2021
, “
A Comprehensive Experimental and Modeling Study of the Ignition Delay Time Characteristics of Ternary and Quaternary Blends of Methane, Ethane, Ethylene, and Propane Over a Wide Range of Temperature, Pressure, Equivalence Ratio, and Dilution
,”
Combust. Flame
,
234
, p.
111626
.10.1016/j.combustflame.2021.111626
15.
Baigmohammadi
,
M.
,
Patel
,
V.
,
Nagaraja
,
S.
,
Ramalingam
,
A.
,
Martinez
,
S.
,
Panigrahy
,
S.
,
Mohamed
,
A. A. E.-S.
, et al.,
2020
, “
Comprehensive Experimental and Simulation Study of the Ignition Delay Time Characteristics of Binary Blended Methane, Ethane, and Ethylene Over a Wide Range of Temperature, Pressure, Equivalence Ratio, and Dilution
,”
Energy Fuels
,
34
(
7
), pp.
8808
8823
.10.1021/acs.energyfuels.0c00960
16.
Smyth
,
K. C.
, and
Bryner
,
N. P.
,
1997
, “
Short-Duration Autoignition Temperature Measurements for Hydrocarbon Fuels
,”
Combust. Sci. Technol.
,
126
(
1–6
), pp.
225
253
.10.1080/00102209708935675
17.
Steinle
,
J. U.
, and
Franck
,
E. U.
,
1995
, “
High Pressure Combustion – Ignition Temperatures to 1000 Bar
,”
Ber. Bunsenges. Phys. Chem.
,
99
(
1
), pp.
66
73
.10.1002/bbpc.19950990110
18.
Healy
,
D.
,
Kalitan
,
D. M.
,
Aul
,
C. J.
,
Petersen
,
E. L.
,
Bourque
,
G.
, and
Curran
,
H. J.
,
2010
, “
Oxidation of C1−C5 Alkane Quintenary Natural Gas Mixtures at High Pressures
,”
Energy Fuels
,
24
(
3
), pp.
1521
1528
.10.1021/ef9011005
You do not currently have access to this content.