Airbus displaying new Multifunctional Fuel Cell system for onboard power
13 September 2012
Airbus is displaying a Multifunctional Fuel Cell (MFFC) system concept for onboard power at the ILA Berlin Air Show. Through a partnership with the DLR German Aerospace Centre and Parker Aerospace, this joint evaluation is studying the MFFC’s use instead of today’s gas turbine-based auxiliary power units.
|
|
| LNG tank, heat exchangers and fans in the tail cone. Click to enlarge. |
In the MFFC system concept, the fuel cell would—for the first time—act as an independent power source capable of supplying electrical power throughout the aircraft, including the cabin. Positioning of the fuel cell is planned in the cargo hold, while the system’s liquid hydrogen tank, heat exchangers and fans are to be located in the tail cone section.
Providing approximately 100 kW of power, the MFFC system offers the potential for significantly higher output than a fuel cell emergency power system flight tested on an A320 during a 2008 campaign involving Airbus, the DLR and Michelin. This earlier fuel cell was installed on a cargo pallet and produced some 25 kW of power.
Flight testing of the MFFC on an A320 could occur in the middle of this decade. For its concept appearance at the ILA Berlin Air Show, the Multifunctional Fuel Cell mock-up is being exhibited on the booth of Germany’s Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology.
Ideally, you want to run the plane on the ground using electricity. You will need a combination of batteries, a fuel cell and maybe some supercaps.
You should have enough power to taxi the plane from the terminal to the runway. You should have the capability to absorb as much energy as possible from the plane landing, so you can reuse it for the taxiing and maybe the start of the take off run.
You should be able to do without taking power from the turbofans to generate electricity.
The question is - how much will all this add to the cost and weight of an airliner.
Posted by: mahonj | 13 September 2012 at 02:30 AM
Mahonj: my guess is that regenerative braking wouldn't be worth the weight. And weight - that is stack power density - is perhaps the issue with current generation fuel cells compared to existing turbine APU.
Which fuel? The text mentions liquid hydrogen whilst the figure mentions LNG. Mentions generating power; wonder if this incorporates the air conditioning loads. Boeing with their no-bleed system of the Dreamliner seem better placed to make use of fuel cell APU.
Posted by: DavidJ | 13 September 2012 at 07:38 AM
FC power density is going up and is/will be better than ICE/turbines. The weight of the Hydrogen tank may be a challenge but an external (flying) aerodynamic tank could represent less real added weight.
Eventually, as more power from the large turbines would be dedicated to the plane, they could be reduced in size and consume less fuel?
Interesting.
Posted by: HarveyD | 13 September 2012 at 11:41 AM
If I recall correctly, the Dreamliner A/C packs are about 1/4 megawatt apiece, so a 100 kW APU would fall well short of their power requirements.
Posted by: Engineer-Poet | 13 September 2012 at 08:12 PM
The APU is used for electric power and conditioned air on the ground. And soon probably for taxi power also.
Also for emergency in the air.
Posted by: ToppaTom | 15 September 2012 at 03:42 PM