February 19, 2019

TKMS Type 212CD submarine propulsion issues, eg. FC AIP


Anonymous has kindly supplied the following details and Table. The following is necessarally speculative about the future TKMS-Norwegian Type 212CD propulsion characteristics as the 212CD may not be launched until around 2023. One of the innovative technologies for 212CD is adoption of metal hydride for hydrogen source. This is designed to achieve safer operation of the fuel cell (FC) AIP (see Table 1). A hydrogen cylinder is used in the current conventional FC AIP on the TKMS Type 214 and 212A.

But, in the new generation FC AIP, waste heat from the FC is effectively used to generate hydrogen. This should be more discrete.

Part of a prototype TKMS/tkMS and SENER methanol reforming FC AIP process. (Courtesy slide 26 of this SENER Presentation.)
---

TKMS and Spain’s SENER (private engineering and technology group) are developing methanol reforming FC which is safer than hydrogen or metal hydride FC AIP (for Type 214, 212A or future 212CD).

But emissions from methanol reformer FC of carbon dioxide against the ocean’s water pressure limits a submarine’s diving depth to around 200m. In contrast hydrogen or metal hydride FC (used on Type 214, 212A and maybe future 212CD) produces water which does not limit diving depth.


(Above and below) Type 212A submarine cutaway indicating where the LOx tanks and hydrogen cylinders are. They are outside the pressure hull for greater safety. (These cutaways all over web.)


The diesel section of a Type 212A uses an outer light hull (diameter 6.8m) and a pressure hull (ca.5.6m?). The two LOx cylinders are arranged above the pressure hull. The LOx cylinder are shock resistant. These cylinder also and have an insulated “adiabatic structure” meaning they do not transfer heat to surroundings. This is totally different than if the LOx cylinders were within the pressure hull (as in a current 214)  as they may effect the temperature within the hull.

The Type 212A is equipped with 9 feul cells (8 x 34kW, and 1 x 34kW (auxiliary FC)). These are superior to the 2 x 120kW on a Type 214.

The hull diameter (8.4m) of a Type 212CD will be significantly larger than a 214’s (6.3m) which has single hull structure. The 214 has 2 x MTU396 diesels.

In contrast 3 x MTU (396 or 4000?) diesels could be installed in a future Type 212CD especially if it uses Lithium-ion Batteries (LIBs) to achieve a higher charge rate [2]. Or 2 x MTUs could be installed on a 212CD (especially those that retain existing Lead-acid Batteries (LABs). A relatively low charge rate using 1 or 2 loud diesels running a longer time (to charge LABs) may be less discrete than 2 or 3 diesels running a shorter time to charge LIBs quickly [6].

So, a double hull will presumably be adopted for the diesel section of the future Type 212CD, as with the current Type 212A. This suggests hydride cylinders will be installed between the 212CD’s light and pressure hulls.

Table 1.  Estimated Location of Cylinders and Submarine

Cylinder
Location
In Diesel section
Submarine type
Inside pressure hull [1]
Metal hydride cylinder [3]
Yes
No
No
214 218SG,
No
Yes
Yes
212CD?
LOx cylinder
Yes [4]
No
No
214
No
Yes [5]
Yes
212A, 212CD?

[1] Simple structure consists of single pressure hull.

[2] Complex structure consists of ligh and pressure hulls.

[3] Electrochemical reaction between oxygen and hydrogen generates electricity and heat in FC. Heat is transferred to metal hydride to generate hydrogen for FC. Metal hydride cylinder has adiabatic stucture.

[4] Cryogenic cylinder is used for oxygen storage located inside of pressure hull.

[5] This cryogenic cylinder is totally different from an ordinary LOx cylinder and is shock resistant to explosions (eg. depth charges) near the submarine.

[6] Three 12PA V200 SMDS with similar dimension to MTUs would likely be installed in the enlarged SAAB-Damen A26 single hull submarine design for the Netherlands Walrus replacement competition. The enlarged A26 design has a smaller diameter (of 8m) than 212CD submarine.

COMMENTS

Pete comments:
-  Dutch Walrus replacement competition? An enlarged SAAB-Damen designed A26 (once called the
    612) might be offered. Naval Group might possibly offer some design sharing Scorpene and 
    Australian Shortfin-Barracuda characteristics.
-  Given the long trans-Atlantic distances a Walrus replacement would need to travel the Netherlands
    may not want any type of AIP – AIP being of diminishing utility with distance and instead LIBs, 
    more than LABs, may stretch fully submerged travel.
-  Western companies are interacting with China on methanol reformer fuel cell generator technology
    for cars and trucks. Such technology is dual-use, China’s vast industrial base may easily reverse
    engineer Western technology for submarine use.

MHalblaub kindly provided the following comments for the previous closely related Submarine Matters’ article:
“The Type 212A always had metal hydride storages for hydrogen.
Also I can't see a problem to use a methanol reformer and metal hydride storages together. I guess a reformer may outproduces most of the time the need of hydrogen so some kind of interim storage would be necessary.
The boat has its own hydrogen producing facility. So just methanol and oxygen is required for the fuel cells.”

Anonymous, Pete and MHalblaub.

6 comments:

  1. Hi Pete & Mhalblaub

    Thank you for correction. Your comment “The Type 212A always had metal hydride storages for hydrogen” is right. I used reliable two diagrams. In one diagram, cylinders under pressure hull of diesel section (214A) were discribed as hydrogen storage cylinders, and in another more reliable and newly diagram, metal hydride cylinders. Therefore, I misunderstood.

    “Table 1. Estimated Location of Cylinders and Submarine” should be corrected as follows: i) delete row of “Hdrogen cylinder”, ii) correct row of “Metal hydride cylinder” (Future 214? --- > 214)

    Regards

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hi Anonymous

    Thanks for your correction comment, above.

    I have changed Table 1. accordingly.

    Regards

    Pete

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hi Pete


    Though reported lost of TKMS [1] in the Warlus replacement bid of Netherlands which may be result in the chain reaction in Polish Orka bid is yet confirmed, business situation of TKMS is still misery [2]. Bad management of TKMS but also callous attitude of Germany against defense let to the current predicament of TKMS. In fact, Merkel administration did too much. Future of TKMS is unclear, but, its techonogy transfer to non-free countries and thier sympathizers should be prevented.

    SENER reported methanol reforming fuel cell system three years ago (19/JAN/2016), but, research progress after this report is not clear. Do they have enough budget for R&D?


    [1] http://www.defenseworld.net/news/24294/ThyssenKrupp__Navantia_Dropped_from_Netherlands_Submarine_Purchase_Bid#.XGt_0-j7TIV
    This news is not confirmed by Neitherlands government. Is it rumor ? But, there is no smoke without fire.

    [2] https://newsparticipation.com/saving-private-tkms/ (Saving private TKMS)
    “The German naval industry is in desperate conditions, and no spin-doctor can hide it anymore. The last program has marked a point of no-return for German shipyards, and the end is nearing. But perhaps, with the now inevitable demise of ThyssenKrupp’s naval division, an opportunity for a new rationalized market is coming to light. A European blessing in disguise.”

    [3] https://www.maritime-executive.com/article/new-system-means-methanol-suitable-for-submarines
    In the process’s toughest conditions, SENER achieves a maximum bubble size of 200 μm at a depth of 18m for warm waters. The CO2 dissolution unit is in the process of being patented in Europe.


    Regards

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hi Anonymous [at 20/2/19 6:18 PM ]

    Thanks for the information and links on the Netherlands possibly dropping Germany's TKMS and Spain's Navantia from the Walrus submarine replacement competition.

    As http://www.defenseworld.net/news/24294/ThyssenKrupp__Navantia_Dropped_from_Netherlands_Submarine_Purchase_Bid#.XG4OFaIzbX6 indicates The Netherlands "is expected to take a decision "next Friday" [22 February or 1 March 2019?] about a possible selection of Swedish-Dutch Saab-Damen or French Naval Group I will wait until the Netherlands has made a decision.

    If there is no decision by 1 March 2019 I will turn this 20/2/19 6:18 PM information into an article.

    Regards

    Pete

    ReplyDelete
  5. Hi Pete

    Four years ago, Der Spiegel revealed the serious problems of second batch of 214A [1,2]. In the case of 214 for South Korea, serious problems of 214 are reported.

    [1] http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/print/d-131355085.html
    [2] U35 and U36 are the second batch of 212A which equips with an optical mast and is slightly longer (57.2m) than the fist batch (56m, U31-34).

    Regards

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous,

      The problems were and are not related specifically to Type 212A. The problems are related to insuffcient personal to test the submarines right after receiving them and insufficient spare parts to run the fleet.

      Regards,
      MHalblaub

      Delete

You can comment :)