Skip to main content Skip to navigation
Washington State University Innovation for Sustainable Energy

Haskel Gas Booster Pressure Test

Of the two gas boosters (compressors) we have, we have successfully pressure tested one of them.  The Haskel AGD-15 has been tested for stall pressure using nitrogen.  This gas booster is a double acting, single state mechanism used to compress a gas to high pressure with only compressed air as a power source.

Our building’s compressed air was used to drive the unit at 90psi.  The nitrogen inlet pressure was at 70psi.  The nitrogen outlet was a high-pressure pipe connected to a vent valve and a pressure gauge.  To test for stall pressure, we left the outlet valve closed.  After only a few seconds, we were able to achieve 1400psi at the gauge (expected stall pressure was 1420psi).  This implies that the flow rate will be similar to expected when not pumping to stall.    However, the output pressure fluctuated significantly: the device would pump once and get to stall pressure.  Then it would pause and the pressure would drop to about 1100psi.  At this point it would pump again up to 1400psi.  This was in part due to the building’s air supply having inadequate flow.  Whenever the gas booster pumped, the building air pressure would drop down to 60 or 70 psi and struggle to rise again.

Further testing will require a larger air compressor unit.  Now, we need to find whatever is leaking in our gas booster (probably the one-way valves which are quite old).  We will also prepare to test our Haskel AG-152 model which has a stall pressure of 13,500psi.

 

AGD-15
Haskel AGD-15 booster ready for testing

Update: August 24, 2016

Using soapy water, we have leak-tested the AGD-15’s components while running nitrogen gas.  Several obvious leaks were fixed, allowing the outlet pressure to rise even further.  We managed to get to 1500psi using 90psi air, slightly higher than the expected stall pressure (1420psi).  This may be due to the fluctuating air pressure of the supply which may have risen past 90psi.  The outlet pressure remained stable when the compressor stalled, which is a great improvement to the previous experiment where gas was clearly leaking.

We also installed an air tank as a buffer between the building’s compressed air lines and the gas booster.  This was intended to mediate the problems caused by the fluctuating air supply.  But the pressure could only rise to about 1000psi this time.  This is either due to higher resistance in the air-flow or because our compressor was started off cold and may require time to “warm up” before operating at full potential.  We will probably not use this tank for the experiment.

The AGD-15 compressor system is now fully ready to be installed for the nitrogen liquefaction testing.  The other compressor will be tested for stall pressure, afterwards.

 

Hydrogen Compression: The Challenge

In March of 2013, it was stated by Mr. Bill Elrick of the California Fuel Cell Partnership that one of the hindrances to deployment of fuel cell electric vehicles (FCEVs) is the lack of standardization and codes.1 The U.S. Department of Energy states, “It is projected that the current state of hydrogen compressor technology will not be able to meet future infrastructure demands in a cost-effective manner.”2. Currently, the best that hydrogen compressor technology can give us is compression of hydrogen gas using methods that result in considerable wear to hydrogen compressors. Research is now being conducted to solve this problem. A team of researchers at FuelCell Energy was recognized in 2009 for the development of a single-stage electrochemical hydrogen compressor (EHC) design that is able to compress hydrogen up to 6,000 psi. The main advantage of their design is the lack of moving parts.2 Additionally, research has been done by a team of researchers in China in order to attempt to discover the root cause of reciprocating piston hydrogen compressor failure. The paper submitted by this team describes experimental validation of two hypotheses: (1) That piston sealing ring failure is due to non-uniform pressure distribution, and (2) that failure of pistons is due to severe impact. Based on these discoveries, parameters were set forth for the design of better reciprocating hydrogen compressors.3 Likewise, research has been done to try to discover the cause of failure for diaphragm compressors.4

So hydrogen compressor design is still in its early stages. New designs are being invented and older designs are being updated for use with hydrogen. In terms of reliability, our most promising design is the scroll compressor. It has the fewest moving parts and is the technology that is the farthest along in development. In terms of getting the desired pressure, the reciprocating piston design is best. This method of compression has been utilized many times and perfected. The main flaw, though, is reliability. So our challenge is to find a compressor that is both reliable and functional for our needs.

Related codes and standards:

(1) Ahmed and E. Sutherland. 2013 Hydrogen Compression, Storage, and Dispensing Cost Workshop Final Report. USDOE. http://www1.eere.energy.gov/hydrogenandfuelcells/pdfs/2013_csd_workshop_report.pdf
(2) “Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) Award Success Story.” http://www.fuelcellenergy.com/assets/Electrochemical-Hydrogen-Compressor-EHC.pdf
(3) Yu, Wang. “Research on sealing performance and self-acting valve reliability in high-pressure oil-free hydrogen compressors for hydrogen refueling stations.” International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, Vol. 35, Issue 15, August 2010, pages 8063-8070.
(4) Rohatgi, Aashish. “Investigation of H2 Diaphragm Compressors to Enable Low-Cost Long-Life Operation.” DOE Hydrogen and Fuel Cells Program. http://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/pdfs/progress14/iii_10_rohatgi_2014.pdf