4.7 Article

Analytical and numerical approach to determine effective diffusion coefficients for composite pressure vessels

Journal

COMPOSITE STRUCTURES
Volume 291, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.compstruct.2022.115616

Keywords

Effective coefficients; Diffusion; Permeation; Composite laminate; Homogenisation; Bounds; Hydrogen storage vessel; Liner-less; Inter-fibre fracture

Funding

  1. University of Magdeburg, Germany
  2. German Aerospace Centre (DLR), Germany

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper investigates the assessment of leak tightness for pressurized hydrogen storage tanks, specifically for composite laminates. Three different homogenization methods are compared to obtain effective permeation coefficients. The Hashin-Shtrikman bounds method proves to be the most satisfactory. The effect of inter-fiber cracks is also examined to further evaluate leak tightness.
To enable the pressurised hydrogen storage, the leak tightness of the pressure tank has to be assessed. For linerless tanks made of composite material, this assessment has to be conducted for the inhomogeneous composite laminate. In this work, we derive and compare three different homogenisation methods to obtain the effective permeation coefficients for hydrogen permeation through composite laminates: the Wiener bounds, the HASHIN-Shtrikman bounds and a numerical finite element calculation of a representative volume element (RVE). A comparison of the methods shows that the Hashin-Shtrikman bounds give the most satisfactory results. As the leak-tightness of composite tanks is severely reduced by cracks, we further include the effect of inter-fibre cracks through a second homogenisation procedure. Through a combination of the upper and the lower Wiener bounds, it is possible to estimate the influence of the crack volume on the effective permeability. The results shows that matrix cracking should be avoided entirely to ensure the leak-tightness.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available