Finite Element Modeling of Different Types of Hydrogen Pressure Vessels Under Extreme Conditions for Space Applications

Abstract

Fuel cells, propulsion systems, and reaction control systems (RCSs) are just a few of the space applications that depend on pressure vessels (PVs) to safely hold high-pressure fluids while enduring extreme environmental conditions both during launch and in orbit. Under these challenging circumstances, PVs must be lightweight while retaining structural integrity in order to increase the efficiency and lower the launch costs. PVs have significant challenges in space conditions, such as extreme vibrations during launch, the complete vacuum of space, and sudden temperature changes based on their location within the satellite and orbit types. Determining the operational temperature limits and endurance of PVs in space applications requires assessing the combined effects of these factors. As the main propellant for satellites and rockets, hydrogen has great promise for use in future space missions. This study aimed to assess the structural integrity and determine the thermal operating limits of different types of hydrogen pressure vessels using finite element analysis (FEA) with Ansys 2019 R3 Workbench. The impact of extreme space conditions on the performances of various kinds of hydrogen pressure vessels was analyzed numerically in this work. This study determined the safe operating temperature ranges for Type 4, Type 3, and Type 1 PVs at an operating hydrogen storage pressure of 35 MPa in an absolute vacuum. Additionally, the dynamic performance was assessed through modal and random vibration analyses. Various aspects of Ansys Workbench were explored, including the influence of the mesh element size, composite modeling methods, and their combined impact on the result accuracy. In terms of the survival temperature limits, the Type 4 PVs, which consisted of a Nylon 6 liner and a carbon fiber-reinforced epoxy (CFRE) prepreg composite shell, offered the optimal balance between the weight (56.2 kg) and a relatively narrow operating temperature range of 10–100 °C. The Type 3 PVs, which featured an Aluminum 6061-T6 liner, provided a broader operational temperature range of 0–145 °C but at a higher weight of 63.7 kg. Meanwhile, the Type 1 PVs demonstrated a superior cryogenic performance, with an operating range of −55–54 °C, though they were nearly twice as heavy as the Type 4 PVs, with a weight of 106 kg. The absolute vacuum environment had a negligible effect on the mechanical performance of all the PVs. Additionally, all the analyzed PV types maintained structural integrity and safety under launch-induced vibration loads. This study provided critical insights for selecting the most suitable pressure vessel type for space applications by considering operational temperature constraints and weight limitations, thereby ensuring an optimal mechanical–thermal performance and structural efficiency.