Upload
trinhhuong
View
269
Download
7
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1 < > MAN Diesel & Turbo
The ME-LGIP Engine fueled by LPG
Niels B. Clausen Senior Manager
EELEE/Engine and System Application Marine Two-Stroke, Engineering
2 < > MAN Diesel & Turbo
Towards Greener Future Portfolio of solutions
Dual Fuel
Technology
SCR
EGR
MGO
Wet Scrubber
SOx NOx
Countermeasures for
3 < > MAN Diesel & Turbo
2011 2016
ME-GI DEMO at DRC
Demonstration test at HHI Demonstration test at MES
2012 2013
Engine delivery for TOTE Maritime
Ethane development and operation at MES
ME-GI retrofit of Nakilat
Development of ME-LGI
2014
Engine delivery for TEEKAY LNG
2015
LPG testrig
First sea trial on Methanol
ME-GI PVU DRC
DSME FGSS
2017
ME-GI and ME-LGI Gas Technologies Development Milestones
4 < > MAN Diesel & Turbo
Fuel gas qualities
ME-GI and ME-LGI Gas Technologies Dual Fuel Combustion Concept
Fuel Methane Ethane Methanol LPG* Diesel Density at injection pressure (kg/m3) 194 440 814 562 860 Typical injection pressure (bar) 300 380 550 600 800 Lower calorific value (LCV) (MJ/kg) 50.0 47.5 19.9 46.3 42.7 Boiling temperature at 1 bar (°C) -162 -89 64 -42 180-360 Critical pressure (bar) 46 49 82 43 435 Kinematic viscosity at injection pressure (cSt) 0.12 0.17 0.67 0.29 2.5-3.0
Bulk modulus at injection pressure (mPa) 78.4 373 1,419 820 1,550
Sulphur content Negligible Negligible No Negligible Max. 2% *Values are based on pure propane
Engine type ME-GI ME-GIE ME-LGIM ME-LGIP Fuel type Methane Ethane Methanol LPG Dual fuel capability Yes Yes Yes Yes Pilot oil MDO/HFO MDO/HFO MDO/HFO MDO/HFO System supply pressure (bar) 300 380 10 50 Tier III SCR/EGR option available Yes Yes/No Yes Yes
Fuel technology platforms for alternative clean fuels
5 < > MAN Diesel & Turbo
Benefits of Diesel-type versus Otto-type combustion
ME-GI and ME-LGI Gas Technologies Dual Fuel Combustion Concept
Combustion concept Diesel cycle Otto cycle Power density Unchanged Power reduced Gas mode efficiency Increased Unchanged Diesel mode efficiency Unchanged Reduced Gas quality/requirements (LCV) Insensitive Sensitive Methane number dependent No Yes Pilot fuel oil (amount) MDO/HFO (3-5%) MDO (approx. 1%) High ambient temperature Insensitive Sensitive Combustion processes Diesel process Premixed Cylinder max. pressure variations Stable and low Unstable and high Knocking during load change None Possible Misfiring None Possible Methane slip 0.1% of SFOC 2-4% of SFOC GWP Reduced by 20% Increased Scavenge air receiver explosion risk No Yes Crankcase explosion risk No Yes Exhaust receiver explosion risk No Yes
6 < > MAN Diesel & Turbo
Prototype system volume: 60 m3
17 ton
New system volume: 8 m3
2 ton
The new ME-GI PVS reduces the size of the FGSS installation significantly
Simplification and design optimisation
ME-GI and ME-LGI Gas Technologies FGSS Simplification
7 < > MAN Diesel & Turbo
Tier III compliance for MAN B&W two-stroke Engines
EGR SCR SCR On-Engine High-pressure Low-pressure
Relevant information is found in the Emission Project guide and CEAS Engine Calculations
Tier III NOx Control Technologies
8 < > MAN Diesel & Turbo
Alternative Fuels Expected reduction of emissions for same engine setting
*Compared to Tier II engine on HFO and conventional fuel valve
NOx SOx PM EEDI (CO2)
Fuel cost
Fuel availability
CAPEX Incl. tanks
LNG* 20-30% 90-95% 90% 25% ++ ++ $$
Ethane* 90-95% 15% +++ - $$
LPG* 10-15% 90-95% 90% 12% ++ +++ $
Methanol* 30-40% 90-95% 90% 7% - ++ $
9 < > MAN Diesel & Turbo
Introduction to case study (DNV GL & MDT) June 2016
Compare alternatives for a specific ship 75 000 DWT LR1 tanker Focus on comparing fuels High and low fuel price scenario
10 < > MAN Diesel & Turbo
Application – trading route
Leg State Total distance
(nm)
Approach (h/leg)
Port (h/leg)
Houston – Rotterdam
Cargo (diesel)
5,052 10 36
Rotterdam – Ventspils
Ballast 961 10 36
Ventspils – Houston
Cargo (MGO)
5,670 10 36
Port (10%)
Approach (3%)
Transit (87%)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Power (MW)
MW Propulsion MW Auxiliary MW PTO
53% load including PTOSpeed: 12.5 knots
11 < > MAN Diesel & Turbo
LR1 example – investment cost distribution As of June 2016
37%
32%
15%
16%
Methanol - Total 3.1 mUSD
7%
39%
5%
49%
LNG - Total 9.6 mUSD
27%
37%
10%
26%
LPG - Total 4.7 mUSD
Engine upgrade
Auxiliary systems
Installation and yard engineering
Fuel tank
LPG represents a relatively low investment since LPG tanks are relatively cheap
12 < > MAN Diesel & Turbo
Fuel price scenarios
High price scenario based on mid 2014 prices
For LNG and LPG distribution costs are added
2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 20220
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Fuel
pric
e ($
/GJ
on L
HV
basi
s)
Time
HFO (380 cSt) HFO/LSFO: High price MGO/MDO MGO: High price Methanol Methanol: High price LNG LNG: High price LPG LPG: High price
13 < > MAN Diesel & Turbo
Fuel price scenarios
High price scenario based on mid 2014 prices
For LNG and LPG distribution costs are added
Low price scenario based on mid 2015 prices
Less price reduction for methanol and LNG
2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 20220
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Fuel
pric
e ($
/GJ
on L
HV
basi
s)
Time
HFO (380 cSt) HFO/LSFO: Low Price MDO/MGO MGO: Low Price Methanol Methanol: Low Price LPG LPG: Low Price LNG LNG: Low Price
14 < > MAN Diesel & Turbo
Study results
Low- and high price scenario LPG results in shortest pay-back time Largest annual cost saving with LNG Methanol: Requires ~18% discount on MGO to
be comparable to LNG Paper available: http://marine.man.eu/two-stroke/technical-papers
-2 0 2 4 6 82
4
6
8
10
12
Payb
ack
time
(yea
rs)
Price spread to LSFO ($/mmbtu)
High price scenario Payback time methanol Payback time LPG Payback time LNG
-10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
12 13 14 152
4
6
8
Payb
ack
time
(yea
rs)
Speed (knots)
LPG: Low price scenario LPG: High price scenario
2017 2018 2019 2020-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
2
Investments
Ann
ual c
ost d
iffer
ence
(mU
SD)
Time
High-price scenario LNG LPG Methanol ULSFO 0.1%
Globalsulfur cap:0.5%
15 < > MAN Diesel & Turbo
Simulation of injection profiles with traditional FBIV: Constant pressure and different temperatures results in delay of injection Different composition of LPG results in delay of injection Solved by independent control of cut-off shaft in FBIV-Hybrid
Injection delay Injection delay
ME-LGIP LPG injection profiles
16 < > MAN Diesel & Turbo
ME-LGIP LPG injection and control - Design
Valve control block: ELVA-valve (fuel pressurisation) ELGI-valve (injection timing) Hydraulic accumulator Hydraulic and sealing oil connections
LPG inlet
LPG return
Cylinder cover with LPG injection valve and gas block
17 < > MAN Diesel & Turbo
ME-LGIP LPG injection and control - Design
FBIV-Hybrid
Sleeve for FBIV-Hybrid
18 < > MAN Diesel & Turbo
Air supply 7 bar N2 Purging
Deck LPG cargo tank
Standard single-walled piping Double-walled piping, ventilated
LPG supply pressure 50 bar @45 +10/-20 °C.
Knockout Drum
Vent
Service tank LPG@18bar & amb.
temp. LPG LFSS
Low Flashpoint Fuel
Supply System
LPG FVT Fuel Valve Train
Liquid return
Vapour return
LS
HC
Vent
New purge/return system Constant recirculation
ME-GI and ME-LGI Gas Technologies ME-LGIP: LPG System layout - Simplified
19 < > MAN Diesel & Turbo
Air supply 7 bar N2 Purging
Deck LPG cargo tank
Standard single-walled piping Double-walled piping, ventilated
LPG supply pressure 50 bar @45 +10/-20 °C.
Knockout Drum
Vent
Service tank LPG@18bar & amb.
temp. LPG LFSS
Low Flashpoint Fuel
Supply System
LPG FVT Fuel Valve Train
Liquid return
Vapour return
LS
HC
Vent
New purge/return system Constant recirculation
ME-GI and ME-LGI Gas Technologies ME-LGIP: LPG System layout - Simplified
Deliver LPG at specified conditions Speed controlled high pressure pump In tank/below tank low pressure pump
Tank example
LFSS example
20 < > MAN Diesel & Turbo
Air supply 7 bar N2 Purging
Deck LPG cargo tank
Standard single-walled piping Double-walled piping, ventilated
LPG supply pressure 50 bar @45 +10/-20 °C.
Knockout Drum
Vent
Service tank LPG@18bar & amb.
temp. LPG LFSS
Low Flashpoint Fuel
Supply System
LPG FVT Fuel Valve Train
Liquid return
Vapour return
LS
HC
Vent
New purge/return system Constant recirculation
ME-GI and ME-LGI Gas Technologies ME-LGIP: LPG System layout - Simplified
Recover liquid during purging Recirculation ensure stable temperature Cubic design with maintenance access from one side
21 < > MAN Diesel & Turbo
Effort area
Concept ME-GI vs LGI
LFSS Low Flashpoint Fuel Supply System
Engine Design
Research Test
Shop test
2015 2016 2017 2018
Injection concept decided
Sub-suppliers selected
Test rig designed
Test rig initial start
Research engine designed
Research engine initial start
HAZID on concept
Initial shop test 50 or 60 bore
LFSS initial start
LFSS delivered
50 or 60 bore engine designed
First Costumer engines
Year
HAZID/HAZOP on LFSS done
Engine design validated
Test results verified & accepted
ME-LGIP Milestone Plan
22 < > MAN Diesel & Turbo
Why consider LPG as a fuel?
LPG is widely accepted ( land based and marine )
Meeting SOx requirement ( SECA and future global fuel )
Potential fuel cost savings ( cheaper than MGO )
Comparable cost to down stream SOx scrubber solution
Flexible fuel utilization to meet future fuel cost variation
Retrofit possible
Savings of both time and fees for fuel bunkering, when fuel can be taken from cargo tanks.
23 < > MAN Diesel & Turbo
Conclusions
Clean gas fuels have a bright future
Full dedication to develop superior gas engine technologies
Development work is maturing fast for major gas qualities
24 < > MAN Diesel & Turbo
All data provided in this document is non-binding. This data serves informational purposes only and is especially not guaranteed in any way. Depending on the subsequent specific individual projects, the relevant data may be subject to changes and will be assessed and determined individually for each project. This will depend on the particular characteristics of each individual project, especially specific site and operational conditions.
Disclaimer