A.J. Donaldson, B.Sc, M.

Sc, MINucE, CEng

Submarine Power Sources

For the Mission
ABSTRACT This study compares Introduction
nuclear and non-nuclear submarines for
various mission requirements. It includes dvanced detection technology is reducing the effectiveness of con-
non-nuclear AIP options: alternative fuels ventional submarines (SSKs) which must “snort” frequently. How-
and oxidants, heat engines and electro-
chemical systems, as well as advanced ever, nuclear submarines (SSNs) also have limitations in shallow
rechargeable batteries. Alternative and enclosed waters, and are more expensive than conventional
submarine power sources are summa- submarines.
rized and the non-nuclear AIP options Several air-independent power (AIP) systems are being developed to main-
are compared with each other for differ- tain the viability on non-nuclear submarines. Although they are sometimes
ent energy storage requirements. The called alternatives to nuclear power, their potential operational roles are quite
AIP options most suitable for low capaci-
ties have already been demonstrated, different.
and descriptions have been published. Submarine capabilities and costs are considered here for representative nu-
This is not the case for the fuel cell clear and non-nuclear installations. They are compared with requirements and
systems which are expected to be most cost targets for alternative missions. The information given is comparative, and
compact for longer endurance AIT: and so does not indicate capabilities of specific submarines, present or future.
an example is described briefly in this
paper. An AIP system is outlined to
meet a particular mission requirement Nuclear Power Options
(1000-3000nm radius to a coastal/
enclosed sea patrol area). This draws on Existing SSNs are generally well-optimized for their principal roles, and will be
fuel cell and reformer programs at Rolls- subject only to evolutionary development. They will not be discussed in detail,
Royce and Associates Limited. but allowances have made for greater speed and more effective acoustic isolation
The paper concludes with a cost in larger hull sizes.
effectiveness assessment of alternative
submarines for typical sets of mission
The SSn concept (Hewitt et al, 1985: Srigl et al, 1987,Boisrayon, 1988) is of
requirements. The alternatives are a low cost nuclear submarine, for shortimedium range coastal water operations,
compared in terms of endurance, speed, with an under-ice capability. However, the scope for reducing nuclear power
payload, signatures and relative cost. system size and cost is limited: shielding and containment requirements impose
This paper does not draw on any study a minimum size and weight, while design, manufacture and testing to nuclear
funded by the Ministry of Defence. AU industry standards tend to impose a minimum cost.
data is from open literature or is esti- SSn proposed power levels have evolved steady towards 1-2MW(e), below
mated on a purely comparative basis.
which the use of nuclear power is difficult to justify.

Non-Nuclear Options
Non-nuclear AIP systems are generally divided into two principal categories:
heat engines and electrochemical systems. The most prominent heat engine AIP
systems are:
1. Closed-cycle diesel (more properly called Recycle diesel)
2. Stirling engine
3. Closed cycle gas turbine
4. Recycle gas turbine
5. Steam Ranlune cycle
6. Organic fluid Rankine cycle
The most prominent electro-chemical AIP systems are:
1. Lead-acid batteries
2. Advanced rechargeable batteries
3. Alkaline fuel cells
4. Proton exchange membrane (PEM) fuel cells
5. Aluminum power cells

NAVAL ENGINEERS J O U R N A L May 1996 129

Submarine Power Sources For the Mission

Individual systems are further distinguished by the choice Supercritical pressure storage of LOX (above 51 bar;
of fuel and oxidant storage systems. Adams and Clarkin, 1993; Perry, 1984) eliminates the liq-
uid free surface. This is one way to avoid disturbance of
the system weight distribution in response to a change in
Fuel and Oxidant Systems boat trim. However, if no gas space is allowed at the time
Alternative fuels offer drfferent energy storage densities, of filhg, thermal expansion must be accommodated by
and they confer dlfferent energy values on the stored oxy- liquid phase discharge to control pressure. This is more
gen, according to the proportions in which fuel and oxidant wasteful than gas phase discharge in a low pressure sys-
combine. For example: tem, as discharge may begin sooner and the mass dis-
1. Diesel oil is easily stored, and has more than double charged will be greater.
the higher heating value of methanol, which requires Allowing for LOX thermal expansion, tank mountings
more complex storage tanks. (Rose and Cooper, 1977). and enclosed supply connections, the insulated tank vol-
2. A quantity of oxygen will produce thirty percent more ume is estimated to be about 1.3m3per tonne of LOX.
energy in combination with hydrogen than in combi-
nation with diesel fuel. HYDROGEN PEROXIDE
Aluminum, as a fuel consumed electro-chemically, is Stored in PVC bags in a protective casing outside the
outstandingly economical in oxygen requirement. How- pressure hull, hydrogen peroxide has been used in exper-
ever, the electrolyte is also consumable, as its water con- imental AIP systems, both as a direct oxidant and as a
tent is consumed, and the electrolyte properties are de- storage medium for oxygen (Comton-Hall, 1988; Reader
graded by accumulation of the aluminum hydroxide et al., 1990). Pure hydrogen peroxide is dangerously un-
product. The picture becomes more complicated when stable. Dilution with water increases safety progressively,
hydrogen peroxide is considered, because this contributes and eighty-five percent is considered the highest accept-
a significant heat of dissociation. able concentration. Hydrogen peroxide is far more expen-
sive than liquid oxygen, but offers superior performance if
GST SYSTEMS the heat of dissociation is used in an integrated system.
GST is a compressed gas storage system using toroids This heat could be used:
integrated into the pressure hull structure (Tufano and 1. Directly, in heat engines
Santi, 1988). The volume which may be regarded as 2. As a heat source for reforming methanol to produce
“free”is limited, defined by the usable hull area and the hydrogen
diving depth. This can only offer a few days of extra dived 3. As a heat source for releasing hydrogen from the high-
endurance, but optimisation of the hull structure for AIP temperature magnesium alloy hydrides.
may minimize or conceal the true cost of extending AIP At eighty-five percent concentration, oxygen generation
endurance to perhaps two weeks. The GST system seems and heat generation are well matched for applications 2
to be suitable for the smallest submarines, in short range and 3.
roles. Use of H,O, is hindered by its aggressiveness to many
structural plastics, its incompatibility with many common
LIQUID OXYGEN (LOX) metals, corrosioderosion of catalysts in the dissociation
Liquid oxygen is widely available at low cost and high units, possible detrimental effects of its chemical stabiliz-
performance vacuum insulation promises very low pres- ing additives and the likely high cost of engineering safety
surization and boil off rates. Heat leakage into the LOX requirements.
will be predominantly via the mounting system, where this
bridges the vacuum insulation. Minimisation of heat leak- FAVOURED OXIDANT SYSTEM
age must be reconciled with military standards of shock The considerations described here support the wide-
resistance. LOX may be pumped to the system pressure spread preference for low pressure LOX as a general pur-
and then evaporated for use as gas, or the tank may be pose oxidant storage system. It is a low cost, low techcal
pressurized by controlled evaporation. The latter option risk option, applicable to a wide range of AIP systems,
will leave more unusable gaseous oxygen in the tank. submarine sizes and endurance requirements.
Some examples of oxygen pressure requirements for
AIP systems are: LIQUID HYDROGEN
1. Hydride Fuel Cell 2.3 bar Liquid hydrogen storage has some fundamental problems:
2. Recycle Diesel 3-5 bar 1. At ZOK, heat entry via the mountings will be thrty-
3. Stirling Engine 20 bar three percent greater than for a similar size LOX tank
4. MESMA 60 bar at 90K.
(Knaack and Petersen, 1988: Klein et al, undated; Edman, 2. The coefficient of thermal expansion of saturated liquid
1991; Le Tallec et al, 1991; Kerros et al, 1993) is thirteen times worse for hydrogen at 20K than for

130 May 1996 NAVAL ENGINEERS JOURNAL

 Submarine Power Sources For lhe Mission

LOX at 90K and it becomes much worse near the Power density, efficiency, fuel storage and LOX storage
critical temperature of only 33K. are all estimated to be as for the closed cycle diesel at
The molar specific heat of hydrogen at 20K is only about 400kW(e), but derior at lower powers. However,
thirty-seven percent of the value for LOX at 90K no argon is required and the acoustic signature should be
(19.4JimolK compared with 53imolK). less.
Also on a molar basis, the latent heat of evaporation of The cost would be greater than for a closed-cyclediesel,
hydrogen at 20K is only thirteen percent of that for because of the specialized design and manufacturing re-
LOX at 90K. quirement.
Release into the submarine atmosphere is extremely
hazardous. RECYCLE GAS TURBINE
The direct cycle, with combustion gas working fluid, re-
HYDRIDES sults in larger and more complicated gas turbine and CO,
Metal hydride storage is compact and overcomes most of disposal units than in the closed-cycle gas turbine system,
the hydrogen safety problems. The limiting factor is but requires fewer heat exchangers. Overall power den-
weight, especially for the iron-titanium family of hydrides. sity, efficiency, signature and costs appear to be much the
Magnesium alloy hybrid systems are lighter (about sixty same as for the closed cycle gas turbine.
percent of the weight of iron-titanium systems) but require
sigruficant heating at about 300C. Both hydride farmlies STIRLING ENGINE
require additional pressure hull volume for buoyancy when The Stirling engine has an inherently low power density
AIP endurance exceeds about 25 MW hours (Fe-Ti and and a clean fuel is needed to avoid heat transfer surface
LOX, Mg-Ni and H,O,) or about 50 MW hours (Mg-Ni fouling. Exhaust disposal, from the high pressure com-
and LOX). bustion circuit, is simple and so the overall system power
METHANOL REFORMING density is not much less than for a closed-cycle diesel.
The system efficiency is slightly better, and it has a low
For long endurance, the most compact, neutral buoyancy acoustic signature. No argon is required, but there is a
hydrogen supply systems are those using reformed meth- greater loss of oxygen in the exhaust.
anol. Efficient AIP system thermal integration is essential. This is a relatively expensive system, because of the
Target overall system efficiencies are in the range of forty- level of technology and because Stirling engines are not
two to forty-four percent (with respect to the higher heat- mass-produced.
ing value of methanol). The reforming process also con-
sumes water, which may be recycled product water. STEAM RANKINE CYCLE
The MESMA system (Le Tallec et al, 1991; Kerros et al,
Heat Engine AIP 1993) has a modest power density, because of general
CLOSED-CYCLE DIESEL (ARGON CYCLE DIESEL) arrangement, mounting system and access requirements
Off-the-shelf diesel engines and alternators are the basis for the major components; steam generator, combustion
of the lowest cost AIP option. Air-independence is chamber, CO, condenser, turbo-alternator and steam con-
achieved by selective dissolution of CO, into seawater, denser. However, acoustic signature should be very low.
before the cooled exhaust is recycled with added oxygen. At 400kW(e), the steam cycle efficiency is about
Argon addition (about five percent of oxygen consumption) twenty-five percent, and the overall system efficiency may
matches the working fluid properties to the requirements be twenty-four percent. LOX consumption will be twelve
of an unmodified diesel, compensating for replacement of to seventeen percent greater than for a closed cycle diesel.
nitrogen by carbon dioxide. Many other closed-cycle diesel For equal endurance, the ethanol fuel tanks (incorporating
systems have been tested, or proposed, but the argon flexible membranes) w ill occupy about double the volume
cycle seems to be the best. Power density is good, with of the equivalent tankage for a closed-cycle diesel.
the CO, removal system being about the same volume as All the major components appear to be special purpose
the diesel generator. Efficiency is good, thirty to t b t y - items, requiring substantial design and manufacturing in-
one percent after allowing for alternator losses, parasitic vestment.
loads and loss of some oxygen.
ORGANIC RANKINE CYCLES
CLOSED CYCLE GAS TURBINE Some fluids, such as R11, R113 and toluene, offer better
With inert gas working fluid and a high speed alternator, cycle efficiencies than steam for given boiler and condenser
the rotating machmery is more compact than a diesel gen- temperatures. Unfortunately, thls is negated by their poor
erator. However, the combustion circuit and the heat ex- heat transfer properties, and it seems unlikely that they
changes make up for the difference, although there is a would give any real advantage. Further, they are undesir-
saving in CO, disposal from the high-pressure gas circuit. able as contaminants of submarine atmospheres.

NAVAL E N G I N E E R S J O U R N A L May 1996 131

Submarine Power Sources For the Mission

Electro-chemical AIP This system appears expensive in through-life cost, due

BATTERIES to the refuelling and reconditioning requirement, but is
moderate in initial cost.
Rechargeability at sea gives batteries flexibility and oper-
ational value comparable with “one-shot’’ AIP systems of
much greater nominal endurance. The pressure hull re- METHANOULOX FUEL CELL SYSTEMS
quirement for buoyancy to support lead-acid batteries is A PEM fuel cell system with LOX storage and a methanol
estimated to be 30m:’iMWhour (very slow discharge). reformer seems attractive for long range missions. Overall
Nickel Cadmium batteries are approximately equivalent to efficiency of perhaps forty-four percent corresponds to fuel
lead acid batteries for very slow discharge (although su- and oxygen storage volume about seventy percent of that
perior for fast discharge). Advanced batteries (sodiumi for the consumables of a closed-cycle diesel system. How-
sulphur, LAIS and sodiuminickel chloride) offer about dou- ever, the generation system power density is relatively low
ble the slow discharge capacity of lead-acid batteries, for Use of fuel cell power for air-breathing transit as well
equal weight and volume in realistic submarine installa- as AIP patrol has been proposed. In the near term, this
tions. Nickel-Zinc batteries might be almost as good as is unlikely because:
these advanced batteries, if an apparently fundamental 1. The system power density is not competitive with die-
cycle life problem can be overcome. (Linden, 1984). sel generators and is further reduced by design com-
promises for air-breathing operation.
FUEL CELLS 2. System efficiency would fall to about thirty-five percent
in air-breathing mode, due to lower cell voltage, air-
Hydrogenfoxygen fuel cells produce DC power with high
delivery loads and increased reformer heat losses.
efficiency, forty-five to fifty-five percent. System power
3. The methanol tank volume would be more than double
density is modest, due to the need for reactant condition-
the diesel tank volume for the same duty.
ing, heat sink and output power conditioning subsystems.
4. Fuel cells would be more expensive than diesel gen-
The power conditioning unit governs load-sharing be-
erators.
tween the fuel cells and the main battery of the submarine.
For reformed methanol fuel cell AIE key issues include:
Its size is minimized by selection of a high nominal voltage
1. Fuel cell module development for efficiency and power
for battery and fuel cell systems. Aluminum power cells
density.
are treated as fuel cells, in this respect.
2. Fuel processing system integration, for compactness
PEM fuel cells are being developed by several compa-
and high efficiency.
nies. The module power density may be more than four
3. Installation design, for close-packing of many sub-units
times that of the alkaline fuel cells demonstrated in the
in the fuel processing and electrical generation sys-
submarine U1, due to higher current densities, thinner
tems.
cells, smaller reactant and coolant manifolds, and simpler
4. Power conditioning and control systems for compact-
auxiliary systems. However, the cell voltage and the sys-
ness and efficiency
tem efficiency are not as high as for alkaline fuel cells.
5. Component and system reliability.
These are likely to be expensive systems, due to the high
ALUMINUM CELLS level of technology development required, and the low level
Aluminum cells consume aluminum alloy anodes as fuel, of production.
and use either hydrogen peroxide or oxygen as oxidants.
The alkaline electrolyte is also an important consumable.
Energy storage is proportional to the number and size of
Comparison of AIP Options
cells, but power may be limited by the heat sink and power- Table 1 shows estimated “best achievable” pressure hull
conditioning units. There are no overboard discharges. volume requirements for three values of energy storage,
Efficiency seems good at thirty-six percent or better, at 400 kW(e). Aluminum power cells look good, subject
and energy storage density is potentially excellent, but to verification of electrolyte utilization, but may be handi-
partial utilization is wasteful, because refuelling is by re- capped by operational inflexibility and through-life cost.
placement. Technical issues include thick anode perfor- Closed-cycle diesel seems the front runner for low to me-
mance, hydroxide separation and cell handling space. The dium endurance, but has not yet found a buyer. Stirling
dominant contributions to pressure hull volume are esti- engines have been chosen by Sweden, hydrideiLOX fuel
mated to be: cell systems by Germany and MESMA by Pakistan. For
1. Electrolyte and product storage 33% high endurance, methanol reformer fuel cell systems ap-
2. LOX storage 27% pear to have a clear advantage, but are still unproven. Fair
3. Cell handling 20% comparison depends on an individual navy’s operational
4. Cell banks 12% needs for specific patrol areas.

132 May 1996 NAVAL ENGINEERS JOURNAL

 Submarine Power Sources For lhe Mission

TABLE 1 5. Depleted reformate recuperative heat exchangers,

CO, dissolution systems, residual gas clean-up and
Pressure hull volumes for AIP systems recycle system.
Capacity, M W hours
6. Low pressure fuel cell installation.
30 100 300 7. Generating system heat sink (freshwateriseawater
System Volume, m3
__ cooler) and pumps.
C-C Diesel 158 396 1074 8. DC/DC power conditioning unit.
C-C GT 152 378 1019
Recycle GT 152 378 1019 9. Fuel cell system switchboard.
Stirling 160 386 1032 10. Control and instrumentation panel.
MESMA 193 501 1381
Lead acid battery 900 3000 9000
Advanced battery 450 1500 4500
AI/LOX cells 139 350 939
INSTALLATION
H,/LOX fuel cell + external 180 510 1452 The LOX tanks and compensation for 162 tonnes of LOX
hydride + 28 + 93 + 278 will occupy about 11.5m of a Z6m pressure hull. Internal
MethanoVLOX fuel cell 189 352 81 9
methanol tanks are preferred for maintenance access (re-
placement of flexible containers). For 108 tonnes of meth-
anol, 136m3of usable capacity is required.
In a Z6m diameter hull, the total volume required for
AIP 3200: A Longer Range AIP the AIP system corresponds to about 18m of hull (sixty-
Submarine four percent LOX, twenty-two percent methanol and four-
REQUIREMENT teen percent system). However, achievement of such com-
pactness will require consideration of the whole submarine
For a future submarine with a payload representative of arrangement, rather than forcing the AIP system to fit
the larger SSKs, it is suggested that an appropriate AIP exactly between bulkheads. Further, no provision has been
capability would be 300MW hours, for a coastal water made here for air purification equipment for long submer-
patrol of over 30 days, 1000-3OOOnmfrom base. gence.
SYSTEM
It is proposed that a fuel cell AIP system with methanol NAVAL ARCHITECTURE CONSEQUENCES
and LOX stores should contain the following features: As a consequence of the volume required for the AIP
1. Methanol tanks, internal, with a methanol-resistant system, the main ballast tanks must be larger than for the
flexible membrane to separate fuel from seawater. equivalent non-AIP submarine to maintain a satisfactory
2. LOX tanks, design pressure in excess of 10 bar, inside reserve of buoyancy. Additionally, the upper casing volume
the pressure hull, shock-mounted. will increase in proportion to the pressure hull length. The
3. Compensationiproduct water tanks, occupying the hydroplanes must also be larger for satisfactory dynamic
spaces around the LOX tanks. stability and manoeuverabilitp The total increase in the
4. Autothermal reformer, operating pressure 20 bars, submarine’s submerged displacement will be rather more
incorporating palladium alloy diffusers to supply pure than the volume of 820m3 of pressure hull required di-
hydrogen (via a compressor). rectly for the AIP system.

TABLE 2
Submarine performance targets
Environment mansit
Coastal Regional Ocean Arctic 500 1500 5000 12000
Transit 6 9 22 30
Speed (knot)
Patrol 3 9 15 10
Mission 25 36 75 120
Endurance (days) Snort Cycle 8 5 3 24
Acoustic signature 1 1.3 1.5 1.5
Theraml signature 1 2 2.8 2.8
Payload 0.55 0.85 1 1.2 0.55 1 1.3 1.6
cost +lo% +30% 0.6 1.2 2 3

NAVAL E N G I N E E R S J O U R N A L May 1996 133

Submarine Power Sources For !he Mission

Meeting Mission Requirements ling. Peacetime safety targets dictate reliability and
OPERATIONAL NEEDS
endurance targets for main and emergency power sup-
plies.
The environments in whch a submarine may operate vary
from restricted waters, intensively patrolled by sophisti-
PERFORMANCE AND COST TARGETS
cated opposing forces, to very large areas of almost empty
ocean. The base-to-patrol-area transit distance is also an Target figures for submarines to be cost-effective for par-
essential consideration in setting submarine performance ticular environments or transit distances are shown in
requirements. For this study, four categories of patrol en- Table 2. The values shown represent the views of the
vironment were defined, with different submarine perfor- author.
mance requirements on patrol. Four representative transit Snort cycle and patrol speed targets are suggested val-
ranges were also considered. ues for different environments. Transit speed and mission
endurance targets represent the need for the submarine
to remain on station for a cost-effective proportion of each
ENVIRONMENTS mission. Acoustic signature targets were estimated in
1. Shallow (-100m) coastal water and small enclosed terms of probability of detection by passive sonar and they
seas, patrolled by hostile conventional submarines and are normalized to assign a value of 1.0 to a conventional
by airborne anti-submarine forces. These environ- submarine using battery power. Thermal signature targets
ments emphasize the importance of low detectability represent normalized gross power use, during 4kt patrol-
on patrol, coupled with dived endurance of perhaps ling. (The Baltic Sea is a special case, where thermal
eight days, so that any “snorting” can be done outside signature will have a low weighing in any overall assess-
the most hazardous area. ment, being much less important than acoustic signature.)
2. Regional seas, further offshore, sparsely patrolled by Payload targets were set for the part of the submarine’s
hostile forces including conventional submarines. pressure hull which cames men, communications sys-
Larger patrol areas require a faster rate of advance for tems, sonar systems and weapons systems. These tar-
efficient patrolling. The dived endurance requirement gets depend on both operating environment and transit
should reflect a moderate risk that observed or sus- range. They are normalized to a value of 1.0 for the larger
pected opposing forces will inhibit snorting. SSKs.
3. Deep ocean conditions with minimal threat. The large Cost targets were proposed to represent the fact that
patrol areas require high patrol speeds, but the dived local, restricted water patrols can be performed by
endurance can be relaxed to about three days, permit- cheaper submarines than would be required for long range
ting flexibility of power use and occasional postpone- or open water patrols and that Arctic operation imposes
ment of a planned snort. additional equipment costs. The cost targets were nor-
4. Arctic waters, including regular under-ice operation. malized to assign the value 1.0 to the cost of a large SSK,
Very long dived endurance is essential, but the patrol and ten percent and thirty percent increases are allowed
speed requirement is less than for deep ocean patrol- for deep ocean and Arctic operation, respectively.

TABLE 3
Submarine performance
SSKB AIP SSK SSKB
SSK1200 1350 1400 2400 3000 AIP3200 SSn2000 SSN3000 SSN5000
Transit 8(s) 8(s) 8(s) lO(s) lO(s) 1O(s) 8 25 30
Speed (knot) Patrol 4 4 4 4 4 4 8 <25 <30
Endurance Mission 30 30 30 60 60 60 50 70 100
(days) Snort Cycle 2 4 12 3 6 30 - - -
Acoustic
signature 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.1 1.8 1.5
Thermal
signature 0.02 0.02 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.16 1 1.6 2.4
Payload 0.4 0.4 0.4 1 1 1 0.65 1 1.7
cost 0.45 0.47 0.5 1 1.05 1.15 1.25 1.75 2.5
(s): Snorting

134 May1996 NAVAL E N G I N E E R S J O U R N A L

 Submarine Power Sources For the Mission

TABLE 4
Submarine performance shortfalls
Environmental Range
Coastal Regional Ocean Arctic 500 1500 5000 12000
Transit .9 .36 .27
Patrol .67 .52 .63
SSK 1200 Mission .a3 .4 .25
Snort .50 .63 .a2 0
Payload .a5 .69 .63 .5a .a5 .63 .55 .50
Transit .9 .36 .27
Patrol .67 .52 .63
SSKB 1350 Mission .a3 .4 .25
Snort .71 .a9 0
Payload .a5 .69 .63 .5a .a5 .63 .55 .50
Transit .45 .33
Patrol .67 .52 .63
SSK 2400 Mission .ao .50
Snort .61 .77 0
Payload .91 .aa .79
cost .60
Transit .45 .33
Patrol .67 .52 .63
SSKB 3000 Mission .80 .50
Snort .a7 0
Payload .91 .aa .79
cost .57
Transit .90 .36 .27
Patrol .67 .52 .63
AIP 1400 Mission .83 .40 .25
Snort .71
Payload .a5 .69 .63 .5a .a5 .63 .55 .50
Transit .45 .33
Patrol .67 .52 .63
AIP 3200 Mission .80 .50
Payload .91 .aa .79
cost .52
Transit .9 .36 .27
Patrol .94 .73 .a9
SSn 2000 Mission .67 .42
Noise .91
Payload .a7 .a1 .74 .a1 .7 1 .64
Cost .4a .96
Transit .a3
Mission .93 .5a
Noise .56 .72 .a3 .a3
SSN 3000 Thermal .a9
Payload .9 1 .aa .79
cost .34 .69
Mission 0.83
Noise .67 .a7
SSN 5000 Thermal .ao .96
cost .24 .4a .ao

SUBMARINE CAPABILITIES W SSKB 1350 represents SSK 1200 with a large advanced
Representative performance figures are given in Table 3, battery and increased charging capacity.
for seven conceptual types of future submarine: AIP 1400 represents SSK 1200 enhanced by an AIP
w SSK 1200 represents a small conventional submarine. system of twelve days endurance.

NAVAL E N G I N E E R S J O U R N A L May 1996 135

Submarine Power Sources For the Mission

SSK 2400 represents a relatively large conventional Performance was compared with each target to give a
submarine. ratio which was 1.0 if the target was achieved or beaten.
H SSKB 3000 represents SSK 2400 with a very large Double-counting and over-emphasis of some parameters
advanced battery and increased charging capacity were corrected by taking the square root of the ratios.
H AIP 3200 represents SSK 2400 enhanced by an AIP For each submarine, the scores where the targets are
system of over t h t y days endurance. not met are given in Table 4. Scores for a combination of
H SSn 2000 represents a small patrol submarine with a patrol environment and transit distance were produced by
low-power nuclear reactor. multiplying the individual scores together. The results are
SSN 3000 represents a small purpose nuclear subma- in Table 5. Table 6 shows the best scores for fifteen com-
rine. binations of patrol environment and transit distance. This
SSN 5000 represents a medium size general purpose provides a ranking of submarine size and propulsion sys-
nuclear submarine. tem options for each set of mission requirements.
The values shown are relative, and do not indicate the
capabilities of specific submarines.

TABLE 5
Operational cost-effectiveness
Range
Submarine Environment 500 1500 5000 12000
Coastal .36 .20 .03 .01
Regional .25 .14 .02 .01
SSK 1200
Ocean .23 .13 .02 .01
Arctic 0 0 0 0

Coastal .37 .61 .19 .08

Regional .31 .52 .16 .07
SSK 2400
Ocean .34 .52 .16 .07
Arctic 0 0 0 0
Coastal .5 .87 .27 .11
Regional .38 .67 .21 .09
SSKB 3000
Ocean .33 .52 .16 .07
Arctic 0 0 0 0
Coastal .51 .28 .05 .02
Regional .35 .19 .03 .01
SSKB 1350
Ocean .28 .15 .03 .01
Arctic 0 0 0 0
Coastal .72 .40 .07 .03
Regional .39 .22 .04 .02
AIP 1400
Ocean .28 .15 .03 .01
Arctic .22 .12 .02 .01
Coastal .52 1. .32 .13
Regional .35 .67 .21 .09
AIP 3200
Ocean .30 .52 .16 .07
Arctic .39 .57 .18 .07
Coastal .44 .64 .16 .07
Regional .39 .57 .14 .06
SSn 2000
Ocean .31 .43 .10 .04
Arctic .41 .48 .11 .05
Coastal .17 .34 .41 .19
Regional .24 .SO .59 .27
SSN 3000
Ocean .31 .63 .68 .32
Arctic .33 .68 .62 .29
Coastal .13 .26 .43 .44
Regional .20 .40 .67 .69
SSN 5000
Ocean .26 .53 .88 .83
Arctic .3 1 .62 1. .83

136 May 1996 NAVAL E N G I N E E R S J O U R N A L

 Submarine Power Sources For the Mission

TABLE 6
Meeting mission requirements
Range
500 1500 5000 12000
AIP 1400 .72 AIP 3200 1. SSN 5000 .43 SSN 5000 .44
AIP 3200 .52 SSKB 3000 .87 SSN 3000 .41 SSN 3000 .19
SSKB 1350 .51 SSn 2000 .64 AIP3200 .32
Coastal SSKB 3000 .5 SSK 2400 .61 SSKB 3000 .27
SSn 2000 .44 AIP 1400 .40
SSK2400 .37 SSN 3000 .34
SSK 1200 .36
SSn 2000 ,353 SSKB 3000 .67 SSN 5000 .67 SSN 5000 .69
AIP 1400 .39 AIP 3200 .67 SSN 3000 .59 SSN 3000 .27
SSKB3000 .38 SSn 2000 .57
Regional
SSKB 1350 .35 SSK 2400 .52
AIP3200 .35 SSN 3000 .50
SSK2400 .31 SSN 5000 .40
SSK2400 .34 SSN 3000 .63 SSN 5000 .88 SSN 5000 .83
SSKB 3000 .33 SSN 5000 .53 SSN 3000 .68 SSN 3000 .32
SSN 3000 .31 SSKB 3000 .52
SSn 2000 .31 AIP 3200 .52
Ocean
AIP 3200 .30 SSK 2400 .52
ssKa 1350 .2a SSn 2000 .43
AIP 1400 .28
SSN 5000 .26
SSn 2000 .41 SSN 3000 .68 SSN 5000 1.
AIP3200 .39 SSN 5000 .62 SSN 3000 .62
Arctic
SSN 3000 .33 AIP 3200 .57
SSN 5000 .31 SSn 2000 .48

is more limited in Arctic conditions. However, non-

Conclusion nuclear options cannot equal the versatility of the SSN
The cost-effectiveness survey confirms that: 3000 and SSN 5000 concepts.
1. Small AIP submarines are appropriate for short range It is noted that the submarine types chosen by nations
operations, especially in coastal waters. with Baltic and North Atlantic coasts conform to the cost-
2. The largest non-nuclear AIP submarines are suitable effective options, for the apparent needs of each nation.
for medium-range operations, especially in coastal A minor qualification is that the United States Navy and
waters. the Russian Navy have increasingly favoured nuclear sub-
3. Large installations of advanced rechargeable batteries marines substantially greater than 5000 tonnes. This sim-
are a very cost-effective AIP option, provided that ply reflects their emphasis on long-range missions, re-
there is some opportunity for snorting near the patrol quiring long endurance and high capability with a mixed
area. weapons payload. 4-
4. Nuclear submarines of 3000-5000 tonnes are cost-ef-
fective for medium-range deep ocean and Arctic mis- REFERENCES
sions.
5. Nuclear submarines of about 5000 tonnes are more [ l ] Adams, M.J., and L. Clarlun, “Canadan Second Genera-
tion AIP-A Formula for Success,” RINA, Naval Subma-
cost-effective for long-range missions. rines 4, 11-13 May 1993, London.
6. The low-power small nuclear submarine (SSn) appears [2] Boisrayon, G., “The Nuclear Coastal Submarine: An Alter-
suitable for some short/medium range duties, espe- native to Exotic Propulsion Systems,” RINA International
cially for nations with Arctic coastlines. Symposium on Conventional Naval Submarines, 3-5 May
7. In every role, at least one of the three nuclear options 1988, London.
achieves an acceptable cost-effectiveness score, and [3] Compton-Hall, R., Submarine uersus Submarine, David and
Charles, 1988.
there is a large area of overlap in which all three
[4] Edman, U., “The AIP Experience,” RINA, Naval Subma-
achieve acceptable scores. rines 3, 13-15 May 1991, London.
8. The AIP 3200, SSKB 3000 and SSn 2000 concepts are [5] Hewitt, J.S., I? Wilkins and G.A. Kastner, “SAGA-N: A
s d a r in range of application, except that SSKB 3000 Nuclear-Powered Submarine Vehicle for Commercial Oper-

NAVAL E N G I N E E R S J O U R N A L May 1996 137

Submarine Power Sources For the Mission

ation,” Canadian Nuclear Society 6th Annual Conference, Development for Underwater Naval Vehicles up to 3000t
June 1985. Displacement,” IME, 22 May 1990.
[6] Kerros, I?, I? Leroy and D. Grouset, “MESMA: AIP Sys- [13] Rose, J.W. and J.R. Cooper (Editors), Technical Data on
tem for Submarines,” RINA, Naval Submarines 4, 11-13 Fuel, Scottish Academic Press, 1977.
May 1993, London. [14] Sligl, VR., G.A. Kastner and A.G. McDonald, “An An-
[7] Klein, M., U. Regensdorf, D. Wittekmd and C. Zartmann, Independent Hybrid NucleariDiesel-Electric Submarine: A
Closed-Cycle Diesel: Principle and Application, Thyssen Proposal Intended to Meet Canadian Requirements,” Mar-
Nordseewerke. itime Defence, December 1982
[8] Knaack, K., and U-K Petersen, “Advantages of Aidnde- [15] Tufano, A. and G.G. Santi, “ ‘20 gst 48’ A Snorkeless Wake-
pendent Propulsion Systems for Submarines being in Ser- less Diesel Submarine of a New Generation,” RINA Inter-
vice. The German Approach,” RINA, Naval Submarines 3, national Symposium on Conventional Naval Submarines,
13-15 May 1991, London. 3-5 May 1988, London.
[9] Le Tallec, J., E Tandeo and J. Gaillard. “AIP for Subma-
rines: Design and Safety Aspects,” RINA, Naval Subma- A.J. Donaldson spent several years at Rolls-Royce and Asso-
rines 3, 13-15 May 1991, London. ciates Limited working on computer methods for reactor
[ 101 Linden, D., Handbook ofBatteries and Fuel Cells, McGraw- transient analysis, before obtaining a Master of Science degree in
Hill, 1984. Nuclear Technology from the Royal Naval College at Greenwich
[ll] Perry, R.H., D.W. Green and J.O. Maloney (Editors), Per- in 1984. Subsequently, as a senior engineel; he joined a team
ry’s Chemical Engineer’s Handbook, McGraw-Hill, 1984. assessing alternative power technologiesfor naval, space and
[12] Reader, G.T., J.G. Hawley and G. Walker, “Power Plant commercial applications.

COMMENTS B Y mature. . . .” To say that these technologies “. . , are not

available for near term submarine AIP applications . . .,”
Thomas Goldsworthy is not a statement about the present technology status of
DESIGNERS AND PLANNERS MCFCs, but is simply a reflection of the lack of naval
funding so far to “marinize” the parallel on-land electric

I would like to thank the author for bringing to light the

topic of ,4r Independent Propulsion (AIP) and in par-
ticular fuel cells for submarines. The analysis done for this
paper appears limited to what is currently being installed
utility MCFC commercialization process already under-
way. The MCFC is far advanced (at 1.8 MW) as compared
with the current modest AIP power requirements of 300
to 400 kW. The author’s statement that “operating tem-
perature, control and management of the warm-up and
in several classes of European submarines such as Proton cool down cycles are of concern” is gratuitous. There is
Exchange Membrane (PEM) Fuel Cells, Stirling Engmes, nothing about h g h temperature fuel cells that inherently
MESMA, and Closed Cycle Diesels (CCD). These types makes them unsuitable for submarine application. Diesel
of AIP systems have been the recent beneficiaries of fund- engines have high temperatures too; charging up subma-
ing to the point where they are being installed as prototype rine batteries from cold takes time, as does the initial
(experimental would be a better term) units as in the case warm-up from cold of high temperature fuel cells. Once
of Agosta 90B (MESMA), or operational such as Sweden’s they are hot, they have an almost instant response to load
A 19 (Stirling Engine), and Germany’s U 212 (PEM Fuel changes. In fact, with internal fuel reforming MCFCs, the
Cell). While discussing the various types of fuel cells, this response to load changes is faster than with (mandatory
paper seems to dismiss high temperature fuel cells in favor external) fuel reformers required by low temperature
of the PEM type fuel cells. An economic assessment of PEMFCs.
AIP that included the high temperature Phosphoric Acid Since the author chose not to investigate PAFCs or
Fuel Cells (PAFC) and Molten Carbonate Fuel Cells MCFCs, he does not properly investigate the use of diesel
(MCFC) would have given the paper a flavor more useful fuel (sulfur free diesel) as an alternative to methanol. Sul-
on this side of the Atlantic. fur free diesel fuel can be steam reformed to synthetic
PAFCs of 7.5 and 11MW were built in the United States methane and carbon dioxide. As long as the carbon bonds
in the early eighties. The Z5 MW unit was sold to Tokyo of this multi-carbon fuel molecule are broken with care so
Electric Power Company and is still in operation. (In late no elemental carbon (soot) results, then the sulfur free
1983, Tokyo Electric Power Co. built a 4.8 MW PAFC form of this standard naval fuel can be used to great ad-
based on a U.S. design that is still in operation.) As early vantage. Diesel fuel is immiscible with seawater and it has
as 1977, it was apparent that MCFCs, and their ability to a high flash temperature, which are both significant naval
use traditional marine fuels, were attractive alternatives system advantages. Based on a high temperature type
for marine applications. The author is inaccurate in as- electric utility derived fuel cell power plant approach
serting that MCFC “. . . technologies are considered im- (which also permits heat recovery) overall system energy

I 38 May 1996 NAVAL ENGINEERS J O U R N A L

 Submarine Power Sources For the Mission

conversion efficiencies of sixty-five percent are reasona- MCFC approach, for the 300 MWh case, (0.129 tonnesi
ble. The diesel fuel stored energy at approximately 43 MJ/ MWh x 300 MWh = ) 38.7 tonnes of diesel fuel. For
kg is almost double that of methanol fuel. The resulting diesel fuel, the oxygen to fuel MOL weight ration is 3.43: 1,
BSFC, or “fuel rate,” wdl then be 0.129 kgikWh or tonnes/ (38.7 x 3.43 = ) 132.7 tonnes of oxygen. The total for
MWh. Compare this to methanol which contains 22.2 MJ1 the diesel fuel plus oxygen reactant weights is then (38.7
kg of stored energy. The resulting BSFC is 0.369 kg/kWh + 132.7 = ) 171.4 tonnes. The MCFC diesel fueled ap-
or tonnesMWh. This diesel fueled BSFC value of 0.129 proach is clearly superior for the 300 MWh submerged
kg/kWh is 2.88 times better than a methanol fueled endurance case by 171.41276.7 = 62% of the weight of
PEMFC type of power system. From the operator’s point reactants or 96.3 tonnes less. The sixty-five percent ef-
of view the submarine can go almost three times as far ficient diesel fueled MCFC approach is clearly superior to
per tonne of fuel used when a high temperature diesel the forty-four percent efficient methanol fueled PEMFC.
fueled fuel cell power system is used. Diesel fueled high This does not even include the current cost differential
temperature fuel cell power plants offer great promise for between methanol ($6.31/Million BTU) and diesel ($4.921
surface ship and naval submarine applications, particularly Million BTU).
because of their large power rating. Their cost per kW is
being rapidly reduced due to the electric utility sponsored Calculation of Spec& Fuel Consumption:
MCFC mass production commercialization process under- Diesel fuel which contains 43 MJkg of stored energy
way in the U.S.
The author makes some statements concerning fuel 3‘6 Mikwh = 0.129kg/kWh or tonnes MWh
cells for air-breathing transit which should be reassessed. 65% x 43 MJ/kg
The “system power density” is not defined in this paper. Methanol which contains 22.2 MJ1kg of stored energy
MCFCs on diesel fuel with air will be at least sixty percent
efficient (with heat recovery). MCFCs on air w ill be about 3.6 lLZTikWh = 0.369 kg/kWh or tonnes1MWh
sixty percent efficient while MCFCs on 0, will be at least 44% x 22.2 MJkg
sixty-five percent efficient. The phrase . . increased
I‘.

reformer heat losses . . .” makes no sense. The author

seems to be reversing hs field when comparing methanol
COMMENTS BY
tank volume to diesel fuel tank volume. Naval fuel cells
derived from mass produced high temperature utility type LCdx Clifford A. Whitcomb, USN and
MCFCs will not be any more expensive than diesel gen-
erators. The author goes on to make some “key” issues LCdx A.B. Smith, Canadian Forces
regarding reformed methanol fuel cells, none of which ap-
pear to be specific to reformed methanol. The author also
(Ret.)
addresses the AIP capital expense issue due in large part The subject paper discusses alternative power sources for
to “. . . the low level of production.” That is the best submarines against a variety of submarine mission re-
argument for the electric utility derived diesel fueled quirements as stated in the abstract “. . . compares nu-
MCFC approach due to its mass production commerciali- clear and non nuclear submarines for various mission re-
zation cost reduction path. (I am curious as to whether or quirements.” A more applicable description of the paper,
not the author is aware of a Detroit company called DTI and we suspect its intent, would be “assessing the merits
that is currently setting up an assembly line to mass pro- of various submarine power sources against specific mis-
duce fuel cells? This reviewer tried to make contact with sion requirements.” The author does a commendable job
the company to learn the type and power output of fuel at bringing together a wide variety of issues. In one suc-
cell they are going to produce, but was unsuccessful in cinct paper, he has brought to the reader’s attention details
getting a timely response.) and information that would otherwise have to be gleaned
For the author’s “AIP 3200: A Longer Range AIP Sub- from numerous sources. There are, of course, a number
marine,” a thirty day patrol with 300 MWh of submerged of points worth discussing and we do so not to take away
endurance is postulated. The comparison of a methanol from the paper, but in an effort to be constructive.
fueled forty-four percent efficient PEMFC approach shows
(0.369 tonnesiMWh x 300 MWh = ) 110.7 tonnes of Power Source
methanol fuel must be carried onboard. The oxygen to
methanol rate of consumption is in the MOL weight ratio The overview of the k r Independent Propulsion (AIP)
of 1.5: 1. Therefore, the 110.7 tonnes of methanol fuel will options for submarines is very good. The point that non
require 166 tonnes of oxygen for a total submarine weight nuclear AIP submarines are not merely alternatives to
of reactants of (110.7 + 166 = ) 276.7 tonnes for the 300 nuclear powered submarines, but have quite different po-
MWh of submerged endurance. A similar calculation is tential roles, is well made. Several aspects of the paper
made for the diesel fueled sixty-five percent efficient are worth pointing out.

NAVAL E N G I N E E R S J O U R N A L May 1996 139

Submarine Power Sources For the Mission

In the comparison of AIP options, the results for the tive. The final selection of methanol may be problematic
estimation of the overall system volume are good. For for the following reasons:
example, Table l-B compares estimates made using val- Methanol is toxic and may not work well in an AIP option
ues obtained in the open literature, of submarine AIP submarine due to personnel safety and atmosphere con-
systems with similar energy storage requirements. Since trol standpoints [4b].
the closed cycle heat engine differences only result in Current logistic availability of methanol, especially at
slight (less than ten percent) changes in the estimates, we ports other than the submarine’s home base, is probably
have grouped the diesels, gas turbines, and Stirling en- not good.
gines together under this heading. The purely battery- The use of reformed diesel fuel may be a better alterna-
based systems are not estimated, since they are consid- tive:
ered infeasible options at these energy storage levels. The Reformed diesel fuel is synergistic with the assumed
MESMA plant is not estimated, due to lack of system installation of a diesel plant for transit propulsion.
parameter mformation. It is already a widely used propulsion fuel for submarine
applications.
It is widely available in existing ports throughout the
TABLE 1-6 world.
Diesel fuel also has disadvantages:
AIP System Estimation Comparison, 328 MWh m Diesel fuel takes more energy to reform than methanol.
Author‘s Discussers‘ The presence of sulfur in marine diesel will poison most
Results Results
System (m’) (m’) fuel cells.
Closed cycle heat engine 1074 918
Although sulfur-free diesel fuel is probably no more avail-
able than methanol at typical ports, its availability is im-
AI-LOX cells 939 490
proving on the world market due to pollution concerns.
H,-LOX fuel cell (with regenerative
hydride bed) 1730 1846
With respect to fuel cells, the high temperature solid oxide
fuel cells (SOFC) and molten carbonate fuel cell (MCFC),
Methanol-LOX 819 773
for example the internally reformed MCFC cells made by
Energy Research Corporation, Inc., hold the possibility of
overcoming some of the disadvantages, but they have not
Our 328 MWh energy estimates are based on an in- been demonstrated at high enough power levels and power
stalled propulsion power of 422 kW, an average loiter densities for submarine use. Whether either of these two
speed of four knots, three high power burst evolutions of fuel cell options is possible or not will have to wait until
one hour each, and 150 kW of hotel load over a sixty day further development is done.
mission. These results include volumes for the AIP power Under batteries, the author mentions “. . . if an appar-
plant, support equipment, energy storage, variable ballast, ent fundamental cycle life problem can be overcome (Lin-
and an equipment arrangement factor. Our results com- den 1984),” what is the problem? There are wide differ-
pare well with the author’s across the board, considering ences in performance available in the traditional battery
that both are high level estimates. The only exception is technology. It would have been useful if the author could
the result for the aluminum-oxygen (AI-0)cell system, have pointed out that charging capacitylspeed, discharge
which is different by a factor of two. This is not surprising capacity and maintenance are quite different between man-
since these systems are not widely developed, have not ufacturers of submarine batteries (Varta, Chloride, GNB)
been demonstrated at high power levels for submarine for similar sizelweight. Especially important is to leave
use, and do not have much open literature information sufficient battery capacity for expected submarine opera-
available for estimation purposes. However, a report from tions, where the battery is never discharged below twenty
Professor A. Douglas Carmichael of MIT [3b] tends to percent, due to depth of discharge h t s , and usually not
support the lower estimate for total system volume for the below fifty percent, due to safe operating margins for
N-0 option. SSKs.
The type of fuel to use is not an easy choice, since all Since no actual design and layout of any submarine op-
have various advantages and disadvantages. The elimina- tions has been done, it is difficult to assess the feasibility
tion of hydrogen peroxide (H,O,) and liquid hydrogen (LH) of a particular submarine option. For example, providmg a
from consideration is correct for the reasons stated. The sufficient equilibrium polygon is difficult at the high endur-
selection of liquid oxygen (LOX) as the preferred oxidant ance level missions proposed. This is due to several rea-
is also correct. The regenerable hydride beds can be used sons, the variable ballast amount and arrangement for
in place of lead ballast in some low energy storage level reactants and oxidants, the stores loadout for long deploy-
AIP submarine designs, but the mass fraction of hydrogen ments, and accounting for the sea water density changes
would have to be increased above the current three to five for operation in missions from warm Mediterranean type
percent levels to make this option more generally attrac- waters to low salinity arctic waters. The selection of an

140 May 1996 NAVAL ENGINEERS JOURNAL

 Submarine Power Sources For the Mission

AIP submarine displacement of 3200 tons is about correct those that will operate them, other considerations are at
for the features stated, but making a high endurance non least as important.
nuclear AIP submarine any smaller does not seem possible The author touches on, but never quite states the im-
given the energy storage and conversion options available portance of indiscretion ratio for the conventional subma-
today. riner. In transit to the patrol area and while in the patrol
The h k between submarine pressure hull volume im- area, the ratio of time snorting to time fully submerged is
pact and the volume required by the AIP is mentioned in a decisive factor for success. In transit, it will be the
the paper’s text, but not in Table 1, rendering it unclear propulsion power requirements that drive the indiscretion
what the impact would be and if it is sizable enough to ratio, making high power output AIP equipment desirable.
influence propulsion requirement. Table 1 would be im- However, in the patrol area where speeds are low, it is
proved if density of the systems were offered. Weight and often the hotel load that will dominate power consumption.
weight distribution are critical design constraints in sub- Consequently, the hotel load consumed by the AIP equip-
marines. ment becomes a deciding factor. In fact, the optimum pro-
pulsion power to hotel load ratio, with respect to a given
energy storage amount, can be shown to be optimum with
Operational Characteristics
Pl‘ropuls~on = 112 phdel load’
There are a number of operational characteristics men- The author does not seem to consider the apparent
tioned in the report that bear scrutiny. In an effort to be increase in risk that some alternatives seem to have. In
concise, there may be too much room for misinterpreta- peacetime, conventional submarines can be struck by the
tion in a few cases. odd wayward practice torpedo and there are the occasional
Shallow water is defined as - 100m. It is not uncommon bumps in the night to consider. The idea of traveling around
for a 300 foot SSK to negotiate waters less than 150 feet the ocean clad in toroids or other containers holding sub-
deep, something that is a nerve wracking (especially in stances that are crucial to my well being sends shivers
busy waters), but a distinguishing, capability of the SSK. down my spine. As a naval architect, I can accept that
There is no way that an eight day (or even a one day) shock calculations may show this to be an unwarranted
dived period will be possible without serious air punfica- concern. As an operator that would have to take such a
tion capability. ship into battle, I would require substantially more con-
In the author’s introduction, he identifies some differ- vincing evidence. Such considerations must have an impact
ences between the SSK and SSN. One that he does not on a Commandmg Officer’s decision making process, how-
mention is that on patrol, the SSK on battery may be a ever slight, when considering courses of action in the heat
more quiet platform than the SSN. AIP in the SSK should of battle.
strive to preserve that goal while increasing the duration Given the incredibly strict measures invoked when bat-
between snorts. tery charging evolutions approach the (hydrogen) gassing
The author does not place enough emphasis on the im- stage, the very idea that large quantities of hydrogen can
portance of air purification. Air quality is often the limiting be camed without a significant impact on the submarine’s
factor in current SSKs for dived duration, and air purifi- crew and operations is questionable. Options that include
cation and control is a highly power-consuming and poten- sizable quantities of pressurized oxygen or hydrogen are
tially noisy activity that could have enough of a volume/ nothing short of scary.
weight impact to affect the submarine design. AIP cannot Acquisition costs are always an important factor, and
be considered in isolation of air purification. Canadian cost estimation at this level of design is always difficult.
Atomic Energy has demonstrated that low power nuclear There are many implicit factors, such as acoustic quieting
powered “plugs” may indeed be an attractive option for level, crew size, weapons loadout, ice hardening of super-
SSK AIE structure, to name a few Using generic, overall cost fac-
The author gives the impression that nuclear power tors is generally inadequate, especially in determining cost
plants can be built to suit. This is an expensive proposi- effectiveness, but is generally unavoidable for early stage
tion. Nuclear power plants are generally available in dis- and conceptual design studies since little useful informa-
crete sizes. Identlrylng a perfectly balanced design that tion is available for open literature publication.
requires a power plant somewhere in between the available Operating and support issues now drive the Cost and
choices is an enormously expensive proposition. Operational Effectiveness Analysis that every program
must do. Parts, training, reliability, availability, maintain-
ability, footprint, noise, weight, and accessibility are a few
Basis for Comparison of the issues that should be considered when comparing
The paper appears to focus on a cost effectiveness of alternatives. Alternatives that show an overall life cycle
various alternatives. This of course is extremely important cost savings for a larger initial investment can be seduc-
to those involved in the acquisition of submarines. For tively attractive when they are not exposed to Net Present

NAVAL E N G I N E E R S J O U R N A L May 1996 141

Submarine Power Sources For the Mission

Value Analysis. Even a marginal discount rate will often

show that dollars spent later is more cost effective than
dollars spent at the outset.
when values must be 5 minimum acceptable levels
Comparison Methodology The F , are functions of the desired objective, such as
speed or acoustic noise goals. The limits for the F , are
Since the targets and submarine performance estimates
also determined by the DM, the F , ilmtl values is the
are subjective, it is important in the discussion to describe
minimum acceptable and the F , ufifiur is the maximum
,tn,r,
carefully the decision model used for the selection process
acceptable value. This formulation for the score, z,, has
so that it can be verified by an interested reader. There
two distinct advantages. Scalarization is not a problem
is insufficient information in the construction and imple-
since the objective functions are normalized to a given
mentation of the assessment model used.
range. Commensurability is also not a problem because
The payload target is stated as being a function of op-
the objective function units cancel from numerator to de-
erating environment and transit range. This is true, but
nominator. To implement this scoring formulation, a stan-
the submarine can have only one payload and leaving it
dard weighted sum model can be used to assess the op-
broken down into two aspects creates assessment &fi-
tions, as in Equation (3).
culties. Perhaps stating this requirement as “the payload k
target for a particular mission option is the maximum of 1
the two values between operating environment and transit P, = y c w ,.
fi , - I
range” would be better. The same idea holds for the cost
estimation. In this way, perhaps the overall assessment where P is the score for the j”’ alternative
could have been done on a single level instead of across This formula yields a value of PI, that can be used to
two of them. compare the ranking of alternatives with various weights,
Without knowing the methodology used, the casual w,,attached to the different objectives. For example, the
reader cannot assess the fidelity of the results, which can acceptable lower limit on the goals could be selected to be
often suffer from problems such as inconsistent scalability within thirty percent of the target. A maximum score of
and commensurability The type of analysis performed is 1.0 is given to any objective that meets or exceeds a
from the field of multi-criteria decision making (MCDM), target. A score of 0.0 is given to any objective that does
using multi-attribute decision making (MADM) in partic- not at least come w i t h thirty percent of the target value.
ular [5b]. Many well known, standard techniques are avail- Table 2-B shows the result of our analysis using the au-
able for implementation of MADM [lb,2bl, and none are thor’s values for target and performance, and our model
listed in the author’s reference list. In addition, the au- using thirty percent from target as acceptable and all
thor’s method of selection of alternatives does not consider w,= 1.
that most of the options simply do not meet, or even come In order to properly assess the options, only subma-
close to meeting, many of the targets. This results in rines that come within the acceptable range for each ob-
many rankings that are not even feasible options, as they jective should be allowed to be ranked. Thus only feasible,
do not come close to satisfying major requirements. Al- as defined by coming within thirty percent of the targets
though this is a very early pre-design stage assessment, on all objectives, submarine alternatives are scored. Table
the target values should at least be close to being met in 3-B shows the ranking of only feasible designs.
order to consider a feasible option. For example, a sub- Note that the “feasibility of design” criteria severely
marine for an arctic mission with an estimated snort cycle restricts the number of acceptable alternatives. This is
of two, four, or twelve days, for a required snort cycle of not to say that the other submarine alternatives are not
twenty-four days, does not deserve a ranking of any sort, possible “real” submarines, it is just that they do not even
since this submarine clearly does not even approach meet- come close to meeting at least a minimum level of all stated
ing the target. objectives. For example, many of the non-AIP submarines
An example of a formulation adapted from proportional should be mfeasible since they do not meet even seventy
scores [lb] and a MADM model [2b] that accounts for percent of the target snort cycle. The larger submarines,
scalableness and commensurability is shown in Equations especially the nuclear options, should fall out of the low
(1) and (2). This formula allows the decision maker (DM) range categories since the cost is too high. In general,
to score an alternative within some acceptable range of arctic snort requirements, long transit requirements, and
the target. large endurance payload requirements make the nuclear
options the only feasible alternatives for long endurance,
high speed missions. Some marginal alternatives could be
reassessed by either relaxing target values or designing
when values must be 2 minimum acceptable levels submarine options that meet at least minimum acceptable

142 May 1996 NAVAL E N G I N E E R S J O U R N A L

 Submarine Power Sources For fhe Mission

TABLE 2-B
Results of the Weighted Sum Assessment Model
Range (nm)
500 1500 5000 12000
Coastal SSKB 3000 0.8864 AIP 3200 1.ooo AIP 3200 0.6955 SSN 5000 0.6806
AIP 3200 0.8750 AIP 1400 0.8958 SSN 5000 0.6458 SSKB 3000 0.6250
SSn 2000 0.8333 SSKB 1350 0.8750 SSN 3000 0.6261 SSn 2000 0.5833
AIP 1400 0.7708 SSn 2000 0.7697 SSKB 3000 0.6250 AIP 1400 0.5208
SSK 2400 0.7614 SSKB 3000 0.7593 AIP 1400 0.5913 AIP 3200 0.5000
SSK 1200 0.7614 SSK 2400 0.6343 SSn 2000 0.5833 SSK 2400 0.5000
SSKB 1350 0.7500 SSK 1200 0.6343 SSKB 1350 0.5705 SSKB 1350 0.s000
SSN 5000 0.6250 SSN 5000 0.6250 SSK 2400 0.5000 SSK 1200 0.5000
SSN 3000 0.6250 SSN 3000 0.6250 SSK 1200 0.5000 SSN 3000 0.4306
Regional SSN 3000 0.7788 AIP 3200 0.8750 SSN 3000 0.7799 SSN 5000 0.7831
SSKB 3000 0.7500 AIP 1400 0.8750 SSN 5000 0.7484 SSN 3000 0.5844
AIP 3200 0.7500 SSn 2000 0.7650 SSn 2000 0.5787 SSn 2000 0.5787
AIP 1400 0.7500 SSKB 1350 0.7500 AIP 3200 0.5705 AIP 3200 0.5000
SSn 2000 0.7307 SSKB 3000 0.6343 AIP 1400 0.5705 AIP 1400 0.5000
SSN 5000 0.7276 SSN 5000 0.6250 SSKB 3000 0.5000 SSKB 3000 0.5000
SSK 2400 0.6667 SSN 3000 0.6250 SSKB 1350 0.4455 SSK 2400 0.4167
SSK 1200 0.6250 SSK 2400 0.5509 SSK 2400 0.4167 SSKB 1350 0.3750
SSKB 1350 0.6250 SSK 1200 0.5093 SSK 1200 0.3750 SSK 1200 0.3750
Ocean SSN 5000 0.8750 SSN 5000 0.8750 SSN 5000 0.9432 SSN 5000 0.9306
SSN 3000 0.8472 AIP 3200 0.8750 SSN 3000 0.8483 SSN 3000 0.6528
SSKB 3000 0.7500 AIP 1400 0.8750 AIP 3200 0.5705 AIP 3200 0.5000
SSK 2400 0.7500 SSKB 1350 0.8750 AIP 1400 0.5705 AIP 1400 0.5000
AIP 3200 0.7500 SSN 3000 0.8472 SSKB 1350 0.5705 SSKB 1350 0.5000
AIP 1400 0.7500 SSn 2000 0.7037 SSn 2000 0.5000 SSN 2000 0.5000
SSKB 1350 0.7500 SSKB 3000 0.6343 SSKB 3000 0.5000 SSKB 3000 0.5000
SSN 2000 0.6250 SSK 2400 0.6343 SSK 2400 0.5000 SSK 2400 0.5000
SSK 1200 0.6250 SSK 1200 0.5093 SSK 1200 0.3750 SSK 1200 0.3750
Arctic SSN 5000 0.8750 SSN 5000 0.8750 SSN 5000 1.000 SSN 5000 0.9306
SSN 3000 0.7778 SSN 3000 0.8520 SSN 3000 0.8483 SSN 3000 0.6528
AIP 3200 0.6806 AIP 3200 0.8056 AIP 3200 0.5705 SSn 2000 0.5417
SSn 2000 0.6667 SSn 2000 0.7454 SSn 2000 0.5417 AIP 3200 0.5000
SSKB 3000 0.6250 SSKB 1350 0.6806 SSKB 1350 0.4455 SSKB 1350 0.3750
SSK 2400 0.6250 AIP 1400 0.6806 AIP 1400 0.4455 AIP 1400 0.3750
SSK 1200 0.6250 SSKB 3000 0.5093 SSKB 3000 0.3750 SSKB 3000 0.3750
SSKB 1350 0.5630 SSK 2400 0.5093 SSK 2400 0.3750 SSK 2400 0.3750
AIP 1400 0.5556 SSK 1200 0.5093 SSK 1200 0.3750 SSK 1200 0.3750

TABLE 3-B
Ranking of Feasible Submarine Alternatives
Range (nm)
500 1500 5000 12000

Coastal AIP 1400 0.7708 AIP 3200 1.oooo

SSKB 3000 0.7593
Regiona I SSN 3000 0.7789 SSN 5000 0.7831
SSN 5000 0.7484
Ocean SSN 5000 0.9432 SSN 5000 0.9306
SSN 3000 0.8483
Arctic SSN 3000 0.8520 SSN 5000 1.000 SSN 5000 0.9306
SSN 3000 0.8483

NAVAL E N G I N E E R S J O U R N A L May 1996 143

Submarine Power Sources For Vie Mission

values for the shortfalls, especially in cases where only a The system energy conversion efficiency (allowing for
single target is missed. any incompleteness of fuel or oxygen utilisation) is a cru-
Overall, the trends indicated by Table 6 in the paper are cial, and sometimes contentious parameter in assessing
reasonable, with smaller, cheaper, non nuclear submarines performance of AIP systems. In some cases (e.g. Tinney
being better suited to close in, short duration missions, and Hensler 1994), proton exchange membrane fuel cell
and nuclear for long endurance, high speed missions. The efficiency of seventy percent or higher, has been claimed
AIP options look like viable alternatives good in the mid- (some authors have even used the same figure for the
range, but still regional missions. The author’s conclu- system efficiency). This value is correct at laboratory
sions may be skewed due to inadequate accounting of Net scale, for low current densities, but falls to about fifty- to
Present Value, safety, air punfication, and operational con- fifty-five percent for practical fuel cell modules running a
siderations such as indiscretion ratio. full power, or fifty-five- to sixty percent for the same mod-
ules running at low load.
Conclusion After allowance for reformer and purification system
losses (as heat and as discharge of unused fuel or oxygen),
Despite the seemingly large number of negative com- for parasitic electrical consumption (pumps and hydrogen
ments, the paper is still considered to be an extremely delivery compressor) and power conditioning (voltage con-
useful piece of work. The author went to great pains to trol for management of power-sharing with the battery,
establish a method for fair comparison between a wide over a representative profile of power use and battery
variety of alternatives. We have presented alternative as- charge), I arrived at a net efficiency of forty-four percent
sessments not to criticize the author’s efforts, but to pre- for a methanoVLOX fueled PEMFC system.
sent possible validation of his results. Those that quibble To ensure a fair comparison, it would be helpful if the
too loudly with the approach should be invited to do better. sixty-five percent efficiency, quoted for MCFC systems,
Cost and Operational Effectiveness Analysis is a task that could be supported by reference to published experimental
is very hard, very time consuming, and liely to introduce data, preferably corresponding to a fuel cell module power
just as many other considerations that could be regarded density in the range 10-100 kWim“. Distinction between
as questionable. The author is encouraged to continue to electrical generation efficiency and the credit for waste
investigate and report on submarine AIP propulsion sys- heat recovery would also be useful, especially in the con-
tem developments and implement MADM methods in his text of the use to which the waste heat is put.
assessment.
REFERENCES Phosphoric Acid Fuel Cells
[lb] Clemen, R., Making Hard Decisions: An Introduction to
Decision Analysis, PWS-Kent Publishing, Boston, 1991. Phosphoric acid electrolyte fuel cells have been demon-
[2b] Ray, T. and 0.E Sha, “Multicriteria Optimization Model for strated on land, in the MW range, for long periods of
a Container Ship Design,” Marine Technology, v.31, n.4, steady operation. The good feature of phosphoric acid fuel
October 1994. cells is that their high temperature operation confers tol-
[3b] Carmichael, A. D., “Submarine Propulsion Systems: An erance of fuel and oxidant stream impurities, especially
Evaluation of Air Independent Propulsion Technologies,” carbon monoxide. They may be used with direct supply of
MIT Department of Ocean Engineering. Report Number
92-6, 1992. reformat gas mixtures. Also, their operating temperature
[4b] Kerros, E , I? Leroy, and D. Grouset, “MESMA: AIP Sys- is high enough for waste heat to be recycled to a methanol
tem for Submarines,” Proceedings of the Warship ’93 In- reformer. However, they have many disadvantages for sub-
ternational Symposium on Naval Submarines 4, Royal In- marine applications.
stitute of Naval Architects, London, May 1993. The electrolyte is solid at room temperature, and hy-
[5b] Vinke, E, Multicriteria Decision-aid, John Wiley and Sons, groscopic. Storage requirements are demanding, and a
New York, 1992.
very long, slow warm-up is necessary to reach the oper-
ating temperature. The corrosive electrolyte and high
temperature enforce the selection of materials, which are
rather brittle, and therefore difficult to protect against
AUTHOR’S REPLY shock.
The hot, concentrated phosphoric acid is capable of cor-
To Tom Goldsworthy: roding the carbon catalyst support, producing carbon diox-
My paper gives only brief coverage of alternative AIP ide, and of damaging the graphic bipolar plates. the cata-
systems, in order to prepare the way for comparison of lyst also degrades during operations, especially at the
different concepts of submarines. Cost is a major factor in higher temperatures required for good power density.
the comparison, but the scope for economic assessment Efficiency is lower than for alkaline or polymer mem-
of AIP options, within this paper, is severely limited. brane electrolyte fuel cells, although not unacceptably so.

144 May 1996 NAVAL E N G I N E E R S J O U R N A L

 Submarine Power Sources For the Mission

Phosphoric acid can migrate as vapour, although only ment, heat exchangers, waste product disposal equip-
slowl~and would be lost to the product water over a long ment, control systems and power conditioning systems,
period. The product water would still be drinkable, but and also taking into account space required for mainte-
the phosphoric acid would hinder recycling of product nance and inspection access.
water for use in a reformer. Development of air-breathg fuel cell systems using
Power density of phosphoric acid fuel cells is generally diesel fuel would remove the fuel tankage disadvantage.
mediocre, although the most compact systems could be On Mr. Goldsworthy’s efficient figures, the efficiency dis-
acceptable in this respect. advantage would also be overcome by MCFCs in an air-
It wdl be appreciated that no single problem rules out breathing mode. I cannot comment specifically on MCFC
submarine application of phosphoric acid fuel cells, but the costs, but we are in complete agreement that use of com-
list of disadvantages is not encouraging. mercially mass-produced technology would be one of the
best ways to reduce costs.

Molten Carbonate and Solid Oxide To LCdr. Clifford Whitcomb, USN:

The agreement between our system size estimates is
Fuel Cells generally pleasing, For the heat engine and MethanoliLOX
These very high temperature systems offer the prospect systems, the small differences between our estimates may
of internal reforming, running on directly supplied metha- originate in my allowances for gangway and through ser-
nol vapour fuel. This avoids the heat losses, fuel and oxi- vices volume, maintenance and inspection access and
dant losses, and electrical parasitic consumption of a sep- structural volume, to achieve a total contribution to the
arate reformer, purification and discharge/recycle system. pressure hull volume. The HydrideiLOX figure is the vol-
The overall system electrical generation efficiency would ume required to achieve a total contribution to the pres-
be close to the fuel cell efficiency, although I would expect sure hull volume. The HydrideiLOX figure is the volume
this to be higher than the fuel cell efficiency of a PEMFC required to achieve neutral buoyancy of a mass-limited
system. system. The difference between our estimates is small,
The concerns about operating temperature and man- and fair comparison between mass-limited and volume-
agement of warm up, cool down cycles are largely read limited systems would, in any case, require comparison
across from the more modest temperature PAFC system, of independently optimized submarine designs.
although I understand that MCFCs and SOFCs contain I have given a breakdown for the major contributions to
brittle components which may be susceptible to thermal my estimate of the MLOX system volume. the most likely
shock. Since poor temperature control cannot degrade sources of the discrepancy between our estimates seem
platinum catalyst performance in MCFC or SOFC sys- to be my thirty-three percent allocation for storage of fresh
tems, reading across from PAFCs may have been inappro- and degraded electrolyte, and my twenty percent allocation
priate. for empty space to facilitate cell handling for refueling by
For use of diesel fuel (sulfur-free), an external reformer replacement. There may also be a difference in the eight
will be required to prevent soot formation. However, the percent minor contributions, which includes power condi-
acceptability of carbon monoxide as a fuel for MCFCs and tioning equipment (for voltage control and management of
SOFCs avoids the requirement for a lower temperature power sharing with the main battery), and DC switchgear.
shdt stage to complete reforming, which is necessary for The hotel load estimate of 150 kW seems rather low. I
low temperature fuel cell systems to run efficiently on suggest 250-300 kW for an AIP submarine of about 3200
hydrogen derived from diesel fuel. tons. This does not greatly affect the comparison of alter-
Mr. Goldsworthy points out that a sixty-five percent native AIP systems, but it is important to the comparison
efficient diesel fueled MCFC submarine could go almost of AIP with nuclear power. Some of this hotel load is for
three times as far as a forty-four percent efficient methanol habitability maintenance requirements which arise from
fueled PEMFC submarine, per tonne of-fuel. Since the the long submerged endurance, including clearance of any
volume of LOX storage is dominant, more emphasis should methanol vapour contamination from the submarine’s at-
be given to his calculations which show that a sixty-five mosphere.
percent efficient diesel fueled MCFC submarine would Methanol is commonly transported in bulk by road tank-
have a twenty-five percent advantage, per tonne of LOX, ers, as is liquid oxygen. The logistic problems of LOX and
over a forty-four percent efficient methanol fueled subma- methanol appear to be manageable, and of similar nature.
rine. The logistic advantages of diesel fuel do not apply to the
My statements on use of fuel cell power for air-breathing sulfur free grade (less than 0.5 ppm) required for reform-
transit are under the heading “MethanoliLOX Fuel Cell ing. Use of low sulfur diesel for a system incorporating a
Systems.” final stage of desulfurization may be possible, but some of
System power density is the net electric power output the sulfur compounds found in diesel fuel are not easily
per volume, taking into account all fuel processing equip- removed.

NAVAL E N G I N E E R S J O U R N A L May 1996 145

Submarine Power Sources For the Mission

I am advised that internal reforming of diesel fuel in presents the credits allowed for performance short of the
MCFCs is not feasible, because of coking. External steam targets, for any given environment or range. The value
pre-reforming of sulfur free diesel to methane, carbon zero eliminates an options. Each entry in Table 5 is the
monoxide, carbon dioxide and hydrogen may be feasible, product of the corresponding environment and transit
at temperatures compatible with recycling of MCFC waste credits given in Table 4. Many entries are clearly so low
heat to the pre-reformer. The low-temperature pre-re- that the option must be eliminated.
forming process has been demonstrated with kerosene, The use of a product of credits rather than a weighted
over highly active nickel catalysts, but diesel fuel is much sum prevents accumulation of an excessive score by an
more difficult to reform. option with a single disquahfymg deficiency. This achieves
The comments about propulsion power, payload targets, the same objectives as the method preferred by the reader.
cost estimation and other requirements are part of a po- Arguably, Table 6 could be made clearer by renormalis-
tentially endless debate. There are so many alternative ation of the values, so that each combination of environ-
viewpoints, that it is probably best to ask all interested ment and range would have a top score of 1.0. +
readers and members of the audience to form their own
views of the requirements and of the validity of the as-
sessment which I have presented. REFERENCE
I have given no credit to nuclear submarines for speed [16] Tinney, LCdr. M.D., and J. Hensler, “Efficiency and Power
and endurance in excess of the targets. However, I have Density Improvements in Electric Propulsion Systems,”
credited non nuclear submarines with some capability, INEC 94 Cost Effective Maritime Defense, RNEC Mana-
even when they fall well short of these targets. Table 4 don, Plymouth, UK, 31 August-2 September 1994.

146 May 1996 NAVAL ENGINEERS JOURNAL