SIST EN 17124:2022
(Main)Hydrogen fuel - Product specification and quality assurance for hydrogen refuelling points dispensing gaseous hydrogen - Proton exchange membrane (PEM) fuel cell applications for vehicles
Hydrogen fuel - Product specification and quality assurance for hydrogen refuelling points dispensing gaseous hydrogen - Proton exchange membrane (PEM) fuel cell applications for vehicles
This document specifies the quality characteristics of hydrogen fuel dispensed at hydrogen refuelling stations for use in proton exchange membrane (PEM) fuel cell vehicle systems, and the corresponding quality assurance considerations for ensuring uniformity of the hydrogen fuel.
Wasserstoff als Kraftstoff - Produktfestlegung und Qualitätssicherung - Protonenaustauschmembran (PEM) - Brennstoffzellenanwendungen für Straßenfahrzeuge
Dieses Dokument legt die Qualitätseigenschaften von Wasserstoff zur Abgabe an Wasserstofftankstellen für die Nutzung in Brennstoffzellenfahrzeugsystemen mit Protonen-Austauschmembran-Brennstoffzellen (Proton Exchange Membrane, PEM) und die zugehörige Qualitätssicherung fest, um eine Gleichförmigkeit von Wasserstoff als Kraftstoff sicherzustellen.
Carburant hydrogène - Spécification de produit et assurance qualité pour les points de ravitaillement en hydrogène distribuant de l'hydrogène gazeux - Applications des piles à combustible à membrane à échange de protons (MEP) pour les véhicules
Le présent document spécifie les caractéristiques de qualité du carburant hydrogène distribué dans les stations de remplissage d'hydrogène et destiné aux systèmes de véhicules à piles à combustible à membrane à échange de protons (MEP), ainsi que les considérations relatives à l'assurance qualité correspondante afin d'assurer l'uniformité du carburant hydrogène.
Vodik kot gorivo - Specifikacija proizvoda in zagotavljanje kakovosti plinastega vodika na polnilnih postajah - Gorivne celice z membrano za protonsko izmenjavo (PEM) za cestna vozila
Ta dokument določa kakovostne značilnosti vodika kot goriva, ki se polni na polnilnih postajah, za uporabo v sistemih cestnih vozil z gorivnimi celicami z membranami za protonsko izmenjavo (PEM) ter povezano zagotavljanje kakovosti za namene zagotavljanja enotnosti vodika kot goriva.
General Information
Relations
Standards Content (Sample)
SLOVENSKI STANDARD
01-november-2022
Nadomešča:
SIST EN 17124:2018
SIST ISO 14687-2:2021
Vodik kot gorivo - Specifikacija izdelka in zagotavljanje kakovosti plinastega
vodika na polnilnih postajah - Gorivne celice z membrano za protonsko izmenjavo
(PEM) za cestna vozila
Hydrogen fuel - Product specification and quality assurance for hydrogen refuelling
points dispensing gaseous hydrogen - Proton exchange membrane (PEM) fuel cell
applications for vehicles
Wasserstoff als Kraftstoff - Produktfestlegung und Qualitätssicherung -
Protonenaustauschmembran (PEM) - Brennstoffzellenanwendungen für
Straßenfahrzeuge
Carburant hydrogène - Spécification de produit et assurance qualité pour les points de
ravitaillement en hydrogène distribuant de l'hydrogène gazeux - Applications des piles à
combustible à membrane à échange de protons (MEP) pour les véhicules
Ta slovenski standard je istoveten z: EN 17124:2022
ICS:
27.075 Tehnologija vodika Hydrogen technologies
43.060.40 Sistemi za gorivo Fuel systems
2003-01.Slovenski inštitut za standardizacijo. Razmnoževanje celote ali delov tega standarda ni dovoljeno.
EN 17124
EUROPEAN STANDARD
NORME EUROPÉENNE
March 2022
EUROPÄISCHE NORM
ICS 75.160.20; 27.075 Supersedes EN 17124:2018
English Version
Hydrogen fuel - Product specification and quality
assurance for hydrogen refuelling points dispensing
gaseous hydrogen - Proton exchange membrane (PEM)
fuel cell applications for vehicles
Carburant hydrogène - Spécification de produit et Wasserstoff als Kraftstoff - Produktfestlegung und
assurance qualité pour les points de ravitaillement en Qualitätssicherung - Protonenaustauschmembran
hydrogène distribuant de l'hydrogène gazeux - (PEM)-Brennstoffzellenanwendungen für Fahrzeuge
Applications des piles à combustible à membrane à
échange de protons (MEP) pour les véhicules
This European Standard was approved by CEN on 24 January 2022.
CEN members are bound to comply with the CEN/CENELEC Internal Regulations which stipulate the conditions for giving this
European Standard the status of a national standard without any alteration. Up-to-date lists and bibliographical references
concerning such national standards may be obtained on application to the CEN-CENELEC Management Centre or to any CEN
member.
This European Standard exists in three official versions (English, French, German). A version in any other language made by
translation under the responsibility of a CEN member into its own language and notified to the CEN-CENELEC Management
Centre has the same status as the official versions.
CEN members are the national standards bodies of Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia,
Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway,
Poland, Portugal, Republic of North Macedonia, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and
United Kingdom.
EUROPEAN COMMITTEE FOR STANDARDIZATION
COMITÉ EUROPÉEN DE NORMALISATION
EUROPÄISCHES KOMITEE FÜR NORMUNG
CEN-CENELEC Management Centre: Rue de la Science 23, B-1040 Brussels
© 2022 CEN All rights of exploitation in any form and by any means reserved Ref. No. EN 17124:2022 E
worldwide for CEN national Members.
Contents Page
European foreword . 3
1 Scope . 4
2 Normative references . 4
3 Terms and definitions . 4
4 Requirements . 5
5 Hydrogen Quality Assurance Methodology . 7
5.1 General Requirements – Potential sources of impurities . 7
5.2 Prescriptive Approach for Hydrogen Quality Assurance . 7
5.3 Risk Assessment for Hydrogen and Quality Assurance . 7
5.4 Impact of impurities on fuel cell power train . 10
6 Hydrogen Quality Control Approaches . 12
6.1 General requirements . 12
6.2 Spot sampling . 12
6.3 Monitoring . 12
7 Routine Quality Control . 12
8 Non-routine Quality Control . 12
9 Non compliances . 13
Annex A (informative) Impact of impurities . 14
Annex B (informative) Example of Supply chain evaluation with regards to potential sources
of impurities . 18
Annex C (informative) Example of Risk Assessment — Centralized production, pipeline
transportation . 23
Bibliography. 31
European foreword
This document (EN 17124:2022) has been prepared by Technical Committee CEN/TC 268 “Cryogenic
vessels and specific hydrogen technologies applications”, the secretariat of which is held by AFNOR.
This European Standard shall be given the status of a national standard, either by publication of an
identical text or by endorsement, at the latest by September 2022, and conflicting national standards shall
be withdrawn at the latest by September 2022.
Attention is drawn to the possibility that some of the elements of this document may be the subject of
patent rights. CEN shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights.
This document supersedes EN 17124:2018.
This document has been prepared under Mandate M/533 given to CEN by the European Commission and
the European Free Trade Association.
Any feedback and questions on this document should be directed to the users’ national standards body.
A complete listing of these bodies can be found on the CEN website.
According to the CEN-CENELEC Internal Regulations, the national standards organisations of the
following countries are bound to implement this European Standard: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia,
Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland,
Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Republic of North
Macedonia, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and the United
Kingdom.
1 Scope
This document specifies the quality characteristics of hydrogen fuel dispensed at hydrogen refuelling
stations for use in proton exchange membrane (PEM) fuel cell vehicle systems, and the corresponding
quality assurance considerations for ensuring uniformity of the hydrogen fuel.
2 Normative references
There are no normative references in this document.
3 Terms and definitions
For the purposes of this document, the following terms and definitions apply.
ISO and IEC maintain terminological databases for use in standardization at the following addresses:
— ISO Online browsing platform: available at https://www.iso.org/obp
— IEC Electropedia: available at https://www.electropedia.org/
3.1
constituent
component (or compound) found within a hydrogen fuel mixture
3.2
contaminant
impurity that adversely affects the components within the fuel cell system or the hydrogen storage
system
Note 1 to entry: An adverse effect can be reversible or irreversible.
3.3
detection limit
lowest quantity of a substance that can be distinguished from the absence of that substance with a stated
confidence limit
3.4
fuel cell system
power system used for the generation of electricity on a fuel cell vehicle, typically containing the following
subsystems: fuel cell stack, air processing, fuel processing, thermal management and water management
3.5
hydrogen fuel index
fraction or percentage of a fuel mixture that is hydrogen
3.6
irreversible effect
effect which results in a permanent degradation of the fuel cell power system performance that cannot
be restored by practical changes of operational conditions and/or gas composition
3.7
on-site fuel supply
hydrogen fuel supplying system with a hydrogen production system in the same site
3.8
off-site fuel supply
hydrogen fuel supplying system without a hydrogen production system in the same site, receiving
hydrogen fuel which is produced out of the site
3.9
particulate
solid or liquid particle (aerosol) that can be entrained somewhere in the delivery, storage, or transfer of
the hydrogen fuel
3.10
reversible effect
effect which results in a non-permanent degradation of the fuel cell power system performance that can
be restored by practical changes of operational conditions and/or gas composition
4 Requirements
The fuel quality requirements at the dispenser nozzle shall meet the requirements of Table 1.
NOTE The fuel specification is not process or feedstock specific. Non-listed contaminants have no guarantee of
being benign.
Table 1 — Fuel quality specifications for PEM fuel cell road vehicle applications
Constituent Characteristics
a
99,97 %
Hydrogen fuel index (minimum mole fraction)
Total non-hydrogen gases 300 μmol/mol
Maximum concentration of individual contaminants
Water (H O) 5 μmol/mol
b
2 μmol/mol
Total hydrocarbons (THC) (Excluding Methane)
Methane (CH ) 100 µmol/mol
Oxygen (O ) 5 μmol/mol
Helium (He) 300 μmol/mol
Nitrogen (N ) 300 μmol/mol
Argon (Ar) 300 μmol/mol
Carbon dioxide (CO ) 2 μmol/mol
c
0,2 μmol/mol
Carbon monoxide (CO)
Total sulfur compounds (H S basis) 0,004 μmol/mol
c
0,2 μmol/mol
Formaldehyde (HCHO)
c
0,2 μmol/mol
Formic acid (HCOOH)
Ammonia (NH ) 0,1 μmol/mol
d
0,05 μmol/mol
Halogenated compounds (Halogenate ion basis)
Maximum particulates concentration 1 mg/kg
For the constituents that are additive, such as total hydrocarbons and total sulfur
compounds, the sum of the constituents shall be less than or equal to the acceptable limit.
a
The hydrogen fuel index is determined by substracting the “total non-hydrogen gases” in this
table, expressed in mole percent, from 100 mol percent.
b
Total hydrocarbons include oxygenated organic species. Total hydrocarbons shall be measured
on a carbon basis (μmolC/mol).
c
Total of CO, HCHO, HCOOH shall not exceed 0,2 µmol/mol.
d
All halogenated compounds which could potentially be in the hydrogen gas (for example,
hydrogen chloride (HCl), and organic halides (R-X)) should be determined according to the hydrogen
quality assurance discussed in Clause 5 and the sum shall be less than 0,05 µmol /mol).
5 Hydrogen Quality Assurance Methodology
5.1 General Requirements – Potential sources of impurities
A quality assurance plan for the entire supply chain shall be created to ensure that the hydrogen quality
will meet the requirements listed in Clause 4. The methodology used to develop the quality assurance
plan can vary but shall include one of the two approaches described in this document. The general
description of these two approaches are described in 5.2 and 5.3.
For a given Hydrogen Refuelling Station (HRS), the contaminants listed in the hydrogen specification
referred to Table 1 could be present. There are several parts of the supply chain where impurities can be
introduced. Annex B describes potential impurities at each step of the supply chain.
When a contaminant is classified as potentially present, it shall be taken into account in the Quality
Assurance methodology (risk assessment or prescriptive approach) described below.
5.2 Prescriptive Approach for Hydrogen Quality Assurance
A prescriptive approach can be applied for clearly identified supply chains. The prescriptive approach is
not defined in this document.
5.3 Risk Assessment for Hydrogen and Quality Assurance
Risk assessment consists of identifying the probability of having each impurity above the threshold
values of specifications given in Table 1 and evaluating the severity of each impurity for the fuel cell car.
As an aid to clearly defining the risk(s) for risk assessment purposes, three fundamental questions are
often helpful:
— What might go wrong: which event could cause the impurities to be above the threshold value?
— What is the likelihood (probability of occurrence) that impurities could be above the threshold value?
— What are the consequences (severity) for the fuel cell car?
In doing an effective risk assessment, the robustness of the data set is important because it determines
the quality of the output. Revealing assumptions and reasonable sources of uncertainty will enhance
confidence in this output and/or help identify its limitations. The output of the risk assessment is a
qualitative description of a range of risk. The probability of an occurrence, in which each hydrogen
impurity exceeds the threshold value, is defined by the following table of occurrence classes:
Table 2 — Occurrence classes for an impurity
Occurrence Occurrence or frequency
Class name Occurrence or frequency
a
class
(example)
Very unlikely Contaminant above threshold
0 (Practically never been observed for this 1 per 10 000 000 refueling
impossible) source / supply chain / station
Known to occur at least once for
1 Unlikely this source / supply chain/ 1 per 1 000 000 refueling
station
Has happened once a year for
2 Possible this source / supply chain / 1 per 100 000 refueling
station
Has happened more than once a
3 Likely year for this source / supply 1 out of 10 000 refueling
chain / station
Happens on a regular basis for
More than 1 out of 1 000
4 Very likely this source / supply chain /
refueling
station
a
Based on a refueling station supplying 100 000 refuelings per year.
The range of severity class (level of damage for vehicle) is defined in Table 3.
Table 3 — Severity classes for an impurity
Impact categories
Severity
Hardware Hardware
FCEV Performance impact or damage
Performance
class
impact impact
impact
temporary permanent
— No impact
0 No No No
— Minor impact
1 Yes No No
— Temporary loss of power
— No impact on hardware
— Car still operates
— Reversible damage
2 Yes or No Yes No
— Requires specific light maintenance
procedure
— Car still operates
— Reversible damage
3 Yes Yes No
— Requires specific immediate
maintenance procedure. Gradual
power loss that does not compromise
safety
— Irreversible damage
a
Yes Yes Yes or No
— Requires major repair (e.g. stack
change)
— Power loss or Car Stop that
compromises safety
a
Any damage, whether permanent ornon-permanent, which compromises safety will be categorized as 4,
otherwise non-permanent damage will be categorized as 1, 2 or 3.
The final risk is defined by Table 4, titled “Acceptability table”, and which combines results from Tables 2
and 3.
Table 4 — Acceptability table
Severity
0 1 2 3 4
Occurrence as
the combined
probabilities 3
of occurrence
along the
whole supply
chain
Further investigations are
Acceptable risk area Unacceptable risk; additional
needed to ensure the risks is
Key Existing controls control or barriers are
reduced to as low as
acceptable required
reasonably practicable
For each impurity of the specification and for a given HRS (including the supply chain of hydrogen), a risk
assessment shall be applied to define the global risk. Risk control includes decision making to reduce
and/or accept risks. The purpose of risk control is to reduce the risk to an acceptable level. The amount
of effort used for risk control should be proportional to the significance of the risk. Decision makers might
use different processes, including a benefit-cost analysis, for understanding the optimal level of risk
control. Risk control might focus on the following questions:
— Is the risk above an acceptable level?
— What can be done to reduce or eliminate risks?
— What is the appropriate balance among benefits, risks and resources?
For each level of risk, decision shall be taken in order to either refuse the risk and then find mitigation or
barriers to reduce it, or accept the risk level as it is. Risk reduction focuses on processes for mitigation or
avoidance of quality risks when it exceeds an acceptable level (yellow or red zone in Table 5). Risk
reduction might include actions taken to mitigate the severity and/or probability of occurrence.
In the yellow zone, the risk could be acceptable but redesign or other changes should be considered if
reasonably practicable. Further investigation should be performed to give better estimate of the risk.
When assessing the need of remedial actions, the number of events of this risk level should be taken into
consideration in order to be As Low As Reasonably Practicable (ALARP).
An example of such approach is given in Annex C.
5.4 Impact of impurities on fuel cell power train
The severity level of each impurity shall be determined. Indeed, the impact on the car if each impurity
exceeds the threshold values given in Table 1 will depend on the concentration of the contaminant. The
following Table 5 shows the summary of the concentration based impact of the impurities on the fuel cell.
For more information on the impact of the impurities on fuel-cell, see Annex A.
In the first two columns the contaminants with their chemical formulas are given. An estimate of the
exceeded concentration above the threshold value for each impurity is named “Level 1” and is given in
column 5. According to this concentration, a severity class is given in column 4 for each impurity. This
severity class covers the impact of this impurity above the threshold value up to this limit.
If higher concentrations that exceed Level 1 can be reached, the Severity Class is given in column 6.
Table 5 — Severity Classes (SC) — Impact of impurities on fuel cell powertrain
SC for impurity SC for impurity
Threshold Value
Level 1 Value
concentration from concentration
[µmol/mol]
Impurity
threshold to level 1 greater than
[ µmol/mol]
(Table 1)
where applicable Level 1
b
Total non-H gases
300 UD 4
1–4
b
Nitrogen N
300 UD 4
1–4
b
Argon Ar 300 UD 4
1–4
b
Oxygen O
5 1–4 UD 4
Carbon dioxide CO
2 1 3 4
b
Carbon monoxide
CO 0,2 2–3 1 4
Methane CH
100 1 300 4
Water H O
5 4 NA 4
Total sulfur compounds H S basis
0,004 4 NA 4
Ammonia NH
0,1 4 NA 4
b
Total hydrocarbons CH basis
2 NA 4
1–4
b
Formaldehyde CH O
0,2 2–3 1 4
b
Formic Acid CH O
0,2 2–3 1 4
2 2
Total carbon monoxide, Σ CO, CH O,
0,2 2–3 1 4
formaldehyde and formic acid
CH O
2 2
Halogenated compounds 0,05 4 NA 4
b
Helium
He 300 UD 4
1–4
Maximum particulates
1 mg/kg 4 NA 4
concentration (liquid and solid)
UD: Undetermined value.
NA: Not applicable.
a
Threshold value according to the requirements in the hydrogen specification.
b
Higher value to be considered for risk assessment approach until more specific data are available.
6 Hydrogen Quality Control Approaches
6.1 General requirements
Quality control for the purpose of quality assurance may be performed at the dispenser nozzle or at other
location in accordance with the quality assurance risk assessment.
There are two kinds of quality control at a HRS: on line monitoring or off line analysis after spot sampling.
These methods shall be used individually or together to ensure hydrogen quality levels.
6.2 Spot sampling
Spot sampling at an HRS involves capturing a measured amount for chemical analysis. Sampling is used
to perform an accurate and comprehensive analysis of impurities, which is done externally, typically at a
laboratory. Since the sampling process involves drawing a gas sample, it is typically done on a periodic
basis and requires specialized sampling equipment and personnel to operate it.
The sampling procedure shall ensure and maintain the integrity of the sample.
NOTE ISO 19880-1 and ISO 21087:2019 include recommendations for sampling procedure.
6.3 Monitoring
An HRS can have real time monitoring of the hydrogen gas stream for one or more impurities on a
continuous or semi-continuous basis. A critical impurity can be monitored to ensure it does not exceed a
critical level, or monitoring of canary species are used to alert of potential issues with the hydrogen
production or purification process.
When used, monitoring equipment should be installed in-line with the hydrogen gas stream and shall
meet the process requirements of the HRS, as well as be calibrated on a periodic basis.
7 Routine Quality Control
Routine analysis shall be performed on a periodic basis once every specified time period or once for each
lot or batch if a quality certificate is not available. The methodology selected in hydrogen quality
assurance plan determines the type and frequency of the routine analysis. A prescriptive methodology
may be used as described in 5.2 or a risk assessment methodology may be used as described in 5.3.
Information on the routine analysis for each step of the supply chain is provided in Annex B.
8 Non-routine Quality Control
The hydrogen quality plan shall identify any non-routine conditions and subsequent required actions.
Some common non-routine conditions include but are not limited to the following:
— a new production system is constructed at a production site or a new HRS is first commissioned;
— the production system at a production site or HRS is modified;
— a routine or non-routine open inspection, repair, catalyst exchange, or the like is performed on a
production system at the production site or HRS;
— a question concerning quality is raised when, for example, there is a problem with a vehicle because
of hydrogen supplied at the production site or HRS, and a claim is received from a user directly or
indirectly;
— an issue concerning quality emerges when, for example, a voluntary audit raises the possibility that
quality control is not administered properly;
— analysis necessary for testing, research or any other purposes;
— after any severe malfunctions of transportation system of compressed hydrogen, liquid hydrogen
and hydrogen pipeline.
9 Non compliances
In case of quality control showing results not compliant with Table 1, appropriate action shall be taken
by the operator to prevent further out of specification H refuelling of the vehicles.
Annex A
(informative)
Impact of impurities
A.1 General
The following chapter gives a brief description of the impact of impurities on the stack, fuel cell
components and the complete fuel cell powertrain. Detailed information can be found in the relevant
literature and journal publications. It shall be noted that Annex A refers to known impurities and their
effects on the fuel cell powertrain at the time of publication. It cannot be excluded that further impurities
exist. Furthermore, in most cases, only the impact of a single impurity has been investigated and there is
still the need for fundamental research regarding the impact of a combination of the different impurities
on the fuel cell power train.
A.2 Inert Gases: Argon, Nitrogen
The main effect due to the presence of inert gases such as argon (Ar) and nitrogen (N ) is to lower the
cell potential due to the dilution effect of the inert species (dilution of the hydrogen gas) and inertial
(diffusion) effects. Nevertheless, under consideration of the threshold value current stack designs, fuel
cell components and fuel cell powertrains are not adversely affected by inert constituents. High inert gas
concentrations will lead to power losses, increased fuel consumption and loss of efficiency. Furthermore,
hydrogen starvation caused by high inert gas concentrations could lead to permanent damage of the fuel
cell stack or car stop. Inert gases will accumulate in the anode loop and could affect venting and recycle
blower control. Further sources report that the presence of N hinders desorption of adsorbed carbon
monoxide (CO) from the surface of the anode catalyst. It should also be noted that inert gases can affect
the accuracy of mass metering instruments for hydrogen dispensing.
A.3 Oxygen
Oxygen (O ) concentrations lower than the threshold value do not adversely affect the function of the
fuel cell. Reactive gas mixtures shall be prevented. However, it could be a concern for some on-board
vehicle storage systems, for example, by reaction with metal hydride storage materials.
A.4 Carbon Dioxide
The contamination effects of carbon dioxide (CO ) depend on the concentration, fuel cell operation
conditions and anode catalyst composition. First of all, CO dilutes the hydrogen gas and could affect
venting and recycle blower control of the fuel cell powertrain. Furthermore, CO can be catalytically
converted via a reverse water gas shift reaction into CO that in consequence poisons the catalyst. In
addition, co-occurrence of CO and CO in hydrogen has an accumulated influence on cell performance.
CO could adversely affect on-board hydrogen storage systems using metal hydride alloys.
A.5 Carbon Monoxide
Carbon Monoxide (CO) causes severe catalyst poisoning that adversely affects the performance of the fuel
cell power train. CO binds strongly to Pt sites, resulting in the reduction of the effective electrochemical
surface area (ECSA) available for H adsorption and oxidation. The catalyst poisoning effect is strongly
related to the concentration of CO, the exposure time, the cell operation temperature and anode catalyst
types. Although the effects of CO on the fuel cell can be reversed through mitigating strategies, such as
material selection of membrane electrode assembly (MEA), system design and operation, the lifetime
effects of CO on performance is a strong concern. Especially lower catalyst loadings needed for cost
optimization and longer hydrogen protection times lead to more severe poisoning effect. Therefore, CO
needs to be kept at very low levels in hydrogen fuel.
A.6 Methane
Methane is one of the very few hydrocarbons that does not contaminate PEMFCs. It does not react with
the catalyst so dilution is the major effect that shall be considered with methane gas.
A.7 Water
Water (H O) is an issue for hydrogen dispensing systems due to the potential formation of ice in the on-
board vehicle tank system or fuel cell components. Excess water can exist in liquid state and can cause
corrosion of metallic components. Already low quantities could lead to severe impacts on the
components. Furthermore, water does affect the function of the stack. Water provides a transport
+ + 2+ + +
mechanism for water-soluble impurities, especially as solvent for cations like Na , K , Ca , Cs and NH
when present as an aer
...
SLOVENSKI STANDARD
01-november-2022
Nadomešča:
SIST EN 17124:2018
SIST ISO 14687-2:2021
Vodik kot gorivo - Specifikacija proizvoda in zagotavljanje kakovosti plinastega
vodika na polnilnih postajah - Gorivne celice z membrano za protonsko izmenjavo
(PEM) za cestna vozila
Hydrogen fuel - Product specification and quality assurance for hydrogen refuelling
points dispensing gaseous hydrogen - Proton exchange membrane (PEM) fuel cell
applications for vehicles
Wasserstoff als Kraftstoff - Produktfestlegung und Qualitätssicherung -
Protonenaustauschmembran (PEM) - Brennstoffzellenanwendungen für
Straßenfahrzeuge
Carburant hydrogène - Spécification de produit et assurance qualité pour les points de
ravitaillement en hydrogène distribuant de l'hydrogène gazeux - Applications des piles à
combustible à membrane à échange de protons (MEP) pour les véhicules
Ta slovenski standard je istoveten z: EN 17124:2022
ICS:
27.075 Tehnologija vodika Hydrogen technologies
43.060.40 Sistemi za gorivo Fuel systems
2003-01.Slovenski inštitut za standardizacijo. Razmnoževanje celote ali delov tega standarda ni dovoljeno.
EN 17124
EUROPEAN STANDARD
NORME EUROPÉENNE
March 2022
EUROPÄISCHE NORM
ICS 75.160.20; 27.075 Supersedes EN 17124:2018
English Version
Hydrogen fuel - Product specification and quality
assurance for hydrogen refuelling points dispensing
gaseous hydrogen - Proton exchange membrane (PEM)
fuel cell applications for vehicles
Carburant hydrogène - Spécification de produit et Wasserstoff als Kraftstoff - Produktfestlegung und
assurance qualité pour les points de ravitaillement en Qualitätssicherung - Protonenaustauschmembran
hydrogène distribuant de l'hydrogène gazeux - (PEM)-Brennstoffzellenanwendungen für Fahrzeuge
Applications des piles à combustible à membrane à
échange de protons (MEP) pour les véhicules
This European Standard was approved by CEN on 24 January 2022.
CEN members are bound to comply with the CEN/CENELEC Internal Regulations which stipulate the conditions for giving this
European Standard the status of a national standard without any alteration. Up-to-date lists and bibliographical references
concerning such national standards may be obtained on application to the CEN-CENELEC Management Centre or to any CEN
member.
This European Standard exists in three official versions (English, French, German). A version in any other language made by
translation under the responsibility of a CEN member into its own language and notified to the CEN-CENELEC Management
Centre has the same status as the official versions.
CEN members are the national standards bodies of Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia,
Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway,
Poland, Portugal, Republic of North Macedonia, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and
United Kingdom.
EUROPEAN COMMITTEE FOR STANDARDIZATION
COMITÉ EUROPÉEN DE NORMALISATION
EUROPÄISCHES KOMITEE FÜR NORMUNG
CEN-CENELEC Management Centre: Rue de la Science 23, B-1040 Brussels
© 2022 CEN All rights of exploitation in any form and by any means reserved Ref. No. EN 17124:2022 E
worldwide for CEN national Members.
Contents Page
European foreword . 3
1 Scope . 4
2 Normative references . 4
3 Terms and definitions . 4
4 Requirements . 5
5 Hydrogen Quality Assurance Methodology . 7
5.1 General Requirements – Potential sources of impurities . 7
5.2 Prescriptive Approach for Hydrogen Quality Assurance . 7
5.3 Risk Assessment for Hydrogen and Quality Assurance . 7
5.4 Impact of impurities on fuel cell power train . 10
6 Hydrogen Quality Control Approaches . 12
6.1 General requirements . 12
6.2 Spot sampling . 12
6.3 Monitoring . 12
7 Routine Quality Control . 12
8 Non-routine Quality Control . 12
9 Non compliances . 13
Annex A (informative) Impact of impurities . 14
Annex B (informative) Example of Supply chain evaluation with regards to potential sources
of impurities . 18
Annex C (informative) Example of Risk Assessment — Centralized production, pipeline
transportation . 23
Bibliography. 31
European foreword
This document (EN 17124:2022) has been prepared by Technical Committee CEN/TC 268 “Cryogenic
vessels and specific hydrogen technologies applications”, the secretariat of which is held by AFNOR.
This European Standard shall be given the status of a national standard, either by publication of an
identical text or by endorsement, at the latest by September 2022, and conflicting national standards shall
be withdrawn at the latest by September 2022.
Attention is drawn to the possibility that some of the elements of this document may be the subject of
patent rights. CEN shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights.
This document supersedes EN 17124:2018.
This document has been prepared under Mandate M/533 given to CEN by the European Commission and
the European Free Trade Association.
Any feedback and questions on this document should be directed to the users’ national standards body.
A complete listing of these bodies can be found on the CEN website.
According to the CEN-CENELEC Internal Regulations, the national standards organisations of the
following countries are bound to implement this European Standard: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia,
Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland,
Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Republic of North
Macedonia, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and the United
Kingdom.
1 Scope
This document specifies the quality characteristics of hydrogen fuel dispensed at hydrogen refuelling
stations for use in proton exchange membrane (PEM) fuel cell vehicle systems, and the corresponding
quality assurance considerations for ensuring uniformity of the hydrogen fuel.
2 Normative references
There are no normative references in this document.
3 Terms and definitions
For the purposes of this document, the following terms and definitions apply.
ISO and IEC maintain terminological databases for use in standardization at the following addresses:
— ISO Online browsing platform: available at https://www.iso.org/obp
— IEC Electropedia: available at https://www.electropedia.org/
3.1
constituent
component (or compound) found within a hydrogen fuel mixture
3.2
contaminant
impurity that adversely affects the components within the fuel cell system or the hydrogen storage
system
Note 1 to entry: An adverse effect can be reversible or irreversible.
3.3
detection limit
lowest quantity of a substance that can be distinguished from the absence of that substance with a stated
confidence limit
3.4
fuel cell system
power system used for the generation of electricity on a fuel cell vehicle, typically containing the following
subsystems: fuel cell stack, air processing, fuel processing, thermal management and water management
3.5
hydrogen fuel index
fraction or percentage of a fuel mixture that is hydrogen
3.6
irreversible effect
effect which results in a permanent degradation of the fuel cell power system performance that cannot
be restored by practical changes of operational conditions and/or gas composition
3.7
on-site fuel supply
hydrogen fuel supplying system with a hydrogen production system in the same site
3.8
off-site fuel supply
hydrogen fuel supplying system without a hydrogen production system in the same site, receiving
hydrogen fuel which is produced out of the site
3.9
particulate
solid or liquid particle (aerosol) that can be entrained somewhere in the delivery, storage, or transfer of
the hydrogen fuel
3.10
reversible effect
effect which results in a non-permanent degradation of the fuel cell power system performance that can
be restored by practical changes of operational conditions and/or gas composition
4 Requirements
The fuel quality requirements at the dispenser nozzle shall meet the requirements of Table 1.
NOTE The fuel specification is not process or feedstock specific. Non-listed contaminants have no guarantee of
being benign.
Table 1 — Fuel quality specifications for PEM fuel cell road vehicle applications
Constituent Characteristics
a
99,97 %
Hydrogen fuel index (minimum mole fraction)
Total non-hydrogen gases 300 μmol/mol
Maximum concentration of individual contaminants
Water (H O) 5 μmol/mol
b
2 μmol/mol
Total hydrocarbons (THC) (Excluding Methane)
Methane (CH ) 100 µmol/mol
Oxygen (O ) 5 μmol/mol
Helium (He) 300 μmol/mol
Nitrogen (N ) 300 μmol/mol
Argon (Ar) 300 μmol/mol
Carbon dioxide (CO ) 2 μmol/mol
c
0,2 μmol/mol
Carbon monoxide (CO)
Total sulfur compounds (H S basis) 0,004 μmol/mol
c
0,2 μmol/mol
Formaldehyde (HCHO)
c
0,2 μmol/mol
Formic acid (HCOOH)
Ammonia (NH ) 0,1 μmol/mol
d
0,05 μmol/mol
Halogenated compounds (Halogenate ion basis)
Maximum particulates concentration 1 mg/kg
For the constituents that are additive, such as total hydrocarbons and total sulfur
compounds, the sum of the constituents shall be less than or equal to the acceptable limit.
a
The hydrogen fuel index is determined by substracting the “total non-hydrogen gases” in this
table, expressed in mole percent, from 100 mol percent.
b
Total hydrocarbons include oxygenated organic species. Total hydrocarbons shall be measured
on a carbon basis (μmolC/mol).
c
Total of CO, HCHO, HCOOH shall not exceed 0,2 µmol/mol.
d
All halogenated compounds which could potentially be in the hydrogen gas (for example,
hydrogen chloride (HCl), and organic halides (R-X)) should be determined according to the hydrogen
quality assurance discussed in Clause 5 and the sum shall be less than 0,05 µmol /mol).
5 Hydrogen Quality Assurance Methodology
5.1 General Requirements – Potential sources of impurities
A quality assurance plan for the entire supply chain shall be created to ensure that the hydrogen quality
will meet the requirements listed in Clause 4. The methodology used to develop the quality assurance
plan can vary but shall include one of the two approaches described in this document. The general
description of these two approaches are described in 5.2 and 5.3.
For a given Hydrogen Refuelling Station (HRS), the contaminants listed in the hydrogen specification
referred to Table 1 could be present. There are several parts of the supply chain where impurities can be
introduced. Annex B describes potential impurities at each step of the supply chain.
When a contaminant is classified as potentially present, it shall be taken into account in the Quality
Assurance methodology (risk assessment or prescriptive approach) described below.
5.2 Prescriptive Approach for Hydrogen Quality Assurance
A prescriptive approach can be applied for clearly identified supply chains. The prescriptive approach is
not defined in this document.
5.3 Risk Assessment for Hydrogen and Quality Assurance
Risk assessment consists of identifying the probability of having each impurity above the threshold
values of specifications given in Table 1 and evaluating the severity of each impurity for the fuel cell car.
As an aid to clearly defining the risk(s) for risk assessment purposes, three fundamental questions are
often helpful:
— What might go wrong: which event could cause the impurities to be above the threshold value?
— What is the likelihood (probability of occurrence) that impurities could be above the threshold value?
— What are the consequences (severity) for the fuel cell car?
In doing an effective risk assessment, the robustness of the data set is important because it determines
the quality of the output. Revealing assumptions and reasonable sources of uncertainty will enhance
confidence in this output and/or help identify its limitations. The output of the risk assessment is a
qualitative description of a range of risk. The probability of an occurrence, in which each hydrogen
impurity exceeds the threshold value, is defined by the following table of occurrence classes:
Table 2 — Occurrence classes for an impurity
Occurrence Occurrence or frequency
Class name Occurrence or frequency
a
class
(example)
Very unlikely Contaminant above threshold
0 (Practically never been observed for this 1 per 10 000 000 refueling
impossible) source / supply chain / station
Known to occur at least once for
1 Unlikely this source / supply chain/ 1 per 1 000 000 refueling
station
Has happened once a year for
2 Possible this source / supply chain / 1 per 100 000 refueling
station
Has happened more than once a
3 Likely year for this source / supply 1 out of 10 000 refueling
chain / station
Happens on a regular basis for
More than 1 out of 1 000
4 Very likely this source / supply chain /
refueling
station
a
Based on a refueling station supplying 100 000 refuelings per year.
The range of severity class (level of damage for vehicle) is defined in Table 3.
Table 3 — Severity classes for an impurity
Impact categories
Severity
Hardware Hardware
FCEV Performance impact or damage
Performance
class
impact impact
impact
temporary permanent
— No impact
0 No No No
— Minor impact
1 Yes No No
— Temporary loss of power
— No impact on hardware
— Car still operates
— Reversible damage
2 Yes or No Yes No
— Requires specific light maintenance
procedure
— Car still operates
— Reversible damage
3 Yes Yes No
— Requires specific immediate
maintenance procedure. Gradual
power loss that does not compromise
safety
— Irreversible damage
a
Yes Yes Yes or No
— Requires major repair (e.g. stack
change)
— Power loss or Car Stop that
compromises safety
a
Any damage, whether permanent ornon-permanent, which compromises safety will be categorized as 4,
otherwise non-permanent damage will be categorized as 1, 2 or 3.
The final risk is defined by Table 4, titled “Acceptability table”, and which combines results from Tables 2
and 3.
Table 4 — Acceptability table
Severity
0 1 2 3 4
Occurrence as
the combined
probabilities 3
of occurrence
along the
whole supply
chain
Further investigations are
Acceptable risk area Unacceptable risk; additional
needed to ensure the risks is
Key Existing controls control or barriers are
reduced to as low as
acceptable required
reasonably practicable
For each impurity of the specification and for a given HRS (including the supply chain of hydrogen), a risk
assessment shall be applied to define the global risk. Risk control includes decision making to reduce
and/or accept risks. The purpose of risk control is to reduce the risk to an acceptable level. The amount
of effort used for risk control should be proportional to the significance of the risk. Decision makers might
use different processes, including a benefit-cost analysis, for understanding the optimal level of risk
control. Risk control might focus on the following questions:
— Is the risk above an acceptable level?
— What can be done to reduce or eliminate risks?
— What is the appropriate balance among benefits, risks and resources?
For each level of risk, decision shall be taken in order to either refuse the risk and then find mitigation or
barriers to reduce it, or accept the risk level as it is. Risk reduction focuses on processes for mitigation or
avoidance of quality risks when it exceeds an acceptable level (yellow or red zone in Table 5). Risk
reduction might include actions taken to mitigate the severity and/or probability of occurrence.
In the yellow zone, the risk could be acceptable but redesign or other changes should be considered if
reasonably practicable. Further investigation should be performed to give better estimate of the risk.
When assessing the need of remedial actions, the number of events of this risk level should be taken into
consideration in order to be As Low As Reasonably Practicable (ALARP).
An example of such approach is given in Annex C.
5.4 Impact of impurities on fuel cell power train
The severity level of each impurity shall be determined. Indeed, the impact on the car if each impurity
exceeds the threshold values given in Table 1 will depend on the concentration of the contaminant. The
following Table 5 shows the summary of the concentration based impact of the impurities on the fuel cell.
For more information on the impact of the impurities on fuel-cell, see Annex A.
In the first two columns the contaminants with their chemical formulas are given. An estimate of the
exceeded concentration above the threshold value for each impurity is named “Level 1” and is given in
column 5. According to this concentration, a severity class is given in column 4 for each impurity. This
severity class covers the impact of this impurity above the threshold value up to this limit.
If higher concentrations that exceed Level 1 can be reached, the Severity Class is given in column 6.
Table 5 — Severity Classes (SC) — Impact of impurities on fuel cell powertrain
SC for impurity SC for impurity
Threshold Value
Level 1 Value
concentration from concentration
[µmol/mol]
Impurity
threshold to level 1 greater than
[ µmol/mol]
(Table 1)
where applicable Level 1
b
Total non-H gases
300 UD 4
1–4
b
Nitrogen N
300 UD 4
1–4
b
Argon Ar 300 UD 4
1–4
b
Oxygen O
5 1–4 UD 4
Carbon dioxide CO
2 1 3 4
b
Carbon monoxide
CO 0,2 2–3 1 4
Methane CH
100 1 300 4
Water H O
5 4 NA 4
Total sulfur compounds H S basis
0,004 4 NA 4
Ammonia NH
0,1 4 NA 4
b
Total hydrocarbons CH basis
2 NA 4
1–4
b
Formaldehyde CH O
0,2 2–3 1 4
b
Formic Acid CH O
0,2 2–3 1 4
2 2
Total carbon monoxide, Σ CO, CH O,
0,2 2–3 1 4
formaldehyde and formic acid
CH O
2 2
Halogenated compounds 0,05 4 NA 4
b
Helium
He 300 UD 4
1–4
Maximum particulates
1 mg/kg 4 NA 4
concentration (liquid and solid)
UD: Undetermined value.
NA: Not applicable.
a
Threshold value according to the requirements in the hydrogen specification.
b
Higher value to be considered for risk assessment approach until more specific data are available.
6 Hydrogen Quality Control Approaches
6.1 General requirements
Quality control for the purpose of quality assurance may be performed at the dispenser nozzle or at other
location in accordance with the quality assurance risk assessment.
There are two kinds of quality control at a HRS: on line monitoring or off line analysis after spot sampling.
These methods shall be used individually or together to ensure hydrogen quality levels.
6.2 Spot sampling
Spot sampling at an HRS involves capturing a measured amount for chemical analysis. Sampling is used
to perform an accurate and comprehensive analysis of impurities, which is done externally, typically at a
laboratory. Since the sampling process involves drawing a gas sample, it is typically done on a periodic
basis and requires specialized sampling equipment and personnel to operate it.
The sampling procedure shall ensure and maintain the integrity of the sample.
NOTE ISO 19880-1 and ISO 21087:2019 include recommendations for sampling procedure.
6.3 Monitoring
An HRS can have real time monitoring of the hydrogen gas stream for one or more impurities on a
continuous or semi-continuous basis. A critical impurity can be monitored to ensure it does not exceed a
critical level, or monitoring of canary species are used to alert of potential issues with the hydrogen
production or purification process.
When used, monitoring equipment should be installed in-line with the hydrogen gas stream and shall
meet the process requirements of the HRS, as well as be calibrated on a periodic basis.
7 Routine Quality Control
Routine analysis shall be performed on a periodic basis once every specified time period or once for each
lot or batch if a quality certificate is not available. The methodology selected in hydrogen quality
assurance plan determines the type and frequency of the routine analysis. A prescriptive methodology
may be used as described in 5.2 or a risk assessment methodology may be used as described in 5.3.
Information on the routine analysis for each step of the supply chain is provided in Annex B.
8 Non-routine Quality Control
The hydrogen quality plan shall identify any non-routine conditions and subsequent required actions.
Some common non-routine conditions include but are not limited to the following:
— a new production system is constructed at a production site or a new HRS is first commissioned;
— the production system at a production site or HRS is modified;
— a routine or non-routine open inspection, repair, catalyst exchange, or the like is performed on a
production system at the production site or HRS;
— a question concerning quality is raised when, for example, there is a problem with a vehicle because
of hydrogen supplied at the production site or HRS, and a claim is received from a user directly or
indirectly;
— an issue concerning quality emerges when, for example, a voluntary audit raises the possibility that
quality control is not administered properly;
— analysis necessary for testing, research or any other purposes;
— after any severe malfunctions of transportation system of compressed hydrogen, liquid hydrogen
and hydrogen pipeline.
9 Non compliances
In case of quality control showing results not compliant with Table 1, appropriate action shall be taken
by the operator to prevent further out of specification H refuelling of the vehicles.
Annex A
(informative)
Impact of impurities
A.1 General
The following chapter gives a brief description of the impact of impurities on the stack, fuel cell
components and the complete fuel cell powertrain. Detailed information can be found in the relevant
literature and journal publications. It shall be noted that Annex A refers to known impurities and their
effects on the fuel cell powertrain at the time of publication. It cannot be excluded that further impurities
exist. Furthermore, in most cases, only the impact of a single impurity has been investigated and there is
still the need for fundamental research regarding the impact of a combination of the different impurities
on the fuel cell power train.
A.2 Inert Gases: Argon, Nitrogen
The main effect due to the presence of inert gases such as argon (Ar) and nitrogen (N ) is to lower the
cell potential due to the dilution effect of the inert species (dilution of the hydrogen gas) and inertial
(diffusion) effects. Nevertheless, under consideration of the threshold value current stack designs, fuel
cell components and fuel cell powertrains are not adversely affected by inert constituents. High inert gas
concentrations will lead to power losses, increased fuel consumption and loss of efficiency. Furthermore,
hydrogen starvation caused by high inert gas concentrations could lead to permanent damage of the fuel
cell stack or car stop. Inert gases will accumulate in the anode loop and could affect venting and recycle
blower control. Further sources report that the presence of N hinders desorption of adsorbed carbon
monoxide (CO) from the surface of the anode catalyst. It should also be noted that inert gases can affect
the accuracy of mass metering instruments for hydrogen dispensing.
A.3 Oxygen
Oxygen (O ) concentrations lower than the threshold value do not adversely affect the function of the
fuel cell. Reactive gas mixtures shall be prevented. However, it could be a concern for some on-board
vehicle storage systems, for example, by reaction with metal hydride storage materials.
A.4 Carbon Dioxide
The contamination effects of carbon dioxide (CO ) depend on the concentration, fuel cell operation
conditions and anode catalyst composition. First of all, CO dilutes the hydrogen gas and could affect
venting and recycle blower control of the fuel cell powertrain. Furthermore, CO can be catalytically
converted via a reverse water gas shift reaction into CO that in consequence poisons the catalyst. In
addition, co-occurrence of CO and CO in hydrogen has an accumulated influence on cell performance.
CO could adversely affect on-board hydrogen storage systems using metal hydride alloys.
A.5 Carbon Monoxide
Carbon Monoxide (CO) causes severe catalyst poisoning that adversely affects the performance of the fuel
cell power train. CO binds strongly to Pt sites, resulting in the reduction of the effective electrochemical
surface area (ECSA) available for H adsorption and oxidation. The catalyst poisoning effect is strongly
related to the concentration of CO, the exposure time, the cell operation temperature and anode catalyst
types. Although the effects of CO on the fuel cell can be reversed through mitigating strategies, such as
material selection of membrane electrode assembly (MEA), system design and operation, the lifetime
effects of CO on performance is a strong concern. Especially lower catalyst loadings needed for cost
optimization and longer hydrogen protection times lead to more severe poisoning effect. Therefore, CO
needs to be kept at very low levels in hydrogen fuel.
A.6 Methane
Methane is one of the very few hydrocarbons that does not contaminate PEMFCs. It does not react with
the catalyst so dilution is the major effect that shall be considered with methane gas.
A.7 Water
Water (H O) is an issue for hydrogen dispensing systems due to the potential formation of ice in the on-
board vehicle tank system or fuel cell components. Excess water can exist in liquid state and can cause
corrosion of metallic components. Already low quantities could lead to severe impacts on the
components. Furthermore, water does affect the function of the stack. Water provides a transport
+ + 2+ + +
mechanism for water-soluble impurities, especially as solvent for cations like Na , K , Ca , Cs and NH
when present as an aer
...
Questions, Comments and Discussion
Ask us and Technical Secretary will try to provide an answer. You can facilitate discussion about the standard in here.
Loading comments...