4.8 Article

Online remaining useful lifetime prediction of proton exchange membrane fuel cells using a novel robust methodology

Journal

JOURNAL OF POWER SOURCES
Volume 399, Issue -, Pages 314-328

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2018.06.098

Keywords

Remaining useful lifetime (RUL) estimation; Proton exchange membrane fuel cell (PEMFC); Autoregressive and moving average (ARMA) model; Nonlinear pattern of stationary time series

Funding

  1. European Commission H2020 grant ESPESA (H2020-TWINN-2015) EU [692224]
  2. Franche-Comte regional council grant PEMFC aging Regional Grant [2013C-5588/92]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper proposes a novel robust prognostic approach that contains three phases for degradation prediction of proton exchange membrane fuel cell (PEMFC) performance and its remaining useful lifetime (RUL) estimation. In the first detrending phase, a physical aging model (PAM) is used to remove the non-stationary trend in the original fuel cell degradation data. In the second filtering phase, the order of autoregressive and moving average (ARMA) model is determined by autocorrelation function (ACF), partial ACF and Akaike information criterion. The linear component in the stationary time series is then filtered by the identified ARMA model. In the third prediction phase, the remaining nonlinear pattern is used to train the time delay neural network (TDNN), in order to provide the final prediction result. Since the proposed prognostic approach uses appropriate methods to analyze and preprocess the original degradation data (i.e., the PAM maintains stationary trend, and then the identified ARMA filters linear component), the remaining nonlinear pattern of stationary time series can thus guarantee a good convergence performance of TDNN. In order to experimentally demonstrate the robustness and prediction accuracy of the proposed approach, degradation tests are performed using two types of PEMFC stack.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available