4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Comparison among various energy management strategies for reducing hydrogen consumption in a hybrid fuel cell/supercapacitor/battery system

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HYDROGEN ENERGY
Volume 46, Issue 8, Pages 6110-6126

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2019.11.195

Keywords

Energy management; Optimization; Fuel cell; Supercapacitor; Battery; Hydrogen consumption

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study introduces a comprehensive comparison of energy management strategies for fuel cell/supercapacitor/battery storage systems, with the novel approach based on the salp swarm algorithm outperforming commonly used strategies in terms of hydrogen fuel economy and overall efficiency.
The aim of this study is to introduce a comprehensive comparison of various energy management strategies of fuel cell/supercapacitor/battery storage systems. These strategies are utilized to manage the energy demand response of hybrid systems, in an optimal way, under highly fluctuating load condition. Two novel strategies based on salp swarm algorithm (SSA) and mine-blast optimization are proposed. The outcomes of these strategies are compared with commonly used strategies like fuzzy logic control, classical proportional integral control, the state machine, equivalent fuel consumption minimization, maximization, external energy maximization, and equivalent consumption minimization. Hydrogen fuel economy and overall efficiency are used for the comparison of these different strategies. Results demonstrate that the proposed SSA management strategy performed best compared with all other used strategies in terms of hydrogen fuel economy and overall efficiency. The minimum consumed hydrogen and maximum efficiency are found 19.4 gm and 85.61%, respectively. (c) 2019 Hydrogen Energy Publications LLC. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available