4.7 Article

Numerical investigation into the effect of serpentine flow channel with a variable cross-section on the performance of proton exchange membrane fuel cell

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENERGY RESEARCH
Volume 45, Issue 5, Pages 7719-7731

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/er.6352

Keywords

cross‐ section; fuel cell; oxygen concentration; pressure drop; serpentine flow channel; water content

Funding

  1. Foundation of State Key Laboratory of Automotive Simulation and Control [20180103]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51875259]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study found that changing the cross-section of the serpentine flow channel can increase the current density of the PEMFC, but it also reduces the uniformity of the current density distribution. When the cross-sectional shape of the flow channel changes from a trapezoid to a triangle, the oxygen is more concentrated and more reaction heat is generated, resulting in higher current density.
The flow channel design of the fuel cell has a great influence on the performance of proton exchange membrane fuel cell (PEMFC). Serpentine flow channel is widely applied because of its excellent performance among different channel designs. In this work, a multiphase, 3D PEMFC model with serpentine flow channel is developed. This work has analysed current density, relative pressure drop, velocity of reactants, oxygen concentrations, distribution of liquid water and temperature. The results show that the change of the cross-section in the serpentine flow channel can increase the current density of the PEMFC, while it also reduces the uniformity of the current density distribution. In this work, the oxygen is more concentrated and more reaction heat is generated when the cross-sectional shape of the flow channel changes from a trapezoid to a triangle, therefore the current density is higher in this case.

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