4.7 Review

Factors influencing the performance of PEM fuel cells: A review on performance parameters, water management, and cooling techniques

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENERGY RESEARCH
Volume 46, Issue 4, Pages 3810-3842

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/er.7437

Keywords

clean environment; heat pipes; hydrogen energy; PEM fuel cell; water management; zero pollution

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper discusses the critical parameters affecting the performance and lifespan of PEM fuel cells, focusing on the control of excess water content and dehydration. It summarizes the effects of these factors on various components of the fuel cell and presents active cooling strategies to remove waste heat from the stack. Additionally, it highlights the role of heat pipes, working fluid, and nanofluid in cooling PEM fuel cells.
This paper addresses the effects of critical parameters that affect the performance and lifespan of proton exchange membrane (PEM) fuel cells. Amongst all, control of excess water content and dehydration in PEM fuel cells is the major issue under various operating conditions. Therefore, their effects on cathode, anode, gas diffusion layer (GDL), catalyst layer (CL), and flow channels are summarized in the initial part of this paper. Various active cooling strategies such as air cooling, liquid cooling, and phase change method to extract the waste heat from the stack are represented. The lateral part of this paper throws light on the role of heat pipes, working fluid, and the effect of the addition of nanofluid with pertinent filling ratio (FR) in cooling of PEM fuel cells. This work is intended to aid the selection of cooling methods for PEM fuel cells through the consideration of the variety of affecting parameters preceding major expenditure for wide-scale production. In future, cost comparison associated with the cooling techniques of the fuel cell would be evaluated.

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