4.0 Article

Parametric sensitivity analysis to investigate the effects of operating and design parameters on single direct methane steam reforming solid oxide fuel cell performance and thermal impacts generation

Journal

ENERGY CONVERSION AND MANAGEMENT-X
Volume 18, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecmx.2023.100374

Keywords

SOFC; Methane Steam Reforming; Sensitivity Analysis; ANOVA and SNR analysis; Thermal impacts generation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Parametric and sensitivity analysis were conducted to investigate the effects of different operational and geometrical parameters on cell performance and thermal impacts in SOFCs. The results showed that an increase in operating temperature led to an increase in current density and thermal stress generation. The sensitivity analysis revealed that operating temperature had the largest contribution to cell performance, followed by electrolyte thickness, material porosity, air-fuel ratio, and flow configuration.
Solid oxide fuel cells (SOFCs) with high operational temperature provide direct methane steam reforming (MSR) but at the same time results in high thermal impacts (thermal stresses and strains) generation. In the present work, parametric and sensitivity analysis have been presented to understand the effects of different operational (operating temperature, air-fuel ratio) and geometrical parameters (porosity, flow configurations and electrolyte thickness) on cell performance and thermal impacts generation in porous electrodes and solid electrolyte. Simulation results show that 25 % increase in operating temperature (800 degrees to 1000 degrees C) causes an increase of 85.85 % in current density (2146.37 A/m2 to 3989.06 A/m2) and 10.5 % larger thermal stress generation (1673.18 MPa to 1849.69 MPa). The sensitivity analysis has been performed by implementing Taguchi Method. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) indicates that operating temperature substantially affects the overall cell per-formance with a significant contribution of 61.81 %, followed by electrolyte thickness 22.42 %, material porosity 13.90 %, air-fuel ratio 0.56 %, and flow configuration 0.40 %, respectively.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available