4.8 Article

Investigation of the assembly for high-power proton exchange membrane fuel cell stacks through an efficient equivalent model

Journal

APPLIED ENERGY
Volume 277, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.115532

Keywords

High-power PEM fuel cell stack; Composite model; Material property equivalent; Active area; Mechanical state

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51705308]
  2. State Key Laboratory of Mechanical System and Vibration [MSVZD202010]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A high-power proton exchange membrane fuel cell (PEMFC) stack usually composes many cells, which induce high difficulty in evaluating its mechanical state of stack assembly. A methodology based on composite model and material property equivalent is developed to predict the mechanical state in PEMFC stack. In this methodology, the stack system is modeled based on a finite element model (FEM), in which bipolar plate (BPP) and membrane exchange assembly (MEA) are combined into a composite component. Experiments with stamped BPP are carried out to validate the FEM of the stack, and both the predicted clamping force and endplates deformation of FEM have a great agreement with the experimental results. Based on the methodology, it is found that more uniform pressure distribution can be generated when high-stiffness endplates are applied and cell number of the stack increases. The cells approaching to mid-stack have more uniform pressure. The pressure distribution of the stack is very sensitive to the compression ratio. High compression ratios leads to large endplate deformation, which increases the average pressure deviation between simulated value and design value, and also increases non-uniformity of pressure distribution. This methodology offers the possibility of evaluating the mechanical state of high-power fuel cell stack and greatly improves the computational efficiency.

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