4.7 Article

Effect of MEA fabrication techniques on the cell performance of Pt-Pd/C electrocatalyst for oxygen reduction in PEM fuel cell

Journal

FUEL
Volume 89, Issue 12, Pages 3847-3852

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.fuel.2010.07.008

Keywords

Catalyst-coated membrane; Catalyst-coated substrate; Pt-Pd/C electrocatalyst; PEM fuel cell; Decal transfer technique

Funding

  1. Center for Petroleum, Petrochemicals, and Advanced Materials, Chulalongkorn University
  2. National Metal and Materials Technology Center (MTEC) [MT-B-52-END-09-069-G]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The effect of three different membrane electrode assembly (MEA) fabrication techniques, catalyst-coated substrate by direct spray (CCS) and catalyst-coated membrane by direct spray (CCM-DS) or decal transfer (CCM-DT), on the performance of oxygen reduction in a proton exchange membrane (PEM) fuel cell was carried out under identical conditions of Pt-Pd/C electrocatalyst loading. The results indicated that the fabrication technique had only a very slight effect on the ohmic resistance of the PEM fuel cell but it significantly affected the charge transfer resistance and open circuit voltage (OCV). The cells prepared by the CCM method, and particularly by decal transfer, exhibited a significantly higher OCV but a lower ohmic and charge transfer resistance compared with the other investigated fabrication techniques. By using cyclic voltammetry with H(2) adsorption, it was found that the electrochemical active area of the electrocatalyst prepared by CCM-DT was higher than those prepared by CCS and CCM-DS by around 1.76- and 1.05-fold, respectively. Under a H(2)/O(2) system at 0.6 V, the cells with MEA made by CCM-DT provided the highest cell performance of around 350 mA/cm(2), significantly greater than those prepared by the CCS and CCM-DS (149 and 42 mA/cm(2), respectively). (C) 2010 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