4.7 Article

Spin-coating derived solid oxide fuel cells operated at temperatures of 500 degrees C and below

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HYDROGEN ENERGY
卷 35, 期 24, 页码 13262-13270

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2010.09.016

关键词

Two-step sintering; Spin-coating; Doped ceria electrolyte; Low-temperature; Solid oxide fuel cells; Microstructure

资金

  1. Natural Science Foundation of China [10979046, 50730002]
  2. US National Science Foundation [CBET 0967166]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Low-temperature solid oxide fuel cells (SOFCs) operated at a temperature of 500 degrees C and below are developed by modifying the microstructures of single cells consisting of Nicermet anodes, doped ceria electrolytes and strontium-doped samaria cobaltite cathodes. The cell microstructure is optimized by varying the starting powder firing temperature, so that the doped ceria electrolytes have a high sinterability, reducing the spin-coating cycles to decrease the electrolyte thickness to approximately 9 mu m, adopting a two-step sintering process so that the electrolytes consist of small grains and have a high density; while the anodes are composed of small particles and have high porosity. In particular, the two-step sintering process depresses the co-firing temperature, thus enhancing the electrolyte conductivity and reducing the electrode polarization resistance. Outstanding performance with peak power density of 476, 319, and 189 mW cm(-2) at 500, 450, and 400 degrees C is achieved with a typical single cell comprising a 9-mu m-thick Sm0.2Ce0.8O1.9 (SDC) electrolyte, a Ni-SDC porous anode, and a Sm0.5Sr0.5CoO3-delta-Sm0.2Ce0.8O1.9 (SSC-SDC) composite cathode. A durability test over 110 h maintained a power density of approximately 150 mW cm(-2) at 400 degrees C, suggesting optimization of the microstructure has promise for enhancing the performance of low-temperature SOFCs. (C) 2010 Professor T. Nejat Veziroglu. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据