4.7 Article

Electrochemical studies of Ruddlesden-Popper layered perovskite-type La0.6Sr1.4Co0.2Fe0.8O4 + δ cathode for solid oxide fuel cells and associated electrical loss phenomena

期刊

CERAMICS INTERNATIONAL
卷 45, 期 2, 页码 1641-1650

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ceramint.2018.10.041

关键词

SOFC cathode; Layered perovskite; Oxygen reduction reaction; Dielectric loss tangent

资金

  1. Natural Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) [RGPIN-2016-03853]
  2. Grand Technion Energy Program (GTEP)
  3. Israel Science Foundation [938/15]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The electrochemical performance of solid oxide fuel cell (SOFC) depends on functional properties of the anode, the cathode and the electrolyte that are being employed. There is a need for better cathode catalyst to decrease operating temperature of SOFCs. Here, we report a layered perovskite-type Ruddlesden-Popper structure La0.6Sr1.4Co0.2Fe0.8O4+delta (RP-LSCF) as cathode for SOFCs. The structural stability, thermal expansion, electrical, and fundamental electrochemical properties of RP-LSCF were investigated. The O-2 reduction reaction (ORR) and O-2 surface exchange properties of RP-LSCF and Gd-doped CeO2 (GDC)-RP-LSCF composite were studied using symmetrical cells. Area normalized resistances for charge transfer (R-i) and surface exchange processes (R-s,), and total polarization are found to be 0.14, 0.28 and 0.42 Omega cm(2) at 800 degrees C, respectively. The exchange current density and oxygen surface exchange co-efficient for RP-LSCF are 54.53 mA cm(-2) and 1.15 x 10(-6) cm s(-1) at 800 degrees C, respectively. Addition of nano-GDC with RP-LSCF leads to increase of polarization resistances, while the activation energies for charge transfer and surface exchange processes are reduced significantly. For the first time, we report a dielectric loss tangent analysis corresponding to the electrode phenomena in RP-LSCF and GDC-RP-LSCF to understand the electrical losses associated with SOFC cathode (ORR) processes.

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