4.8 Article

Study of relative humidity on durability of the reversal tolerant proton exchange membrane fuel cell anode using a segmented cell

期刊

JOURNAL OF POWER SOURCES
卷 449, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2019.227542

关键词

Proton exchange membrane fuel cell; Hydrogen starvation; Reversal tolerant anode; Segmented cell; Degradation; Oxygen evolution reaction catalyst

资金

  1. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2017YFB0102701]
  2. Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Energy Materials for Electric Power [2018B030322001]
  3. Guangdong Innovative and Entrepreneurial Research Team Program [2016ZT06N500]
  4. Shenzhen Peacock Plan [KQTD2016022620054656]
  5. Shenzhen Key Laboratory project [ZDSYS201603311013489]
  6. Development and Reform Commission of Shenzhen Municipality 2017 [1181, 1106]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cell voltage reversal resulted from hydrogen starvation at the anode is one of the factors that exacerbate the overall degradation of proton exchange membrane fuel cells (PEMFCs). An effective mitigation strategy is to involve oxygen evolution reaction (OER) catalysts into the anode to facilitate water electrolysis against carbon corrosion. As such, this paper aims to study the influence of relative humidity (RH) on the performance and durability of reversal-tolerant-anodes (RTAs) during hydrogen starvation. An advanced segmented technique is employed to examine the coupling reactions by simultaneously measuring current density, RH and temperature in a fuel cell with a large active area. It is found that the inlet of RTAs undergoes degradation earlier than the outlet and the membrane electrode assembly (MEA) with a RTA has an optimal humidity during cell reversal. Results also show that the failure of the RTA MEA is due to a loss of electron conduction medium rather than the deactivation of the OER catalyst. In addition, this work highlights the importance of plate flow field design and the OER catalyst gradient design of the RTA MEA.

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

4.8
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