4.7 Article

Electrochemical behavior and compression force analysis for proton exchange membrane fuel cells with different reaction areas

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENERGY RESEARCH
卷 46, 期 2, 页码 1168-1179

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/er.7236

关键词

compression; fuel cell; mapping; PEMFC; pressure

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study compared the performance of two different PEMFC cell areas (25 and 50 cm(2)), focusing on clamping load, pressure distribution, and resistance. Results showed that different bolt torques led to varying compression pressures and affected the overall performance of the cells. The findings contribute valuable insights for the design and preparation of large-scale PEMFC stacks in industrial applications.
Changes in the specific performance of proton exchange membrane fuel cells (PEMFCs) at different reaction areas (25 and 50 cm(2)) were examined using the parameters of clamping load, pressure distribution, and resistance. The 50 cm(2) cell received less internal compression pressure (CP) with a more uneven pressure distribution than the 25 cm(2) cell when the same bolt torques were used. The clamping force for the 50 cm(2) cell did not fully reach the central area; however, the force for the 25 cm(2) cell reached the center and overlapped. This was confirmed by multidimensional compression mapping analysis. The different compressed geometric shapes were due to the difference in the unit area for each bolt. This study provides detailed reasons for the observed correlation between performance, CP, and cell scale. This study also provides key information regarding the design of large-scale cells for industrial PEMFC applications. Highlights Performance of two different PEMFC cells areas (25 and 50 cm(2)) were compared. Examined parameters were clamping load, pressure distribution, and resistance. Bolt torques were varied and different power densities were obtained. Results can provide key information for the preparation of large-scale PEMFC stacks.

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