4.7 Article

Constructing region-specific porous flow field to enhance heat, mass and charge transports in proton exchange membrane fuel cells

期刊

ENERGY CONVERSION AND MANAGEMENT
卷 274, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.enconman.2022.116459

关键词

Proton exchange membrane fuel cell; Porous flow field; Mass transport; Heat transfer

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China
  2. [52176204]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A region-specific porous flow field (rs-PFF) is proposed to enhance the performance of proton exchange membrane fuel cells (PEMFCs) by improving heat, mass and charge transports. Experimental results show that the rs-PFF design can increase oxygen concentration, decrease temperature and improve peak power density, while saving energy consumption.
The pursuit of ever-improving performance in proton exchange membrane fuel cells (PEMFCs) requires more appropriate flow field design to reduce the electrode polarizations. Herein, a region-specific porous flow field (rs-PFF) that simultaneously enhances the heat, mass and charge transports is proposed, of which gas permeability and heat conductivity are respectively higher in marginal region and central region than those of the conven-tional uniform porous flow field (u-PFF). A three-dimensional non-isothermal PEMFC model that considers the multi-phase multi-species transfer is adopted to elucidate the impacts of the rs-PFF. It is demonstrated that the oxygen concentration in weak flow regions is increased by 26.3 % while the temperature in main flow region is decreased by 2.14 K, thus yielding a 5.5 % increase in peak power density. The rs-PFF is effective to reduce reactant supply, thereby saving the system energy consumption. Additionally, even the lower humidified rs-PFF-based PEMFC shows the better performance than the fully humidified u-PFF-based PEMFC. This region-specific design strategy has the potential to be applied to other types of flow field design for improving cell performance.

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