4.8 Article

PAF-6 Doped with Phosphoric Acid through Alkaline Nitrogen Atoms Boosting High-Temperature Proton-Exchange Membranes for High Performance of Fuel Cells

期刊

ADVANCED MATERIALS
卷 -, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/adma.202303535

关键词

fuel cells; high-temperature proton-exchange membranes; OPBI; porous aromatic frameworks; proton transfer

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study incorporates a phosphoric acid (PA)-doped porous aromatic framework (PAF-6-PA) into poly[2,2'-(p-oxydiphenylene)-5,5'-(benzimidazole)] (OPBI) to fabricate novel PAF-6-PA/OPBI composite high-temperature proton-exchange membranes (HT-PEMs) through solution-casting. The PAF-6-PA/OPBI exhibits optimal proton conductivity and peak power density at 200°C.
High-temperature proton-exchange-membrane fuel cells (HT-PEMFCs) can offer improved energy efficiency and tolerance to fuel/air impurities. The high expense of the high-temperature proton-exchange membranes (HT-PEMs) and their low durability at high temperature still impede their further practical applications. In this work, a phosphoric acid (PA)-doped porous aromatic framework (PAF-6-PA) is incorporated into poly[2,2 & PRIME;-(p-oxydiphenylene)-5,5 & PRIME;-benzimidazole] (OPBI) to fabricate novel PAF-6-PA/OPBI composite HT-PEMs through solution-casting. The alkaline nitrogen structure in PAF-6 can be protonated with PA to provide proton hopping sites, and its porous structure can enhance the PA retention in the membranes, thus creating fast pathways for proton transfer. The hydrogen bond interaction between the rigid PAF-6 and OPBI can also enhance the mechanical properties and chemical stability of the composite membranes. Consequently, PAF-6-PA/OPBI exhibits an optimal proton conductivity of 0.089 S cm(-1) at 200 & DEG;C, and peak power density of 437.7 mW cm(-2) (Pt: 0.3 mg cm(-2)), which is significantly higher than that of the OPBI. The PAF-6-PA/OPBI provides a novel strategy for the practical application of PBI-based HT-PEMs.

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