4.0 Article

Equivalent Scheme of the Fuel Cell Taking into Account the Influence of Eddy Currents and A Practical Way to Determine Its Parameters

期刊

INVENTIONS
卷 7, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/inventions7030072

关键词

power plant; fuel cell; equivalent scheme; transient processes; modeling; experimental data; aerial vehicles

资金

  1. Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation [FENN-2020-0022]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of this work is to develop a dynamic equivalent scheme of the fuel cell, considering eddy currents in the conductive parts of the structure. The study shows the feasibility and accuracy of calculating circuits with fuel cells by taking into account the influence of eddy currents.
The aim of this work is to develop a dynamic equivalent scheme of the fuel cell, taking into account eddy currents in the conductive parts of the structure, to offer a practical way to determine the parameters of this circuit and also to show the adequacy of the scheme and parameters by numerical simulation and comparison with experiment. Fuel cells, as a rule, are connected to the voltage converters, which create a high-frequency component of the main fuel cell current and eddy currents in the conductive parts. The problem is that the effect of these currents on the characteristics of the fuel cell-based power plants has not been studied. To determine the parameters of the proposed equivalent scheme, we use experiments and calculations of transient modes of the fuel cell. The main result of the work is the possibility and feasibility of calculating circuits with fuel cells, taking into account the influence of eddy currents. This effect depends both on the design of the fuel cell and on the parameters of the circuit to which it is connected. From this it follows that, in general, it is necessary to take into account the influence of eddy currents of the fuel cell. The refusal of this accounting is possible, but in each specific case it must be justified.

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

4.0
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