4.7 Article

A numerical study on thermal analysis and cooling flow fields effect on PEMFC performance

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HYDROGEN ENERGY
卷 42, 期 38, 页码 24319-24337

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2017.08.036

关键词

PEM fuel cell; Thermal management; Serpentine gas flow field; Cooling flow field; IUT

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Thermal management and water management are two important interconnected topics in the design and increase the efficiency of PEM fuel cells. Suitable cooling flow field design with proper performance is an important factor in increasing the lifetime of PEM fuel cell, because non-uniformity of temperature reduces the stability and durability of PEM fuel cell. Different cooling strategies are considered for removing of heat generation by PEM fuel cell, because the fuel cell temperature remains in a tolerable range and homogeneous as possible. In the first step, determine the value and location of heat sources in fuel cell, is important and appropriate cooling strategy can be applied. In this study, a PEM fuel cell with serpentine gas flow field is simulated with six different cooling flow fields simultaneously, e.g. conventional serpentine (Model 1), typical of MPSFFs (model 2), typical of serpentine (Model 3), parallel-serpentine (Model 4), conventional spiral (Model 5) and conventional parallel (Model 6). This simulation showes a correct perception of temperature distribution in PEMFC. The results indicate that Model 5 has a good temperature and performance based on the minimum and maximum temperature gradient, Index of uniform temperature (IUT), however has a more pressure drop. For second choice when the pressure drop is important, the Model 3 has a better performance than other models. Also, thermal analysis in these cases shows that ohmic, entropic and reaction heating included 20%, 35%, 45% of the total heat generation by PEMFC, approximately. (C) 2017 Hydrogen Energy Publications LLC. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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