Articles & Issues
- Language
- English
- Conflict of Interest
- In relation to this article, we declare that there is no conflict of interest.
- Publication history
-
Received February 22, 2017
Accepted July 24, 2017
-
This is an Open-Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/bync/3.0) which permits
unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright © KIChE. All rights reserved.
All issues
Nitrogen doped graphene/cobalt-based catalyst layers of a PEM fuel cell: Performance evaluation and multi-objective optimization
1Department of Energy Engineering, Graduate College of Environment and Energy, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran 2School of Chemical Engineering, Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran 3Fuel Cell Laboratory, Green Research Center, Iran University of Science and Technology 4Department of Energy, Materials and Energy Research Center (MERC), Tehran, Iran
rowshanzamir@iust.ac.ir
Korean Journal of Chemical Engineering, November 2017, 34(11), 2978-2983(6), 10.1007/s11814-017-0202-2
Download PDF
Abstract
The proton exchange membrane fuel cell could be made more commercially viable by substituting the expensive platinic catalyst without loss of performance. This should be done simultaneously through optimization and use of a non-precious metal catalyst. In this study, multi-objective optimization of the catalyst layer was done on nonprecious metal catalysts. Nitrogen-doped graphene (NG)-based cobalt was synthesized as a non-precious metal catalyst. Differential equations were solved at the modeling stage by the shooting method, and objective functions were solved at the optimization stage using sequential quadratic programming. NG-based cobalt was evaluated in a cell and then compared with the platinum catalyst. Results present the synthesized non-precious catalyst as an appropriate replacement for existing precious metal catalyst. Also, the polarization curve demonstrates that the current modeling is in good agreement with NG-based cobalt catalyst. Finally, the Pareto curve at the voltage of 0.6 V (and 300 A/m2 current density in the base case) indicated that the best tradeoff between cost and performance of the catalyst layer was achieved when the current density was increased in the range of 5% to 15%.
Keywords
References
Spiegel C, PEM fuel cell modeling and simulation using Matlab, Elsevier Inc. (2008).
Wilkinson DP, Zhang J, Hui R, Fergus J, Li X, Taylor and Francis Group LLC (2010).
Othman R, Dicks AL, Zhu ZH, Int. J. Hydrog. Energy, 37(1), 357 (2012)
Ghanbarlou H, Rowshanzamir S, Kazeminasab B, Parnian MJ, J. Power Sources, 273, 981 (2015)
Broka K, Ekdunge P, J. Appl. Electrochem., 27(3), 281 (1997)
Sui PC, Chen LD, Seaba JP, Wariishi Y, SAE Congress, 01, 61 (1999)
Wang QP, Song DT, Navessin T, Holdcroft S, Liu ZS, Electrochim. Acta, 50(2-3), 725 (2004)
Sun W, Peppley BA, Karan K, Electrochim. Acta, 50(16-17), 3359 (2005)
Srinivasarao M, Bhattacharyya D, Rengaswamy R, Narasimhan S, Chem. Eng. Res. Des., 89(1A), 10 (2011)
Kulikovsky AA, Electrochim. Acta, 79, 31 (2012)
Mert SO, Ozcelik Z, Int. J. Energy Res., 37(10), 1256 (2013)
Feali MS, Fathipour M, Russian J. Electrochem., 50, 561 (2014)
Ang SMC, Brett DJL, Fraga ES, J. Power Sources, 195(9), 2754 (2010)
Park JC, Park SH, Chung MW, Choi CH, Kho BK, Woo SI, J. Power Sources, 286, 166 (2015)
Malko D, Lopes T, Ticianelli EA, Kucernak A, J. Power Sources, 323, 189 (2016)
Kazeminasab B, Rowshanzamir S, Ghadamian H, Bulgarian Chem. Commun., 47, 38 (2015)
Moein-Jahromi M, Kermani MJ, Int. J. Hydrog. Energy, 37(23), 17954 (2012)
Inamuddin, Cheema TA, Zaidi SMJ, Rahman SU, Renew. Energy, 36(2), 529 (2011)
Obut S, Alper E, J. Power Sources, 196(4), 1920 (2011)
Khajeh-Hosseini-Dalasm N, Fesanghary M, Fushinobu K, Okazaki K, Electrochim. Acta, 60, 55 (2012)
O’Hayre R, Cha SW, Colella W, Prinz FB, Fuel Cell Fundamentals, New York, Wiley (2006).
Zhang J, PEM fuel cell electrocatalysts and catalyst layers, Springer (2008).
Alaswad A, Olabi AG, Palumbo A, Dassisti M, PEM Fuel Cell Cost Analysis during the Period (1998-2014), Elsevier (2016).
Wilkinson DP, Zhang J, Hui R, Fergus J, Li X, Taylor and Francis Group LLC (2010).
Othman R, Dicks AL, Zhu ZH, Int. J. Hydrog. Energy, 37(1), 357 (2012)
Ghanbarlou H, Rowshanzamir S, Kazeminasab B, Parnian MJ, J. Power Sources, 273, 981 (2015)
Broka K, Ekdunge P, J. Appl. Electrochem., 27(3), 281 (1997)
Sui PC, Chen LD, Seaba JP, Wariishi Y, SAE Congress, 01, 61 (1999)
Wang QP, Song DT, Navessin T, Holdcroft S, Liu ZS, Electrochim. Acta, 50(2-3), 725 (2004)
Sun W, Peppley BA, Karan K, Electrochim. Acta, 50(16-17), 3359 (2005)
Srinivasarao M, Bhattacharyya D, Rengaswamy R, Narasimhan S, Chem. Eng. Res. Des., 89(1A), 10 (2011)
Kulikovsky AA, Electrochim. Acta, 79, 31 (2012)
Mert SO, Ozcelik Z, Int. J. Energy Res., 37(10), 1256 (2013)
Feali MS, Fathipour M, Russian J. Electrochem., 50, 561 (2014)
Ang SMC, Brett DJL, Fraga ES, J. Power Sources, 195(9), 2754 (2010)
Park JC, Park SH, Chung MW, Choi CH, Kho BK, Woo SI, J. Power Sources, 286, 166 (2015)
Malko D, Lopes T, Ticianelli EA, Kucernak A, J. Power Sources, 323, 189 (2016)
Kazeminasab B, Rowshanzamir S, Ghadamian H, Bulgarian Chem. Commun., 47, 38 (2015)
Moein-Jahromi M, Kermani MJ, Int. J. Hydrog. Energy, 37(23), 17954 (2012)
Inamuddin, Cheema TA, Zaidi SMJ, Rahman SU, Renew. Energy, 36(2), 529 (2011)
Obut S, Alper E, J. Power Sources, 196(4), 1920 (2011)
Khajeh-Hosseini-Dalasm N, Fesanghary M, Fushinobu K, Okazaki K, Electrochim. Acta, 60, 55 (2012)
O’Hayre R, Cha SW, Colella W, Prinz FB, Fuel Cell Fundamentals, New York, Wiley (2006).
Zhang J, PEM fuel cell electrocatalysts and catalyst layers, Springer (2008).
Alaswad A, Olabi AG, Palumbo A, Dassisti M, PEM Fuel Cell Cost Analysis during the Period (1998-2014), Elsevier (2016).
