| Literature DB >> 31146378 |
Zhenyu Yuan1, Wenhui Chuai2, Zhongming Guo3, Zhaoyin Tu4, Fanbo Kong5.
Abstract
To achieve a self-adaptive fuel supply mechanism for the micro direct methanol fuel cell (μDMFC), we designed and developed a thermal control microvalve channel structure, where we considered the relationship between the temperature characteristics, viscosity, and velocity of the methanol solution. Both the single channel model and three-dimensional cell model for the microvalve were established using the COMSOL Multiphysics program. The results demonstrated that in the microvalve channel, the viscosity of the solution decreased, and the flow rate at the microvalve outlet increased with the increasing temperature. Meanwhile, the geometry structure of the microvalve single channel was optimized, so that the effect of the control speed of the microvalve under temperature changes became more prominent. In the full-cell model analysis, a low-velocity methanol solution at the low current density can significantly inhibit methanol crossover. At the high current densities, an increase in the methanol solution flow rate was beneficial to an increase in the cell reaction output. The μDMFC was fabricated and the experiment was conducted, where the results showed that the power density of the self-adaptive cell reached a maximum value of 16.56 mW/cm2 in 2 M methanol solution, which was up to 7% better than conventional cell performance. The proposed microvalve structure can effectively improve the output power of the μDMFC during the whole reaction process, and it may improve the stability of the cell operation.Entities:
Keywords: direct methanol fuel cell; microvalve; self-adaptive; thermal control
Year: 2019 PMID: 31146378 PMCID: PMC6631143 DOI: 10.3390/mi10060353
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Micromachines (Basel) ISSN: 2072-666X Impact factor: 2.891
Figure 1Three-dimension full cell model.
Variables and parameters in the model.
| Descriptions | Parameters | Values |
|---|---|---|
| Pressure constant |
| 1 [atm] |
| Density, H2O |
| 1000 [kg/m3] |
| Density, Methanol |
| 791.7 [kg/m3] |
| Viscosity, Gas phase |
| 14.96 × 10−6 [kg/(m·s)] |
| Permeability, GDL | 1 × 10−12 [m2] | |
| Porosity, AGDL CGDL |
| 0.7 |
| Electric conductivity, AGDL CGDL |
| 4000 [S/m] |
| Reference concentration, Methanol |
| 1000 [mol/m3] |
| Reference concentration, O2 |
| 0.21P/(R·T) [mol/m3] |
| Transfer coefficient, Anode |
| 0.239 |
| Transfer coefficient, Cathode |
| 0.875 |
| Liquid methanol enthalpy |
| −238.66 × 103 [J/mol] |
| Liquid water enthalpy |
| −285.83 × 103 [J/mol] |
| Carbon dioxide enthalpy |
| −393.51 × 103 [J/mol] |
| Liquid methanol Gibbs free energy |
| −166.27 × 103 [J/mol] |
| Liquid water Gibbs free energy |
| −237.08 × 103 [J/mol] |
| Carbon dioxide Gibbs free energy |
| −394 × 103 [J/mol] |
| Gas constant |
| 8.314 [J/(mol.K)] |
| Faraday’s constant |
| 96485 [C/mol] |
| Reference concentration, O2 |
| 0.21 P/(R.T) |
| Liquid methanol specific heat capacity |
| 2530 [J/(kg·K)] |
| Gas phase specific heat capacity |
| 1005 [J/(K·kg)] |
| Thermal conductivity, Plate |
| 50 [W/(K·m)] |
| Thermal conductivity, Membrane |
| 0.21 [W/(K·m)] |
| Thermal conductivity, GDL |
| 1.7 [W/(K·m)] |
| Thermal conductivity, Methanol |
| 0.21 [W/(K·m)] |
| Thermal conductivity, Water |
| 0.58 [W/(K·m)] |
| Thermal conductivity, Gas |
| 0.0257 [W/(K·m)] |
| Diffusion coefficient, Methanol |
| 2.8 × 10−9 exp(2436 × (1/333 − 1/T)) [m2/s] |
| Diffusion coefficient, O2 |
| 1.775 × 10−5 × (T/273)1.823 [m2/s] |
| Diffusion coefficient in PEM, methanol |
| 4.9 × 10−10 exp(2436 × (1/333 − 1/T)) [m2/s] |
| Anode equilibrium potential |
| −1 × (131350 − 408.22 × T)/(6 × F) [V] |
| Cathode equilibrium potential |
| −1 × (−285830 × 3 + 489.52 × T)/(6 × F) [V] |
| Anode referential current |
| 94.25 exp(35570 × (1/353 − 1/T)) [A/m2] |
| Cathode referential current |
| 0.04222 exp(73200/R × (1/353 − 1/T)) [A/m2] |
Methanol solution viscosity at different temperatures.
| Temperature (K) | Viscosity (Pa·S) |
|---|---|
| 300 | 0.0009043 |
| 320 | 0.0006095 |
| 340 | 0.0004389 |
Figure 2Temperature distribution in the microvalve under different heating conditions.
Figure 3Velocity distribution in the microvalve under different heating conditions.
Figure 4Maximum outlet velocity variation with heat temperatures.
Figure 5Effect of the microvalve geometry change on the outlet flow rate: (a) Depth-width Ratio (b) Valve length (c) Cross-section dimension.
Figure 6The methanol permeability at inlet methanol velocity is: (a) 0.7 mL/min and (b) 1 mL/min.
Figure 7The output power variation with the inlet methanol velocity.
Figure 8The micro DMFC and the performances between the cell with a microvalve and a conventional cell. (a) The cell fabrication structure, (b) I-V and I-P curve.