T S Mayadevi1,2, Bon-Hyuk Goo1,2, Sae Yane Paek3, Ook Choi2, Youngkwang Kim4, Oh Joong Kwon5,6, So Young Lee3, Hyoung-Juhn Kim3,7, Tae-Hyun Kim1,2. 1. Organic Material Synthesis Laboratory, Department of Chemistry, Incheon National University, 119 Academy-ro, Yeonsu-gu, Incheon 22012, Republic of Korea. 2. Research Institute of Basic Sciences, Incheon National University, 119 Academy-ro, Incheon 22012, Republic of Korea. 3. Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Research Center, Korea Institute of Science and Technology (KIST), Seoul 02792, Republic of Korea. 4. School of Chemical and Biological Engineering, Seoul National University, Seoul 08826, Republic of Korea. 5. Department of Energy and Chemical Engineering, Incheon National University, 119 Academy-ro, Yeonsu-gu, Incheon 22012, Republic of Korea. 6. Innovation Center for Chemical Engineering, Incheon National University, 119 Academy-ro, Yeonsu-gu, Incheon 22012, Republic of Korea. 7. Hydrogen Energy Technology Laboratory, Korea Institute of Energy Technology (KENTECH), Ujeong-ro, Naju-si, Jeollanam-do 58217, Republic of Korea.
Abstract
We prepared Nafion composite membranes by impregnating Nafion-212 with polydopamine, poly(sulfonated dopamine), and poly(dopamine-co-sulfonated dopamine) using the swelling-filling method to generate nanopores in the Nafion framework that were filled with these polymers. Compared to the pristine Nafion-212 membrane, these composite membranes showed improved thermal and mechanical stabilities due to the strong interactions between the catecholamine of the polydopamine derivatives and the Nafion matrix. For the composite membrane filled with poly(sulfonated dopamine) (N-PSDA), further interactions were induced between the Nafion and the sulfonic acid side chain, resulting in enhanced water uptake and ion conductivity. In addition, filling the nanopores in the Nafion matrix with polymer fillers containing aromatic hydrocarbon-based dopamine units led to an increase in the degree of crystallinity and resulted in a significant decrease in the hydrogen permeability of the composite membranes compared to Nafion-212. Hydrogen crossovers 26.8% lower than Nafion-212 at 95% relative humidity (RH) (fuel cell operating conditions) and 27.3% lower at 100% RH (water electrolysis operating conditions) were obtained. When applied to proton exchange membrane-based fuel cells, N-PSDA exhibited a peak power density of 966 mW cm-2, whereas N-PSDA showed a current density of 4785 mA cm-2, which is 12.4% higher than Nafion-212 at 2.0 V and 80 °C.
We prepared Nafion composite membranes by impregnating Nafion-212 with polydopamine, poly(sulfonated dopamine), and poly(dopamine-co-sulfonated dopamine) using the swelling-filling method to generate nanopores in the Nafion framework that were filled with these polymers. Compared to the pristine Nafion-212 membrane, these composite membranes showed improved thermal and mechanical stabilities due to the strong interactions between the catecholamine of the polydopamine derivatives and the Nafion matrix. For the composite membrane filled with poly(sulfonated dopamine) (N-PSDA), further interactions were induced between the Nafion and the sulfonic acid side chain, resulting in enhanced water uptake and ion conductivity. In addition, filling the nanopores in the Nafion matrix with polymer fillers containing aromatic hydrocarbon-based dopamine units led to an increase in the degree of crystallinity and resulted in a significant decrease in the hydrogen permeability of the composite membranes compared to Nafion-212. Hydrogen crossovers 26.8% lower than Nafion-212 at 95% relative humidity (RH) (fuel cell operating conditions) and 27.3% lower at 100% RH (water electrolysis operating conditions) were obtained. When applied to proton exchange membrane-based fuel cells, N-PSDA exhibited a peak power density of 966 mW cm-2, whereas N-PSDA showed a current density of 4785 mA cm-2, which is 12.4% higher than Nafion-212 at 2.0 V and 80 °C.
A fuel
cell is an energy conversion device that generates electricity
using hydrogen as fuel. This technology is considered an eco-friendly
energy source because it generates only water as a byproduct. Fuel
cells are categorized into various types according to the electrolyte
used. Proton exchange membrane-based fuel cells (PEMFCs) are currently
widely employed in a range of applications, such as energy sources
for transportation and power generation systems suitable for various
areas because they provide high energy efficiency of about 45% and
can operate under relatively low-temperature conditions from 60 to
80 °C.[1−3]Meanwhile, hydrogen used as fuel for fuel cells
is primarily obtained
from byproducts generated in petrochemical processes, and carbon dioxide
is inevitably generated during hydrogen production. As such, it is
difficult to consider this energy source as completely eco-friendly.
In contrast, water electrolysis is among the most eco-friendly hydrogen
production methods because the technology generates hydrogen with
zero carbon dioxide emission. Among the water electrolysis methods,
proton exchange membrane-based water electrolysis (PEMWE) uses a proton
exchange membrane (PEM) as an electrolyte; thus, the technology ensures
high energy efficiency with no risk of electrolyte leakage. PEMWE
systems also can operate under high voltage conditions and can be
implemented in a compact design. For these reasons, this technology
has been attracting significant attention.[4−6]A PEM
is a key component of PEMFC and PEMWE systems that allows
protons to be conducted between the anode and cathode and separates
the two electrodes from each other. These PEMs significantly affect
the overall performance of fuel cells and water electrolyzers. Therefore,
a great deal of research has addressed developing PEM materials that
provide not only high ionic conductivity but also excellent physicochemical
stability.Among commercially available PEM materials, Nafion
consists of
a perfluoroalkyl-based main chain and side chains containing sulfonic
acid groups. Due to its unique structure, this polymeric material
exhibits a distinct phase separation between the hydrophobic and hydrophilic
domains. Thus, Nafion-based membranes provide both excellent mechanical
properties and electrochemical stability. The sulfonic acid groups
contained in these membranes tend to gather, forming a unique fringed-rod-like
morphology. Nafion-based membranes provide high ionic conductivity
and excellent stability due to this unique morphology.[7−9]However, the proton conductivity of Nafion and other perfluorosulfonic
acid (PFSA)-based polymer membranes depends on relative humidity (RH);
thus, achieving high ionic conductivity requires that a highly hydrated
condition be maintained. In a humidified or hydrated state, however,
water serves as a plasticizer, lowering the glass-transition temperature, Tg, of polymers. This leads to a change in the
morphology of Nafion in the actual operating conditions of cells,
thereby degrading their mechanical properties while abruptly accelerating
hydrogen permeability.[9,10] The occurrence of this hydrogen
crossover results in enhanced Ohmic potential and reduced current
density under the actual operating conditions of cells. This directly
not only lowers fuel cell performance (for PEMFC) and hydrogen production
efficiency (for PEMWE) but also leads to the formation of hydrogen
peroxides and hydroperoxyl radicals that negatively affect the long-term
duration of the PEMs.[7,11]Much research has been
conducted to ensure that Nafion can maintain
its high ionic conductivity and excellent physicochemical stability
even under high-temperature and humidified conditions. These studies
have focused mainly on composite materials in which Nafion dispersion
solutions are blended with inorganic materials, such as composite
membranes made of sulfonated silica and Nafion,[12] Nafion composite membranes blended with sulfonated graphene
oxides,[13] and composite membranes made
of carbon nanotubes containing amine-functionalized cerium oxides
and Nafion.[14] Most of these studies successfully
achieved the intended conductivity improvement compared to typical
Nafion membranes, but information about hydrogen crossover was not
reported.Meanwhile, sulfonated aromatic hydrocarbon has attracted
wide attention
as an alternative PEM material for Nafion.[15−18] Some attempts have been made
to overcome the limitations of Nafion-based membranes by mixing this
material with Nafion. For example, various composite membranes were
developed by combining sulfonated poly(arylene ether ketone) (sPAEK)
with Nafion.[19] Composite membranes fabricated
using these approaches showed improved ionic conductivity and mechanical
and oxidative properties compared to typical Nafion membranes. However,
due to poor compatibility between Nafion and the applied additives,
the overall performance of membranes was degraded. However, these
approaches are somewhat effective in reducing methanol crossover in
direct methanol fuel cells (DMFCs), where methanol is used as a fuel.[19]Recently, a swelling–filling (SF)
method was developed for
minimizing the occurrence of phase separation between heterogeneous
polymers during the fabrication of Nafion composite membrane.[20−25] In this method, Nafion membranes are subjected to swelling by organic
solvents to maximize the pore size, and additives are then added to
fill these pores. Proton conductive macromolecules (PCMs) with nano-spherical
morphology are used as additives to fill nanopores while further facilitating
the interaction between the sulfonic acid groups of Nafion and the
hydrophilic functional groups of the additives in the swollen Nafion
framework. Nafion composite membranes fabricated by this swelling–filling
method may have a nanophase-separated morphology, unlike existing
composite membranes with a macrophase-separated morphology. With these
unique structural features, these membranes provide improved ionic
conductivity and physical and chemical stability. Some studies on
SF composite membranes have introduced sheared graphene oxides or
nano-sized functionalized silica into Nafion and other types of SF
composite membranes.[23] These methods were
also somewhat effective in reducing the crossover of methanol as a
fuel, but little research has been conducted on hydrogen permeability.Meanwhile, due to the catechol and amine functional groups contained
in its structure, polydopamine, which is derived from mussels (and
mimicks the adhesive strength of mussels), is known to have strong
adhesion to the surface of a wide range of materials, such as poly(tetrafluoroethylene)
(PTFE), metals, nonmetals, organic polymers, and inorganic materials.[26−28] Because its strong adhesion forces allow it to be coated on almost
all kinds of surfaces, polydopamine is currently widely used in various
surface modification applications. For example, this material has
been used in the electroless deposition process of metallic silver
and gold, as an organic electrode material in energy storage devices
for lithium and sodium batteries,[26] and
recently as a coating material for PTFEs along with cerium oxides
(CeO) in PEM applications.[29]Polydopamine is generated via the spontaneous
oxidation of dopamine.[30] This material
is characterized by containing
low-molecular-weight dopamine species capable of penetrating the three-dimensional
porous surface of a material with nano-sized pores and then adsorbing
onto the surface. In a recent study, polydopamine and a PFSA dispersion
agent were blended; the resultant composite membranes provided improved
mechanical properties and reduced hydrogen permeability.[31] This was attributed to the π–π
stacking of dopamine molecules enhancing the physical stability of
the composite membranes, as well as a number of hydrophilic groups
contained in the dopamine structure that also induced hydrogen bonds
and electrostatic mutual attraction. Further, it has recently been
reported that polydopamine itself can conduct protons.[32]In the present study, both dopamine and
sulfonated dopamine were
polymerized to form polydopamine and poly(sulfonated dopamine), and
the sulfonated dopamine was also copolymerized with dopamine to obtain
poly(dopamine-co-sulfonated dopamine). Subsequently,
the obtained materials were introduced as additives to fabricate Nafion
composite membranes impregnated with these polymers using the SF method.
These novel PEM materials were examined for their applicability to
PEMFCs and PEMWEs. As described earlier, the swollen pores of Nafion
membranes were effectively filled with poly(sulfonated dopamine) or
poly(dopamine-co-sulfonated dopamine) via the SF
method, allowing the resultant composite membranes to have a nanophase-separated
morphology. As a result, improved conductivity and physicochemical
properties are expected, together with reduced hydrogen crossover.
The physicochemical and electrical properties of the obtained composite
membranes, along with the properties of PEMFCs and PEMWE cells using
the membranes, were examined, and the results were compared to those
obtained from pristine Nafion-212 and polydopamine-filled Nafion composite
membranes. To our knowledge, this is the first example of using polydopamine
or functionalized polydopamine as an impregnation agent to Nafion.
Experimental Section
Materials
Dopamine
hydrochloride
was purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (Yongin, Korea). 1,3-Propane sultone
was obtained from Tokyo Chemical Industries Ltd. (Seoul, Korea). Nafion-212
membrane was available from a local vendor. All other chemicals and
solvents, such as NaOH, HCl, ammonia solution, and methanol, were
purchased from Daejung Metals & Chemicals Co., Ltd. (Shiheung,
Korea) and used as received. Deionized (DI) water was used throughout
this study for membrane treatment and measuring properties.
Synthesis of Sulfonated Dopamine (SDA)
The sulfonated
dopamine (SDA) was prepared following the procedures
reported as follows.[33] First, 2.27 g of
dopamine hydrochloride (DA) was dissolved in 300 mL of anhydrous ethanol
to form a homogeneous solution in a round-bottom flask. Afterward,
1.6 g of 1,3-propane sultone and 0.832 mL of ammonia solution were
successively added into the DA/ethanol solution. The resulting solution
was heated at 50 °C for 18 h. The final SDA (yield of 40%) was
obtained by filtration from the final solution and washing in ethanol
several times, followed by drying at 40 °C in an oven for 24
h to give the product as a white solid; δ (400 MHz, D2O) 6.86 (1H, d, J =
8.0, H2), 6.80 (1H, s, H3), 6.71 (1H, d, J = 8.0, H1), 3.25 (2H, t, J = 8.0, H8), 3.16 (2H, t, J = 8.0, H5), 2.95 (2H, t, J = 8.0, H6),
2.86 (2H, t, J = 8.0, H4), 2.07 (2H, p, J = 8.0, H7).
Preparation
of the Polydopamine Derivatives
Each polydopamine-derivative
solution was prepared by modifying
the reported procedure. First, polydopamine (PDA), poly(dopamine-co-sulfonated dopamine) [P(DA-SDA)], and poly(sulfonated
dopamine) (PSDA)were prepared by the oxidative polymerization using
their corresponding monomers (Figure )[34] as follows:
Figure 1
Schematic representation
of the synthesis of three different types
of dopamine homopolymer and copolymers using DA and SDA, and the preparation
of Nafion composite membranes using these polymers through the swelling–filling
method.
Schematic representation
of the synthesis of three different types
of dopamine homopolymer and copolymers using DA and SDA, and the preparation
of Nafion composite membranes using these polymers through the swelling–filling
method.For the preparation of PDA, 0.25
g of dopamine (DA) was completely
dissolved in 42 mL of 70% MeOH (MeOH/H2O = 7:3) with a
concentration of 0.6 wt %, followed by adding a few drops of 0.1 N
NaOH and stirring at room temperature. The reaction was carried out
until the appearance of the solution changed from colorless to dark
brown or black, indicating complete polymerization.For P(DA-SDA),
0.125 g of DA and 0.125 g of SDA (1:1 ratio by weight)
were combined using the same procedure as above. The PSDA polymer
solution was also prepared in the same way, using 0.25 g of SDA. All
of these polymer solutions were used for filling the Nafion membrane
to produce the corresponding composite membranes.
Preparation of Composite Polymer Membranes
Each Nafion
composite membrane was directly filled with the polydopamine-derivative
solutions as follows: each polymer solution (42 mL in 70% MeOH) was
prepared in a vial. Subsequently, the Nafion membrane was placed in
the prepared PDA, P(DA-SDA), and PSDA solutions for 36 h to yield
N-PDA, N-P(DA-SDA), and N-PSDA membranes, respectively. Afterward,
the solvent was removed by heating the treated membranes at 70 °C
for 24 h. In addition, a pristine Nafion membrane treated in 70% MeOH
was also prepared (N-MeOH) using the method mentioned above along
with Nafion-212 membrane as a reference. All polymer-filled composite
membranes had thicknesses in the range of 50–60 μm. Next,
all of the membranes were acidified with 1M HCl at 50 °C for
5 h, then washed with deionized (DI) water at least three times.
Characterization and Measurement Methods
All characterization and measurement methods are described in detail
in the Supporting Information.
Results and Discussion
Synthesis and Characterization
of Polydopamine,
Poly(Sulfonated Dopamine), and Poly(Dopamine-co-Sulfonated
Dopamine)
First, dopamine and 1,3-propane sultone were allowed
to react in an ammonia solution to obtain sulfonated dopamine (SDA)
(Scheme S2).The synthesized sulfonated
dopamine (SDA) was then subjected to structural analysis by comparing
it with dopamine (DA) as a reference through a comparative spectroscopic
analysis using proton nuclear magnetic resonance (1H NMR)
and Fourier transform infrared (FT IR) (Figure S1). In the 1H NMR spectrum of DA, peaks corresponding
to aromatic protons (H1,2,3) and alkyl protons (H4,5) were observed at 6.70–6.87 ppm and 2.80–3.20 ppm,
respectively. In the spectrum of SDA, however, new peaks appeared
at 2.07 (H7), 2.95 (H6), and 3.25 (H8) ppm in addition to the peaks mentioned above. The newly introduced
peaks were attributed to propyl sulfonates (Figure S1a).The structure of SDA was further confirmed using
the FT IR spectroscopic
analysis, where a new absorption peak corresponding to the S=O
stretching of SO3 was observed at 1056 cm–1. These results confirmed the successful synthesis of SDA (Figure S1b).Next, dopamine and sulfonated
dopamine were used to synthesize
the following three polymers: dopamine homopolymer (polydopamine,
PDA), sulfonated dopamine homopolymer [poly(sulfonated dopamine),
PSDA], and dopamine-sulfonated dopamine copolymer [poly(dopamine-co-sulfonated dopamine), P(DA-SDA)]. Each polymerization
process was conducted in basic conditions: a 0.6 wt % MeOH solution
(MeOH/H2O = 7:3) (Figure ).During this reaction, 5,6-dihydroxyindole
(DHI) is formed as a
reaction intermediate via nucleophilic cyclization between dopamine
molecules, followed by polymerization through autoxidation between
these molecules. The hydroxide ions in the reaction solution are known
to facilitate the rate-determining step (r.d.s.), thereby accelerating
the formation of nanoparticle-type polydopamine.[26] In the synthesis of P(DA-SDA), DA and SDA were mixed in
a weight ratio of 1:1.With the formation of polydopamine via
the oxidation of dopamine,
the corresponding solutions were found to gradually turn black. In
the polymerization process using DA, the corresponding solutions quickly
turned dark brown due to their high reactivity for polymerization.
However, the color change was very slow in the polymerization process
using SDA (i.e., the fabrication of P(DA-SDA) and PSDA) because the
polymerization of the relevant monomers was slowed by the electrostatic
repulsion of the sulfonate groups.[33] The
polymerization process was conducted for at least 5 days, given the
difference in the reactivity of monomers. It was found that, after
that period, all solutions turned dark black (Figure S2).The polymerization of the three types of
dopamine and their derivatives
was confirmed based on the UV–vis spectra. The formation of
polydopamine allowed each molecular component to have a conjugation
structure in the form of quinone.[33,35−37] As a result, a shoulder absorption peak was observed at ∼350
nm in all three polymers, which indicated the successful synthesis
of the intended polymers (Figure S3).In addition, an energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) mapping
analysis was conducted on the three fabricated dopamine (DA)-based
polymer particles using SEM (Figure S4 and Table S1). The quantitative elemental analysis results showed sulfur
content of 3.03% in P(DA-SDA) and 5.25% in PSDA. This confirmed that
sulfonated dopamine had participated in the polymerization process.FT IR spectroscopic analysis was conducted for further structural
analysis of the obtained polymers (Figure S5). Characteristic peaks corresponding to the C=O bonds from
quinone were observed at 1610 cm–1 in all three
polymers.[38,39] In addition, an adsorption band, corresponding
to the stretching vibration of NH groups (at 1521 cm–1), a peak corresponding to the vibration of methylene C–H
(at 1470 cm–1), a peak corresponding to the vibration
of phenolic C–O–H bonds (at 1390 cm–1), and a peak corresponding to C–O bonds (at 1285 cm–1) were observed. In P(DA-SDA) and PSDA, in particular, a peak corresponding
to the symmetric stretching vibration of SO3 groups was
additionally observed at 1041 cm–1.[31,39−41] These results confirmed the successful oxidative
self-polymerization of DA, SDA, and DA-SDA in alkaline solutions.
Fabrication and Characterization of Nafion
Composite Membranes Filled with PDA Derivatives
The three
polymer solutions (PDA, PSDA, and P(DA-SDA)) were used to fabricate
Nafion composite membranes according to the following procedures (Figure ). First, Nafion-212
membranes were immersed in aqueous MeOH solutions (0.6 wt %) of PDA,
PSDA, and P(DA-SDA) for 36 h and then dried. In the process, these
Nafion membranes were subjected to swelling by MeOH as a solvent;
at the same time, the newly developed micropore structure of Nafion
was impregnated with the polymers in situ.These Nafion composite
membranes, impregnated with three different polymers: polydopamine,
poly(dopamine-co-sulfonated dopamine), and poly(sulfonated
dopamine), were obtained in the form of a flexible film; these films
were, respectively, denoted as N-PDA, N-P(DA-SDA), and N-PSDA (Figure S6). In addition, a Nafion membrane was
subjected to swelling by methanol without the addition of polymers
as impregnation agents to fabricate a Nafion composite membrane filled
with methanol. This membrane was then named N-MeOH and used to compare
the changes in some basic membrane properties of the pristine Nafion-212
control group (Figure S6).The structural
analysis of the Nafion composite membranes filled
with the polydopamine derivatives, that is, N-PDA, N-P(DA-SDA), and
N-PSDA, was performed via FT IR, and the results were compared to
those obtained from Nafion-212 as a control group (Figure S7). Absorption bands characteristic of Nafion-based
polymers were observed in all tested materials. More specifically,
peaks corresponding to the stretching vibration of fluorocarbon chains
appeared at 1201 and 968 cm–1, and peaks corresponding
to the symmetric and asymmetric stretching vibration of O=S=O
in the −SO3H groups were observed at 1140 and 1056
cm–1.The introduction of different fillers
(PDA, P(DA-SDA), and PSDA)
into the Nafion matrix caused the intensity of the peak corresponding
to the O=S=O vibration to decrease. This was attributed
to the electrostatic attraction generated at the interface between
the SO3H groups of the Nafion matrix and the functionalized
polymer fillers. To be more specific, this attraction corresponded
to the interaction between the SO3H groups in the matrix
and the hydroxyl groups or amine groups contained in the dopamine
molecules (−S=O···H–O–
and −S=O···H–N−). Some
absorption bands appeared in the composite membranes that were not
observed in Nafion-212. These new absorption bands appeared in the
range of 2000–1300 cm–1. More specifically,
peaks corresponding to the indole or indoline structure, the stretching
vibration of NH groups, the bending vibration of methylene C–H
bonds, and phenolic C–O–H bonds were observed at 1610,
1521, 1470, and 1390 cm–1, respectively (Figure S7b). These results confirmed that the
three different polydopamine-derivative fillers had been successfully
impregnated into the micropores of each Nafion membrane.Next,
the density of the three obtained Nafion composite membranes
was measured, and the results were compared to those obtained from
N-MeOH. These composite membranes were expected to have high-density
networks because their internal pores were impregnated with the PDA-based
fillers. The density of the membranes was examined with respect to
the duration of the swelling–filling process to confirm this.
The results showed that the density of N-MeOH remained constant regardless
of the duration of the process, while the density of the composite
membranes N-PDA, N-P(DA-SDA), and N-PSDA increased over time (Table S2). The density changes were attributed
to filling the micropores present inside these MeOH-treated Nafion
membranes with the polymer fillers.Once the duration of the
swelling–filling process exceeded
36 h, no density change was observed in all membranes, which confirmed
that the pores in the Nafion membranes had been completely filled
with the polymer fillers. These membranes were then used for further
analysis and characterization.The densities of the fully impregnated
composite membranes were
then compared. The density of N-MeOH was lower than that of pristine
Nafion-212 due to the swelling of the membrane after methanol treatment.
The density decreased for the membranes in the following order: SDA
[N-PDA (1.991) > N-P(DA-SDA) (1.934) ∼ N-PSDA (1.932)] because
the introduction of SDA led to an increase in the free volume inside
the membranes. More specifically, unlike dopamine, sulfonated dopamine
contains flexible aliphatic chains that fill the Nafion micropores
differently.The fractional free volume (FFV) of the applied
polydopamine derivatives
was calculated to confirm this mechanism (Table S3). In general, polymers containing rigid side chains or bulky
functional groups, such as sulfonated groups, are known to have relatively
large FFVs. Indeed, the FFV of the polymer fillers was found to increase
with increasing SDA content (PDA < P(DA-SDA) < PSDA). These
FFV results confirmed that the degree of filling might be altered
by the introduction of SDA; this was also consistent with the tendency
observed in the membrane density measurements. Simply put, the introduction
of SDA with relatively large FFV led to a decrease in the density
of the membranes. The FFV is directly related to the amount of space
that can be occupied by the water molecules contained in the applied
polymer, and the conductivity of the resultant membranes can be further
affected.Subsequently, scanning electron microscopy (SEM) was
conducted
to characterize the surface and cross section of the three Nafion
composite membranes [N-PDA, N-P(DA-SDA), and N-PSDA], and the results
were compared to those obtained from N-MeOH (Figure S8). All three composite membranes were found to have a smooth,
dense, and uniform surface. This uniform and homogeneous microstructure
was attributed to the hydrophilic groups (amino, imino, and catechol
groups) contained in the dopamine structure of the impregnation agents
that induce additional interactions and form a physical interaction
with the Nafion matrix.Elemental analysis was also conducted
on the cross section of the
three Nafion composite membranes via energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy
(EDS) mapping, and the results were compared to those obtained from
N-MeOH (Figure and Table S4). The cross section of all membranes
was smooth and homogeneous, as in the SEM surface analysis results.
The elemental analysis results showed that the carbon content was
higher, and the fluorine content was lower in the composite membranes
impregnated with the polymer fillers than in the N-MeOH control (with
a carbon content of 37.70% and a fluorine content of 57.41%). This
confirmed that dopamine, an aromatic hydrocarbon material, had been
successfully impregnated into each Nafion membrane. The O/C content
ratio increased in the order of N-PDA < N-P(DA-SDA) < N-PSDA
because an increase in the SDA content of the impregnation agent led
to an increase in the proportion of the sulfonic acid groups.
Figure 2
SEM cross-sectional
images of the pretreated membranes: (a–d)
secondary electron images, (a1–d1) EDS
mapping images with carbon (C) elemental maps, (a2–d2) EDS mapping images with oxygen (O) elemental maps, (a3–d3) EDS mapping images with fluorine (F)
elemental maps, (a4–d4) EDS mapping images
with nitrogen (N) elemental maps, and (a5–d5) EDS mapping images with sulfur (S) elemental maps: N-MeOH
(a series), N-PDA (b series), N-P(DA-SDA) (c series), and N-PSDA (d
series).
SEM cross-sectional
images of the pretreated membranes: (a–d)
secondary electron images, (a1–d1) EDS
mapping images with carbon (C) elemental maps, (a2–d2) EDS mapping images with oxygen (O) elemental maps, (a3–d3) EDS mapping images with fluorine (F)
elemental maps, (a4–d4) EDS mapping images
with nitrogen (N) elemental maps, and (a5–d5) EDS mapping images with sulfur (S) elemental maps: N-MeOH
(a series), N-PDA (b series), N-P(DA-SDA) (c series), and N-PSDA (d
series).Overall, these SEM analysis results
confirmed that no defects resulting
from nonuniform phase separation between the Nafion matrix and the
two polydopamine polymers were observed in the Nafion composite membranes.
The polydopamine-derivative fillers were uniformly distributed throughout
the Nafion matrix.
Ion Exchange Capacity (IEC),
Water Uptake
(WU), and Swelling Ratio (SR) of the Nafion Composite Membranes
The ion exchange capacity (IEC), water uptake (WU), and swelling
ratio (SR) of the three Nafion composite membranes [N-PDA, N-P(DA-SDA),
and N-PSDA] were analyzed, and the results were compared to those
obtained from Nafion-212 and N-MeOH (Table ).
Table 1
IEC, Water Uptake,
and Swelling Ratio
of the Nafion-212, N-MeOH, N-PDA, N-P(DA-SDA), and N-PSDA Membranes
membrane
exp. IEC (meq g–1)
water
uptake (%)
swelling
ratio (%)
20 °C
80 °C
20 °C
(Δl)
80 °C
(Δl)
20 °C
(Δt)
80 °C
(Δt)
Nafion-212
0.91 ± 0.06
14.10 ± 0.27
32.90 ± 0.18
13.9 ± 0.17
20.9 ± 0.11
13.2 ± 0.25
23.0 ± 0.27
N-MeOH
0.92 ± 0.09
30.53 ± 0.17
47.20 ± 0.13
18.2 ± 0.50
29.5 ± 0.25
21.8 ± 0.32
30.8 ± 0.27
N-PDA
0.75 ± 0.01
24.18 ± 0.31
40.05 ± 0.12
13.6 ± 0.34
20.5 ± 0.20
12.5 ± 0.42
21.4 ± 0.18
N-P(DA-SDA)
0.78 ± 0.01
26.10 ± 0.24
43.41 ± 0.18
15.9 ± 0.29
22.7 ± 0.51
15.5 ± 0.37
24.1 ± 0.49
N-PSDA
0.83 ± 0.00
28.03 ± 0.13
45.71 ± 0.63
17.3 ± 0.19
23.2 ± 0.39
16.4 ± 0.26
25.5 ± 0.31
The IEC refers to the milliequivalent
of ion-conducting groups
present in polymers and is closely related to the ionic conductivity
and WU of membranes. In general, the higher the IEC of a membrane
is, the higher its ionic conductivity becomes; however, this is likely
to significantly increase the WU, leading to an excessive increase
in the SR.The IEC of the composite membranes was experimentally
measured
using acid–base titration (i.e., IECexp), and the
results are presented in Table . The N-MeOH (0.92 meq g–1) with no polymers
added showed almost the same IECexp as that of Nafion-212
(0.9 meq g–1) (Table ). The figures for N-PDA, N-P(DA-SDA), and N-PSDA were
then measured to be 0.75, 0.78, and 0.83 meq g–1, respectively. Simply put, the three Nafion composite membranes
impregnated with the polymers showed slightly lower IEC than Nafion-212
and N-MeOH as control groups. This indicates that introducing polymer
fillers into a Nafion membrane leads to an increase in the total mass
of the resultant composite membrane, thereby lowering its IECexp. N-PDA, in particular, exhibited the lowest IEC, and the
IECs of N-P(DA-SDA) and N-PSDA were slightly higher than that of N-PDA.
This was attributed to the sulfonic acid groups contained in SDA.Next, the WU and SR of each composite membrane were measured and
compared with Nafion-212 and N-MeOH. These two parameters are primary
factors determining the physical and mechanical properties of membranes.
The WU, in particular, closely affects not only the physical properties
but also the ionic conductivity of PEMs because the presence of a
sufficient number of water molecules in the membrane leads to the
formation of ion channels, which help promote the diffusion of protons
while enhancing stability. However, excessively high WU inevitably
degrades the dimensional stability of membranes, resulting in a decrease
in their mechanical properties and the overall performance of the
resultant membrane–electrode assembly (MEA). Not only that,
the WU and SR of a membrane are known to depend on the porosity of
the membrane; high porosity leads to a high WU and SR.[42−44]The WU and SR values of each membrane measured at low (20
°C)
and high (80 °C) temperatures are presented in Table . The results showed that both
WU and SR were increased for N-MeOH compared to the pristine Nafion-212
because the methanol treatment caused the Nafion-212 membrane to swell.
The composite membranes also exhibited higher WU and similar or slightly
higher SR than Nafion-212. All of the composite membranes, however,
showed lower WU and SR (i.e., higher dimensional stability) than the
N-MeOH membrane. More specifically, N-MeOH showed the highest WU and
SR (or lowest dimensional stability). The WU values of the polydopamine-filled
Nafion (N-PDA) were 24.18 and 40.05% at 20 and 80 °C, respectively,
lower than those of N-MeOH at 30.53 and 47.20% at 20 and 80 °C,
respectively. This was attributed to the fact that N-PDA exhibited
a lower IEC than N-MeOH and also to the fact that N-PDA was fabricated
by filling the pores of a Nafion membrane with PDA-based fillers that
are more aromatic and, thus, more hydrophobic in nature than Nafion.At both 20 and 80 °C, the increasing content of PSDA led to
an increase in the WU and SR (N-PDA < N-P(DA-SDA) < N-PSDA).
This was attributed to the sulfonic acid groups present in the flexible
side chains of the SDA units. In other words, the introduction of
hydrophilic sulfonic acid groups helped attract more H2O molecules. Here, note that the composite membranes impregnated
with PSDA showed lower WU and SR at both low and high temperatures
than N-MeOH even though all membranes had a similar IEC. These results
were attributed to the strong interaction between Nafion and PSDA
and between PSDAs, resulting in increased swelling and dimensional
stability of the composite membranes.
Mechanical
and Thermal Properties of the Membranes
Next, the stress–strain
curves of the obtained composite
membranes were measured at room temperature and 50% RH to examine
their mechanical stability (Figure and Table S5). The results
showed that the tensile strength of Nafion-212 as a control group
was 15.5 MPa, while its elongation at break was 277.7%. However, N-PDA,
N-P(DA-SDA), and N-PSDA all exhibited similar or higher tensile strength
than Nafion-212. This was because the composite membranes were fabricated
by filling the pores of Nafion membranes with PDA-based fillers that
are physically stable due to the π–π stacking between
catechol structures. In addition, various hydrophilic functional groups
contained in the dopamine monomers (including amino, imino, and catechol
groups) served to form hydrogen bonds and electrostatic interactions
with the sulfonic acid functional groups of Nafion. Accordingly, the
tensile strength tended to increase with increasing SDA content, that
is, 15.0 MPa for N-PDA, 15.9 MPa for N-P(DA-SDA), and 17.6 MPa for
N-PSDA. The elongation at break also increased with increasing SDA
content, that is, 204.1% for N-PDA, 210.1% for N-P(DA-SDA), and 263.4%
for N-PSDA. Overall, the Nafion composite membranes filled with the
dopamine-derivative fillers exhibited excellent mechanical performance
with significantly higher tensile properties while still providing
similar levels of elongation as Nafion-212.
Figure 3
Stress–strain
curves of the composite membranes with different
polymer fillers and the reference membrane.
Stress–strain
curves of the composite membranes with different
polymer fillers and the reference membrane.Thermogravimetric analysis (TGA) was performed to examine the thermal
degradation behavior of each membrane (Figure ). All tested membranes exhibited the characteristic
thermal behavior of Nafion. More specifically, a weight loss was observed
below 200 °C, which corresponded to the evaporation of the water
and solvents contained in the membrane. The weight loss observed in
the range of 280–400 °C was attributed to the degradation
of the sulfonic acid groups present in the side chains of Nafion (and
the sulfonic acid groups attached to the side chains of the PSDA units).
In the range of 400–500 °C, a weight loss corresponding
to the degradation of Nafion’s side chains was observed. Above
500 °C, a weight loss resulting from the degradation of the PTFE
backbone was detected. In N-P(DA-SDA) and N-PSDA, the maximum degradation
temperatures of the sulfonic acid groups were 354 and 353 °C,
respectively—slightly higher than that of N-PDA at 339 °C.
This was attributed to the strong interaction between the functional
groups inside the sulfonated dopamine (catecholamine) units. In N-P(DA-SDA)
and N-PSDA, in particular, an additional weight loss corresponding
to the degradation of the alkyl side chains of the SDA units was observed
at around 440 °C in the side chain degradation temperature range
of 400–500 °C. These results again confirmed that different
amounts of SDA fillers had been impregnated into each Nafion membrane.
Figure 4
TGA curves
from 30 to 800 °C were obtained from the reference
and composite membranes (inset: DTG of the TGA thermograph).
TGA curves
from 30 to 800 °C were obtained from the reference
and composite membranes (inset: DTG of the TGA thermograph).The thermal analysis can be further validated by
DSC for all three
composite membranes and pristine Nafion-212, and the obtained curves
are presented in Figure S9. The relaxation
process during the structural reorganization of polymer results in
the appearance of endothermic peaks. The glass-transition temperatures
(Tg) for each composite membrane were
compared with Nafion-212 (Figure S9). The
pristine Nafion-212 showed Tg at 83.4
°C, whereas N-PDA, N-P(DA-SDA), and N-PSDA showed a value at
78.2, 85.9, and 87.1 °C, respectively, indicating that Tg increased with the increase of SDA content.
This is ascribed to the strong interaction between the sulfonic acid
side chains in the PSDA unit and Nafion.Overall, the Nafion-filling
strategy using sulfonated dopamine-derivatives
helped to improve the thermal properties of composite membranes compared
to pristine Nafion-212.A water state analysis of each composite
membrane was further conducted
using DSC and compared with that of Nafion-212 (Figure S10). In all tested membranes, depression of the freezing
point for bound water was observed. This phenomenon can be interpreted
as a peak shift to lower temperatures caused by loosely bound water.
More specifically, it was attributed to the interaction between the
sulfonic acid groups of Nafion and loosely bound water. However, in
N-PSDA with the PSDA fillers, the degree of freezing point depression
was greater than other membranes. This was attributed to the introduction
of sulfonic acid groups from the SDA-containing fillers. Thus, N-PSDA
exhibited improved water holding capacity and was also expected to
provide improved ionic conductivity and cell performance accordingly.
Morphological Analysis
A topographical
analysis was performed on the surface of each membrane via atomic
force microscopy (AFM) (Figure a-d). First, tapping mode phase images were obtained from
each membrane. In these images, the bright region corresponds to the
hydrophobic phases of the membrane, while the dark region represents
the hydrophilic phases of the membrane. In Nafion-212, distinct phase
separation between its hydrophobic PTFE backbone chain and the side
chains of the sulfonic acid groups was observed. In contrast, in N-PDA,
which contained aromatic dopamine units that were more hydrophobic,
a hydrophobic region (the yellowish part) was more pronounced. In
N-P(DA-SDA) and N-PSDA with the SDA-containing fillers applied, the
higher the SDA content, the more pronounced the well-connected hydrophilic
channels, that is, N-P(DA-SDA) < N-PSDA. This was attributed to
the introduction of flexible alkyl chains containing sulfonic acid
groups in their catecholamine monomers. The reinforcement of hydrophilic
channels observed here was also consistent with the WU results described
above (Table ).
Figure 5
AFM phase images
of (a) Nafion-212, (b) N-PDA, (c) N-P(DA-SDA),
and (d) N-PSDA, and transmission electron microscopy (TEM) images
of (a′) Nafion-212, (b′) N-PDA, (c′) N-P(DA-SDA),
and (d′) N-PSDA.
AFM phase images
of (a) Nafion-212, (b) N-PDA, (c) N-P(DA-SDA),
and (d) N-PSDA, and transmission electron microscopy (TEM) images
of (a′) Nafion-212, (b′) N-PDA, (c′) N-P(DA-SDA),
and (d′) N-PSDA.The morphology of the
Nafion composite membranes was further examined
using TEM (Figure a'-d'). Nafion is known to form a unique rod-like morphology
resulting
from phase separation between the backbone hydrophobic perfluorinated
polymer chains and the sulfonic acid groups present in its side chains.[45] Accordingly, distinct phase separation between
hydrophilic and hydrophobic regions was observed as in the AFM results
described above. Ion clusters were found in all tested membranes,
formed by the hydrophilic sulfonic acid groups present in the side
chains of Nafion. However, in the polydopamine-filled Nafion composite
membrane (N-PDA) (Figure b′), these ion clusters were smaller than those in
Nafion-212 (Figure a′). This was because the introduction of the PDA fillers
into the swollen Nafion membrane led to dense packing. Well-developed
ion clusters were observed in the TEM images of N-P(DA-SDA) (Figure c′) and N-PSDA
(Figure d′),
unlike in N-PDA. This was attributed to the introduction of the SDA
units containing additional hydrophilic sulfonic acid groups, which
then formed additional hydrogen bonds and ionic interactions with
Nafion. The magnified TEM images showed that ion clusters were more
pronounced and well developed in N-PSDA than in Nafion-212 (Figure S11).The morphology of the Nafion
composite membranes was further analyzed
using small-angle X-ray scattering (SAXS) and wide-angle X-ray diffraction
(WAXD), and the results were compared to those obtained from Nafion-212
(Figure ).
Figure 6
(a) SAXS plots
and (b) WAXD plots of the Nafion-212, N-PDA, N-P(DA-SDA),
and N-PSDA membranes.
(a) SAXS plots
and (b) WAXD plots of the Nafion-212, N-PDA, N-P(DA-SDA),
and N-PSDA membranes.First, SAXS patterns
obtained from the four types of membranes
are shown in Figure a. Ionomeric peaks of Nafion-212, N-PDA, N-P(DA-SDA), and N-PSDA
were observed at qmax = 0.00181, 0.00185,
0.00171, and 0.00163 Å–1, respectively. Compared
with Nafion-212, the ionic cluster size increased (lower q values) for N-P(DA-SDA) and N-PSDA and decreased for N-PDA, indicating
that the introduction of PDA fillers into Nafion membranes did not
contribute to the formation of large ion clusters, unlike with PSDA.
In other words, the dense membrane structure and lack of flexible
side chains in the dopamine units caused N-PDA to have the smallest d-spacing (or largest qmax).
In contrast, N-P(DA-SDA) and N-PSDA exhibited lower q values than Nafion-212, which means their ion domains are larger.
This was attributed to the aggregation of sulfonic acid groups contained
in the flexible side chains of the SDA units leading to microphase
separation while contributing to the formation of proton-conducting
channels. These results were also consistent with the AFM (Figure a-d) and TEM (Figures a'-d'
and S11) results, in which an increase
in the SDA
content enhanced the formation of well-developed hydrophilic ion-conducting
channels and ion clusters.Three characteristic peaks of Nafion
were observed in the WAXD
patterns of each membrane (Figure b). Two scattering peaks were observed in the range
of 2θ ≈ 15–20°: one corresponding to the
amorphous region near 16.1° and the other corresponding to the
crystalline region near 17.7°. In addition, a diffraction peak
attributed to the amorphous packing of Nafion chains was observed
near 39°. Similar to those observed in Nafion-212, characteristic
peaks corresponding to crystalline and amorphous units were observed
in all composite membranes as well.Changes in the peak corresponding
to the amorphous region near
39° were observed in the Nafion composite membranes filled with
the PDA derivatives. To be more specific, the degree of crystallinity
was higher in N-PDA (2θ = 39.44) than in Nafion-212 (2θ
= 38.6). This was due to the PDA filling the pores of the Nafion matrix.
Furthermore, the degree of crystallinity decreased with increasing
SDA content: 2θ = 39.44, 39.32, and 38.96 for N-PDA, N-P(DA-SDA),
and N-PSDA, respectively. This was attributed to the plasticization
effect caused by the sulfonic acid groups present in the flexible
side chains of the introduced SDA monomers.
Proton
Conductivity of the Membranes
Proton conductivity (σ),
an important factor that determines
actual cell performance, is significantly affected by the IEC, WU,
and morphology of membranes, along with humidity and temperature conditions.
The conductivity of the fabricated Nafion composite membranes was
measured in water in the temperature range of 20–80 °C
(Table ).
Table 2
Proton Conductivity of the Membranes
Filled with Different Polymer Fillers at Different Temperatures
membrane
IEC (meq g–1)
proton
conductivity (mS cm–1)
exp
20 °C
40 °C
60 °C
80 °C
Nafion-212
0.91 ± 0.06
95.60 ± 0.21
131.2 ± 0.18
168.8 ± 0.48
204.6 ± 0.72
N-PDA
0.75 ± 0.01
84.4 ± 0.1
113.7 ± 0.3
148.8 ± 0.1
188.7 ± 0.1
N-P(DA-SDA)
0.78 ± 0.01
103.8 ± 0.1
137.7 ± 0.2
177.4 ± 0.3
215.5 ± 0.5
N-PSDA
0.83 ± 0.00
120.9 ± 0.1
160.2 ± 0.3
216.0 ± 0.1
254.3 ± 0.5
In these conductivity tests, the time required for
polymer fillers
to completely fill the pores of Nafion membranes during composite
membrane fabrication was considered, as presented earlier in the density
measurement results (Table S2). Thus, each
conductivity measurement was performed at an interval of 12 h. After
36 h, the conductivity remained constant over time at each temperature
(Table S6).In all fabricated membranes,
the ionic conductivity increased with
the increase in the temperature due to the increased ion mobility
caused by thermal activation. In general, ion-conducting polymers
with higher IEC values (or higher WU) tend to provide higher ionic
conductivity. Accordingly, as described earlier in the IEC and WU
results (Table ),
N-PDA exhibited a lower IEC (0.75 meq g–1) than
Nafion-212 at 0.91 meq g–1 with a densely packed
structure. Thus, the ionic conductivity was lower over the entire
temperature range in N-PDA than in Nafion-212 (Table ).Meanwhile, polydopamine allows for
additional ion transport based
on the Grotthuss mechanism in which protons hop from one hydrogen
bond site to another. In these membranes, the additional hydrogen
bonds the dopamine molecules formed with the sulfonic acid groups
of Nafion could also serve the Grotthuss mechanism.[32] It was, therefore, originally expected that N-PDA would
exhibit higher ionic conductivity than Nafion-212. However, the ionic
conductivity of N-PDA was lower. This was attributed to the fact that
filling the high-porosity Nafion matrix with PDA limited ionic conduction
via the vehicular mechanism, in which protons are conducted through
ion diffusion.N-P(DA-SDA) and N-PSDA exhibited improved ionic
conductivity over
the entire temperature range. This was a result of the introduction
of flexible alkyl chains containing sulfonic acid groups in their
catecholamine monomers. This modification improved the WU (Table ) and water holding
capacity (Figure S10) of the corresponding
membranes. Overall, introducing these hydrophilic fillers enhanced
the formation of well-developed hydrophilic channels, thereby facilitating
ionic conduction. More specifically, N-P(DA-SDA) and N-PSDA were fabricated
by filling the pores of Nafion membranes with the sulfonated-PDA fillers
with larger free volume (FFV: PDA < P(DA-SDA) < PSDA) (Table S3). In the process, the decrease in ionic
conduction via vehicle-type transfer was minimized; at the same time,
additional ionic conduction was allowed via the Grotthuss mechanism
enabled by the sulfonic acid groups. These results were also consistent
with the AFM and TEM (Figure ) results, in which an increase in the SDA content enhanced
the formation of well-developed hydrophilic ion-conducting channels
and ion clusters, as shown in the SAXS data (Figure a): that is, qmax Nafion-212 = 0.00181 Å–1 and qmax N-PSDA = 0.00163 Å–1.In addition, the activation energy was calculated based on
the
slopes of the obtained Arrhenius plot (Figure ). The activation energy of Nafion-212 as
the control group was measured as 10.54 kJ mol–1; this is slightly lower than that of N-PDA (11.15 kJ mol–1). Meanwhile, the composite membranes with SDA units exhibited lower
activation energy than Nafion-212. This confirmed the contribution
of the sulfonic acid groups contained in the SDA units to the formation
of additional ion-conducting channels while improving the overall
conductivity.
Figure 7
Arrhenius plots of the proton conductivity versus temperature
for
the membranes with different polymer fillers.
Arrhenius plots of the proton conductivity versus temperature
for
the membranes with different polymer fillers.As mentioned earlier, proton conduction requires water molecules
to facilitate the transfer process. Thus, ionic conductivity depends
significantly on ambient humidity. In the present study, the ionic
conductivity of each membrane was measured in the actual operating
conditions of fuel cells, that is, at 95% RH and 80 °C (Table S7). The results showed the same patterns
as observed in the ionic conductivity results measured in water described
above (Table ). Simply
put, N-PDA exhibited significantly lower ionic conductivity than Nafion-212;
however, the introduction of the SDA fillers significantly enhanced
the ionic conductivity of the corresponding membranes. In particular,
the ionic conductivity of N-PSDA was 95.2 mS cm–1, about 23.9% higher than that of Nafion-212, which was 76.8 mS cm–1. This implied that the introduction of SDA and the
subsequent formation of hydrophilic ion-conducting channels provided
an effective contribution even under high-RH conditions. Overall,
in both water and under high-RH conditions, the N-P(DA-SDA) and N-PSDA
composite membranes exhibited significantly improved ionic conductivity.
Based on the results, these membranes were also expected to provide
excellent performance when applied to actual PEMFCs and PEMWE cells.
Oxidative and Hydrolytic Stability of the
Membranes
Next, the oxidative stability of the Nafion composite
membranes was examined. The oxidative stability of PEMs is an important
parameter that is closely related to the resultant cell performance
and durability. Peroxide radicals generated during cell operation
may attack the polymer chains of the membrane and chemically degrade
the membrane, thereby possibly reducing the overall cell performance.Each membrane was immersed in Fenton’s reagent (4 ppm FeSO4 and 3 wt % H2O2) at 80 °C for
6 h. Changes in the weight of each membrane were then measured to
examine their ex-situ oxidative stability (Figure S12). The weight retention was about 3.6% higher in Nafion-212
than in N-PDA. N-P(DA-SDA) and N-PSDA exhibited higher oxidative stability
than N-PDA, and the degree of improvement increased with increasing
SDA content. This was because the sulfonic acid groups attached to
the side chains of the SDA units formed strong ionic interactions
with the sulfonic acid groups contained in Nafion. In addition, the
aliphatic side chains of the SDA units helped keep the aromatic backbone
of the PDA fillers in a hydrophobic environment. Note that N-PSDA
(96.6%) exhibited a level of oxidative stability comparable to Nafion-212
(98.4%). Given that aromatic hydrocarbon-based polymers with hydrophilic
functional groups have relatively low oxidative stability in contrast
to Nafion, which is inherently stable due to the C–F bonds
in its structure,[46] this result is highly
encouraging.Furthermore, the weight loss was analyzed using
TGA for each membrane
after treating the membranes with Fenton’s reagent (4 ppm FeSO4 and 3 wt % H2O2) at 80 °C for
6 h (Figure S13). All of the tested membranes
exhibited thermal behavior similar to that of the membranes prior
to Fenton’s treatment. However, a minute change was observed
for N-P(DA-SDA) and N-PSDA at the temperature ranges 280–400
°C (degradation of sulfonic acid groups) and 400–500 °C
(degradation of the alkyl side chains of the SDA units), indicating
that the sulfonic acid group degradation occurred not only from the
Nafion side chains but also by the alkyl side chains of the SDA units
in the sulfonated dopamine-based polymers. Moreover, from the DTG
graph, the degradation of the alkyl side chains of SDA units in N-P(DA-SDA)
seemed slightly higher compared to N-PSDA; this is in line with the
weight loss data shown in Figure S12.In addition, the remaining conductivity was measured after the
oxidative stability test under the same conditions (Figure S14). All of the membranes retained >95% conductivity
after this test. While the Nafion-212 membrane showed the lowest weight
loss, it suffered from the highest conductivity loss. Meanwhile, the
other three composite membranes retained comparatively higher conductivity
with increasing SDA content even after Fenton’s test; this
result is in line with the data in Figure S12. The highest conductivity retention being obtained for N-P(DA-SDA)
and N-PSDA suggests that the number of sulfonic acid groups that degraded
from the filler polymers is negligible and also shows enhanced oxidative
stability.Following the oxidative stability test, we further
analyzed the
mechanical properties of the membranes by measuring the stress–strain
curves and compared them with those obtained prior to the stability
test (Figure S15). The membranes’
mechanical properties were found to be affected by Fenton’s
treatment to a certain extent. Nevertheless, the curves obtained after
the stability test exhibited a trend similar to that of the membranes
prior to the test (as shown in Figure ), with similar tensile strength values and relatively
lower elongation at break values. Compared to Nafion-212 (tensile
stress of 14.3 MPa), the N-PDA (17.8 MPa), N-P(DA-SDA) (17.5 MPa),
and N-PSDA (18.5 MPa) membranes retained their tensile strength, indicating
that the filler molecules inside the Nafion membrane are nearly stable
against the peroxide attack. Notably, the dopamine-based filler molecules
can help maintain the membranes’ mechanical properties by serving
hydrogen bonds and electrostatic interactions with the sulfonic acid
functional groups of Nafion. However, the decrease in elongation at
break values for the membranes may be caused by the morphological
changes resulting from the weight loss during the oxidative stability
test. The elongation at break values for Nafion-212, N-PDA, N-P(DA-SDA),
and N-PSDA were 180.2, 188.8, 196.6, and 228.2, respectively. Essentially,
the composite membranes were also successful in maintaining their
tensile strain values. In short, the mechanical properties after the
oxidative stability test show that all three composite membranes are
efficient in maintaining the mechanical stability required for PEM
applications.Next, durability tests were conducted to assess
whether the polydopamine-based
fillers might leak from the Nafion membranes. To this end, each composite
membrane was immersed in water at 60 °C for 500 h. In the process,
changes in conductivity over time were monitored to determine their
hydrolytic stability (Figure S16). The
hydrolytic stability test results showed that all of the membranes
retained >90% conductivity after the long-term durability test
in
water. More specifically, N-PSDA (100%) exhibited higher hydrolytic
stability than the reference Nafion-212 membrane (91.2%) and N-PDA
(92.4%). The introduction of sulfonic acid groups significantly enhanced
the interaction between the modified filler molecules and the Nafion
matrix. This result indicated that the well-connected hydrophilic
channels formed as a result of the reaction between the micropores
of the Nafion matrix, and the impregnated fillers remained highly
stable in water at 60 °C for 500 h.
Hydrogen
Permeability of the Membranes
Subsequently, the hydrogen
permeability of the Nafion composite membranes
was measured at 60 °C in three conditions: at 5% RH (dry state)
and 95% RH, and in water. The results were then compared to those
obtained from Nafion-212 (Figure and Table S8). All composite
membranes exhibited lower hydrogen permeability than Nafion-212 in
all tested conditions, as expected. The hydrogen permeability of N-PDA,
in particular, was significantly lower than that of Nafion-212. This
was attributed to the fact that the nanopores of Nafion had been filled
with the aromatic hydrocarbon-based dopamine units. In addition, the
PDA fillers contributed to the narrowing of mass transport channels,
that is, hydrogen transport pathways, through the formation of electrostatic
attractions and hydrogen bonds with Nafion at the interface between
the nanopores and the Nafion matrix. These results confirm that the
polymer-filling approach proposed in the present study effectively
suppresses hydrogen permeation.
Figure 8
Humidity dependence of hydrogen permeability
of Nafion-212, N-PDA,
N-P(DA-SDA), and N-PSDA.
Humidity dependence of hydrogen permeability
of Nafion-212, N-PDA,
N-P(DA-SDA), and N-PSDA.The measured hydrogen
permeability increased in the order of N-PDA
< N-P(DA-SDA) < N-PSDA. This was attributed to the fact that
P(DA-SDA) and PSDA had a larger FFV than PDA because their fillers
contained sulfonic acid groups in the form of flexible side chains;
thus, these polymer fillers were able to increase the free volume
of the composite membrane. This tendency was also consistent with
those found in the density measurement (Table S2) and crystallinity analysis (Figure b) results described above. These results
confirm that the increased degree of crystallinity makes composite
membranes more resistant to hydrogen permeation.[47] The hydrogen permeability of N-PSDA, in particular, was
26.8% lower at 95% RH (fuel cell operating conditions) and 27.3% lower
in a fully hydrated state (water electrolysis operating conditions)
than Nafion-212. These results confirm that N-PSDA not only allows
ion-conducting channels to be effectively formed but also, at the
same time, distorts hydrogen flow passages, thereby significantly
reducing hydrogen permeation. When applied to PEMWEs and PEMWE cells,
this composite membrane is expected to help control hydrogen crossover
in the actual operating conditions of these cells.
Performance of PEM-Based Fuel Cells: PEMFC
and PEMWE
Among the fabricated composite membranes, N-PSDA
exhibited the best electrochemical and mechanical properties; the
membrane was then subjected to single-cell tests at 80 °C and
100% RH, and in H2 (150 ccm) and O2 (300 ccm)
conditions to determine its cell performance when applied to hydrogen
fuel cells. The results were compared to the cell data obtained from
pristine Nafion-212 (Figure a). The tested membranes were fabricated to have a similar
thickness, and the same membrane–electrode assembly (MEA) fabrication
procedures were applied to minimize the effect of parameters other
than those related to the intrinsic characteristics of the two membranes.
Figure 9
Cell polarization
curves of the (a) PEMFC made of Nafion-212 and
N-PSDA for H2/O2 PEMFC at 80 °C and 100%
RH and (b) PEMWEs made of Nafion-212, N-PDA, N-P(DA-SDA), and N-PSDA
at 80 °C and 1.6 V.
Cell polarization
curves of the (a) PEMFC made of Nafion-212 and
N-PSDA for H2/O2 PEMFC at 80 °C and 100%
RH and (b) PEMWEs made of Nafion-212, N-PDA, N-P(DA-SDA), and N-PSDA
at 80 °C and 1.6 V.A significant improvement
in the cell performance for N-PSDA was
expected due to its higher ionic conductivity than pristine Nafion-212.
However, in reality, the N-PSDA composite membrane showed worse performance
than Nafion-212 under the actual PEMFC operating conditions. The peak
power density of the N-PSDA membrane was measured to be 966 mW cm–2, whereas that of Nafion-212 was 1300 mW cm–2. When the applied voltage was 0.6 V, the current density of Nafion-212
was 1690 mA cm–2, whereas N-PDSA showed 1041 mA
cm–2. This performance degradation may be related
to the interfacial interaction between the membrane and the electrodes,
as the MEA performance was greatly influenced by the membrane–electrode
interface. In addition, the incompatibility between the hydrocarbon-based
electrolyte membrane and the Nafion ionomers can also be a reason
for the performance loss of N-PSDA even if the membrane showed higher
proton conductivity and lower hydrogen permeability.Next, the
performance of N-PSDA and Nafion-212 as proton exchange
membrane water electrolyzers (PEMWEs) was examined. To this end, the
single-cell performance of Nafion-212 and N-PSDA was measured in the
voltage range of 0–2 V. The results are presented as polarization
curves (Figure b and Table S9). The N-PSDA membrane exhibited higher
cell performance (current density) than Nafion-212. At 2.0 V and 80
°C, in particular, the current density of N-PSDA was 4785 mA
cm–2, about 12.5% higher than that of Nafion-212,
at 4254 mA cm–2. The high cell performance of the
N-PSDA membrane has motivated analysis of the cell performance of
N-PDA and N-P(DA-SDA), which achieved current densities of 2376 and
4455 mA cm–2, respectively.Both N-P(DA-SDA)
and N-PSDA showed higher performance than the
pristine Nafion-212 membrane. The membranes were also tested for their
applicability to PEMWEs at high temperature and at a different voltage
level of 1.6 V, i.e., at voltage levels above the thermoneutral voltage
of PEMWE at 1.48 V[48,49] (EIS graphs in Figure S17 and Table S10). The results showed that N-PSDA
exhibited lower Ohmic resistance than N-P(DA-SDA) and N-PDA. This
was attributed to the improved water holding capacity and ionic conductivity
of N-PSDA achieved by the introduction of PSDA. In addition, N-P(DA-SDA)
followed N-PSDA in performance, thanks to the presence of SDA units
that contribute to higher ionic conductivity. Moreover, given that
water electrolyzer cells operate in a fully hydrated state, the hydrogen
crossover has a greater effect on the cell performance in water electrolyzer
cells than in fuel cells operated under RH conditions. Herein, the
lower hydrogen permeability of N-P(DA-SDA) and N-PSDA might also be
another reason for the higher cell performance, when the N-PDA was
an exception due to its lower conductivity.PFSA membranes are
known to exhibit high hydrogen crossover at
high temperatures and in hydrated conditions, which reduces the efficiency
of hydrogen production in PEMWEs. Hydrogen permeation can be reduced
by thickening the membrane, but this increases its Ohmic resistance.[50,51] The hydrogen permeability of membranes with the same thickness was
measured and discussed above (Figure ); in a hydrated state, the hydrogen permeability of
Nafion-212 was very high, at 44%, while the figure was lower for N-PSDA,
at 32%. Given that the overall performance of PEMWEs significantly
depends on the performance of the applied membrane, this decrease
in hydrogen crossover observed in N-PSDA was expected to improve the
cell performance, especially in high-temperature conditions (80 °C).
This can be accounted for as follows: the micropores of Nafion were
filled with the PSDA fillers via the in situ SF method, and this modification
effectively enhanced the formation of well-developed ion-conducting
channels while significantly reducing hydrogen crossover at the membrane–electrode
interface and inside the membrane matrix without changing the membrane
thickness.
Conclusions
In the
present study, sulfonated dopamine was synthesized, and
different polymer impregnation agents—PDA, P(DA-SDA), and PSDA—were
prepared via the self-oxidation reaction of dopamine. Nafion-212 membranes
were impregnated with these agents to fabricate a series of Nafion
composite membranes. The prepared polydopamine derivatives filled
the nanopores generated in the Nafion framework using the swelling–filling
method.The fractional free volume (FFV) of each polymer was
measured,
and the degree of filling of the Nafion membranes was analyzed. FT
IR analysis and SEM-EDS mapping were performed to confirm the uniform
distribution of polydopamine-derivative fillers in the Nafion membrane.The impregnation agents’ catecholamine structure induced
strong interactions between the fillers and Nafion matrix, giving
the resultant composite membranes improved thermal and mechanical
stability compared to Nafion-212 while preventing inhomogeneous phase
separation.Using AFM, SAXS, and TEM, a comprehensive morphological
analysis
was performed to confirm that, with the introduction of PSDA-containing
fillers, the sulfonic acid groups in PSDA side chains allowed further
interactions between the Nafion matrix and PSDA fillers, increasing
the water uptake of the resultant composite membranes while contributing
to the expansion of hydrophilic regions and ion clusters. N-PSDA,
which contains well-connected hydrophilic channels, exhibited the
highest ionic conductivity. Hydrolytic stability tests confirmed that
the membrane could effectively retain its ionic conductivity for 500
h.Each composite membrane underwent XRD analysis. Filling the
nanopores
in the Nafion matrix with the polymer fillers containing aromatic
hydrocarbon-based dopamine units increased the degree of crystallinity
in all tested composite membranes. Consequently, the hydrogen permeability
of each composite membrane decreased significantly under both RH and
hydrated conditions compared to Nafion-212.This study is the
first to use polydopamine-derivative fillers
as impregnation agents for Nafion-212. N-PSDA exhibited a peak power
density of 966 mW cm–2 and a current density of
4785 mA cm–2 when applied to a PEMFC and PEMWE,
respectively; the latter is 12.4% higher than Nafion-212 at 2.0 V
and 80 °C. These results confirm that N-PSDA enhances the formation
of well-developed ion-conducting channels, thus improving the overall
cell performance while providing effective control over the hydrogen
crossover at the membrane–electrode interface and inside the
membrane matrix. Therefore, this material may garner significant attention
as a novel material for PEMs in the future.