MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4249674756 · doi:10.1149/ma2017-02/37/1665

Analysis of Inkjet Printed Polymer Electrolyte Electrolyzer Electrodes

2017· article· en· W4249674756 sur OpenAlexaff
Manas K. Mandal, Antoni Valls, Niklas Gangnus, Marc Secanell

Notice bibliographique

RevueECS Meeting Abstracts · 2017
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMaterials Science
ThématiqueConducting polymers and applications
Établissements canadiensUniversity of Alberta
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMaterials scienceAnodeElectrolysisElectrolyteFabricationElectrophoretic depositionPolymerElectrodeNanotechnologyChemical engineeringComposite materialCoatingChemistry

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

A critical aspect determining catalyst utilization of polymer electrolyte fuel cells (PEFC) and electrolzyer cells (PEECs) is the membrane electrode assembly (MEA) fabrication method. Over the past two decades, a variety of membrane electrode assembly and catalyst coated membrane (CCM) methods have been explored in the literature including wet and dry spraying, ultrasonic spraying, doctor blade followed by decal transfer, screen printing, magnetron sputtering, electro deposition, electro spraying and electrophoretic deposition. A promising approach for CCM fabrication is inkjet printing because the method, based on drop-by-drop deposition, allows for accurate deposition control enabling the fabrication of low loading [1], conventional loading [2] and patterned electrodes [3]. Further, the method results in very low catalyst waste. Inkjet printing was first explored by Towne et al. [4] and Taylor et al. [5], followed by Saha et al. [6]. More recently, Shukla et al. demonstrated one of the highest mass activities in the literature using low loading electrodes manufactured using this method [1]. Despite these promising results however, the use of inkjet printing for the manufacture of polymer electrolyzer cells has not been reported in the literature. The goal of this article is therefore to analyze the use of inkjet printing for the manufacturing of polymer electrolyte electrolyzer cells. Given that the anode of a polymer electrolyte electrolyzer is commonly based on iridium black, the ink composition and fabrication is substantially different than for fuel cells. In order to fabricate the catalyst coated membranes, an anode catalyst ink is prepared by dispersing 44.7 mg of iridium(IV) oxide powder (99%, Alfa Aesar) in a dispersion media, stirring in an ultrasonic bath, and then adding 99.3 mg of Nafion solution (5%wt., Ion Power). The anode ink is then deposited layer-by-layer using the inkjet printer until a catalyst loading of 1.03 mg IrO2 /cm 2 is achieved (about 15 layers). The cathode ink is prepared using the method described in ref. [1] and deposited onto the membrane to achieve a loading of 0.1 mg Pt /cm 2 . For this study, N211 and N117 membranes were used to make the electrolyzer CCMs. A titanium mesh was used on the oxygen (anode) side whereas a Sigracet SGL 24BC gas diffusion layer (GDL) was used on the hydrogen (cathode) side. In order to characterize the cell, an in-house electrolyzer testing facility was developed. The electrolyzer hardware consisted of two single serpentine plates, a titanium plate in the anode and a graphite plate in the cathode and heated end plates, which were maintained at 80 o C. Deionized water at 80 o C and a flow rate of 9.1 ml/min is circulated through the cell using peristaltic pump and the cell was operated at atmospheric pressure. The anode catalyst layer (CL) morphology were analyzed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) for surface and thickness characterization. The attached figure shows the CL is uniform, well adhered to the membrane and thickness of 2.66 μm. Electrochemical performance tests were also performed (shown in the attached figure). The catalyst coated electrolyzer membranes fabricated could generate 1 and 2 A/cm 2 at potentials of 1608 mV and 1701 mV respectively using a Nafion N-211 membrane. Using N117, the same current densities were obtained at 1746 mV and 1972 mV. These results are comparable to previous results in the literature (shown in the figure). The achieved performance is comparable to some of the best results reported in the literature, e.g., Xu et. al. [7] reported potentials of 1640mV and 1740 mV at 1 and 2 A/cm 2 , respectively, using an MEA with 1 mg IrO2 /cm 2 IrO 2 catalyst on N212. Hydrogen crossover, cyclic voltametry (CV) and electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) tests were also performed. The hydrogen crossover for N211 and N117 membranes were 4.51×10 −9 and 6.29×10 −10 mol.cm −2 .s −1 respectively. The R PEM and R ct at 1A were 0.08 and 0.215 ohms.cm 2 for the N211 cell and 0.201 and 0.35 ohms.cm 2 for the N117 cell. These results suggest that inkjet printing can be used to fabricate electrolyzer electrodes with low loading, good performance and minimal wastage of catalyst. References [1] S. Shukla et al. Electrochimica Acta 2015; 156: 289 - 300. [2] S. Shukla et al. Journal of The Electrochemical Society 2006;163 (7): F677-F687. [3] S. Shukla et al. ECS Transactions 2004; 64 (3): 341-352. [4] S. Towne et al. Journal of Power Sources 2007; 171: 575-584. [5] A.D. Taylor et al. Journal of Power Sources 2007; 171: 101-106 [6] M. S. Saha et al. Journal of The Electrochemical Society 2011; 158(5): B562 - B567. [7] J. Xu et al. Electrochimica Acta 2012; 59:105-12 [8] M. Carmo et al. International Journal of Hydrogen Production 2013; 38: 4901 - 4934. Figure 1

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Expérimental (laboratoire) · Signal consensuel: Expérimental (laboratoire)
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,039
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,700

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,019
Tête enseignante GPT0,285
Écart entre enseignants0,265 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeExpérimental (laboratoire)
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2017
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueECS Meeting AbstractsMême sujetConducting polymers and applicationsTravaux en français237 207