MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1999593694 · doi:10.1115/icnmm2014-21288

An Analysis of Two-Phase Flow Pressure Drop in Operating Proton Exchange Membrane Fuel Cell Channels With the Lockhart-Martinelli Approach

2014· article· en· W1999593694 on OpenAlexafffund
Ryan Anderson, Lifeng Zhang, David P. Wilkinson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFuel Cells and Related Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsProton exchange membrane fuel cellPressure dropTwo-phase flowCurrent (fluid)Materials scienceCathodeFlow (mathematics)MechanicsDrop (telecommunication)Range (aeronautics)Volumetric flow rateNuclear engineeringFuel cellsElectrical engineeringComposite materialChemical engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Proton exchange membrane fuel cells (PEMFCs) are considered one of the most promising alternatives for the automotive industry owing to their high energy efficiency, zero emission at the vehicle use stage, and low temperature operation. Water as a byproduct plays a complex role in fuel cell operation. In particular, the inevitable occurrence of liquid water leads to gas-liquid two-phase flows in various components of PEMFCs including flow channels of which diameters range from micrometers to millimeters. In conventional minichannels and microchannels, the Lockhart-Martinelli (LM) approach has been employed to predict the two-phase pressure drop of gas-liquid systems. This approach has previously been updated by our group to more accurately reflect the introduction of liquid water into the flow channels of a PEMFC i.e. from a porous media perpendicular to the gas flow. Importantly, the LM method normalizes the data independent of the flow field design and operating conditions like temperature, pressure, and relative humidity. This paper analyzes the increasing amount of experimental data on two-phase flow pressure drops/two-phase flow multipliers in the literature with these approaches. The focus is the cathode side (therefore an air/water system), and data is collected from multiple research groups using active fuel cells (electrochemically produced water). The traditional LM approach greatly under-predicts the two-phase pressure drop at low current densities. However, the analysis is applied over a range of current densities, and it better predicts results at higher current densities (>600 mA cm−2). Literature correlations for the Chisholm parameter C, a flow regime dependent parameter in the LM equation, have been proposed for non-active (external water injection) fuel cells but do not match the results from operating fuel cells. C is shown here to vary with current density, flow stoichiometry (gas velocity), gas diffusion layer, and slightly with relative humidity.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.211 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFuel Cells and Related Materials→French-language works237,207→