MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2015517280 · doi:10.1115/fuelcell2006-97235

CFD and Flow Network Analysis of Manifolding in a PEMFC

2006· article· en· W2015517280 on OpenAlexafffund
R.I. Mackie, Pang‐Chieh Sui, Ned Djilali

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFuel Cells and Related Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaBallard Power Systems (Canada)
FundersMitacsBallard Power Systems
KeywordsHeaderStack (abstract data type)Computational fluid dynamicsProton exchange membrane fuel cellInletFlow (mathematics)MechanicsDistributorPressure dropSimulationMaterials scienceMechanical engineeringEngineeringFuel cellsComputer sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Near-uniform flow distribution in a fuel cell stack is essential to stack performance and overall system efficiency. The gradients induced by the non-uniformity of the flow within each of the unit cells also have a significant impact on stack durability. In typical configurations, the oxidant and fuel are fed into a stack through manifolds and then enter each unit cell through secondary inlet port. After flowing through the unit cells, the spent gases as well as possible liquid water then enter the outlet header to leave the stack. The objective of this paper is to develop a practical model to predict cell-to-cell flow distribution in a proton exchange membrane fuel cell (PEMFC) stack. The flow distribution is first simulated using a computational fluid dynamics (CFD) tool, CFD-ACE+, in a 3D computational domain for single-phase gas flows. The simulations use a domain encompassing the flow from the inlet header through an array of unit cells to the outlet header. The CFD simulations show that in the outlet header, the flow injected from the unit cells to the header changes the flow pattern considerably, which results in a reduced cross section area for the flow in the axial direction. A circulation zone is seen near the low velocity end of the header, which may potentially become a region where liquid water accumulates. Increasing static pressure along the flow direction is observed in the inlet header. The simulated results are validated and found to be in good agreement with experimentally measured pressures in a fuel cell stack. Based on the observations in the CFD simulations, a flow network model is developed to provide quick estimates of the flow distribution as a function of stack dimensions including header and unit cell geometry. In essence, the flow network model solves for the pressure at each junction of the unit cell and the header. Three fitting parameters are introduced to account for effects of surface roughness of the headers, reduced effective header area in the outlet header, and pressure drop in the unit cell. The flow network model is shown to capture the characteristics of pressure variation and flow distribution obtained in the CFD simulations. The flow network model can effectively match experimental data and be used as a fast tool for initial design of a PEMFC stack.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.002
GPT teacher head0.158
Teacher spread0.156 · 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

Citations5
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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