The Role of Radiative Heat Transfer With Participating Gases on the Temperature Distribution in Solid Oxide Fuel Cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Solid oxide fuel cell (SOFC) technology has been shown to be viable, but its profitability has not yet been seen. To achieve a high net efficiency at a low net cost, a detailed understanding of the transport processes both inside and outside of the SOFC stack is required. Of particular significance is an accurate determination of the temperature distribution because material properties, chemical kinetics and transport properties depend heavily on the temperature. Effective utilization of the heat can lead to a substantial increase in overall system efficiency and decrease in operating cost. Despite the extreme importance in accurately predicting temperature, the majority of SOFC modeling work ignores radiative heat transfer. SOFCs operate at temperatures around or above 1200 K, where radiation effects can be significant. In order to correctly predict the radiation heat transfer, participating gases must also be included. Water vapour and carbon dioxide can absorb, emit, and scatter radiation, and are present at the anode in high concentrations. This paper presents a thermal transport model for analyzing heat transfer and improving thermal management within planar SOFCs. The model was implemented using a commercial computational fluid dynamic (CFD) code and includes conduction, convection, and radiation in a participating media. It is clear from this study that radiation must be considered when modelling solid oxide fuel cells. The effect of participating media radiation was shown to be minimal in this geometry, but it is likely to be more important in tubular geometries.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".