Analytical Modeling and Experimental Study of Thermal Conductivity of Catalyst Layer of Polymer Electrolyte Membrane (PEM) Fuel Cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In a PEM fuel cell, waste heat generation occurs due to: 1) reversible heat of the electrochemical reaction in catalyst layer, 2) irreversible heat due to losses caused by over-potential in catalyst layer, 3) latent heat due to phase change in cathode catalyst layer, and 4) joule heating in all of the fuel cell components including catalyst layer. The mentioned heat sources induce local temperature variations inside fuel cells, which, in turn, highly affect their drying, flooding, and degradation. Accordingly, detailed knowledge about the in situ temperature distribution in PEM fuel cells is essential for efficiently managing water and heat in these systems as well as for minimizing their degradation. A temperature distribution can be obtained through comprehensive structural models for thermal conductivity of different components. The thermal conductivity of PEM fuel cell gas diffusion layers (GDL) is well understood, and some experimental data on thermal conductivity of other components have been provided in literature. However, the thermal conductivity of the catalyst layer, where most of the heat generation modes occur, is still unknown. Accordingly, this work is concerned with structural modeling of this property through a unit cell approach. A detailed geometrical model is developed based on the real microstructural properties of the catalyst layer, and unit cells of various scales are developed. Then, the thermal conductivities of various unit cells are modeled in a mechanistic manner and are interconnected to and integrated with each other to yield the effective thermal conductivity of the whole catalyst layer. In addition to modeling, catalyst layers with different compositions are produced via precise micro-fabrication techniques, their thermal conductivity is tested by transient plane source and guarded heat flux methods, and the experimental values are used to tune and validate the model.
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".