Analysis of Inkjet Printed Polymer Electrolyte Electrolyzer Electrodes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Inkjet printing (IJP) is studied as a novel fabrication method for catalyst coated membranes (CCMs) for polymer electrolyte electrolyzers. Compared to traditional fabrication methods, such as ultrasonic spray and doctor blade, inkjet's drop-by-drop deposition allows for accurate deposition control, enabling the fabrication of low loading, conventional loading, patterned electrodes, while reducing catalyst waste. CCMs were prepared by IJP by depositing IrO2 and Pt/C inks over the membrane to fabricate anode and cathode electrodes respectively. The anode catalyst layer morphology was analyzed using an optical microscope and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) for surface and thickness characterization. SEM images show the catalyst layer is uniform and well adhered to the membrane. Hydrogen crossover and cyclic voltammetry (CV) tests were performed to estimate hydrogen cross-over, and double layer capacitance. Electrochemical performance tests showed that inkjet printed catalyst coated electrolyzer membranes fabricated achieved 1 and 2 A/cm2 current densities at potentials of 1608 and 1694 mV (NRE211) and average of 1743 and 1994 mV (N117) respectively. These results outperform most previously reported electrolyzer data in the literature using commercial IrO2 catalyst and suggest that IJP can be used to fabricate electrolyzer electrodes with excellent performance and minimal catalyst wastage.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".