Design, Development, and Testing of a Low-Concentration Vanadium Redox Flow Battery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The purpose of this paper is to highlight the design, development, and testing of a low-concentration vanadium redox flow battery (VRFB). The low-cost implementation has a 7 cm × 7 cm active membrane area and an electrolyte volume of 450 mL for each positive and negative electrolyte. The electrolyte concentration is approximately 0.066 M vanadium. An H-cell for performing electrolysis with the electrolytes is developed, and the process and method for creating the electrolyte for this low-concentration implementation are described and documented. The maximum power density and energy efficiency of the battery among tests between 500 and 800 mA are 1.32 W/L and 28.51%, respectively. Results are presented in terms of polarization curves, charge/discharge cycles, and voltage, coulombic, and energy efficiencies. Adaptation of a COMSOL Multiphysics model is implemented to compare the computational performance figures and the results of our VRFB implementation. The numerical results agree with experimentation, and differences in the results can be attributed to the losses present in the experimental tests. The proposed battery and design are intended to investigate the performance and feasibility of a low-concentration VRFB. The ultimate long-term objective of this research is the development of a novel, cost-effective, and safe redox flow battery using hydrogen peroxide as one of the electrolytes.
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".