Fluid Dynamics Modelling and Experimental Studies of the Flowing Electrolyte Channel in a Flowing Electrolyte - Direct Methanol Fuel Cell
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fuel cells, and direct methanol fuel cells in particular, are a technology with intriguing potential.However, methanol crossover is a significant concern in direct methanol fuel cells that reduces power and efficiency.The flowing electrolyte -direct methanol fuel cell is a concept intended to combat this issue by using a sulphuric acid flowing electrolyte layer to remove crossed-over methanol before it can reach the cathode.Hydrodynamic modelling of the flowing electrolyte channel was conducted in order to investigate the flow characteristics in this porous channel and analyze its response to various parameters.It was concluded that pressure drop decreases with temperature, is proportional to volume flux but unaffected by channel thickness, and can be reduced by increasing permeability, which can be achieved with higher porosities and pore diameters.Experimental studies noted improved cell performance at higher temperatures, but limited improvements at higher volume fluxes, likely due to leakage associated with higher pressure drops.Experimentally estimated permeability values had some discrepancy with theoretical values, highlighting the sensitivity of permeability values to imprecise parameters.It was recommended that the flowing electrolyte channel should be very thin with a higher sphere diameter and lower porosity with a flow rate high enough to effectively negate methanol crossover.However, a possible alternative may be to use a higher porosity, but increase the flow rate to achieve the same performance; this may result in a lower pressure drop.4.4.1 General Behaviour .........
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".