MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285397403 · doi:10.1149/ma2022-01126mtgabs

Failure Analysis of Nickel-Coated Anodes in Zinc-Air Hybrid Flow Batteries

2022· article· en· W4285397403 on OpenAlexaff
Hang Hu, Anqiang He, Douglas G. Ivey, Drew Aasen, Sheida Arfania, Shantanu Shukla

Bibliographic record

VenueECS Meeting Abstracts · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced battery technologies research
Canadian institutionsZincNyx Energy Solutions (Canada)University of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceZincateAnodeCoatingElectrolyteZincNickelChemical engineeringMetallurgyElectrodeComposite materialChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A zinc-air flow battery system pumps "fuel” (a zinc particle/KOH slurry) from a fuel tank to a fuel cell stack, where the zinc particles are combined with oxygen from the air to form zincate ions and produce electricity. The zincate-rich electrolyte is then returned to the fuel tank. During the charging cycle, the electrolyte is passed to the zinc regenerator, where electricity (from renewable sources such as solar or wind) is utilized to convert the zincate ions to zinc particles. The regenerated fuel is pumped back into the fuel tank for the discharge process. Nickel is considered for use as the anode during zinc regeneration as it has been shown to be an active catalyst for the oxygen evolution reaction (OER). However, nickel electrodes pose manufacturing challenges due to machinability issues. Alternatively, nickel can be coated on a machinable metal substrate to improve scalability. These electrodes are subjected to open circuit voltage (OCV), OER, and the hydrogen evolution reaction (HER) during operation of zinc-air flow batteries. The electrodes have been observed to fail during prolonged voltage cycling due to nickel coating delamination, which manifests itself as blistering, flaking, and discoloration. It is hypothesized that this may be due to electrolyte penetration into the pores of the nickel coating during operation. The present work is aimed at analyzing and mitigating the coating delamination process through characterization of various Ni coating recipes. As-fabricated and cycled electrodes are characterized using various microstructural techniques, including optical microscopy, x-ray diffraction (XRD), scanning and transmission electron microscopy (SEM and TEM), and x-ray tomography. Coated electrodes are also evaluated electrochemically and the results are correlated with the microstructural analysis. The overall goal of the work is to understand the failure mechanisms and apply the knowledge to fabricate improved coatings for OER electrodes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.681
Threshold uncertainty score0.868

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.232 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueECS Meeting AbstractsSame topicAdvanced battery technologies researchFrench-language works237,207