Biomimetic Microchannels for the Passive Management of Water in PEM Fuel Cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In polymer electrolyte membrane (PEM) fuel cells, the bipolar plates (BPPs) are responsible for the transport of reactants (via embedded flow fields), heat, and electrons, and account for 18-28% of the cost of fuel cell systems1. Thus, there is a great opportunity to improve the energy density of PEM fuel cells by improving the functions of BPPs, such as providing liquid water management, which affects reactant delivery and heat distribution. Previous work has shown that mass transport losses due to liquid water accumulation under the lands and channels of PEM fuel cell flow fields limit the power density of fuel cells2. Previous work has demonstrated that water will preferentially flow in a desired direction by implementing biomimetic wicking structures3; however, such wicking structures have not been previously implemented into a fuel cell. Furthermore, the design of BPPs has not been tailored to target areas of water accumulation. In this work, biomimetic geometries that promote passive unidirectional water wicking were implemented in a PEM fuel cell flow field to enhance liquid water removal and the distribution of reactant gases. The BPPs were characterized via constant current electrochemical testing and electrochemical impendence spectroscopy (EIS) to elucidate the dominant losses observed during operation. Operando synchrotron X-ray radiography was performed during the electrochemical testing in order to quantify the liquid water accumulation on the cathode side of the PEM fuel cell. The spatial distribution of liquid water was combined with EIS characterizations to explain the performance of the designs at high current densities, where mass transport losses typically dominate. The results from this work can be used to further optimize the design of PEM fuel cell bipolar plates in order to produce more efficient fuel cell stacks and drive PEM fuel cells into the global energy market. References Y. Wang, D. F. Ruiz Diaz, K. S. Chen, Z. Wang, and X. C. Adroher, Materials Today, 32, 178–203 (2020). N. Ge et al., Electrochimica Acta, 328, 135001 (2019). J. Feng and J. P. Rothstein, Journal of Colloid and Interface Science, 404, 169–178 (2013).
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".