4.5 Article

Effect of sorbed methanol, current, and temperature on multicomponent transport in nafion-based direct methanol fuel cells

期刊

JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY B
卷 112, 期 29, 页码 8542-8548

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/jp803158h

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The CO2 in the cathode exhaust of a liquid feed direct methanol fuel cell (DMFC) has two sources: methanol diffuses through the membrane electrode assembly (MEA) to the cathode where it is catalytically oxidized to CO2; additionally, a portion of the CO2 produced at the anode diffuses through the MEA to the cathode. The potential-dependent CO2 exhaust from the cathode was monitored by online electrochemical mass spectrometry (ECMS) with air and with H, at the cathode. The precise determination of the crossover rates of methanol and CO2, enabled by the subtractive normalization of the methanol/air to the methanol/H-2 ECMS data, shows that methanol decreases the membrane viscosity and thus increases the diffusion coefficients of sorbed membrane components. The crossover of CO2 initially increases linearly with the Faradaic oxidation of methanol, reaches a temperature-dependent maximum, and then decreases. The membrane viscosity progressively increases as methanol is electrochemically depleted from the anode/electrolyte interface. The crossover maximum occurs when the current dependence of the diffusion coefficients and membrane CO2 solubility dominate over the Faradaic production of CO2. The plasticizing effect of methanol is corroborated by measurements of the rotational diffusion of TEMPONE (2,2,6,6-tetramethyl-4-piperidone N-oxide) spin probe by electron spin resonance spectroscopy. A linear inverse relationship between the methanol crossover rate and current density confirms the absence of methanol electro-osmotic drag at concentrations relevant to operating DMFCs. The purely diffusive transport of methanol is explained in terms of current proton solvation and methanol-water incomplete mixing theories.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据