4.7 Article

Hydrogen permeation through porous stainless steel for palladium-based composite porous membranes

期刊

JOURNAL OF MEMBRANE SCIENCE
卷 515, 期 -, 页码 22-28

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.memsci.2016.05.036

关键词

Hydrogen separation; Palladium-based membrane; Porous stainless steel; Composite membrane; Surface modification

资金

  1. EPSRC SUPERGEN Delivery of Sustainable Hydrogen [EP/G01244X/1]
  2. Birmingham Science City Hydrogen Energy projects
  3. Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Research Hub
  4. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/G01244X/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  5. EPSRC [EP/G01244X/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Surface topography and hydrogen permeation properties of Porous Stainless Steel (PSS) substrates for thin films deposition of Pd-based hydrogen separation membrane were investigated. Hydrogen permeance through the as received PSS substrates demonstrated a wide range, despite a similar average surface pore size of similar to 15 mu m determined by SEM and confocal laser microscopy analyses. The surface pores of the PSS substrates were modified by impregnation of varying amounts of tungsten (W) powder. Maximum hydrogen flux reduction of 28% suggested that W has a limited effect on the hydrogen permeation through the PSS substrate. Therefore, it appears that hydrogen transport through PSS substrates is mainly controlled by the substrate geometrical factor (epsilon/tau), that is the ratio of the porosity to tortuosity. In addition, tungsten was shown to inhibit the iron inter-diffusion between the PSS substrate and the deposited Pd60Cu40 film at temperature as high as 800 degrees C. Thus, tungsten layer also serves as an effective inter-diffusion barrier. The variation in the permeance between the nominally similar PSS substrates indicates the importance to independently assess the hydrogen transport characteristics of each of the components in a composite membrane. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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