FC100-1 Steady-State Normal Loading

The first test performed on the FC100-1 test bench is for steady-state loading under “normal”

design conditions. This is performed at the start of life, whilst the stack is assumed to be at full

Figure 6.1: Voltage output during FC100-1 normal loading test;

H2/Air, 45°C, 15 A steady-state

health and should give the best output performance. Figure 6.1 shows the voltage performance throughout the test duration. Both the measured voltage output and the voltage model pre-diction are presented. The model parameters are defined from the polarisation after this test, however the prediction is added in post-processing for completeness of the results.

There is a notable long-duration voltage fluctuation during the initial 30 minutes of the test, amounting to a 0.03 V range. It is believed this behaviour is due to some platinum-Nafion interaction within the catalyst layer, lingering after the break-in of the new MEA, as discussed by Yuang et al. in [191]. Break-in is a procedure for conditioning a brand new MEA in order to establish performance at the start of life; during this time the PEFC performance is unstable and may fluctuate as observed here. This is not considered as a degradation phenomena in the diagnostic, as the effects of manufacture were eliminated during the knowledge acquisition process in chapter 4.

Otherwise, and as should be expected, the voltage level holds relatively constant at 0.57 V throughout the remainder of the test period. Smaller fluctuations can be seen in figure 6.1, but these are short-duration and less than 0.01 V in magnitude; this is most likely deemed to be some measurement noise. The on-design operating conditions afford the best functional lifetime, without accelerated component degradation, and no gross drop off in voltage over the observed time period.

Accompanying the voltage observation is the condition assessment from the ∆V calculation performance in figure 6.2. This is the difference between the measured output and the predicted performance as calculated by the detection model in chapter 3. Whilst only small voltage degradation (decline over time) is observed in the measurements, the output is however a fixed value below the prediction, after the initial voltage fluctuation.

Figure 6.2: Condition assessment output during FC100-1 normal loading test;

H2/Air, 45°C, 15 A steady-state

The ∆V value is approximately 0.085, meaning the measured 0.57 V is 8.5% lower than the predicted 0.63 V. This is already approaching the 10% limit for full lifetime loss, so is of concern to the operator and health management assessment. As the conditions of this test are the on-design “normal” values, it is not clear the reason for this difference, however the diagnostic can be consulted for further information.

Figure 6.3 shows an example of the fuzzy logic diagnostic output within the FCCM interface.

The diagnostic inputs are seen to the upper left and provide the operator with a sense of the operational state; which levels are high or low within their expected range. To the upper right are the diagnostic outputs at that time point. This shows all degradation modes are very low in the “none” state, except for output 4 which relates to flooding, which is at the “evidenced”

level. The chart at the bottom of figure 6.3 allows the test operator to track the recent diagnostic changes. Instead of this representation, the numerical values for the diagnostic will be graphed.

The expert diagnostic outputs throughout the test are presented in figure 6.4. This graphs the defuzzified output result for each degradation mode considered by the system, as discussed

Figure 6.3: Example of the diagnostic output in the FCCM

Figure 6.4: Diagnostic output during FC100-1 normal loading test;

H2/Air, 45°C, 15 A steady-state

in chapter 4. Each sub-figure relates to the progression of each diagnosis throughout the test duration. As the operating conditions are at optimal levels, most of the diagnostic measures remain close to 0 (membrane chemical fig. 6.4.a, membrane mechanical fig. 6.4.b, catalyst ag-glomeration fig. 6.4.c, carbon corrosion fig. 6.4.d, and dehydration fig. 6.4.f). This diagnostic is for the “none” level, and is as expected, confirming that no false diagnostic alerts have been generated.

The flooding diagnostic in fig. 6.4.e reports a medium certainty output throughout the test;

0.35 for an “evidenced” level. This is related to rule N from table 4.10 which cites cooler stack temperatures as the cause of water condensation and flooding events. Because of limitations with the fuel cell test rig, the FC100-1 temperature cannot reach the desired 60 °C, instead reaching 46°C during this test.

The diagnosis of flooding accounts for the residual in the voltage measurement given in figure 6.2. Excess water in the GDE and flow fields is likely causing mass transport difficulties and small-scale reactant starvation. The combination of the flooding diagnosis and the 8.5%

voltage loss informs the operator to take reparative action, such as reducing the amount of humidification in the gas streams.

The polarisation characterisation at the end of this normal loading test is considered to be full-health for all constituent components. This is despite the flooding diagnostic result in figure 6.4. Flooding is known to be a temporary and reversible degradation state, which can be eliminated without the PEFC being permanently damaged [192]. Sweeping the current loading through the polarisation range can avoid further flooding because of the relationship between current and product water; lower current leads to lower flooding rates. This is referenced in rule Q of the rules base table 4.10, and is seen in the literature [193]. Indeed, the polarisation measurement reports greater voltage at the same current loading as was used in the steady-state test, adding credence to this assessment.

The performance characterisation in figure 6.5 is considered the baseline health condition, and is used to define the parameters for the condition assessment model. Table 6.1 lists these parameters as used in equation 6.1, reproduced here from chapter 3. These values are fitted against the measurement data with 99.93% accuracy based on mean squared error analysis.

Vmodel(j) =

Figure 6.5: Polarisation characterisation after FC100-1 normal loading test, H2/Air, 45°C

Parameter Value j0 0.0251 A/cm² ASR_stack 1.058 Ω

jL 1 A/cm²

Ecorrected 0.375 V Table 6.1: Model parameters

As seen in figure 6.5, the current-voltage relationship exhibits the expected form. Open circuit voltage, at 0 A loading, is at 0.96 V. At low current loads, from 0–3 A, the activation losses dominate, with the logarithmic form. Across the remaining loading range, the roughly linear ohmic loss region is observed. A maximum power of 13.2 W is measured at 34 A loading.

The mass transport losses are not distinct within this current range.

Other interesting observations in the polarisation include the clear hysteresis between the descending and ascending current sweeps, at 0.05 V at its greatest magnitude. This hystere-sis is expected behaviour, associated with the water production variations as noted previously.

Polarisation measurements are typically averaged from the multiple current sweeps in the liter-ature [192, 194]. This method shall also be followed here, with average values seen in figure 6.5 and further test results.