Next Article in Journal
Experimental Study on Forced Convective Heat Transfer with Low Volume Fraction of CuO/Water Nanofluid
Next Article in Special Issue
A Self-Supported Direct Borohydride-Hydrogen Peroxide Fuel Cell System
Previous Article in Journal
Experimental Investigations of Extracted Rapeseed Combustion Emissions in a Small Scale Stationary Fluidized Bed Combustor
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Analysis of the Coupling Behavior of PEM Fuel Cells and DC-DC Converters

1
Max Planck Institute for Dynamics of Complex Technical Systems, Process Synthesis and Process Dynamics Group, Sandtorstraße 1, 39106 Magdeburg, Germany
2
Otto-von-Guericke-Universit¨at Magdeburg, Lehrstuhl f¨ur Automatisierungstechnik / Modellbildung, Universit¨atsplatz 2, 39106 Magdeburg, Germany
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Energies 2009, 2(1), 71-96; https://doi.org/10.3390/en2010071
Submission received: 8 January 2009 / Accepted: 19 February 2009 / Published: 4 March 2009
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Fuel Cells)

Abstract

:
The connection between PEM fuel cells and common DC-DC converters is examined. The analysis is model-based and done for boost, buck and buck-boost converters. In a first step, the effect of the converter ripples upon the PEM fuel cell is shown. They introduce oscillations in the fuel cell. Their appearance is explained, discussed and possibilities for their suppression are given. After that, the overall behaviors of the coupled fuel cell-converter systems are analyzed. It is shown, that neither stationary multiplicities nor oscillations can be introduced by the couplings and therefore separate control approaches for both the PEMFC and the DC-DC converters are applicable.

Graphical Abstract

1. Introduction

Fuel cells are a promising technology for electrical power generation. They are able to convert chemical energy directly into electrical energy, avoiding an intermediate step of producing mechanical energy. Therefore, the electrical efficiency of fuel cells is considerably higher than that of most conventional processes for electrical power generation. For mobile applications, Polymer-Electrolyte-Membrane fuel cells (PEMFCs) are most suitable. These cells can be characterized by a high power density, an easy production, a low-temperature operation and a fast response to load changes.
A fuel cell is electrically connected to its load via a power conditioning unit (PCU) [1]. This is done for the purpose of power transfer and power conversion. A PCU is generally made up from storage units and/or conversion units and is typically designed and operated according to requirements and characteristics of the load. While storage units buffer electrical energy, conversion units or converters are used to adapt the DC electricity from the fuel cell to the load’s demands. Two types of converters are suitable in fuel cell operation: DC-DC and DC-AC converters.
If a fuel cell is connected to a load via a PCU a complex dynamic system is created. Such a connection might lead to phenomena like multiplicities or oscillations, which are not present in the single systems. These phenomena can contribute to the performance of the whole system either in a positive or in a negative way. Therefore, a detailed investigation of the coupling is necessary to adapt and improve the design and operation of the whole system, especially if the original design was based on single separate subsystems. The coupling behavior of PEMFCs and PCUs is a current field of research. First results have been obtained for the coupling of PEMFCs and DC-AC converters [1,2,3]. The coupling of these systems leads to a ripple in the fuel cell current at a frequency that is twice the output frequency of the converter. This effect was analyzed in [1,2,3] and may contribute to fuel cell degradation. In [4] the control of a PEMFC connected to a buck-boost converter was investigated. The emphasis was on converter control and the coupling phenomena were hardly considered. This work tries to extend the results in literature by analyzing the coupling phenomena between PEMFCs and DC-DC converters.
The contribution is divided in 5 sections. In the next section the used PEMFC model is presented. After that the DC-DC converter models are stated. In the following section the results of the analysis are shown. The contribution ends with a conclusion.

2. Modeling of the PEM fuel cell

In this contribution we use a dynamic, lumped one-phase fuel cell model. The main model characteristics are:
  • It is assumed that there is no liquid water in the gas bulks and the diffusion layers.
  • Only the cathode of the fuel cell is considered. The anodic reaction is assumed to be in equilibrium and the anodic overpotential is equal to zero.
  • The cathodic gas bulk and gas diffusion layer are modeled as one perfectly mixed phase (Figure 1).
  • The cathodic catalyst layer and the membrane are modeled by the equivalent electrical circuit in Figure 1, as was suggested in [5].
  • The dynamic behavior of the membrane’s water household is neglected.
  • The model is isothermal and the gas phases are isobaric and behave like an ideal gases.
  • The Tafel approach is used for the cathode kinetics.
In the following the model equations are presented. For a derivation of the model equations please see Appendix A. The appearing quantities and their values and units are listed in the nomenclature at the end of this article. The parameters for the fuel cell model are mainly taken from [6], while the parameters for
Figure 1. Modeling approach for the PEM fuel cell.
Figure 1. Modeling approach for the PEM fuel cell.
Energies 02 00071 g001
the DC-DC converters are chosen according to guidelines in [7,8]. First of all, the dynamic equations of the model are specified:
V c x ˙ o 2 = - q ^ ( 1 + x o 2 ) i r + ( x o 2 i n - x o 2 ) V i n ,
V c x ˙ h 2 o = q ^ ( 2 - x h 2 o ) i r + ( x h 2 o i n - x h 2 o ) V i n ,
C d l η ˙ c = i r - i c e l l with i r : = i r 0 x o 2 exp ( - α ^ η c )
and q ^ : = A g / 2 c t n F , α ^ : = ( 1 - α ) n F / R Θ .
The differential Equations (1) and (2) are used to calculate the content of oxygen x o 2 and water vapor x h 2 o in the PEMFC. The symbol η c denotes the overpotential at the cathodic catalyst and is calculated from Eqn. (3). The electrical current density in the fuel cell is given by i c e l l . V i n describes the volume flow rate of humidified air that enters the cell. The other terms are constant model parameters. An additional algebraic equation is used to calculate the cell voltage U c e l l :
U c e l l = U c e l l 0 + η c - r m ( x h 2 o ) i c e l l .
Equation (5) includes activation losses of the catalyst via η c and ohmic losses in the cell voltage via the resistance r m of the membrane for proton transport. The membrane’s resistance is calculated from its proton conductivity σ p : r m ( x h 2 o ) : = d m / σ p ( x h 2 o ) where the following dependency from [9] is used:
σ p ( x h 2 o ) = σ p 0 e x p ( 14 ( x h 2 o p g / p s a t ) 0 . 2 ) .
In summary, the fuel cell model is made up by a system of 3 nonlinear ordinary differential equations and an additional algebraic equation. The PEMFC model is operated at one-phase conditions with respect to the water household and at a common operating temperature of Θ = 353 K [10]. It is fed with air and will be operated in rheostatic mode due to the coupling with the DC-DC converters. Although this fuel cell model is relatively simple and consists only of a single cell with a cross-sectional area of one square centimeter [6,11], the modeling approach is complex enough to analyze and outline the essential qualitative effects due to the coupling between one-phase or two-phase PEM fuel cells and DC-DC converters as we will show during the analysis.

3. Modeling of the DC-DC converters

The purpose of DC-DC converters is the transformation of direct electricity. They are built up from power electronic devices and operated as switched systems. Due to the switched operation the output quantities of these systems show an unavoidable ripple which should be small. Three DC-DC converters are considered in this contribution: boost, buck and buck-boost converter [7]. The converters are assumed to be lossless and are modeled with resistive loads. In order to examine the coupling effects between PEMFC and converters due to switching, the DC-DC converters are modeled via switched differential equations. In the case of the boost converter (Figure 2) they read:
L I ˙ l = U e - ( 1 - s ) U c
C U ˙ c = ( 1 - s ) I l - U c / R L
where I l is the inductor current, U c the capacitor voltage and s is the switching function shown in Figure 3.
Figure 2. Lossless boost converter with resistive load.
Figure 2. Lossless boost converter with resistive load.
Energies 02 00071 g002
The load resistance R L is assumed to be constant over one switching period T. Note that the input current of the converter, denoted with I e is equal to the inductor current: I e = I l . Another widely used
Figure 3. Duty cycle of the DC-DC converters.
Figure 3. Duty cycle of the DC-DC converters.
Energies 02 00071 g003
DC-DC converter is the buck converter (Figure 4). It can be modeled with the following equations:
L I ˙ l = s U e - U c
C U ˙ c = I l - U c / R L
where I l is denotes the converter’s inductor current and U c its capacitor voltage. The switching function s is the same as for the boost converter (Figure 3). The input current I e to the converter in this case is equal to: I e = s I l . The buck-boost converter (Figure 5) is the last considered converter and can also be
Figure 4. Lossless buck converter with resistive load.
Figure 4. Lossless buck converter with resistive load.
Energies 02 00071 g004
modeled by switched differential equations:
L I ˙ l = s U e + ( 1 - s ) U c
C U ˙ c = - ( 1 - s ) I l - U c / R L .
Again, the inductor current of the converter is denoted by I l , the capacitor voltage by U c and the switching function s is given by Figure 3. For the input current I e the same statement as for the buck converter is true: I e = s I l .
Figure 5. Lossless buck-boost converter with resistive load.
Figure 5. Lossless buck-boost converter with resistive load.
Energies 02 00071 g005
DC-DC converters can also be described by averaged model equations [7] if the intrinsic ripple is negligible. The structure of these equations is the same as for the switched models, only the time-dependent quantities are substituted with their averaged counterparts, where the average is taken over one duty cycle T, i.e.
a ( t 0 ) , I ¯ l ( t 0 ) , U ¯ c ( t 0 ) , U ¯ e ( t 0 ) : = 1 T t 0 t 0 + T s ( t ) , I l ( t ) , U c ( t ) , U e ( t ) d t
and the input current I e is also integrated to be I ¯ e ( t 0 ) = I ¯ l ( t 0 ) for the boost and I ¯ e ( t 0 ) = a ( t 0 ) I ¯ l ( t 0 ) for the buck and buck-boost converter. The averaged model equations allow a simple characterization of the specified DC-DC converters in terms of their input/output behavior. In Figure 6a the stationary output voltages U ¯ c of the three converters are shown. One can see, that a boost (buck) converter can be used to produce an output voltage U c that is greater (smaller) in magnitude than the input voltage U e . The buck-boost converter is a mixed form and is used to invert the output voltage U c and decrease or increase its magnitude with respect to the input voltage U e . In Figure 6b the stationary input resistances of the converters R ¯ e : = U ¯ e / I ¯ e are depicted.
Figure 6. Stationary and averaged output voltages U ¯ c (a)and input resistances R ¯ e (b) of boost, buck and buck-boost converters with respect to their duty ratio a.
Figure 6. Stationary and averaged output voltages U ¯ c (a)and input resistances R ¯ e (b) of boost, buck and buck-boost converters with respect to their duty ratio a.
Energies 02 00071 g006

4. Interconnection analysis of PEMFC and DC-DC converters

In this section the connection between PEMFC and DC-DC converters is analyzed. First of all, the coupling conditions are specified. For the coupling between the PEM fuel cell (Eqns. (1-5)) and the converters (Eqns. (6-11)) the following conditions apply:
U c e l l U e and i c e l l I e / A g .
With the above equation the fuel cell and the converters are connected and a feedback of the converter’s input current I e to itself via the cell voltage U c e l l (Eqn. (5)) is established. It is the aim of this contribution to analyze the effect and extent of this feedback. This is done for each connection in three steps. In a first step, the effect of the converter ripple upon the PEMFC is shown and explained, while in the second step the found effect is discussed. Finally, the overall behavior of the connected PEMFC - converter system is examined in order to check for the appearance of stationary multiplicities and oscillations due to the coupling.

4.1. PEMFC and Boost-converter

In this section the coupling between the PEMFC and the boost converter is examined.
Effect of the converter ripple upon the PEMFC In a first step the effect of the converter ripple upon the PEMFC is shown. For this purpose the PEMFC (Eqns. (1-3)) and the boost converter model (Eqns. (6,7)) are coupled via Eqn. (13) and form a system of switched differential equations. This system is dynamically simulated using step changes of the load resistance R L depicted in Figure 7. The converter’s duty ratio a is set to 0 . 2 and the other model parameters are kept constant at their nominal values. Three simulations I , I I , I I I are performed with the same initial value R L I . In simulation I the load resistance is kept constant at R L I whereas in simulations I I and I I I the load is stepped to R L I I and R L I I I respectively.
Figure 7. Time plot of load resistance R L and stationary voltage-current profile of the PEM fuel cell with assigned operating points.
Figure 7. Time plot of load resistance R L and stationary voltage-current profile of the PEM fuel cell with assigned operating points.
Energies 02 00071 g007
The simulation scenario can be further illustrated with the stationary voltage-current profile of the PEMFC together with the considered operating points O P I , O P I I and O P I I I shown inside of Figure 7. The operating points are determined by the load resistance R L . A relationship between R ¯ e and R L i can be derived from the averaged version of the boost converter model in Eqns. (6,7):
L I ¯ ˙ l ( t 0 ) = U ¯ e ( t 0 ) - ( 1 - a ( t 0 ) ) U ¯ c ( t 0 ) C U ¯ ˙ c ( t 0 ) = ( 1 - a ( t 0 ) ) I ¯ l ( t 0 ) - U ¯ c ( t 0 ) / R L
For the stationary operation of the converter one obtains: U ¯ e = ( 1 - a ) U ¯ c and I ¯ l = U ¯ c / ( 1 - a ) R L . The average input resistance of the boost converter is given by R ¯ e = U ¯ e / I ¯ e and with the dependency I ¯ e = I ¯ l one obtains from the previous statements R ¯ e = R L ( 1 - a ) 2 .
The simulation results are shown in Figure 8 and Figure 9. The diagrams are split into two parts. The first part shows the time plots from the simulation start to the settlement of the electrical transients of the coupled system. The second part shows stationary simulations after the transients for mass transport of oxygen and water vapor have settled. It can be seen, that during simulations I and I I no significant impact from the PEMFC to the boost converter or vice versa can be found. After the applied step the simulation settles and finally reaches a steady state. The oscillations of the quantities are small and can be neglected. In contrast, if simulation I I I is considered a clear interaction of PEMFC and converter can be observed. The overpotential η c and the cell voltage U e in Figure 8 show relatively large oscillations compared to the cases I, I I . The oscillations are present immediately after the applied step and also at steady state. This is not the case for the converter input current I e and the capacitor voltage U c in Figure 9. Both of them show only small oscillations in case I I I , similar to the simulation cases I and I I . The given interaction is therefore one-sided in direction from boost converter to PEMFC and is located at small cell currents in the activation polarization region of the fuel cell (Figure 7).
The reason for this interaction can be found from the model equation of the overpotential in Eqn. (3). A linearization of this equation at an averaged and stationary operating point ( x ¯ o 2 s , x ¯ h 2 o s , η ¯ c s , I ¯ e s , U ¯ c s ) of
Figure 8. a) Step response of overpotential η c and b) cell (=converter input) voltage U e .
Figure 8. a) Step response of overpotential η c and b) cell (=converter input) voltage U e .
Energies 02 00071 g008
Figure 9. a) Step response of converter input (=inductor) current I e and b) capacitor (=converter output) voltage U c .
Figure 9. a) Step response of converter input (=inductor) current I e and b) capacitor (=converter output) voltage U c .
Energies 02 00071 g009
the coupled system leads to
C d l α ^ I ¯ e s / A g τ : = δ η ˙ c + δ η c = - δ I e α ^ I ¯ e s
with I ¯ e s = A g i r 0 x ¯ o 2 s exp ( - α ^ η ¯ c s )
where δ η c and δ I e are the variations of the overpotential and the converter input current around the operating point respectively. It is assumed, that the variation of the oxygen content x o 2 due to the converter switching can be neglected. The variation δ I e of the converter input current is considered as an input quantity in Eqn. (14), which is independent from δ η c because of the observed one-sided interaction from converter to PEMFC. Equation (14) is therefore a linear ordinary differential equation of first order with constant coefficients whose transient behavior is determined by its time constant τ. If the time constant τ is small compared to the given time interval of the duty cycle T then the variation δ η c can approximately be calculated by
δ η c - 1 α ^ I ¯ e s δ I e = - ( - η ¯ c s ) I ¯ e s δ I e .
This relationship is determined from the Tafel kinetic in Eqn. (15) where ( - η ¯ c s ) / I ¯ e s is the sensitivity of the overpotential - η ¯ c s with respect to the cell current I ¯ e s . It can be seen, that the sensitivity increases with decreasing cell current. If the variation δ I e does not change very much at different cell currents I ¯ e s , the change of variation δ η c can approximately be determined by the changed sensitivity. This is the case for the three simulation experiments above. The oscillations Δ I e i , i = I , I I , I I I in the cell current (Figure 9a) are nearly the same for all three simulation cases, but the average values are clearly different. For simulation case I I I the average cell current is the smallest resulting in the largest sensitivity of the three cases. The large oscillations in the overpotential for case I I I (Figure 8a) are the consequence. In Figure 10 the above statements are illustrated. The Tafel equation (15), the oscillation amplitudes of the cell current Δ I e i (Figure 9a) and the corresponding amplitudes of the overpotential Δ η c i (Figure 8a) are shown for the three simulation cases I, I I and I I I .
We have seen, that the reason for the large oscillation Δ η c I I I is a too small time constant τ with respect to the duty period T. From Eqn. (14) we can see, that the time constant τ is proportional to the double layer capacitance C d l and (with Eqn. (16)) to the sensitivity ( - η ¯ c s ) / I ¯ e s . The sensitivity in simulation I I I is the largest, so the double layer capacitance C d l of the fuel cell is responsible for the small τ. Therefore, the oscillations in the activation polarization region of the PEMFC in I I I are caused by an insufficient adaption of the double layer capacitance C d l and the duty period T to each other.
Discussion of the effect We have shown and explained in the previous section that the converter ripple introduces oscillations in the activation polarization region of the fuel cell. This statement is true for the used double layer capacitance C d l and duty period T, but it is also in general valid as long as the ratio between C d l and T is less or equal to the given one. This means for example, that we cannot increase T in order to decrease switching losses in the boost converter, because this will result in larger oscillations in the fuel cell. This also means for example, that if the fuel cell owns a larger double layer capacitance C d l and we use the same duty period T the oscillations will vanish. If we increase the duty period T (and
Figure 10. Tafel equation for simulation cases I, I I and I I I .
Figure 10. Tafel equation for simulation cases I, I I and I I I .
Energies 02 00071 g010
the boost converter’s inductivity L, capacitance C to stay at the same ripple in the output voltage U c ) the oscillations will reoccur.
The impact of converter introduced oscillations in the overpotential is currently under research and up to now it is not clear, if they lead to cell degradation, as long as no reactant depletion appears [12]. Anyway, in order to avoid oscillations in the fuel cell we have to take suitable measures which are presented in the following. For the above simulations we used a small double layer capacitance in the order of magnitude as in [13,14]. In other publications like in [15,16] a larger double layer capacitance in the PEMFC is observed. For the latter case, the oscillations in the fuel cell vanish for the given duty period and no further effort has to be taken to avoid them. In the first case there are two simple possibilities to avoid oscillations. The first is to decrease the duty period T. This has a smaller variation Δ I e of the cell current and a larger impact of the time constant τ within the time interval T as a consequence, but can also lead to larger switching losses in the converter. The second alternative is to increase the double layer capacitance C d l of the PEMFC and therefore the time constant τ. The first point can be achieved via the control of the boost converter. After the boost converter has been designed [7] and the duty period T has been adjusted to meet the boost converter’s requirements, a minimal cell current I ¯ e s , m i n I ¯ e s has to be specified. This puts an upper bound on the sensitivity in Eqn. (16). If the double layer capacitance and all other necessary parameters are roughly known then the relevant time constant C d l A g / α ^ I ¯ e s , m i n can be estimated. If T C d l A g / α ^ I ¯ e s , m i n oscillations are expected to appear if the fuel cell is operated in the activation polarization region. In order to avoid these oscillations the duty period T can be decreased, e.g. T C d l A g / α ^ I ¯ e s , m i n . The second possibility can be implemented for example by inserting a capacitor between PEMFC and boost converter. This leads to an increased double layer capacitance as is shown in appendix B.
Overall behavior of the coupled system With the above suggestions the impact of the converter ripple can be suppressed and we can describe the connection between the PEMFC and the boost converter with averaged model equations and check the overall behavior of this coupled system for the occurrence of stationary multiplicities and oscillations.
At first, we consider the stationary operation of PEMFC and boost converter. Therefore, the stationary and averaged relationship in Figure 6 for the boost converter is valid. Due to the coupling in Eqn. (13) the input resistance of the converter R ¯ e serves as load resistance of the PEMFC V ¯ c e l l / I ¯ c e l l = U ¯ e A g / I ¯ e = R ¯ e A g and forces a rheostatic operation of the cell. Moreover, the mapping between the converter’s input resistance R ¯ e and the load resistance R L is unique as is indicated in Figure 6b. Therefore, no further stationary multiplicities are added by the coupling PEMFC and boost converter to the ones that are already present in a rheostatic operated PEM fuel cell [17,18,19].
However, oscillations induced by the coupling are still possible. They appear if a Hopf bifurcation occurs due to the coupling. A Hopf bifurcation appears in a nonlinear system z ˙ = f ( z , p ) if a pure imaginary pair of eigenvalues of the Jacobian matrix J = f / z , evaluated at the steady state ( z 0 , p 0 ) arises at the parameter p 0 . Therefore, in order to search for the onset of oscillations, we have to check the Jacobian matrix of the coupled system. For this purpose we start with the following averaged model of PEMFC and boost converter:
V c x ¯ ˙ o 2 = - q ^ ( 1 + x ¯ o 2 ) i ¯ r + ( x o 2 i n - x ¯ o 2 ) V i n ,
V c x ¯ ˙ h 2 o = q ^ ( 2 - x ¯ h 2 o ) i ¯ r + ( x h 2 o i n - x ¯ h 2 o ) V i n ,
C d l η ¯ ˙ c = i ¯ r - I ¯ l / A g with i ¯ r = i r 0 x ¯ o 2 exp ( - α ^ η ¯ c ) ,
L I ¯ ˙ l = U c e l l 0 + η ¯ c - r m ( x ¯ h 2 o ) I ¯ l / A g - ( 1 - a ) U ¯ c ,
C U ¯ ˙ c = ( 1 - a ) I ¯ l - U ¯ c / R L .
It is derived by coupling Eqns. (1-7) using Eqn. (13) and averaging, like in Eqn. (12), the resulting model over one duty cycle. For this purpose it is assumed that the states x o 2 , x h 2 o , η c , I l , U c are approximately constant during one duty cycle. This is a valid assumption due to the negligible impact of the converter ripple.
The above system of equations includes averaged model equations for oxygen and water transport (Eqn. (17,18)). This mass transport typically shows transient times in the order of magnitude of seconds while the resonant behavior of the converter is in the order of magnitude of milli seconds and smaller. Due to this we consider the mass transport Eqns. (17,18) as static and use only the equations (19-21) to search for the appearance of a Hopf bifurcation.
The first step in order to detect a Hopf bifurcation is the calculation of the Jacobian matrix. If we calculate the Jacobian matrix of equations (19-21) at the steady state ( x ¯ o 2 s s , x ¯ h 2 o s s , η ¯ c s s , I ¯ l s s , U ¯ c s s , R L s s , a s s ) we get
J : = - b 11 - b 12 0 b 21 - b 22 - b 23 0 b 32 - b 33 = - α ^ I ¯ l s s / A g C d l - 1 / A g C d l 0 1 / L - r m ( x ¯ h 2 o s s ) / A g L - ( 1 - a s s ) / L 0 ( 1 - a s s ) / C - 1 / R L s s C .
The duty ratio a s s of the boost converter is typically between 0 a s s < 1 and therefore, the coefficients b i j of J are always greater than zero. In the next step we have to check the location of the eigenvalues of the Jacobian matrix J . The eigenvalues of J are the roots of the characteristic polynomial P ( λ ) = d e t ( λ I - J ) which is given by
P ( λ ) = λ 3 + c 2 λ 2 + c 1 λ + c 0
with c 2 : = b 11 + b 22 + b 33 ,
c 1 : = b 11 b 22 + b 11 b 33 + b 22 b 33 + b 23 b 32 + b 12 b 21 ,
c 0 : = b 11 b 22 b 33 + b 11 b 32 b 23 + b 21 b 12 b 33 .
The location of the roots of P ( λ ) can be determined with the criterion of LIÉNARD-CHIPART [20]. The polynomial has only roots with negative real parts if the following necessary and sufficient conditions are fulfilled: c 0 > 0 , c 2 > 0 and c 2 c 1 - c 0 > 0 . The first two conditions are fulfilled through Eqns. (24,26), because the coefficients c 2 , c 1 and c 0 of the polynomial are always positive. The third condition is also fulfilled, because of
c 2 c 1 - c 0 = b 11 2 b 22 + b 11 2 b 33 + b 11 b 12 b 21 + b 11 b 22 2 + b 11 b 22 b 33 + b 22 2 b 33 + (27) b 22 b 23 b 32 + b 12 b 21 b 22 + b 11 b 22 b 33 + b 11 b 33 2 + b 22 b 33 2 + b 23 b 32 b 33 > 0 .
Therefore, the characteristic polynomial P ( λ ) (Jacobian matrix J ) has always roots (eigenvalues) with negative real parts and because of this the connection between a PEMFC and a boost converter cannot lead to a Hopf bifurcation in the coupled PEMFC - boost converter system.

4.2. PEMFC and Buck-converter

In this section the coupling between the PEMFC and the buck converter is examined.
Effect of the converter ripple upon the PEMFC In the first step we consider the effect of the buck converter ripple upon the fuel cell. For this purpose we couple the PEMFC (Eqns. (1-3)) and the buck converter model (Eqns. (8,9)) with Eqn. (13) and apply step changes of the duty ratio a (Figure 11a) to this system. The load resistance R L is chosen such that the fuel cell is operated close to the maximum power point. The other model parameters are at their nominal values. Two simulations I, I I are carried out. In simulation I the duty ratio a is kept constant at a I and in I I the duty ratio is stepped to a I I . The simulation scenario can be further illustrated by the stationary voltage current profile of the fuel cell and the considered operating points O P I and O P I I . It is shown inside of Figure 11a. The operating points are determined by the buck converter’s input resistance R ¯ e via the converter’s duty ratio a from the following dependency R ¯ e i = R L / a i 2 with i = I , I I . This relationship can be derived in an analogous manner from an averaged and stationary version of the buck converter model like it was done for the boost converter in section 4.1.
The simulation results are shown in Figure 11b and Figure 12. The diagrams are split into two parts. As in section 4.1, the first part shows the fast dynamics due to electrical effects, the second part shows the long term behavior, after the transients of the mass balances have settled. In simulation I the duty ratio is equal to a = a I = 1 . This means that the switch S of the buck converter is always in position s = 1 and no oscillations occur. In contrast, if simulation I I is considered, relative large oscillations in the overpotential η c I I (Figure 11b), cell current I e I I (Figure 12a) and the cell voltage U e I I (Figure 12b) are appearing. The large oscillations are present immediately after the applied step and also at the steady state. This is not the case for the inductor current I l I I (Figure 12a) and the capacitor voltage U c I I
Figure 11. a) Time plot of duty ratio a and (inside) the stationary voltage-current profile of the fuel cell with considered operating points. In b) the step response of the overpotential η c is shown.
Figure 11. a) Time plot of duty ratio a and (inside) the stationary voltage-current profile of the fuel cell with considered operating points. In b) the step response of the overpotential η c is shown.
Energies 02 00071 g011
Figure 12. a) Step response of inductor current I l and cell (=converter input) current I e . In b) the step responses of cell (=converter input) voltage U e and capacitor (=converter output) voltage U c are shown.
Figure 12. a) Step response of inductor current I l and cell (=converter input) current I e . In b) the step responses of cell (=converter input) voltage U e and capacitor (=converter output) voltage U c are shown.
Energies 02 00071 g012
(Figure 12b) of the converter. Both of them show only small oscillations. The given interaction is therefore one-sided in direction from the buck converter to the PEMFC. The reason for the relatively large oscillations in the PEMFC is due to the presence of the switching function s in the coupling of fuel cell and buck converter: i c e l l = I e / A g = s I l / A g . This leads to a switched ODE for the overpotential:
C d l η ˙ c = i r 0 x o 2 exp ( - α ^ η c ) - s I l / A g
and causes the large oscillations in the overpotential and in the cell voltage.
Discussion of the effect The above equation can be used to further discuss the oscillation amplitudes of the overpotential. With the above observation that the interaction is one-sided from buck converter to the fuel cell and the assumptions that the changes in the inductor current I l and the oxygen content x o 2 are small over one duty period T and can be approximately described by their average values I ¯ l and x ¯ o 2 , the following formula can be derived for the stationary oscillation amplitudes Δ η c of the overpotential:
Δ η c = 1 α ^ ln 1 + γ ( 1 - a ) T γ β exp ( - β a T ) - 1 γ β γ β exp ( - β a T ) - 1 + exp ( - β a T ) γ β - γ ( 1 - a ) T
with γ = α ^ i r 0 x ¯ o 2 / C d l , β = α ^ I ¯ l / A g C d l and ( 1 - a ) T β > 1 .
The derivation of this equation is given in Appendix C. The equation can be used to further investigate the oscillations in the fuel cell. Figure 13a shows the oscillation amplitudes Δ η c calculated with Eqn. (29) at different duty ratios a. The ratio of duty period and double layer capacitance T / C d l is used as parameter and the other quantities remain constant at their nominal values. It can be seen, that a
Figure 13. a) Stationary oscillation amplitudes Δ η c of the overpotential with respect to the buck converter’s duty ratio a at different ratios of duty period and double layer capacitance T / C d l and b) stationary simulations of the overpotential for the cases i to i i i at a duty ratio a = 0 . 5 .
Figure 13. a) Stationary oscillation amplitudes Δ η c of the overpotential with respect to the buck converter’s duty ratio a at different ratios of duty period and double layer capacitance T / C d l and b) stationary simulations of the overpotential for the cases i to i i i at a duty ratio a = 0 . 5 .
Energies 02 00071 g013
decreasing ratio of T / C d l leads to smaller oscillations in the overpotential and vice versa. Therefore, in order to reduce oscillations in the fuel cell either the duty period T of the buck converter has to be decreased or the double layer capacitance C d l of the PEMFC has to be increased or both things have to be done. As was discussed in section 4.1, this can be achieved either by adjusting the switching period of the converter or by adding a capacitor. In Figure 13b an increased double layer capacitance is used. Stationary simulation results of the overpotential η c for the coupled PEMFC and buck converter model at a duty ratio a = 0 . 5 are shown. The duty period T is held constant and the double layer capacitance is increased from its nominal value in case i to 10 C d l in case i i and 100 C d l in case i i i . One can see, that the oscillation amplitudes of the overpotential decrease ( Δ η c i > Δ η c i i > Δ η c i i i ) as it is predicted in Figure 13a.
The oscillations in the overpotential due to the coupling of PEMFC and buck converter may also be used to estimate parameters of the fuel cell. This may be useful for monitoring or control purposes of the PEMFC. Rather expensive to obtain are the parameters describing the reaction kinetics of the fuel cell. Their identification is usually done in experiments using the impedance spectroscopy, the current interrupt technique [21] and the electrochemical parameter identification [22]. Equation (29) may also be used for this purpose. For an estimation of the fuel cell’s reaction kinetics the exchange current density together with the cell’s oxygen content i r 0 x ¯ o 2 , the exponent in the Tafel equation α ^ and the double layer capacitance C d l have to be determined. If we want to identify these parameters from Eqn. (29) we need to know the average inductor current I ¯ l and the oscillation amplitude Δ η c of the overpotential while the other quantities are rather well known. The quantity I ¯ l can be obtained by measuring and averaging the inductor current. The oscillation amplitude Δ η c can be obtained by measuring the oscillation amplitude Δ U e of the cell voltage. If the fuel cell is well humidified the ohmic and concentration losses are negligible and we have Δ η c Δ U e .
If I ¯ l and Δ η c are known we have to analyze the sensitivity of these measurements with respect to the unknown parameters in Eqn. (29) to get an indication about the quality of the obtainable estimation results. For the double layer capacitance C d l we can use Figure 13 for this purpose. If we define the changes of the oscillation amplitude Δ η c with respect to changes in C d l at some fixed duty ratio a as sensitivity Δ ( Δ η c ) / Δ C d l a we can see from Figure 13a that this sensitivity should be large enough for all duty ratios to get acceptable estimation results for C d l . The sensitivity with respect to the exchange current density i r 0 is analyzed in Figure 14. If we consider the changes of the oscillation amplitude Δ η c with respect to the changes in i r 0 at some duty ratio a as sensitivity Δ ( Δ η c ) / Δ i r 0 a it can be seen, that this sensitivity is rather small. Therefore, we cannot expect to get acceptable estimation results for i r 0 x ¯ o 2 from Eqn. (29).
Finally, in Figure 15 the sensitivity with regard to the parameter α ^ (Eqn. (4)) is examined. If we consider the changes of the stationary oscillation amplitude Δ η c with respect to the changes in α ^ at a duty ratio a as sensitivity Δ ( Δ η c ) / Δ α ^ a it can be seen from Figure 15, that this sensitivity should be large enough for duty ratios between 0 . 1 and 0 . 9 to get acceptable estimation results for the parameter α ^ . The estimation results for α ^ can be used to determine the transfer coefficient α from Eqn. (4), since the relative change of ± 0 . 4 in α ^ corresponds to a relative change of 0 . 2 in the transfer coefficient. To determine α from Eqn. (4) the cell temperature Θ has to be roughly known, e.g. from measurements. In summary, the sensitivity analysis reveals that acceptable estimation results can be expected for the double layer capacitance C d l and the parameter α ^ . The exchange current density cannot be estimated due to its small sensitivity. It should be noted, that due to this fact the precise value of the exchange current density as well as the precise value of the oxygen content in the cathodic catalyst is not necessary
Figure 14. Stationary oscillation amplitudes Δ η c of the overpotential with respect to the buck converter’s duty ratio a at different exchange current densities i r 0 .
Figure 14. Stationary oscillation amplitudes Δ η c of the overpotential with respect to the buck converter’s duty ratio a at different exchange current densities i r 0 .
Energies 02 00071 g014
Figure 15. Stationary oscillation amplitudes Δ η c of the overpotential with respect to the buck converter’s duty ratio a at different values of α ^ .
Figure 15. Stationary oscillation amplitudes Δ η c of the overpotential with respect to the buck converter’s duty ratio a at different values of α ^ .
Energies 02 00071 g015
for an estimation of C d l and α ^ . The estimation requires the measurement of the average inductor current and the oscillation amplitude of the cell voltage at a highly humidified fuel cell. It should not be carried out at too small oscillation amplitudes Δ η c to reduce the impact of the neglected inductor current ripple in Eqn. (29).
Overall behavior of the coupled system If we suppress the oscillations in the fuel cell and neglect the impact of the buck converter ripple, we can describe and analyze the coupling between the PEMFC and the buck converter with averaged model equations in order to check the overall behavior of the coupling for the appearance of stationary multiplicities and oscillations.
First of all, the stationary operation of PEMFC and buck converter is considered. Therefore, the stationary and averaged relationship in Figure 6 for the buck converter is valid. Like in the case of the PEMFC and the boost converter, the same reasoning is true and therefore the coupling between PEMFC and buck converter cannot introduce further stationary multiplicities as are already present in the PEMFC. However, oscillations induced by the coupling are still possible. In order to analyze the onset of oscillations we start with the following averaged model of PEMFC and buck converter:
V c x ¯ ˙ o 2 = - q ^ ( 1 + x ¯ o 2 ) i ¯ r + ( x o 2 i n - x ¯ o 2 ) V i n ,
V c x ¯ ˙ h 2 o = q ^ ( 2 - x ¯ h 2 o ) i ¯ r + ( x h 2 o i n - x ¯ h 2 o ) V i n ,
C d l η ¯ ˙ c = i ¯ r - a I ¯ l / A g with i ¯ r = i r 0 x ¯ o 2 exp ( - α ^ η ¯ c ) ,
L I ¯ ˙ l = a U c e l l 0 + η ¯ c - r m ( x ¯ h 2 o ) a I ¯ l / A g - U ¯ c ,
C U ¯ ˙ c = I ¯ l - U ¯ c / R L .
It is derived by coupling the model equations of the PEMFC (1-3) and the buck converter (8,9) via Eqn. (13) and averaging the resulting equations over one duty cycle. This is done in the same way as for the boost converter above. Like there, we consider the equations for the mass transport Equation (30,31) as static and use only the averaged model equations (32-34). The Jacobian matrix of these equations evaluated at the steady state ( x ¯ o 2 s s , x ¯ h 2 o s s , η ¯ c s s , I ¯ l s s , U ¯ c s s , R L s s , a s s ) is given by
J : = - b 11 - b 12 0 b 21 - b 22 - b 23 0 b 32 - b 33 = - α ^ a s s I ¯ l s s / A g C d l - a s s / A g C d l 0 a s s / L - a s s 2 r m ( x ¯ h 2 o s s ) / A g L - 1 / L 0 1 / C - 1 / R L s s C .
The duty ratio for a buck converter is typically between 0 < a s s 1 . With this, the coefficients b i j in J are always positive and therefore the same reasoning as in the previous analysis of PEMFC and boost converter is true: The connection between a PEMFC and a buck converter cannot introduce a Hopf bifurcation in the coupled PEMFC - buck converter system.

4.3. PEMFC and Buck-Boost-Converter

In this section the coupling between the PEMFC and the buck-boost converter is examined.
Effect of the converter ripple upon the PEMFC In a first step the effect of the converter ripple upon the fuel cell is considered by analyzing the coupled system of switched differential equations made up from the PEMFC (Eqns. (1-3)) and the switched buck-boost converter model (Eqns. (10,11)). The analysis reveals that the buck-boost converter introduces oscillations in the fuel cell in the same way as the buck converter. As in this previous case, the reason is due to the presence of the switching function s in the coupling of the fuel cell and the buck-boost converter: i c e l l = s I l / A g . This leads to the same switched ODE for the overpotential (28) and causes the oscillations in the fuel cell.
Discussion of the effect The formula for the oscillation amplitude Δ η c in Eqn. (29) can also be used to describe the stationary oscillations introduced by a buck-boost converter. Figure 16 shows the oscillation amplitude of the overpotential calculated with this formula at different duty ratios. The ratio of the duty period and the double layer capacitance T / C d l is used as parameter. The load resistance R L is set to 7 Ω while the other quantities remain constant at their nominal values. It can be seen from Figure 16,
Figure 16. Stationary oscillation amplitudes of the overpotential with respect to the buck-boost converter’s duty ratio a at different ratios of duty period and double layer capacitance T / C d l . The quantity a ( P m a x ) denotes the duty ratio at the maximal cell power P m a x .
Figure 16. Stationary oscillation amplitudes of the overpotential with respect to the buck-boost converter’s duty ratio a at different ratios of duty period and double layer capacitance T / C d l . The quantity a ( P m a x ) denotes the duty ratio at the maximal cell power P m a x .
Energies 02 00071 g016
that a decreasing ratio of T / C d l leads to smaller oscillations in the overpotential and vice versa. This is the same qualitative behavior as in the case of the buck converter in Section 4.2. Therefore, the same possibilities to reduce the oscillations are applicable.
The connection between the PEMFC and the buck-boost converter can also be used to estimate parameters of the fuel cell. We can use Eqn. (29) for this purpose again. In detail, the double layer capacitance C d l and the exponent of the Tafel kinetics α ^ can be estimated. In the case of the double layer capacitance this can be seen from Figure 16. The sensitivity | Δ ( Δ η c ) / Δ C d l | a of the oscillation amplitude with respect to the double layer capacitance should be large enough to get acceptable estimation results for C d l . In the case of the parameter α ^ we can use Figure 17. We see, that the sensitivity | Δ ( Δ η c ) / Δ α ^ | a of the oscillation amplitude Δ η c with respect to α ^ should be large enough to get acceptable estimation results for α ^ too.
Figure 17. Stationary oscillation amplitudes Δ η c of the overpotential with respect to the buck-boost converter’s duty ratio a at different values of α ^ . The quantity a ( P m a x ) denotes the duty ratio at the maximal cell power P m a x .
Figure 17. Stationary oscillation amplitudes Δ η c of the overpotential with respect to the buck-boost converter’s duty ratio a at different values of α ^ . The quantity a ( P m a x ) denotes the duty ratio at the maximal cell power P m a x .
Energies 02 00071 g017
Overall behavior of the coupled system If we reduce the oscillations and are able to neglect the impact of the converter ripple we can finally analyze the overall behavior of the coupled PEMFC and buck-boost converter with averaged model equations.
First of all, the stationary operation of PEMFC and buck-boost converter is considered. Like for the previous two converters the same reasoning is true and therefore the coupling between PEMFC and buck-boost converter cannot introduce further stationary multiplicities as are already present in the PEMFC. However, oscillations are still possible and their appearance has to be analyzed. This is done by coupling and averaging the model equations of the PEMFC (1-3) and the buck-boost converter (10,11) in the same way like in the previous two cases. We obtain the same mass transport equations for oxygen and water vapor like in the case of the buck converter (Eqns. (30,31)). Like there, we assume them as static and use only the model equations for the overpotential and the buck-boost converter’s inductor current and capacitor voltage:
C d l η ¯ ˙ c = i r 0 x ¯ o 2 exp ( - α ^ η ¯ c ) - a I ¯ l / A g ,
L I ¯ ˙ l = a U c e l l 0 + η ¯ c - r m ( x ¯ h 2 o ) a I ¯ l / A g + ( 1 - a ) U ¯ c ,
C U ¯ ˙ c = - ( 1 - a ) I ¯ l - U ¯ c / R L .
If we calculate the Jacobian matrix of the above system at the steady state ( x ¯ o 2 s s , x ¯ h 2 o s s , η ¯ c s s , I ¯ l s s , U ¯ c s s , R L s s , a s s ) we get
J : = - b 11 - b 12 0 b 21 - b 22 - b ˜ 23 0 b ˜ 32 - b 33 = - α ^ a s s I ¯ l s s / A g C d l - a s s / A g C d l 0 a s s / L - a s s 2 r m ( x ¯ h 2 o s s ) / A g L ( 1 - a s s ) / L 0 - ( 1 - a s s ) / C - 1 / R L s s C .
The duty ratio of the buck-boost converter is typically between 0 < a s s < 1 . With this, the coefficients b i j of J are always positive and the coefficients b ˜ 23 , b ˜ 32 are always negative. If we calculate the characteristic polynomial of J we get the equations (23-26) with negative quantities b 23 = b ˜ 23 and b 32 = b ˜ 32 . Despite this difference, the coefficients c 0 , c 1 , c 2 of the characteristic polynomial and the condition c 2 c 1 - c 0 are still positive due to the fact that only the positive product b 23 b 32 = b ˜ 23 b ˜ 32 > 0 enters the determining equations (24-27). Therefore, the same conclusion as in the case of the PEMFC and the boost converter applys: The connection of a PEMFC and a buck-boost converter cannot induce a Hopf bifurcation in the coupled system.

5. Conclusion

The connection of PEM fuel cells and DC-DC converters is analyzed in this contribution. The analysis is done for common DC-DC converters like the boost, buck and buck-boost converters. First of all, the effect of the converter ripples are shown. They introduce oscillations in the fuel cell. Their origin is explained, discussed and possibilities for their suppression are given. In the case of the coupling between PEMFC and buck and buck-boost converter it is shown, that the oscillations may also be useful to estimate parameter of the fuel cell’s Tafel kinetic.
Finally, the overall behaviors of the coupled systems are examined. This is a necessary step, because PEM fuel cells can show a complex nonlinear behavior like multiplicities, instabilities and oscillations [18,19,23,24,25] and the coupling with DC-DC converters might have introduced additional nonlinear effects. We have shown mathematically, that this is not the case: The connection between PEM fuel cells and boost, buck and buck-boost converters can neither lead to stationary multiplicities nor to oscillations in the coupled systems. As a consequence, it is not necessary to develop integrated control approaches for the couplings. Instead, we can concentrate ourselves on the development of control strategies considering only the PEMFC and we can use existing control approaches for the DC-DC converters [7] in order to control both subsystems.
Although the PEMFC model used in this contribution is quite simple, the obtained results are also valid for PEMFC stacks in general. This due to the fact, that in PEMFC stacks the electrochemical reactions in the catalysts can also be described by the modeling approach we use in our analysis. Other transient effects that appear in PEMFC stacks, like the mass transport of gases and liquid water through the gas diffusion layers, the catalyst layers or the membrane as well as the transient behavior of the operating temperature of the fuel cell are orders of magnitudes slower than the electrochemical processes and can therefore be neglected.

Acknowledgment

The authors thank Prof. Lindemann for helpful discussions.

A. Derivation of the PEMFC model

In this section the equations for the fuel cell model are derived. At first, this is done for the differential equation of the overpotential from the equivalent electrical circuit in Figure 1. The charge balance at the double layer capacitor C d l reads d Q / d t = i c = i c e l l - i r . The charge Q can be expressed in terms of the overpotential to be Q = - C d l η c where η c < 0 . If the double layer capacitance is assumed to be constant and the current i r is expressed using the Tafel equation
i r = i r 0 x o 2 e x p ( - α ^ η c ) with α ^ : = ( 1 - α ) n F / R Θ ,
the differential equation for the overpotential in Eqn. (3) results. The algebraic equation for the cell voltage in Eqn. (5) can be obtained using Kirchhoff’s voltage law.
The model equations for the oxygen and water content in the fuel cell are derived from the CSTR in Figure 1. Mass balances for the species k { O 2 , N 2 , H 2 O } read
n ˙ k = V i n c k i n - V o u t c k + ν k r A g
where n k ( c k ) describes the molar amount (concentration) of species k in the CSTR. The symbol ν k denotes the stoichiometric coefficients of the cathodic reaction with ν o 2 = - 0 . 5 , ν h 2 o = 1 and ν n 2 = 0 and the quantity r refers to the reaction rate and is given by Faraday’s law r = i r / n F . The volume flow rate of air at the inlet V i n is kept constant. The volume flow rate at the output V o u t can be determined if the gas phase is assumed to be isotherm, isobaric and ideal. The ideal gas law reads p g V c = n a l l R Θ . The symbol n a l l = k n k denotes the whole amount of gas inside the CSTR and is constant if isobaric, isothermic conditions as well as a constant CSTR volume V c is assumed. This means n ˙ a l l = k n ˙ k = 0 . If the mass balances from Eqn. (41) are inserted an algebraic equation for the output flow rate V o u t results: V i n k c k i n - V o u t k c k + k ν k r A g = 0 . This equation can be simplified if the total concentration in the CSTR c t : = n a l l / V c = k n k / V c = k c k = p g / R Θ = c o n s t . is defined. The total concentration in the CSTR and the inlet is the same: c t i n = c t because we assume an ideal and isobaric, isothermic gas phase in the inlet as well. With these simplifications the output flow rate can be written as
V o u t = V i n + k ν k A g r / c t = V i n + A g i r / 2 c t n F .
If we insert the above equation in Eqn. (41) and use n k = V c c k and molar fractions x k : = n k / n a l l = c k / c t , x k i n = c k i n / c t the model equations (1,2) result for k = O 2 , H 2 O .

B. Enlargement of the double layer capacitance

In this section it is briefly shown that a capacitor connected in parallel to a PEMFC can be used to increase the double layer capacitance of the cell. The capacitor with capacitance C I I is assumed to be lossless and is connected to the ports of the equivalent electrical circuit in Figure 1. The capacitor can be used to suppress oscillations in the fuel cell induced by the duty cycle of a connected DC/DC-converter. A time interval of one duty period T is considered for the following equations. For the overpotential η c and the cell voltage U c e l l the Eqns. (3,5) are still valid. The voltage at the new capacitor is identical to the cell voltage and is calculated by
C I I d U c e l l d t = i c e l l - i ,
where i denotes the new output current of the fuel cell that is different from i c e l l . If Eqn. (5) is differentiated with respect to time and inserted in Eqn. (43) one gets
C I I d η c d t - r m d i c e l l d t = i c e l l - i ,
where we have assumed, that the change in water content x h 2 o in the cell is negligible over one duty period. If Eqn. (3) is differentiated with respect to time under the assumption that the oxygen content x o 2 is assumed to be constant and solved for d i c e l l / d t we obtain
d i c e l l d t = i r η c d η c d t - C d l d 2 η c d t 2 .
where i r denotes the Tafel equation (40). If Eqn. (45) and Eqn. (3) are inserted for d i c e l l / d t and i c e l l in Eqn. (44) a second order ODE for the overpotential results:
r m C d l C I I d 2 η c d t 2 + C d l + C I I 1 - r m i r η c d η c d t = i r ( η c ) - i .
If the first term on the left hand side is negligible compared to the second term, e.g. if the fuel cell is well humidified and leads to a fairly small membrane resistance r m , a first order ODE for the overpotential follows:
C d l + C I I 1 + r m α ^ i r ( η c ) d η c d t = i r ( η c ) - i .
This equation has the same structure as the original ODE for the overpotential in Eqn. (3) whereas the new equation and therefore the parallel connection of the fuel cell and the capacitor shows an increased double layer capacitance.

C. Formula for stationary oscillations of the overpotential in a PEMFC if connected to buck or buck-boost converters

In this section the formula in Eqn. (29) is derived. The ODE for the overpotential in Eqn. (28) is used as a starting point. It is assumed that the changes in the inductor current I l and the oxygen content x o 2 are small over one duty period T of the converter and can be approximately replaced by their average values I ¯ l and x ¯ o 2 . If the switching function s is defined by
s = 1 , t T o n : = [ t 0 , t 0 + t o n [ 0 , t T o f f : = [ t 0 + t o n , t 0 + T [
the following nonlinear ODE in η c results:
C d l η ˙ c = - I ¯ l A g + i r 0 x ¯ o 2 exp ( - α ^ η c ) , t T o n i r 0 x ¯ o 2 exp ( - α ^ η c ) , t T o f f
with initial conditions η c ( t 0 ) = η c 0 and η c ( t 0 + t o n ) = η c 1 . With the following change in variables z : = exp ( α ^ η c ) and the definitions β : = α ^ I ¯ l / A g C d l and γ : = α ^ i r 0 x ¯ o 2 / C d l a linear ODE in z can be obtained:
z ˙ = - β z + γ , t T o n γ , t T o f f
This ODE can be solved easily and the solution in the original variables reads
η c o n = 1 α ^ ln γ β + exp ( α ^ η c 0 ) - γ β exp ( - β ( t - t 0 ) ) , t T o n
η c o f f = 1 α ^ ln exp ( α ^ η c 1 ) + γ ( t - ( t 0 + t o n ) ) , t T o f f .
With the above solutions we can now define the oscillation amplitude Δ η c of the overpotential. It is given by
Δ η c : = lim t t 0 + T η c o f f - lim t t 0 + t o n η c o n
with unknown initial conditions η c 0 and η c 1 . The initial condition η c 1 can be calculated by demanding continuity at t = t 0 + t o n between both solutions: η c 1 lim t t 0 + t o n η c o n . We get from Eqn. (51)
exp ( α ^ η c 1 ) = γ β + exp ( α ^ η c 0 ) - γ β exp ( - β t o n ) .
The initial condition η c 0 can be obtained by demanding η c 0 lim t t 0 + T η c o f f . This is valid for the stationary case and we get
exp ( α ^ η c 0 ) = ( γ β ) 2 exp ( - β t o n ) - γ ( T - t o n ) γ β exp ( - β t o n ) - 1
from calculating this limit from Eqn. (52) after inserting Eqn. (54). The initial conditions in the solutions can now be eliminated by inserting Eqns. (54,55) in Eqns. (51,52). Therefore, the stationary oscillation amplitude of the overpotential can now be calculated from Eqn. (53). With the relation a = t o n / T from Eqn. (12) the formula in Eqn. (29) results. Note that the oscillation amplitude Δ η c = η c 0 - η c 1 has to be always greater than zero, because in fuel cell operation we have η c 0 > η c 1 . With Eqns. (54,55) and a = t o n / T this condition can be reformulated to ( 1 - a ) T β > 1 .

Nomenclature

α
transfer coefficient of cathodic reaction, 0 . 5
η c
overvoltage at cathodic catalyst, V
σ p
proton conductivity of membrane, S m - 1
σ p 0
min. proton conductivity of membrane, 1 . 3 × 10 - 5 S m - 1
Θ
cell temperature, 353 K
a
duty ratio of DC-DC converters
A g
cross-sectional area of fuel cell, 1 . 0 × 10 - 4 m 2
C
capacitance of DC-DC converters, 300 . 0 × 10 - 6 F
c t
p g / ( R Θ ) , m o l m - 3
C d l
double layer capacitance, 0 . 01 F m - 2
d m
membrane thickness, 25 × 10 - 6 m
F
Faraday constant, 96485 . 3 C m o l - 1
I e
input current of DC-DC converters, A
I l
inductor current of DC-DC converters, A
i r 0
exchange current density, 0 . 01 A m - 2
i c e l l
cell current density, A m - 2
L
inductivity of DC-DC converters, 82 . 0 × 10 - 5 H
n
number of electrons consumed in cathodic reaction, 2
p g
overall gas pressure, 1 . 013 × 10 5 P a
p s a t
saturation pressure of H 2 O at Θ, 4 . 7373 × 10 4 P a
R
gas constant, 8 . 314 J m o l - 1 K - 1
R L
resistive load of DC-DC converters, Ω
r m
membrane resistance against proton transport, Ω m 2
T
duty period of DC-DC converters, 1 . 0 × 10 - 4 s
U c
capacitor (=output) voltage of DC-DC converters, V
U c e l l
cell voltage, V
U c e l l 0
equilibrium voltage of the cell, 1 . 17 V
V c
gas volume of CSTR, 0 . 5 × 10 - 6 m 3
V i n
volume flow rate of air, 1 . 7873 × 10 - 7 m 3 s - 1
x h 2 o
molar fraction of H 2 O
x h 2 o i n
molar fraction of H 2 O at inlet, 0 . 14
x o 2
molar fraction of O 2
x o 2 i n
molar fraction of O 2 at inlet, 0 . 21

References and Notes

  1. Choi, W.; Howze, J.; Enjeti, P. Development of an equivalent circuit model of a fuel cell to evaluate the effects of inverter ripple current. J. Power Sources 2006, 158, 1324–1332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Gemmen, R. S. Analysis for the effect of inverter ripple current on fuel cell operating condition. Trans. ASME 2003, 125, 576–585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Shireen, W.; Kulkarni, R. A.; Arefeen, M. Analysis and minimization of input ripple current in pwm inverters for designing reliable fuel cell power systems. J. Power Sources 2006, 156, 448–454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Zenith, F.; Skogestad, S. Control of fuel cell power output. J. Proc. Control 2007, 17, 333–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Eikerling, M.; Kornyshev, A. A. Electrochemical impedance of the cathode catalyst layer in polymer electrolyte fuel cells. J. Electroanalyt. Chem. 1999, 475, 107–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Ziegler, C.; Yu, H.; Schumacher, J. Two-phase dynamic modeling of the PEMFC and simulation of cyclo-voltammograms. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2005, 152, A1555–A1567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Erickson, R. W.; Maksimović, D. Fundamentals of Power Electronics; Springer-Verlag: Heidelberg, Germany, 2001. [Google Scholar]
  8. Seifart, M. Analoge Schaltungen; Verlag Technik; 2003. (in German) [Google Scholar]
  9. Yang, C.; Srinivasan, S.; Bocarsly, A. B.; Tulyani, S.; Benziger, J.B. A comparison of physical properties and fuel cell performance of nafion and zirconium phosphate/nafion composite membranes. J. Membrane Sci. 2004, 237, 145–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Barbir, F. PEM Fuel Cells; Academic Press Sustainable World, Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  11. Ziegler, C.; Schmitz, A.; Tranitz, M.; Fontes, E.; Schumacher, J. O. Modeling planar and self-breathing fuel cells for use in electronic devices. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2004, 151, A2028–A2041. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. de Bruijn, F.; Dam, V.; Janssen, G. Review: Durability and Degradation Issues of PEM Fuel Cell Components. Fuel Cells 2008, 8, 3–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Bautista, M.; Bultel, Y.; Ozil, P. Polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cell modelling: d.c. and a.c. solutions. Chem. Eng. Res. Design 2004, 82, 907–917. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Bultel, Y.; Wiezell, K.; Jaouen, F.; Ozil, P.; Lindbergh, G. Investigation of mass transport in gas diffusion layer at the air cathode of a pemfc. Electrochim. Acta 2005, 51, 474–488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Makharia, R.; Mathias, M. F.; Baker, D. R. Measurement of catalyst layer electrolyte resistance in pefcs using electrochemical impedance spectroscopy. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2005, 152, A970–A977. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Rubio, M.; Urquia, A.; Dormido, S. Diagnosis of pem fuel cells through current interruption. J. Power Sources 2007, 171, 670–677. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Benziger, J.; Chia, E.; Moxley, J.; Kevrekidis, I. The dynamic response of pem fuel cells to changes in load. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2005, 60, 1743–1759. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Grötsch, M.; Hanke-Rauschenbach, R.; Mangold, M. Bifurcation analysis of a two-phase pemfc model. J. Fuel Cell Sci. Technol. 2008, 5, 021001–021009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Hanke-Rauschenbach, R.; Mangold, M.; Sundmacher, K. Bistable current-voltage characteristics of pem fuel cells operated with reduced feed stream humidification. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2008, 155, B97–B107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Ludyk, G. Theoretische Regelungstechnik 1; Springer-Verlag: Heidelberg, Germany, 1995. (in German) [Google Scholar]
  21. Schindele, L. Einsatz eines leistungselektronischen Stellglieds zur Parameteridentifikation und optimalen Betriebsführung von PEM-Brennstoffzellensystemen. Ph.D. thesis, University Karlsruhe, Germany, 2006. [Google Scholar]
  22. Danzer, M.; Hofer, E. Electrochemical parameter identification - an efficient method for fuel cell impedance characterisation. J. Power Sources 2008, 183, 55–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Kulikovsky, A. A. The effect of stoichiometric ratio [lambda] on the performance of a polymer electrolyte fuel cell. Electrochim. Acta 2004, 49, 617–625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Zhang, J.; Fehribach, J.D.; Datta, R. Mechanistic and bifurcation analysis of anode potential oscillations in pemfcs with co in anode feed. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2004, 151, A689–A697. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Katsaounis, A.; Balomenou, S.; Tsiplakides, D.; Brosda, S.; Neophytides, S.; Vayenas, C. Proton tunneling-induced bistability, oscillations and enhanced performance of pem fuel cells. Appl. Catal. B: Environ. 2005, 56, 251–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Grötsch, M.; Mangold, M.; Kienle, A. Analysis of the Coupling Behavior of PEM Fuel Cells and DC-DC Converters. Energies 2009, 2, 71-96. https://doi.org/10.3390/en2010071

AMA Style

Grötsch M, Mangold M, Kienle A. Analysis of the Coupling Behavior of PEM Fuel Cells and DC-DC Converters. Energies. 2009; 2(1):71-96. https://doi.org/10.3390/en2010071

Chicago/Turabian Style

Grötsch, Markus, Michael Mangold, and Achim Kienle. 2009. "Analysis of the Coupling Behavior of PEM Fuel Cells and DC-DC Converters" Energies 2, no. 1: 71-96. https://doi.org/10.3390/en2010071

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop