# Optimization of Fuel Cell Performance Using Computational Fluid Dynamics

^{1}

^{2}

^{3}

^{4}

^{5}

^{6}

^{7}

^{*}

## Abstract

**:**

## 1. Introduction

^{2}active area of a PEM fuel cell flow field channels was developed using SOLID WORKS 2016 version software and imported into ANSYS FLUENT 18.0 licensed software for simulation.

## 2. Geometry Design

^{2}; the channels are 2 mm in width and 2 mm in depth. The rib width is 2 mm. Table 1 and Table 2 shows the geometry properties and parameters for the simulation.

#### 2.1. Computational Domain

#### 2.2. Boundary Conditions

## 3. Mathematical Modelling

_{i}

_{,}

_{ϵ}of i species along ϵ direction is given by:

_{i}as:

_{sol}∇ø

_{sol}) + R

_{sol}= 0

_{mem}∇ø

_{mem}) + R

_{mem}= 0

_{sol}= -R

_{a}at the anode side of the solid phase and R

_{sol}= -R

_{c}at the cathode side. As for the membrane phase, R

_{mem}= +R

_{a}at the anode side and R

_{mem}= -R

_{c}at the cathode side.

_{a}and R

_{c}are the current exchange densities and they are calculated using the Butler–Volmer equation:

_{ref}is reference concentration, γ is concentration coefficient, α is transfer coefficient, ɳ is activation losses, F is Faraday constant. The anode and cathode over-potentials are related to the solid phase potential fields, and the membrane, ø

_{sol}and ø

_{mem}are given as:

_{a}= ø

_{sol}− ø

_{mem}

_{c}= ø

_{sol}− ø

_{mem}− V

_{oc}

_{oc}is open-circuit voltage, as stated by Um et al. [20]

_{oc}= 0.0025T + 0.2329

_{oc}= V

_{oc}− ɳ

_{act}− ɳ

_{ohm}− ɳ

_{conc}

_{act}is activation over-potential, which represents the irreversibility in the cell as a results of the energy losses during the chemical activation reactions; ɳ

_{ohm}is ohmic over-potential, this is the irreversibility caused from the flow of ions across the electrolyte, and electrons across the current collectors and electrodes; while the ɳ

_{conc}is mass transport or concentration over-potential, it occurs due to the high current density operation of the fuel cell [21]. When the energy demand conditions are high, then the electrochemical reactions consumption becomes faster.

Governing Equations | Mathematical Expressions | Ref. |
---|---|---|

Continuity | $\frac{\partial \left(\rho u\right)}{\partial x}$ + $\frac{\partial \left(\rho v\right)}{\partial y}$ + $\frac{\partial \left(\rho w\right)}{\partial z}$ = ${S}_{m}$ | [22] |

Momentum transport | $u\frac{\partial \left(\rho u\right)}{\partial x}$ + $v\frac{\partial \left(\rho v\right)}{\partial y}$ + $w\frac{\partial \left(\rho w\right)}{\partial z}$ = $-\frac{\partial P}{\partial x}+\frac{\partial}{\partial x}\left(\mu \frac{\partial u}{\partial x}\right)+$ $\frac{\partial}{\partial y}\left(\mu \frac{\partial u}{\partial y}\right)+\frac{\partial}{\partial z}\left(\mu \frac{\partial u}{\partial z}\right)+{S}_{px}$ $u\frac{\partial \left(\rho v\right)}{\partial x}$ + $v\frac{\partial \left(\rho v\right)}{\partial y}$ + $w\frac{\partial \left(\rho v\right)}{\partial z}$ = $-\frac{\partial P}{\partial y}+\frac{\partial}{\partial x}\left(\mu \frac{\partial v}{\partial x}\right)+$ $\frac{\partial}{\partial y}\left(\mu \frac{\partial v}{\partial y}\right)+\frac{\partial}{\partial z}\left(\mu \frac{\partial v}{\partial z}\right)+{S}_{py}$ $u\frac{\partial \left(\rho w\right)}{\partial x}$ + $v\frac{\partial \left(\rho w\right)}{\partial y}$ + $w\frac{\partial \left(\rho w\right)}{\partial z}$ = $-\frac{\partial P}{\partial z}+\frac{\partial}{\partial x}\left(\mu \frac{\partial w}{\partial x}\right)+$ $\frac{\partial}{\partial y}\left(\mu \frac{\partial w}{\partial y}\right)+\frac{\partial}{\partial z}\left(\mu \frac{\partial w}{\partial z}\right)+{S}_{pz}$ | [23] |

Energy | $u\frac{\partial \left(\rho CT\right)}{\partial x}$ + $v\frac{\partial \left(\rho CT\right)}{\partial y}$ + $w\frac{\partial \left(\rho CT\right)}{\partial z}$ = $\frac{\partial}{\partial x}\left(k\frac{\partial T}{\partial x}\right)+$ $\frac{\partial}{\partial y}\left(k\frac{\partial T}{\partial y}\right)+\frac{\partial}{\partial z}\left(k\frac{\partial T}{\partial z}\right)+{S}_{h}$ | [24] |

Hydrogen transport (anode region) | $u\frac{\partial \left(\rho {Y}_{{H}_{2}}\right)}{\partial x}$ + $v\frac{\partial \left(\rho {Y}_{{H}_{2}}\right)}{\partial y}$ + $w\frac{\partial \left(\rho {Y}_{{H}_{2}}\right)}{\partial z}=$ $\frac{\partial \left({J}_{x,{H}_{2}}\right)}{\partial x}$ + $\frac{\partial \left({J}_{y,{H}_{2}}\right)}{\partial y}$ + $\frac{\partial \left({J}_{z,{H}_{2}}\right)}{\partial z}$ $+{S}_{{H}_{2}}$ | [25] |

Water transport (anode region) | $u\frac{\partial \left(\rho {Y}_{aw}\right)}{\partial x}$ + $v\frac{\partial \left(\rho {Y}_{aw}\right)}{\partial y}$ + $w\frac{\partial \left(\rho {Y}_{aw}\right)}{\partial z}=$ $\frac{\partial \left({J}_{x,aw}\right)}{\partial x}$ + $\frac{\partial \left({J}_{y,aw}\right)}{\partial y}$ + $\frac{\partial \left({J}_{z,aw}\right)}{\partial z}$$+{S}_{aw}$ | [26] |

Oxygen transport (cathode region) | $u\frac{\partial \left(\rho {Y}_{{O}_{2}}\right)}{\partial x}$+$v\frac{\partial \left(\rho {Y}_{{O}_{2}}\right)}{\partial y}$+$w\frac{\partial \left(\rho {Y}_{{O}_{2}}\right)}{\partial z}=$ $\frac{\partial \left({J}_{x,{O}_{2}}\right)}{\partial x}$+$\frac{\partial \left({J}_{y,{O}_{2}}\right)}{\partial y}$+$\frac{\partial \left({J}_{z,{O}_{2}}\right)}{\partial z}$$+{S}_{{O}_{2}}$ | [27] |

Water transport (cathode region) | $u\frac{\partial \left(\rho {Y}_{cw}\right)}{\partial x}$+$v\frac{\partial \left(\rho {Y}_{cw}\right)}{\partial y}$+$w\frac{\partial \left(\rho {Y}_{cw}\right)}{\partial z}=$ $\frac{\partial \left({J}_{x,cw}\right)}{\partial x}$+$\frac{\partial \left({J}_{y,cw}\right)}{\partial y}$+$\frac{\partial \left({J}_{z,cw}\right)}{\partial z}$$+{S}_{cw}$ | [28] |

Source terms | S_{m} = ${S}_{{H}_{2}}+{S}_{aw}$ S_{m} = ${S}_{{O}_{2}}+{S}_{cw}$ | [29] |

S_{px} = −$\frac{\mu u}{k}$ S_{py} = −$\frac{\mu v}{k}$ S_{pz} = −$\frac{\mu w}{k}$ | [30] | |

$\overrightarrow{{\mathrm{J}}_{i}}$ = −$\rho \nabla \xb7{y}_{i}$ | [31] | |

S_{h} = I^{2}R_{ohm} + h_{react} + ${\mathsf{\u019e}}_{act}{R}_{an,ca}$ | [32] | |

${\mathrm{S}}_{{\mathrm{H}}_{2}}=-\frac{{\mathrm{M}}_{{\mathrm{H}}_{2}}}{2\mathrm{F}}{\mathrm{R}}_{\mathrm{an}}$ | [33] | |

${\mathrm{S}}_{\mathrm{aw}}$$=-\frac{{\mathrm{M}}_{{\mathrm{H}}_{2}}\mathrm{O}}{\mathrm{F}}{\mathrm{R}}_{\mathrm{an}}$ | [34] | |

${\mathrm{S}}_{{\mathrm{O}}_{2}}=-\frac{{\mathrm{M}}_{{\mathrm{O}}_{2}}}{4\mathrm{F}}{\mathrm{R}}_{\mathrm{ca}}$ | [35] | |

${\mathrm{S}}_{\mathrm{cw}}=-\frac{{\mathrm{M}}_{{\mathrm{H}}_{2}\mathrm{O}}}{2\mathrm{F}}{\mathrm{R}}_{\mathrm{ca}}$ | [36] | |

Charge transport | ∇·(σ_{sol} ∇ø_{sol}) + R_{sol} = 0∇·(σ _{mem} ∇ø_{mem}) + R_{mem}= 0 | [37] [38] |

## 4. Results and Discussion

#### 4.1. Effects of Operating Temperature Variation

#### 4.2. Effects of Operating Pressure Variation

#### 4.3. Mass Fraction

#### 4.4. Modeling Results Validation

^{2}. Some of these materials were integrated into Ansys software in order to simulate and find out the best material cell performance. In their experiment, a serpentine flow field plate was used with an anode and cathode parallel flow. A single cell with a serpentine flow channel with the co-counter flow was used in the model to represent their experimental setup.

## 5. Conclusions

## Author Contributions

## Funding

## Institutional Review Board Statement

## Conflicts of Interest

## References

- Abdelkareem, M.A.; Lootah, M.A.; Sayed, E.T.; Wilberforce, T.; Alawadhi, H.; Yousef, B.A.A.; Olabi, A.G. Fuel cells for carbon capture applications. Sci. Total Environ.
**2021**, 769, 144243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] - Olabi, A.G.; Wilberforce, T.; Abdelkareem, M.A. Fuel cell application in the automotive industry and future perspective. Energy
**2021**, 214, 118955. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Abdelkareem, M.A.; Wilberforce, T.; Elsaid, K.; Sayed, E.T.; Abdelghani, E.A.M.; Olabi, A.G. Transition metal carbides and nitrides as oxygen reduction reaction catalyst or catalyst support in proton exchange membrane fuel cells (PEMFCs). Int. J. Hydrog. Energy
**2020**, in press. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Wilberforce, T.; El-Hassan, Z.; Khatib, F.N.; Al Makky, A.; Baroutaji, A.; Carton, J.G.; Olabi, A.G. Developments of electric cars and fuel cell hydrogen electric cars. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy
**2017**, 42, 25695–25734. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Olabi, A.G.; Wilberforce, T.; Sayed, E.T.; Elsaid, K.; Abdelkareem, M.A. Prospects of Fuel Cell Combined Heat and Power Systems. Energies
**2020**, 13, 4104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Wilberforce, T.; Khatib, F.N.; Ijaodola, O.; Ogungbemi, E.; El Hassan, Z.; Durrant, A.; Thompson, J.; Olabi, A.G. Numerical modelling and CFD simulation of a polymer electrolyte membrane (PEM) fuel cell flow channel using an open pore cellular foam material. Sci. Total Environ.
**2019**, 678, 728740. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Baroutaji, A.; Arjunan, A.; Alaswad, A.; Praveen, A.S.; Wilberforce, T.; Abdelkareem, M.A.; Olabi, A.G. Materials for fuel cell membranes. Ref. Modul. Mater. Sci. Mater. Eng.
**2020**. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Karimi, S.; Fraser, N.; Roberts, B.; Foulkes, F.R. A review of metallic bipolar plates for proton exchange membrane fuel cells: Materials and fabrication methods. Adv. Mater. Sci. Eng.
**2012**. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Sun, H.; Cooke, K.; Eitzinger, G.; Hamilton, P.; Pollet, B. Development of PVD coatings for PEMFC metallic bipolar plates. Thin Solid Films
**2013**, 528, 199–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Wilberforce, T.; El Hassan, Z.; Khatib, F.N.; Ahmed, A.M.; Jim, M.; Ahmad, B.; Carton, J.G.; Olabi, A.G. Development of Bi-polar plate design of PEM fuel cell using CFD techniques. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy
**2017**, 42, 25663–25685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Hong, L.; Peiwen, L.; Jon, V.L. CFD study on flow distribution uniformity in fuel distributors having multiple structural bifurcations of flow channels. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy
**2010**, 35, 9186–9198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Jason, P.K.; Xia, W.; Joan, L.; Zhongying, S.; Laila, G. Investigation of bio-inspired flow channel designs for bipolar plates in proton exchange membrane fuel cells. J. Power Sources
**2009**, 188, 132–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Mohammad, H.A.; Behzad, R. Numerical investigation of flow field configuration and contact resistance for PEM fuel cell. Renew. Energy
**2008**, 33, 1775–1783. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Sierra, J.M.; Figueroa-Ramirez Diaz, S.E.; Vargas, J.; Sebastian, P.J. Numerical evaluation of a PEM fuel cell with conventional flow fields adapted to tubular plates. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy
**2014**, 39, 16694–16705. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Um, S.; Wang, C.Y. Three-dimensional analysis of transport and electrochemical reactions in polymer electrolyte fuel cells. J. Power Sources
**2004**, 125, 40–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Yousef, V.; Kurosh, S. Numerical investigation of a novel compound flow-field for PEMFC performance improvement. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy
**2015**, 40, 15032–15039. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Bladimir, R.A.; Abel, H.G.; Daniel, J.R.; Peiwen, L. Numerical investigation of the performance of symmetric flow distributors as flow channels for PEM fuel cells. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy
**2012**, 37, 436–448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Tabbi Wilberforce, A.G.O. Design of Experiment (DOE) Analysis of 5-Cell Stack Fuel Cell Using Three Bipolar Plate Geometry Design. Sustainability
**2020**, 12, 4488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Springer, T.E.; Zawodzinski, T.A.; Gottesfeld, S. Polymer electrolyte fuel cell model. J. Electrochem. Soc.
**1991**, 138, 2334–2342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Um, S.; Wang, C.Y.; Chen, K.S. Computational fluid dynamics modeling of proton exchange membrane fuel cells. J. Electrochem. Soc.
**2000**, 147, 4485e93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Atul, K.; Ramana, G.R. Effect of channel dimensions and shape in the flow-field distributor on the performance of polymer electrolytemembranefuel cells. J. Power Sources
**2003**, 113, 11–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Miguel, P.A.; Enzo, S.; Contreras, J. Renewable energy policy performance in reducing CO2 emissions. Energy Econ.
**2016**, 54, 272–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Negin, H.; Joshua, M.P. A review of greenhouse gas emission liabilities as the value of renewable energy for mitigating lawsuits for climate change related damages. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.
**2016**, 55, 899–908. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Bladimir, R.A.; Peiwen, L.; Hong, L.; Abel, H.G. CFD study of liquid-cooled heat sinks with micro-channel flow field configurations for electronics, fuel cells, and concentrated solar cells. Appl. Therm. Eng.
**2011**, 31, 2494–2507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Guilin, H.; Jianren, F.; Song, C.; Yongjiang, L.; Kefa, C. Three-dimensional numerical analysis of proton exchange membrane fuel cells (PEMFCs) with conventional and interdigitated flow fields. J. Power Sources
**2004**, 136, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Zheng, C.H.; Oh, C.E.; Park, Y.I.; Cha, S.W. Fuel economy evaluation of fuel cell hybrid vehicles based on equivalent fuel consumption. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy
**2012**, 37, 1790–1796. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Yuh, M.F.; Ay, S. A three-dimensional full-cell CFD model used to investigate the effects of different flow channel designs on PEMFC performance. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy
**2007**, 32, 4466–4476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Elif, E.H.; Imdat, T. Assessment of single-serpentine PEM fuel cell model developed by computational fluid dynamics. Fuel
**2018**, 217, 51–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Alizadeh, E.; Rahimi, M.; Rahgoshay, S.M.; Saadat, S.H.; Khorshidian, M. Numerical and experimental investigation of cascade type serpentine flow field of reactant gases for improving performance of PEM fuel cell. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy
**2017**, 42, 14708–14724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Antonio, S.; Alfredo, I.; Felipe, R.; Elvira, T.; Eduardo, L.; Fernando, I. Optimization of a PEM fuel cell operation conditions: Obtaining the maximum performance polarization curve. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy
**2016**, 41, 19713–19723. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Lin, W.; Attila, H.; Tianhong, Z.; Hongtan, L. A parametric study of PEM fuel cell performances. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy
**2003**, 28, 1263–1272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Falcao, D.S.; Gomes, P.J.; Pinho, C.; Pinto, A.M. 1D and 3D numerical simulations in PEM fuel cells. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy
**2011**, 36, 12486–12498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Hua, M. A three-dimensional PEM fuel cell model with consistent treatment of water transport in MEA. J. Power Sources
**2006**, 162, 426–435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Abdollahzadeh, M.; Ribeirinha, P.; Boaventura, M.; Mendes, A. Three-dimensional modeling of PEMFC with contaminated anode fuel. Energy
**2018**, 152, 939–959. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Fatemeh, H.; Soosan, R.; Mashallah, R. CFD simulation of PEM fuel cell performance: Effect of straight and serpentine flow fields. Math. Comput. Model.
**2012**, 55, 1540–1557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Iranzo, A.; Muñoz, M.; Rosa, F.; Pino, J. Numerical model for the performance prediction of a PEM fuel cell. Model results and experimental validation. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy
**2010**, 35, 11533–11550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Guobin, Z.; Linhao, F.; Jing, S.; Kui, J. A 3D model of PEMFC considering detailed multiphase flow and anisotropic transport properties. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf.
**2017**, 115, 714–724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Guobin, Z.; Kui, J. Three-dimensional multi-phase simulation of PEMFC at high current density utilizing Eulerian-Eulerian model and two-fluid model. Energy Convers. Manag.
**2018**, 176, 409–421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Ijaodola, O.S.; El-Hassan, Z.; Ogungbemi, E.; Khatib, F.N.; Wilberforce, T.; Thompson, J.; Olabi, A.G. Energy efficiency improvements by investigating the water flooding management on proton exchange membrane fuel cell (PEMFC). Energy
**2019**, 179, 246–267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Shimpalee, S.; Lilavivat, V.; McCrabb, H.; Khunatorn, Y.; Lee, H.K.; Lee, W.K.; Weidner, J.W. Investigation of bipolar plate materials for proton exchange membrane fuel cells. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy
**2016**, 41, 13688–13696. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Wilberforce, T.; Ijaodola, O.; Khatib, F.N.; Ogungbemi, E.; El Hassan, Z.; Thompson, J.; Olabi, A.G. Effect of humidification of reactive gases on the performance of a proton exchange membrane fuel cell. Sci. Total Environ.
**2019**, 688, 1016–1035. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] - Yu, L.; Yuanchun, H.; Zhengbing, X.; Xianwei, R. Study of Adsorption of Hydrogen on Al, Cu, Mg, Ti Surfaces in Al Alloy Melt via First Principles Calculation. Metals
**2017**, 7, 21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Zhao, M.; Anderson, A.B. Theory of Hydrogen Deposition and Evolution on Cu(111) Electrodes. J. Electrochem. Soc.
**2017**, 164, H691–H695. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]

**Figure 1.**Exploded view of a single PEM fuel cell [6].

**Figure 3.**A three-dimensional view of the single PEM fuel cell and its components. (

**a**) Inlet channel (

**b**) outlet channel.

**Figure 4.**Temperature distribution at the anode region (GDL/CL) for each material at 298K: (

**a**) Aluminum, (

**b**) Copper, (

**c**) Steel.

**Figure 5.**Temperature distribution at the cathode region (GDL/CL) for each material at 298K: (

**a**) Aluminum, (

**b**) Copper, (

**c**) Steel.

**Figure 6.**Temperature distribution at the anode region (GDL/CL) for each material at 323K: (

**a**) Aluminum, (

**b**) Copper, (

**c**) Steel.

**Figure 7.**Temperature distribution at the cathode region (GDL/CL) for each material at 323K: (

**a**) Aluminum, (

**b**) Copper, (

**c**) Steel.

**Figure 8.**Temperature distribution at the cathode region (GDL/CL) for each materials at 338K: (

**a**) Aluminum, (

**b**) Copper, (

**c**) Steel.

**Figure 9.**Temperature distribution at the cathode region (GDL/CL) for each material at 338K: (

**a**) Aluminum, (

**b**) Copper, (

**c**) Steel.

**Figure 10.**Pressure distribution at the anode region (GDL/CL) for each material with temperature 323 K at 1.5 bar: (

**a**) Aluminum, (

**b**) Copper, (

**c**) Steel.

**Figure 11.**Pressure distribution at the cathode region (GDL/CL) for each material with temperature 323 K at 1.5 bar: (

**a**) Aluminum, (

**b**) Copper, (

**c**) Steel.

**Figure 12.**Pressure distribution at the anode region (GDL/CL) for each material with temperature 323 K at 2.0 bar: (

**a**) Aluminum, (

**b**) Copper, (

**c**) Steel.

**Figure 13.**Pressure distribution at the cathode region (GDL/CL) for each material with temperature 323 K at 2.0 bar: (

**a**) Aluminum, (

**b**) Copper, (

**c**) Steel.

**Figure 14.**Pressure distribution at the anode region (GDL/CL) for each material with temperature 323 K at 2.5 bar: (

**a**) Aluminum, (

**b**) Copper, (

**c**) Steel.

**Figure 15.**Pressure distribution at the cathode region (GDL/CL) for each material with temperature 323 K at 2.5 bar: (

**a**) Aluminum, (

**b**) Copper, (

**c**) Steel.

**Figure 16.**Contours of hydrogen mass fraction at the anode region (GDL/CL) for each material with temperature 323 K at pressure 1.5 bar: (

**a**) Aluminum, (

**b**) Copper, (

**c**) Steel.

**Figure 17.**Contours of oxygen mass fraction at the cathode region (GDL/CL) for each material with temperature 323 K at pressure 1.5 bar: (

**a**) Aluminum, (

**b**) Copper, (

**c**) Steel.

**Figure 18.**Water mass fraction at the membrane for (

**a**) Aluminum, (

**b**) Copper, (

**c**) Steel bipolar plate materials at 338 K, 1.5 bar.

**Figure 19.**Comparison between numerical and experimental results of various bipolar plate materials.

Parameters | Value | Unit |
---|---|---|

Current collector width (anode side) | 45 | mm |

Current collector width (cathode side) | 45 | mm |

Gas flow field channel width | 45 | mm |

Gas flow field channel depth | 2 | mm |

Cell electrode length | 65 | mm |

Gas diffusion layer thickness (anode region) | 0.39 | mm |

Gas diffusion layer thickness (cathode region) | 0.39 | mm |

Catalyst layer thickness (anode side) | 0.08 | mm |

Catalyst layer thickness (cathode side) | 0.08 | mm |

Active area | 25 | cm^{2} |

Membrane thickness | 0.6 | mm |

Gas diffusion layer porosity (anode side) | 0.5 | − |

Gas diffusion layer porosity (cathode side) | 0.5 | − |

Catalyst layer porosity (anode region) | 0.5 | − |

Catalyst layer porosity (cathode region) | 0.5 | − |

Parameters | Value | Unit |
---|---|---|

Operating temperature | 298/323/338 | K |

Operating pressure | 1.5/2/2.5 | Bar |

Mole fractions for hydrogen and water vapor (anode region) | 0.6/0.4 | − |

Mole fractions for oxygen and water vapor (cathode region) | 0.2/0.15 | − |

Relative humidity at anode side | 100 | % |

Relative humidity at cathode side | 100 | % |

Open circuit voltage | 0.7 | V |

**Table 4.**Peak power data is for simulation and experimental results for the three bipolar plate materials.

Materials | Peak Power (Simulation) | Peak Power (Experimental) | % Deviation b/w Simulation and Experimental Results |
---|---|---|---|

Aluminium | 0.36 | 0.33 | 8.33 |

Copper | 0.3 | 0.28 | 6.67 |

Steel | 0.25 | 0.23 | 8.00 |

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |

© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

## Share and Cite

**MDPI and ACS Style**

Wilberforce, T.; Ijaodola, O.; Emmanuel, O.; Thompson, J.; Olabi, A.G.; Abdelkareem, M.A.; Sayed, E.T.; Elsaid, K.; Maghrabie, H.M. Optimization of Fuel Cell Performance Using Computational Fluid Dynamics. *Membranes* **2021**, *11*, 146.
https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes11020146

**AMA Style**

Wilberforce T, Ijaodola O, Emmanuel O, Thompson J, Olabi AG, Abdelkareem MA, Sayed ET, Elsaid K, Maghrabie HM. Optimization of Fuel Cell Performance Using Computational Fluid Dynamics. *Membranes*. 2021; 11(2):146.
https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes11020146

**Chicago/Turabian Style**

Wilberforce, Tabbi, Oluwatosin Ijaodola, Ogungbemi Emmanuel, James Thompson, Abdul Ghani Olabi, Mohammad Ali Abdelkareem, Enas Taha Sayed, Khaled Elsaid, and Hussein M. Maghrabie. 2021. "Optimization of Fuel Cell Performance Using Computational Fluid Dynamics" *Membranes* 11, no. 2: 146.
https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes11020146