大尺寸固体氧化物燃料电池的电极过程解析方法

doi:10.3866/PKU.WHXB202011009

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

电化学阻抗谱(Electrochemical Impedance Spectroscopy，EIS)作为一种原位/非原位的电化学表征技术，在固体氧化物燃料电池(Solid Oxide Fuel Cell，SOFC)尤其是小尺寸电池的研究中得到了广泛应用，而工业大尺寸电池的EIS研究较少且大多基于小尺寸电池的研究结果。本文对工业尺寸(10 cm × 10 cm)阳极支撑平板式SOFC搭建了EIS测试系统，并改变电池运行温度、阳极/阴极气体组分，对该电池进行了系统的EIS测试，而后采用不基于先验假设的弛豫时间分布法(Distribution of Relaxation Times，DRT)对EIS数据进行解析。通过比较分析不同条件下的DRT结果，揭示了DRT中各特征峰与电池中具体电极过程的对应关系。与小尺寸电池相比，由于大尺寸电池的有效面积较大且入口流量较小，气体转化过程在大尺寸电池中不容忽视。本文通过解析EIS实现了对工业大尺寸SOFC单电池中各项电极过程的分辨，该方法及结果能够进一步应用于SOFC原位表征、在线监测以及衰减机理等相关研究。

关键词: 固体氧化物燃料电池, 电化学阻抗谱, 弛豫时间分布, 大尺寸

Abstract:

Solid oxide fuel cell (SOFC) with high energy conversion efficiency, low pollutant emission, and good fuel adaptability has witnessed rapid development in recent years. However, the commercialization of SOFC remains limited by constraints of performance and stability. Electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) can distinguish ohmic impedance caused by ion transport from polarization impedance related to electrode reaction; it has been widely used in the research of performance and stability as an efficient on-line characterization technology. The physical/chemical processes involved in EIS overlap significantly and can be decomposed by the distribution of relaxation times (DRT) method which does not depend on prior assumptions. Since industrial large-size SOFC is vulnerable to the influence of inductance and disturbance when testing EIS, its EIS analysis is rarely studied and mostly based on the research results of cells with smaller electrode active area. To further elucidate the impedance spectrum of industrial large-size SOFC under actual working conditions, the EIS of industrial-size (10 cm × 10 cm) anode-supported planar SOFC was systematically tested over a broad temperature and anode/cathode gas composition range. First, the quality of the impedance data was examined by performing a Kramers-Kronig test. The residuals of real and imaginary data were within the range of ±1%, indicating good data quality. Then, the DRT method was adopted to parse the EIS data. By comparing and analyzing the DRT results under different conditions, the corresponding relationships between each characteristic peak in the DRT results and the specific electrode process in the SOFC were revealed. The characteristic frequencies were separated into 0.5-1, 1-30, 10-30, 1 × 10²-1 × 10³, and 1 × 10⁴-3 × 10⁴ Hz regions, corresponding to gas conversion within the anode, gas diffusion within the anode, oxygen surface exchange reaction within the cathode, charge-transfer reaction within the anode, and oxygen ionic transport process, respectively. In this study, the identification of each electrode process in industrial large-size SOFC is realized, indicate that the gas conversion process in large-size SOFC with larger active area and smaller flows cannot be ignored compared with the cells with smaller electrode active area. The method followed and the results obtained have a universal quality and can be applied to the in situ characterization, online monitoring, and degradation mechanism research of SOFC, thus laying a foundation for the optimization of the performance and stability.

Key words: Solid oxide fuel cell, Electrochemical impedance spectroscopy, Distribution of relaxation time, Large-size

崔同慧, 李航越, 吕泽伟, 王怡戈, 韩敏芳, 孙再洪, 孙凯华. 大尺寸固体氧化物燃料电池的电极过程解析方法[J]. 物理化学学报, 2022, 38(8), 2011009. doi: 10.3866/PKU.WHXB202011009

Tonghui Cui, Hangyue Li, Zewei Lyu, Yige Wang, Minfang Han, Zaihong Sun, Kaihua Sun. Identification of Electrode Process in Large-Size Solid Oxide Fuel Cell[J]. Acta Phys. -Chim. Sin. 2022, 38(8), 2011009. doi: 10.3866/PKU.WHXB202011009

链接本文: https://www.whxb.pku.edu.cn/CN/10.3866/PKU.WHXB202011009

https://www.whxb.pku.edu.cn/CN/Y2022/V38/I8/2011009

图/表 11

图1

表1

图2

图3

图4

图5

图6

图7

图8

表2

图9

参考文献 35

1	Hjalmarsson P. ; Sun X. ; Liu Y. L. ; Chen M. J. Power Sources 2014, 262, 316. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2014.03.133
2	Fang Q. ; Frey C. E. ; Menzler N. H. ; Blum L. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2018, 165 (2), F38. doi: 10.1149/2.0541802jes
3	Hauch A. ; Brodersen K. ; Chen M. ; Mogensen M. B. Solid State Ionics 2016, 293, 27. doi: 10.1016/j.ssi.2016.06.003
4	Lyu Z. ; Wang Y. ; Zhang Y. ; Han M. Chem. Eng. J. 2020, 393, 124755. doi: 10.1016/j.cej.2020.124755
5	Barfod R. ; Hagen A. ; Ramousse S. ; Hendriksen P. V. ; Mogensen M. Fuel Cells 2006, 6 (2), 141. doi: 10.1002/fuce.200500113
6	Jensen S. R. H. J. ; Hauch A. ; Hendriksen P. V. ; Mogensen M. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2009, 156 (6), B757. doi: 10.1149/1.3116247
7	Schichlein H. ; Müller A. C. ; Voigts M. ; Krügel A. ; Ivers-Tiffée E. J. Appl. Electrochem. 2002, 32 (8), 875. doi: 10.1023/a:1020599525160
8	Leonide A. ; Sonn V. ; Weber A. ; Ivers-Tiffée E. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2008, 155 (1), B36. doi: 10.1149/1.2801372
9	Endler C. ; Leonide A. ; Weber A. ; Tietz F. ; Ivers-Tiffée E. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2010, 157 (2), B292. doi: 10.1149/1.3270047
10	Kromp A. ; Leonide A. ; Weber A. ; Ivers-Tiffée E. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2011, 158 (8), B980. doi: 10.1149/1.3597177
11	Caliandro P. ; Nakajo A. ; Diethelm S. ; Van herle J. J. Power Sources 2019, 436, 226838. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2019.226838
12	Shi W. Y. ; Jia C. ; Zhang Y. L. ; Lü Z. W. ; Han M. F. Acta Phys. -Chim. Sin. 2019, 35 (5), 509.
	施王影; 贾川; 张永亮; 吕泽伟; 韩敏芳. 物理化学学报, 2019, 35 (5), 509. doi: 10.3866/PKU.WHXB201806071
13	Vinke I. C. ; de Haart L. G. J. ; Eichel R. A. ECS Trans. 2019, 91 (1), 589. doi: 10.1149/09101.0589ecs
14	Fang Q. ; Blum L. ; Menzler N. H. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2015, 162 (8), F907. doi: 10.1149/2.0941508jes
15	Sun X. ; Hendriksen P. V. ; Mogensen M. B. ; Chen M. Fuel Cells 2019, 19 (6), 740. doi: 10.1002/fuce.201900081
16	Jia C. ; Chen M. ; Han M. Int. J. Appl. Ceram. Technol. 2017, 14 (5), 1006. doi: 10.1111/ijac.12748
17	Sonn V. ; Leonide A. ; Ivers-Tiffée E. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2008, 155 (7), B675. doi: 10.1149/1.2908860
18	Bessler W. G. ; Gewies S. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2007, 154 (6), B548. doi: 10.1149/1.2720639
19	Fan H. ; Keane M. ; Singh P. ; Han M. J. Power Sources 2014, 268, 634. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2014.03.080
20	Shi W. ; Lyu Z. ; Han M. ECS Trans. 2019, 91 (1), 791. doi: 10.1149/09101.0791ecst
21	Bessler W. ; Warnatz J. ; Goodwin D. Solid State Ionics 2007, 177 (39-40), 3371. doi: 10.1016/j.ssi.2006.10.020
22	Shri Prakash B. ; Senthil Kumar S. ; Aruna S. T. Renew. Sust. Energy Rev. 2014, 36, 149. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2014.04.043
23	Simrick N. J. ; Bieberle-Hütter A. ; Ryll T. M. ; Kilner J. A. ; Atkinson A. ; Rupp J. L. M. Solid State Ionics 2012, 206, 7. doi: 10.1016/j.ssi.2011.10.029
24	Endler-Schuck C. ; Joos J. ; Niedrig C. ; Weber A. ; Ivers-Tiffée E. Solid State Ionics 2015, 269, 67. doi: 10.1016/j.ssi.2014.11.018
25	Boukamp B. Solid State Ionics 2004, 169 (1-4), 65. doi: 10.1016/j.ssi.2003.07.002
26	Schönleber M. ; Klotz D. ; Ivers-Tiffée E. Electrochim. Acta 2014, 131, 20. doi: 10.1016/j.electacta.2014.01.034
27	Dittrich L. ; Nohl M. ; Jaekel E. E. ; Foit S. ; de Haart L. G. J. ; Eichel R. A. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2019, 166 (13), F971. doi: 10.1149/2.0581913jes
28	Tong X. ; Ovtar S. ; Brodersen K. ; Hendriksen P. V. ; Chen M. J. Power Sources 2020, 451, 227742. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2020.227742
29	Wang J. ; Huang Q. A. ; Li W. H. ; Wamg J. ; Zhuang Q. C. ; Zhang J. J. J. Electrochem. 2020, 26, 607.
	王佳; 黄秋安; 李伟恒; 王娟; 庄全超; 张久俊. 电化学, 2020, 26, 607. doi: 10.13208/j.electrochem.200641
30	Primdahl S. ; Mogensen M. J. Electrochem. Soc. 1998, 145 (7), 2431. doi: 10.1149/1.1838654
31	Leonide A. ; Apel Y. ; Ivers-Tiffee E. ECS Trans. 2009, 19 (20), 81. doi: 10.1149/1.3247567
32	Primdahl S. ; Mogensen M. J. Electrochem. Soc. 1999, 146 (8), 2827. doi: 10.1149/1.1392015
33	Hong J. ; Bhardwaj A. ; Bae H. ; Kim I. H. ; Song S. J. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2020, 167 (11), 114504. doi: 10.1149/1945-7111/aba00f
34	Gewies S. ; Bessler W. G. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2008, 155 (9), B937. doi: 10.1149/1.2943411
35	Sumi H. ; Shimada H. ; Yamaguchi Y. ; Yamaguchi T. ; Fujishiro Y. Electrochim. Acta 2020, 339, 135913. doi: 10.1016/j.electacta.2020.135913

Parameter	Anode	Cathode
Effect of Temperature
T/℃	700, 750, 800
φ(H₂)/%	100%	–
φ(H₂O)/%	0	–
φ(O₂)/%	–	21%
Total flow/(L∙min⁻¹)	2	6
Effect of Temperature
T/℃	700, 750, 800
φ(H₂)/%	90%	–
φ(H₂O)/%	10%	–
φ(O₂)/%	–	21%
Total flow/(L∙min⁻¹)	2	6
Effect of anode H₂ partial pressures
T/℃	800
φ(H₂)/%	40%–90%	–
φ(H₂O)/%	10%	–
φ(O₂)/%	–	21%
Total flow/(L∙min⁻¹)	2	6
Effect of anode H₂O partial pressures
T/℃	800
φ(H₂)/%	50%	–
φ(H₂O)/%	3%–30%	–
φ(O₂)/%	–	21%
Total flow/(L∙min⁻¹)	2	6
Effect of cathode O₂ partial pressures
T/℃	800
φ(H₂)/%	90%	–
φ(H₂O)/%	10%	–
φ(O₂)/%	–	10.5%–50%
Total flow/(L∙min⁻¹)	2	2

Characteristic frequency/Hz	Physicochemical origin
Characteristic frequency/Hz	KIT (active area = 1 cm²) ⁸	Shi (active area = 0.5 cm²) ¹²	This work (active area = 100 cm²)
1 × 10⁴–1 × 10⁵	Charge transfer reaction and ionic transport in the Ni/YSZ anode structure	Charge transfer at YSZ/GDC or LSCF/GDC interface	Oxygen ionic transport
100–1 × 10⁴		H₂ electrochemical reaction at Ni/YSZ/H₂ boundary, O₂ reduction at LSCF/O₂ boundary	Charge transfer reaction within the anode
10–100	Oxygen surface exchange kinetics of LSCF as well as the diffusivity of oxygen ions through the LSCF bulk, Gas diffusion within the anode substrate	H₂ diffusion in anode, O₂ diffusion in cathode	Oxygen surface exchange reaction within the cathode, Gas diffusion within the anode
1–10		Gas diffusion	Gas diffusion within the anode
0.1–1	Gas-phase diffusion in the pores of the LSCF electrode		Gas conversion within the anode

[1]	施王影, 贾川, 张永亮, 吕泽伟, 韩敏芳. 固体氧化物燃料电池电化学阻抗谱差异化研究方法和分解[J]. 物理化学学报, 2019, 35(5): 509 -516 .
[2]	王晓强.,刘江.,谢永敏.,蔡位子.,张亚鹏.,周倩.,于方永.,刘美林.. 可用作便携式电源的高性能直接碳固体氧化物燃料电池组[J]. 物理化学学报, 2017, 33(8): 1614 -1620 .
[3]	谢永敏,王晓强,刘江,余长林. 管式电解质支撑型直接碳固体氧化物燃料电池的浸渍法制备及电性能[J]. 物理化学学报, 2017, 33(2): 386 -392 .
[4]	余亮,于方永,苑莉莉,蔡位子,刘江,杨成浩,刘美林. 银基陶瓷复合电极的电性能及其在固体氧化物燃料电池中的应用[J]. 物理化学学报, 2016, 32(2): 503 -509 .
[5]	程庆利, 张卫华, 陶彬. 用三电极体系研究铜在微液滴下的电化学腐蚀[J]. 物理化学学报, 2015, 31(7): 1345 -1350 .
[6]	付召明, 王明阳, 张岩星, 张娜, 杨宗献. 第一性原理研究由金属镍和钇稳定的氧化锆所形成的三相边界微观结构[J]. 物理化学学报, 2014, 30(6): 1055 -1060 .
[7]	刘丹丹, 谢永敏, 刘江, 王金霞. NiO-YSZ-石墨水系浆料的研制及其在注浆成型制备固体氧化物燃料电池中的应用[J]. 物理化学学报, 2014, 30(2): 331 -337 .
[8]	孙现众, 黄博, 张熊, 张大成, 张海涛, 马衍伟. 双电层电容器电化学阻抗谱的实验研究[J]. 物理化学学报, 2014, 30(11): 2071 -2076 .
[9]	罗兵, 夏大海. 扫描电化学显微镜原位表征pH值对核电蒸汽发生器合金腐蚀行为的影响[J]. 物理化学学报, 2014, 30(1): 59 -66 .
[10]	胡智, 黄晓巍, 陈杨辉. EDTA-甘氨酸法制备SmBaCo₂O_5+δ阴极材料及其性能[J]. 物理化学学报, 2013, 29(12): 2585 -2591 .
[11]	上官鹏鹏, 童少平, 李海丽, 冷文华. 电位对α-Fe₂O₃和掺钛α-Fe₂O₃光氧化水电荷转移速率常数的影响[J]. 物理化学学报, 2013, 29(09): 1954 -1960 .
[12]	孟秀霞, 宫勋, 杨乃涛, 谭小耀, 马紫峰. 梯度Cu-CeO₂-Ni-YSZ复合阳极直接甲烷SOFC的制备与性能[J]. 物理化学学报, 2013, 29(08): 1719 -1726 .
[13]	覃国恒, 黄晓巍, 胡智. LaAlO₃基电解质与阳极材料的化学相容性及电化学性能[J]. 物理化学学报, 2013, 29(02): 311 -318 .
[14]	曹剑瑜, 汤佳丽, 宋玲政, 许娟, 王文昌, 陈智栋. EDTA对活性炭的功能化处理及其对炭载Pd催化剂电催化性能的影响[J]. 物理化学学报, 2013, 29(01): 144 -150 .
[15]	孙成, 李喜明, 许进, 闫茂成, 王福会, 王振尧. 尿素对土壤中碳钢微生物腐蚀的影响[J]. 物理化学学报, 2012, 28(11): 2659 -2668 .