Evaluation of sub-rib convection in PEM fuel cell flow fields with different geometrical characteristics

1. INTRODUCTION
In must be pointed out that Tthe most qualitative flow field for PEMFC applications proved to be the serpentine flow field, having a higher pressure drop than parallel flow field
and efficiently removing accumulated water from the channels. Water flooding can still occur for this type of field at the outlet regions and U-bend regions [4, 5] and fluid flow
transport mechanisn by convection and difusion must be studied in detail in those areas of the field.
Due to a significant velocity of flow gasses along the channels, pressure differences can develop between adjacent channels due to viscous losses, forcing the fluid to short-
circuit from one channel to the next through the porous gas diffusion layer (GDL) under the lands (ribs) of the bipolar plate [6]. This convective-type transport mechanism is
known in literature under the name of channel bypass or sub-rib (under-rib) convection. This mechanism is schematically represented in fig1, were reactant flow traveling
through GDL layer of thichness t. The under-rib convection is directly correlated with the channel geometry (width, depth, shape) and in this paper the channel geometry
parameters were modified to reveal the effects of sub-rib convection and to improve the fuel cell performance.
2. Model set-up
The numerical model consists of one complete channel domain, including the two flow channels plus the serpentine and the underlying GDL domain, as we can see in Fig. 2.a.
The geometrical parameters of the flow field were also presented here: L(mm) is the vertical flow channel length, w(mm) is the channels rib width, representing the width of the
bipolar plate region in contact with GDL, a(mm) is the channel width and b(mm) is the channel height.In order to create the finite element mesh models(see Fig. 1.b), the user-
controlled mesh work mode was considered for each numerical model, choosing the option Free Tetrahedral with minimum and maximum mesh element dimensions of a/3
(mm) and 0.1 mm for the domains corresponding to flow channels and GDL layer. It was used also the option Free Triangular with minimum and maximum mesh element
dimensions of w/3 (mm) and 0.1 mm for upper boundary of GDL, in contact with flow channels. A particular quantity of interest is the amount of flow, which penetrates into the
GDL during each channel pass. The ratio of fluid going around the corner of the serpentine to the flow through the GDL is expressed with relation (1). The dimensionless
parameter m can increase the percentage of the convective flow traveling under the bipolar plate ribs, being defined with expression (2) where fch is a channel geometry
coefficient depending on the ratio b/a, calculated starting from the relation[3].Here, the derivate dP/dy represent the pressure variation along the length L of
the flow channel 1 on y direction, numerically computed with Comsol Multiphysics software. The Peclet number mediated along the channel length L will illustrate the
importance of bypass convection between the two channels, calculated for each model with expression [4].The Schmidt number Sc is defined by relation (5) and the Reynolds
number was evaluated using the expression (6).

3.Results of this study

In tables 1 and 2 we can see the geometrical and calculated parameters for the models
In fig. 3, In the case of models M2 and M3 we could observe a discontinuous velocity field distribution along the entire channel length, a maximum field being located only in
the gas admission area. Model M4 presented a relatively constant velocity field distribution through GDL along the inter-channel region.
From local current density distribution at cathode boundary, computed for numerical models M1-M7 and presented in Fig. 4, we could notice that the model M3
developed a clear delimitation of maximum current distribution only along the GDL areas in direct contact with gas channels
As we can see in fig.5, Models M2 and M3 with the most discontinuous GDL velocity field distribution along the channel length showed the most reduced oxygen
convective flux (of about 0.1 0.2 g/m2s) at cathode boundary. For model M3 with lowest convective flow near serpentine was observed the lowest pressure drop along
the channel 1 length, of about 31 Pa, as we could see in Fig. 5.b. Model M6 having the highest channel length L presented the highest pressure drop of 65 Pa.
From Fig. 6 we could see clearly that Model M5 presented the best consumption of oxygen near the central part of electrode-electrolyte active area, oxygen molar
concentration being here only at about 2.1 2.2 mol/m3.
As a general conclusion, model M5 with a medium convective flow through GDL layer in the serpentine area and the second highest sub-rib convection degree
proved to have the most uniform local current distribution along the entire cathode active area, and the best consumption of oxygen near the central part of
cathode boundary.