Received: 29 May 2019 Revised: 27 July 2019 Accepted: 30 July 2019

DOI: 10.1002/er.4809

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Effective methodology based on neural network optimizer

for extracting model parameters of PEM fuel cells

Mohamed Fawzi1 | Attia A. El‐Fergany2 | Hany M. Hasanien3

1
Department of Electrical
Summary
EngineeringFaculty of Engineering,
Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt I/V polarization curves of proton‐exchange membrane fuel cells (PEMFCs) are
2
Electrical Power and Machines used to characterize the performance of single cells and stacks. Numerous
DepartmentFaculty of Engineering, semi‐empirical models are presented to predict such polarization curves by
Zagazig University, Zagazig 44519, Egypt
3 determining the unknown parameters of mathematical model of the PEMFCs
Electrical Power and Machines
DepartmentFaculty of Engineering, Ain stack. In this paper, a novel optimization approach, namely neural network
Shams University, Cairo 11517, Egypt algorithm (NNA) is applied for an estimation of the unknown PEMFC model

Correspondence
Attia A. El‐Fergany, Electrical Power and
Machines Department, Faculty of
Engineering, Zagazig University, Zagazig
44519, Egypt.
Email: el_fergany@ieee.org.
parameters. The NNA is employed to minimize adopted objective function,
which is formulated as the sum of squared deviations (SSD) between the actual
data and estimated voltage points subjects to set of inequality constraints are
satisfied. Three commercial types of PEMFCs stack namely Ballard Mark V,
BCS‐500 W, and Nedstack PS6 are numerically simulated to show the effective-
ness of the proposed NNA‐based tool for parameter identification. The mini-
mum values of SSD are 0.8536 V2 for Ballard Mark V, 0.011698 V2 for BCS‐
500 W stack, and 2.14487 V2 for Nedstack PS6, respectively. The obtained
results of the NNA are compared with other optimizers recently published in
the literature such as flower pollination algorithm, slap swarm optimizer, grey
wolf algorithm, grasshopper optimization algorithm, and shark smell algo-
rithm under the same conditions. The comparisons and other performance
tests indicate the robustness and the competition of the adopted NNA‐based
method for producing accurate I/V polarization curves under different operat-
ing scenarios.

KEYWORDS
optimization algorithms, parameter extraction, polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cells, steady‐state
modeling

1 | INTRODUCTION properties to achieve high performance and resilience

required for FCs. The FCs can be categorized into a num-
The contribution of renewable energy resources became ber of major types as presented in Liu et al and Kim and
mandatory because of the of scarcity of fossil fuel, price Lee.7,8 Among them, proton‐exchange membrane fuel
inflation, and environmental pollution.1-3 The fuel cell cell (PEMFC) has low operating pressure, low operating
(FC) is one of the important recently developed clean temperature, low relative humidity, high efficiency, green
energy technologies with high efficiency and fuel flexibil- source, no contamination, and waste less other than
ity.4-6 The ‐electrolyte membranes (PEM) have sufficient other types.7,9,10 Current can directly be produced during
Int J Energy Res. 2019;1–12. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/er © 2019 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 1
2 FAWZI
the normal operation between hydrogen and oxygen in
the presence of platinum as reagent.9 It can be utilized
for different power applications. The steadiness of electro-
chemical, mechanical, and thermal process of PEM using
a thinner membranes leads to produce effective
generation.7
The identification of the best utilized properties of the
FC is a big challenge for the simple and accurate model-
ing6 . Many factors affect PEMFC selection and perfor-
mance such as stack life, startup speed, efficiency,
temperature, and modularity.11 One of the most signifi-
cant FC issues is the improvement of the used com-
pounds leading to reliable operation with high
performance. To achieve optimum operation and control
for FCs, many researches have been exerted to accurately
identify its parameters, modeling, simulation, and con-
trol. The model procedures can be classified as mechani-
cal or experimental modeling.9 The mechanical modeling
deals with the electrochemical, heat, and mass parame-
ters. The experimental modeling is stimulated partially
from the mechanical one and formulated as empirical
formulas.
Many researchers studied the PEMFC as fitting prob-
lem using the most extensively used model which is con-
cerned with the reversible voltage, ohmic voltage drop,
the activation, and diffusion overvoltage. They are
searching for a set of unknown parameters minimizing
error between real and estimated data. The most fre-
quently addressed issues with PEMFC parameters identi-
fication are (a) difficulty of the applying conventional
methods, (b) degree of correspondence between PEMFC
volt and current, (c) algorithm speed, (d) type of objective
function, and (e) the identified parameters precision.12
Formerly, many deterministic methods have been
introduced to model the PEMFC and identify its parame-
ters. The PEMFC identification problem is reformulated
by using an emulator based on a dynamic model to obtain
fast and high accuracy solutions as reported in
Voottipruex et al.13 The PEMFC transient response model
is proposed for automotive implementations.14 The
changes of the magnetic field caused by the pinholes in
the PEM membrane are simulated using a current dipole
flaw model utilizing the linear superposition theory. The
proton current density can be identified due to magnetic
contrary and field decline ramp.15 The deterministic
methods require continuous, convexity, and differentia-
bility conditions.5 It cannot perfectly deal with nonlinear,
nonconvex, multivariable, and powerfully joined PEMFC
problem. These methods have problems in finding the
unknown values of the unidentified parameters because
of restrictions of the data which leads to large deviations
between mathematical representations and the real
PEMFC characteristics.4
ET AL.
Therefore, recent heuristic‐based optimization methods
have been used to overcome these shortfalls and easily
resolve these problems. One of the well‐known heuristic
techniques is the genetic algorithm (GA). Simple GA has
been employed to define PEMFC parameters.16 An
adaptive RNA‐GA has been used to evaluate PEMFC
performance along with improving the convergence char-
acteristics and reducing the absolute voltage error.17 A
mechanistic model, describing all internal phenomena in
a single PEMFC with artificial neural network (ANN)
has been adopted.18 To reduce unpredictability in evaluat-
ing control variables and FC parameters, neural network
(NN) is mixed with a particle‐swarm optimizer (PSO).19
In addition, a metaheuristic optimization technique
stipulated based on an effective modified PSO addressed
more PEMFC complicated optimization problem.20 A dif-
ferential evolution (DE) approach has been applied to
accurately identify the PEMFC parameters model.4 Tradi-
tional DE is updated to increase its quality by using rank‐
based mutation and rank‐based different strategies.21,22
In addition, a Markovian switching system is used to reg-
ulate DE population size and distribution.23 A DE conver-
gence trend is enhanced by using two neighborhood
search, dynamic crossover probability, and integrated
scaling factor.24 Moreover, flower pollination algorithm
has been adopted to estimate unknown PEMFC
parameters.25
A fast and precise parameter identification for differ-
ent types of FCs with decomposition and recent optimiza-
tion method is addressed.26 Another grouping‐based
harmony‐search procedure is introduced to define a
PEMFC model and to evaluate PEMFC parameters.27
DE has been updated with global optimization and
applied to identify seven parameters using the empirical
polarization properties of known PEMFC stack.28 The
biogeography‐based optimization algorithm with muta-
tion of DE including chaos theory has been utilized to
identify PEMFC parameters.5
PEMFC has been modeled and represented by
metaheuristic optimization algorithms such as multiverse
optimizer,2 adaptive DE,4 three metaheuristic optimiza-
tion algorithms such as shuffled frog‐leaping algorithm
(SFLA), imperialist competitive algorithm (ICA), and fire-
fly optimization algorithm (FOA) in Kandidayeni et al10
and grey wolf optimizer (GWO)29 to preciously obtain
its characteristics at various states. The simplified
teaching‐learning based optimizer (STLBO) is applied
with the purpose of solving the PEMFC's problem. Using
STLBO search algorithm means population quality is pro-
moted, and local search with the aid of a chaotic map is
conducted to improve the global best solution.30 TLBO
and DE have been combined to improve and accelerate
the search process to solve the PEMFC problem.31 PSO
FAWZI ET AL.
has been applied to generate a detailed PEMFC modeling
to assess system behavior regardless temperature value.32
A backtracking search optimizer to define PEMFC's
polarization curves is presented.33
Many other heuristic methods have been utilized for
solving the PEMFC problems such as salp swarm opti-
mizer (SSO),34 grasshopper optimization algorithm
(GOA),35 aging and exciting P‐systems based optimiza-
tion procedures using semi‐empirical models,9 bird mat-
ing optimizer,36 atom search optimizer,37 and shark
smell algorithm (SSA).38
Some researchers have been concerned with the
PEMFC controller design in addition to parameters to
enhance its performance and characteristics.39-42 Differ-
ent nonlinear controllers methods were designed using
a linearization approach to extend the PEMFC stack
lifespan. A sliding‐mode based on methodology to control
compressor motor to feed FC with air has been
reported.40 The researchers were interested with control-
ler optimization such as stable and optimal controls,39
PEMFC fuel‐cell reduced‐order model and a sliding‐mode
control,40 stable optimal control,41 and PEMFC control-
lers stability and H‐disturbance attenuation.42
Over and above the aforesaid literature survey, a
recent comprehensive review in this regard can be found
in Priya et al.12 As per the aforementioned survey, the
reader can note that many heuristic‐based optimization
approaches have been attempted, and some of them
achieve good results. Following no‐free‐launch theorem,
still there is a room of improvement in terms of the con-
vergence trend, steady pattern ahead toward the mini-
mum cost function, and precision of the generated
results.
The NN algorithm (NNA) is considered a novel
metaheuristic algorithm, which is motivated by biological
nervous systems and the behavior of the ANNs. It is
invented by Ali Sadollah and other researchers in
2018.43 It was applied to solve several complex optimiza-
tion problems, and it is examined by many well‐known
benchmark functions. A comparison of its results with
other optimization methods has proven its high efficacy
and performance.43 It is mainly based on the ANN struc-
ture and its coherent concepts to produce new candidate
solutions. It has several merits such as its high speed of
convergence and its lower number of parameters to be
designed. This helps the designer in selecting a proper
design of the NNA when dealing with a nonlinear optimi-
zation problem. Recently, NNA has been successfully
applied to tune a fractional order fuzzy PID control of
an automotive PEMFC air feed system.44
This current research study aims at (a) identifying the
best values of the unknown PEMFC parameters, (b)
developing an effective model of commercial PEMFCs
3
based on NNA to simulate their real behaviors under var-
ious operating conditions, and (c) generating the various
polarization characteristics for further investigations by
other researchers.
In this current research, the NNA is employed to iden-
tify (optimally) the seven unknown parameters of
PEMFCs for further modeling and simulations. The pro-
cess of parameters extraction is adopted as an optimiza-
tion problem pending that predefined inequality
constraints are satisfied. Three typical commercial
PEMFC systems are used to demonstrate and emphasize
the viability of the proposed NNA‐based tool. Necessary
discussions and detailed comparisons are in order to eval-
uate the results of the NNA. In addition, simple statistical
measures are made as well.
The rest of this article is structured as follows: Section
2 announces the mathematical model of PEMFC based
on the generalized steady‐state model along with problem
definition and parameters identifications. The procedures
of the NNA are presented in Section 3. Section 4 reveals
the numerical cropped results with necessary subsequent
discussions and further validations. At last, the conclu-
sion and future work are drawn in Section 5.
2 | M A T H E M A T I C A L M O D E L OF
PEM F UEL CELLS A N D
PARAMETERS' IDENTIFICATIONS
An electrochemical model of PEMFC, which is developed
by Mann et al,45 widely used in the literature to charac-
terize the steady‐state performance of the PEMFC is
employed in this current work. In this model, three volt-
age drops per cell are indicated, specifically called (a) cell
activation overpotential (vact), (b) cell ohmic voltage drop
(vΩ), and (c) concentration overpotential (vcon).
The voltage of PEMFCs stack (VStack) of many cells
connected in series assuming the same behavior for all
the cells is computed using (1).34,45
V Stack ¼ N cells :ðE Nernst − vact − vΩ − vcon Þ (1)
where Ncells is the number of cells connected in series,
and ENernst is the cell reversible voltage.
A closer look to a typical I‐V polarization characteris-
tics of the PEMFCs, initially the cell voltage drops rapidly
due the activation overpotential and then drops linearly
and gradually because of the Ohmic resistance. Once
again, at higher current values, the cell voltage comes
down faster due to the convection overpotential.
The ENernst is calculated using Equation (2) which
assumes that the reference temperature equals 25°C.
The aforementioned three types of voltage drops can be
determined spending Equations (3) to (5), respectively.45
4 FAWZI ET AL.


E Nernst ¼ 1:229 − 0:85 × 10−3 T fc − 298:15

pffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
þ 4:3085 × 10−5 T fc ln PH 2 PO2
vact ¼ − ½ξ1 þ ξ2 Tfc þ ξ3 Tfc lnðCO2 Þ þ ξ4 Tfc lnðIfc Þ
is adopted to minimize the sum of squared deviations
(2) (SSD), commonly used in the literature for sake of fair
comparisons, between experimental measured cell volt-
age and estimated voltage values by the proposed NNA‐
based model which is depicted in Equation (6).

where
OF ¼ Minimize
ðSSDÞ
Nsamples  2 
P o2
 ¼ Minimize ∑m¼1 V FC;meas ½m−V FC;est ½m (6)
C o2 ¼ 6 exp 498=T fc (3)
5:08:10
where Nsamples denotes the number of measured sam-
ρ l ples, m defines the iteration counter, VFC,meas is the exper-
vΩ ¼ I fc ðRm þ Rc Þ; Rm ¼ m (4)
MA imental measured voltage (V), and VFC,est defines model
calculated voltage (V).
where
The OF subjects to the provisions of number of
   2  2:5
inequality restrictions as follows:
I fc T I fc
181:6 1 þ 0:03 þ 0:062 303fc
MA MA
8 h i
ρm ¼  
>
I fc T −303
4:18: fcT >
> ξ i ∈ ξ i; min ; ξ i; max ∀i ¼ f1; 2; 3; 4g
λ − 0:634 − 3 e >
>
<
fc
MA λ ∈ ½λmin ; λmax 
 
J >
vcon ¼ −β: ln 1 −
J max
where Tfc is the operating FC's temperature (K), PH 2 and
PO2 are the partial pressures of H2 and O2 (atm), respec-
tively, Ifc is the FC's current (A), MA defines the active
area of the membrane (cm2), CO2 denotes the concentra-
tion of O2 in (mol/cm3), ξi (i ∈ {1 to 4}) are semi‐
empirical coefficients, Rm is the membrane resistance
(Ω), Rc is the connections' resistance (Ω), l is the mem-
brane thickness (cm), ρm is the membrane resistivity
(Ω. cm), λ denotes an adjustable parameter concerning
the water content and humidity, β is a parametric coeffi-
cient which is treated as a constant, and J and Jmax stand
for the actual and maximum current densities (A/cm2),
respectively.
It is worth noting that the estimation of water con-
tent is difficult and changes during the utilization of
the FC as well. The value of λ equals 13 under ideal sit-
uations and is equal to 23 under supersaturated situa-
tions. λ is being considered as an adjustable parameter
with a possible maximum value of 23 in this research.
It is worthy emphasizing that the value of λ depends
on relative humidity and other many factors.45 In this
current study, the assumption of a proper membrane
water content at all possible operating conditions is
valid.
From the above stated formulas, it can be concluded
that there are seven variables in the above model required
to be extracted carefully to characterize the PEMFCs,
namely ξ1,ξ2,ξ3,ξ4,λ,Rc & β.
With the aim of estimating the abovementioned
unknown seven parameters, an objective function (OF)
S:t:   (7)
>
> Rc ∈ Rc; min ; Rc; max
>
>
:
(5) β ∈ ½βmin ; βmax 
where ξi,min and ξi,max are min/max interval of ξi, λmin and
λmax are min/max values of λ, Rc,min and Rc,max are
min/max boundaries of Rc, and βmin and βmax are
min/max interval of the constant β.
3 | NEURAL NETWORK
O P T I M I Z A T I O N A L GO R I T HM
The ANNs are composed of computational models that
are inspired by the biological nervous systems. The
ANN structure consists of several artificial neurons,
which are connected together to form the NN. Based on
the ANN structure, it can be classified into two types
feed‐forward or recurrent NNs, and it relies on its struc-
ture whatever open loop or feedback, respectively. More-
over, the recurrent NNs have either a local or global
feedback structure based on its type.
As all the metaheuristic algorithms, the NNA starts its
process with generating an initial population entitled pat-
tern solutions within the search space. The NNA is likely
to imitate the ANN behavior, where its input data and
output/target data are received and then predicting the
relationship between them. These input data can be pro-
duced from experiments or simulation results.43,44 In this
algorithm, the best solution at each iteration is consid-
ered the output data, and the main goal is to decrease
the error between this best solution and the other pre-
dicted solutions. This target solution is updated with the
course of iterations. In any D dimensional optimization
problem, the candidate solution or the pattern solution
FAWZI ET AL. 5

is an array, as written in Equation (8), and it is the input W update ðt þ 1Þ ¼ W i ðt Þ þ 2 × rand × ðW target ðt Þ − W i ðt ÞÞ;
i
data to the NNA.
i ∈ N POP (16)
Pattern solution ¼ ½x 1 ; x 2 ; x 3 ; ……:; x D  (8)
The bias operator can act as a noise of the system. It
A pattern solution matrix (X) is produced to start the can represent the exploration process within the search
optimization process. Its number of rows represents the area, and it is similar to the mutation property of GA. It
number of population NPOP, and its number of columns affects the new pattern solution (Equations 14 and 15)
is the number of design variables D. It can be written as and the weight updating of Equation (16). The following
follows: Pseudo code indicates the calculation of a bias operator
2 3 for new pattern solutions and update the weight under
x 11 x 12 ⋯ x 1D the condition rand ≤ ψ, where ψ is the modification fac-
6 7
X ¼4 ⋮ ⋱ ⋮ 5: (9) tor that demonstrates the percentage of pattern solutions
x N1 POP x N2 POP ⋯ x ND POP needed to be altered.

The fitness function is evaluated for each pattern solu- For i = 1 to NPOP
tion as follows: %% Bias for new pattern solutions

 Nb = Round (D×ψ)
C i ¼ f x i1 ; x i2 ; ……:; x iD : (10) For j = 1 to Nb
xinput(i, integer rabd [0,D]) = LB+(UB ‐ LB) ×
The target solution is considered. Therefore, the NNA rand .
has now X input matrix data and one target solution. The
weight matrix is a squared matrix with NPOP side. It gener- End For
ates random numbers which lie in the range [0, 1] through %% Bias for update weight matrix
the iterations. It is expressed by the following equation: Nwb = Round (NPOP×ψ)
2 3 For j = 1 to Nwb
W 11 W i1 ⋯ W N1 POP
6 7 Wupdate(j, interg rand [0, NPOP]) = U(0,1).
W ðt Þ ¼ 4 ⋮ ⋱ ⋮ 5 End For
W 1N POP W iN POP ⋯ W NN POP End For
2 POP 3
W 11 ……… W i1 ⋯ W N POP 1
6 7 Under the condition rand > ψ, the transfer function
¼4 ⋮ ⋱ ⋮ 5: (11)
W 1 N POP W i N POP ⋯ W N POP N POP (TF) operator can be applied as follows:

The constraints of the weight values are mathemati- X *i ðt þ 1Þ ¼ X i ðt þ 1Þ þ 2 × rand × ðX target ðtÞ − X i ðt þ 1ÞÞ;
cally modeled by the following equation: i ∈ N POP : (17)

N POP Then, the fitness value for all updated pattern agents is
∑ wij ðtÞ ¼ 1; i ∈ N POP (12)
j¼1 calculated. A complete flowchart of the NNA is
established in Figure 1.

wij ∈ U ð0; 1Þ; i& j ∈ N POP (13)

4 | NUMERICAL SIMULATIONS,
After determining the weight matrix W, a new X CASE STUDIES, VALIDATIONS, AND
matrix is created based on the ANN strategy, and it is DISCUSSIONS
modeled as follows:
Simulations are demonstrated on three case studies under
N POP
various operating conditions, and the results are pre-
j ðt
X new þ 1Þ ¼ ∑ wij ðt Þ × X i ðt Þ; j ∈ N POP (14)
i¼1 sented in comparison to other competing optimizers. At
first, the best values of the unknown seven parameters
X i ðt þ 1Þ ¼ X i ðtÞ þ X new are cropped using the NNA. At a later stage, various oper-
i ðt þ 1Þ; i ∈ N POP : (15)
ating conditions such as temperature and partial pres-
Equations (14) and (15) are used to update the pattern sures variations are analyzed. The min/max margins of
solutions with the course of iterations. Then, the these unknowns are listed in Table 1 which are widely
weighting matrix can be updated by Equation (16). used in literatures.2,4,10,29,34,35,37,38
6 FAWZI ET AL.

FIGURE 1 Flowchart of the proposed NNA [Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]

TABLE 1 Min/max limits of unknown parameters

Parameter ξ1 ξ2 × 10−3 ξ3 × 10−5 ξ4 × 10−5 λ Rc(mΩ) β

Low −1.1997 1.00 3.60 ‐26.00 13.00 0.10 0.0136

High −0.8532 5.00 9.80 ‐9.54 23.00 0.80 0.5000

It is worthy stating that the final agreed controlling
parameters of the NNA which are reached after many tri-
als and errors are NPOP equals to 50, Max ¯ Iter is equal to
100, and ψ is equal to 1. It is well‐known that the meta‐
heuristic optimization procedures such as NNA have a
high level of randomness, and for that reason the NNA
has been implemented 100 times independently, and the
best results are reported among these independent trials.
Some statistical performance parametric measures such
as best, worst, and standard deviation (SD) of the adapted
SSD are performed to appraise the NNA's robustness for
all presented case studies. In the next subsections, the
subsequent case studies are detailed.
convergence, ie, SSD is shown in Figure 2. It can be seen
that the convergence occurs in steadily and moves fast to
the final best value in only 100 iterations. Since, the pro-
cess of PEMFC parameter extraction is offline in nature
which means that the processing time is not the issue.
Table 2 indicates the obtained values for each targeted
parameter after implementing the NNA for PEMFC
parameter extraction. The corresponding best fitness

4.1 | Case study (1): Ballard Mark V 5 kW

In this case, the data sheet and operating data of this type
of stack are collected from the literatures.25,29,30,35,38 This
stack has 35 cells connected in series with 70‐A maxi-
mum thermal current. After implementing the NNA to
estimate these unknown parameters in order to describe
this PEMFCs stack, the best values are selected carefully FIGURE 2 The signature of best score of SSD convergence
among several trials. The trend of the fitness function [Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
FAWZI ET AL. 7

TABLE 2 The extracted best parameters along with the lowest SSD in comparisons to others for case study (1)

Parameter NNA FPA25 GWO29 GOA35 SSA38

ξ1 −0.97997 −1.0257 −1.1827 −0.8532 −1.1827

−3
ξ2 × 10 3.6946 3.4000 3.7080 3.4173 3.7080
ξ3 × 10−5 9.0871 6.7952 9.3600 9.8000 9.3600
−5
ξ4 × 10 −16.2820 −12.8500 −11.9250 −15.9555 −11.9250
λ 23.0000 15.6446 11.7603 *
22.8458 11.7603*
Rc(mΩ) 0.1000 0.52906 0.7877 0.1000 0.78773
β 0.0136 0.0614 0.0136 0.0136 0.0136
# **
SSD (best) 0.85361 307.9250 0.002067 0.8710 0.002067**
SSD (Worst) 0.87068 NR NR 0.9097 NR
SSD (SD) 0.00854 NR NR 0.0113 NR

Abbreviation: NR, Not reported.

#
This value is recalculated using the generated parameters by the FPA. * The value of λ violates the min/max range (infeasible solution**).

value produced by the NNA overall 100 independent runs

along with relevant statistical actions is itemized in
Table 2 as well. Additionally, the subsequent compari-
sons among the other competing optimizers are indicated
there. The I/V characteristics of this PEMFC stack com-
bining the experimental and estimated voltage data by
the NNA‐based method are shown in Figure 3A. Simi-
larly to this, the I/P plots for this stack under study are
shown in Figure 3B. It can be confirmed that good
matchings or one can say even full unison between actual
measured and estimated points (either voltage or power)
are indicated. It may be worth mentioning that the num-
ber of measured data is 13 points.

4.2 | Case study (2): 500 W BCS stack

In this subsection, the behavior of the BCS 500‐W

PEMFC stack which consists of 32 cells connected in
series which is manufactured by the American Company
called BCS Technologies is investigated. The main char-
acteristics of this PEMFCs stack are extracted from the lit-
eratures.22,24,25,29,34,38 As can be seen, the thermal rated
current of this system is 30 A. After the implementations
of NNA to define the unknown parameters overall 100
runs, the best results by the NNA in comparisons to other
optimizers are presented in Table 3. In addition to that, FIGURE 3 Curves of Ballard mark V: A, I/V polarization plots;
the quality statistical measures are reported in the same B, I/P plots [Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
table. The trend of SSD minimization to the best value
is depicted in Figure 4. The performance curves to char-
acterize the steady‐state behavior of this stack such as Figure 5, the worthy performance of the NNA is indicated
I/V and I/P plots are presented in Figure 5A‐5B, respec- in terms of the lower SSD value and good matching
tively, in consort with the experimental data (number of between measured and estimated data by the NNA‐based
measured data equals 18). A closer look to Table 3 and method.
8 FAWZI ET AL.

TABLE 3 The extracted best parameters along with the lowest SSD in comparisons to others for case study (2)

Parameter NNA SFLA10 ICA10 FOA10 FPA25 GWO29 SSO34 SSA38

ξ1 −1.0596 −0.9657 −0.9086 −0.9928 −0.9851 −1.0180 −0.8532 −1.0180

−3
ξ2 × 10 3.7435 3.0800 2.4798 2.6210 2.8000 2.3151 4.8115 (computed) 2.3151
ξ3 × 10−5 9.6902 7.2236 4.4583 3.7464 4.4600 5.2400 9.4334 5.2400
ξ4 × 10−5 −19.3020 −19.3000 −19.3000 −19.3000 −23.2000 −12.8150 −19.2050 −12.8150
λ 20.8772 20.8862 22.6626 21.1011 17.4598 18.8547 23.0000 18.8547
Rc(mΩ) 0. 1000 0.1000 0.2460 0.1000 0.1660 0.7504 0.3499 0.75036
β 0.0161 0.0161 0.0162 0.0163 0.0697 0.0136 0.01589 0.0136
SSD (best) 0.011698 0.011697 0.011856 0.011819 0.01642 7.18890 0.01219 7.18890
SSD (worst) 0.013670 0.011698 0.034665 0.030233 NR NR 0.01520 NR
−4 −8 −4
SSD (SD) 5.640 × 10 5.039 × 10 0.00586 0.00417 NR NR 8.711 × 10 NR

Abbreviation: NR, Not reported.

FIGURE 4 The signature of the best score of SSD convergence

[Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]

4.3 | Case study (3): 6 kW Nedstack PS6

PEMFCs stack

In this last study, Nedstack PS6 PEMFCs stack (in which,

65 cells are linked together in series) with the rated active
power of 6 kW and its main characteristics and operating
data can be found in the literatures.10,34,46-48 The maxi-
mum thermal current of this system is 225 A. The same FIGURE 5 Curves of BCS‐500 W: A, I/V polarization plots; B, I/P
plots [Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
procedures performed for the above presented two case
studies are followed. The best trend of SSD minimization
over the 100 iterations is described in Figure 6, in which,
the best value of SSD is 2.14487 V2 which is lesser than
obtained by various algorithms (SFLA, ICA, and FOA) generated by other recent competing algorithms. The rep-
employed in,10 FPA,25 SSO,34 GOA,35 and GA,35 as publi- resentations of the steady‐state behavior of this stack are
cized in Table 4. The identified best values of Nedstack depicted in Figure 7A‐7B, respectively (number of mea-
type PS6 are presented in Table 4 together with those sured data equals 30).
FAWZI ET AL. 9

FIGURE 6 The signature of the best score of SSD convergence

[Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]

4.4 | Various operating scenarios:

temperature and pressure variations

In this subsection, further simulations under various

operating temperatures and pressures are investigated.
At this moment, after the best values of the seven
unknown parameters of the above three typical stacks
in the market are cropped, two scenarios of each stack
under study are planned such as (a) temperature varia-
tions under constant partial pressures and (b) varying
the operating partial pressures under constant tempera-
FIGURE 7 Curves of Nedstack PS6: A, I/V polarization plots; B,
ture. The aforementioned means that these proposed sce-
I/P plots [Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
narios are repeated three times and avoid length article;
just as a representative study, only these scenarios are
presented for Ballard Mark V stack. voltage and output power can be boosted to a certain
The simulated behavior analysis of this stack overall degree. On the other hand, by keeping the cell tempera-
various operating temperatures (at 25oC, 50oC, 70oC, ture constant at 70oC, the system behaves as depicted in
and 90oC) is depicted in Figure 8, at which the PO2 and Figure 9. Once again, it can be noted that by regulating
PH2 are maintained constant at 1/1 atm. The reader can the partial pressures, more terminal voltage and realized
observe that by increasing the temperature, the stack power can be produced by the stack.

TABLE 4 The extracted best parameters along with the lowest SSD in comparisons to others for case study (3)

Parameter NNA SFLA10 ICA10 FOA10 FPA25 SSO34 GOA35 GA35

ξ1 −0.8535 −1.02307 −1.0343 −1.0357 −1.1605 −0.9719 −1.1997 ‐1.1997

−3
ξ2 × 10 2.4316 3.4760 3.3202 2.9502 4.0000 3.3487 3.5505 3.4172
(Computed)
ξ3 × 10−5 3.7545 7.7883 6.4421 3.7669 8.4565 7.9111 4.6144 3.6000
ξ4 × 10−5 −9.5400 −9.5400 −9.5400 −9.5400 −10.1230 −9.5435 −9.5400 −9.5400
λ 13.0802 15.0323 15.0970 15.0297 15.1264 13.0000 13.0092 13.0000
Rc(mΩ) 0.1000 0.1620 0.1650 0.1622 0.12863 0.1000 0.1005 0.1376
β 0.0136 0.0136 0.0136 0.0136 0.0153 0.0534 0.0579 0.0359
*
SSD (best) 2.14487 2.16706 2.16834 2.16709 13.3791 2.18067 2.18586 2.4089
SSD (worst) 2.1645 2.16760 2.51819 2.61422 NR 2.25060 NR NR
−3 −4
SSD (SD) 5.848 × 10 1.0336 × 10 0.07707 0.1298 NR 0.0203 NR NR
*
Abbreviation: NR, Not reported. This value is recalculated using the generated parameters by the FPA.
10
FIGURE 8 Behavior analysis of the Ballard Mark V under
changed temperatures: A, I/V polarization curves; B, I/P plots
[Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
5 | C O N C L U S I O N S AN D F UT U R E
WORK
In this paper, the extraction of PEMFCs parameters to
define their characteristics has been treated as an optimi-
zation problem and solved by NNA. According to the
numerical results, the following points can be concluded:
• Lesser effort in adjusting the NNA controlling param-
eters to guarantee good performance is observed with
less calculation burden,
• The best values of the model seven unknown parame-
ters are cropped for accurate characterization of three
real commercial PEMFCs stack under study (eg, Bal-
lard Mark V, BCS‐500 W, and Nedstack PS6) with
necessary discussions,
• Statistical performance measures have been made to
validate the competency of the proposed NNA‐based
tool,
• Detailed comparisons in this article along with perfor-
mance tests have confirmed that the NNA‐based tech-
nique is better than the other competing methods,
FAWZI ET AL.
FIGURE 9 Behavior analysis of the Ballard Mark V under
regulating pressures: A, I/V polarization curves; B, I/P plots
[Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
• Various operating conditions such as different tem-
perature variations and pressure regulations are inves-
tigated, and
• Validation of the PEMFC model results‐based NNA
with experimental data has been confirmed and
well‐matched.
It is worthy stating that the authors are scheduling to
extend the current work by implementing a detailed
dynamic model with an appropriate control strategy to
improve the dynamic responses of the PEMFC stack
and to simulate actual working conditions. This charac-
terizes our near future research works.
A C KN O WL ED G EME N T S
The authors would like to deeply thank the editor and
anonymous referees for their valid remarks, and con-
structive comments and kind recommendations, which
have significantly upgraded the technical quality and pre-
sentation of this article which make it more interesting to
the readers.
FAWZI ET AL.
ORCID
Attia A. El‐Fergany https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3476-1361
R EF E RE N C E S
1. El‐Hay EA, El‐Hameed MA, El‐Fergany AA. Optimized param-
eters of SOFC for steady state and transient simulations using
interior search algorithm. Energy. 2018;166:451‐461. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.10.038
2. Fathy A, Rezk H. Multi‐verse optimizer for identifying the opti-
mal parameters of PEMFC model. Energy. 2018;43:634‐644.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2017.11.014
3. Saleh IMM, Ali R, Zhang H. Simplified mathematical model of
proton exchange membrane fuel cell based on horizon fuel cell
stack. J Mod Power Syst Clean Energy. 2016;4:668‐679. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s40565‐016‐0196‐5
4. Cheng J, Zhang G. Parameter fitting of PEMFC models based on
adaptive differential evolution. Electr Power Energy Syst.
2014;62:189‐198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijepes.2014.04.043
5. Niu Q, Zhang L, Li K. A biogeography‐based optimization algo-
rithm with mutation strategies for model parameter estimation
of solar and fuel cells. Energ Conver Manage. 2014;86:1173‐1185.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2014.06.026
6. El‐Hay EA, El‐Hameed MA, El‐Fergany AA. Steady‐state and
dynamic models of solid oxide fuel cells based on satin bower-
bird optimizer. Int J Hydrogen Energy. 2018;43:14751‐14761.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2018.06.032
7. Liu D, Xia S, Tang H, et al. Parameter optimization of PEMFC
stack under steady working condition using orthogonal experi-
mental design. Int J Energy Res. 2019;43:2571‐2582. https://doi.
org/10.1002/er.4131
8. Kim YS, Lee KS. Fuel cell membrane characterizations. Polymer
Rev. 2015;55:330‐370. https://doi.org/10.1080/15583724.2015.
1011275
9. Yang S, Chellali R, Lu X, Li L, Bo C. Modeling and optimization
for proton exchange membrane fuel cell stack using aging and
challenging P systems based optimization algorithm. Energy.
2016;109:569‐577. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2016.04.093
10. Kandidayeni M, Macias A, Khalatbarisoltani A, Boulon L,
Kelouwani S. Benchmark of proton exchange membrane fuel
cell parameters extraction with metaheuristic optimization
algorithms. Energy. 2019;183:912‐925. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
energy.2019.06.152
11. Kumar P, Kannaiah SKK, Choudhury SR, Rajasekar N.
Genetic algorithm‐based modeling of PEM fuel cells suitable
for integration in DC microgrids. Electr Power Compono Syst.
2017;45:1152‐1160. https://doi.org/10.1080/15325008.2017.1318
980
12. Priya K, Sathishkumar K, Rajasekar N. A comprehensive review
on parameter estimation techniques for proton exchange mem-
brane fuel cell modelling. Renew Sustain Energy Rev.
2018;93:121‐144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.05.017
13. Voottipruex K, Sangswang A, Naetiladdanon S, Mujjalinvimut
E, Wongyoa N. PEM fuel cell emulator based on dynamic model
with relative humidity calculation. In: 14th Inter. Conf. on Elect.
Eng./Electronics, Comp., Telecom. and Info. Techn. (ECTI‐CON).
11
Phuket, Thailand: IEEE; June 2017:27‐30 10.1109/
ECTICon.2017.8096291.
14. Abid RA, Masoud R. Dynamic simulation of a proton exchange
membrane fuel cell system for automotive applications. In: Pro-
ceedings of SEEP2012. Dublin, Ireland: DCU; 05‐08 June
2012:311‐316. ISBN:978‐1‐873769‐11‐9.
15. Claycomb JR. Algorithms for the magnetic assessment of proton
exchange membrane (PEM) fuel cells. Res in Nondest Eval
(RNDE). 2018;9:167‐182. https://doi.org/10.1080/09349847.2017.
1304596
16. Priya K, Babu TS, Balasubramanian K, Kumar KS, Rajasekar N.
A novel approach for fuel cell parameter estimation using sim-
ple genetic algorithm. Sustain Energy Techn Assess.
2015;12:46‐52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seta.2015.09.001
17. Zhang L, Wang N. An adaptive RNA genetic algorithm for
modeling of proton exchange membrane fuel cells. Int J Hydro-
gen Energy. 2013;38:219‐228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijhydene.2012.10.026
18. Grondin‐Perez B, Roche S, Lebreton CL, Benne M, Damour C,
Kadjo JA. Mechanistic model versus artificial neural network
model of a single‐cell PEMFC. Engineering. 2014;6:418‐426.
https://doi.org/10.4236/eng.2014.68044
19. Chang W. Equivalent circuit parameters estimation for PEM
fuel cell using RBF neural network and enhanced particle
swarm optimization. Math Probl Eng. 2013;2013:67268. https://
doi.org/10.1155/2013/672681
20. Askarzadeh A, Rezazadeh A. Optimization of PEMFC model
parameters with a modified particle swarm optimization. Int J
Energy Res. 2011;35:1258‐1265. https://doi.org/10.1002/er.1787
21. Gong W, Cai Z. Accelerating parameter identification of proton
exchange membrane fuel cell model with ranking‐based differ-
ential evolution. Energy. 2013;59:356‐364. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.energy.2013.07.005
22. Gong W, Cai Z. Parameter optimization of PEMFC model with
improved multi‐strategy adaptive differential evolution. Eng
App Artif Intell. 2014;27:28‐40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
engappai.2013.07.016
23. Zhu W, Fang J, Zhang W, Xu Y, Tong L. A hybrid differential evo-
lution for optimum modeling of PEM fuel cells. Arab J Sci Eng.
2014;9:2869‐2885. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13369‐014‐0958‐1
24. Sun Z, Wang N, Bi Y, Srinivasan D. Parameter identification of
PEMFC model based on hybrid adaptive differential evolution
algorithm. Energy. 2015;90:1334‐1341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
energy.2015.06.081
25. Priya K, Rajasekar N. Application of flower pollination algo-
rithm for enhanced proton exchange membrane fuel cell
modelling. Int J Hydrogen Energy. 2019;44:18438‐18449.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2019.05.022
26. Gong W, Yan X, Hu C, Wangc L, Gao L. Fast and accurate
parameter extraction for different types of fuel cells with decom-
position and nature‐inspired optimization method. Energ Conver
Manage. 2018;174:913‐921. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.
2018.08.082
27. Askarzadeh A, Rezazadeh A. A grouping‐based global harmony
search algorithm for modeling of proton exchange membrane
fuel cell. Int J Hydrogen Energy. 2011;36:5047‐5053. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2011.01.070
12
28. Chakraborty UK, Abbott TE, Das SK. PEM fuel cell modeling
using differential evolution. Energy. 2012;40:387‐399. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2012.01.039
29. Ali M, El‐Hameed MA, Farahat MA. Effective parameters' iden-
tification for polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cell models
using grey wolf optimizer. Renew Energy. 2017;111:455‐462.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.04.036
30. Niu Q, Zhang H, Li K. An improved TLBO with elite strategy for
parameters identification of PEM fuel cell and solar cell models.
Int J Hydrogen Energy. 2014;39:3837‐3854. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.ijhydene.2013.12.110
31. Turgut OE, Coban MT. Optimal proton exchange membrane
fuel cell modelling based on hybrid teaching learning based
optimization‐differential evolution algorithm. Ain Shams Eng
J. 2016;7:347‐360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2015.05.003
32. Salim R, Nabag M, Noura H, Fardoum A. The parameter identi-
fication of the Nexa 1.2 kW PEMFC's model using particle
swarm optimization. Renew Energy. 2015;82:26‐34. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.renene.2014.10.012
33. Askarzadeh A, Coelho LDS. A backtracking search algorithm
combined with Burger's chaotic map for parameter estimation
of PEMFC electrochemical model. Int J Hydrogen Energy.
2014;39:11165‐11174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2014.
05.052
34. El‐Fergany AA. Extracting optimal parameters of PEM fuel cells
using salp swarm optimizer. Renew Energy. 2018;119:641‐648.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.12.051
35. El‐Fergany AA. Electrical characterisation of proton exchange
membrane fuel cells stack using grasshopper optimizer. IET
Renew Power Gen. 2018;12:9‐17. https://doi.org/10.1049/iet‐
rpg.2017.0232
36. Askarzadeh A, Rezazadeh A. A new heuristic optimization algo-
rithm for modeling of proton exchange membrane fuel cell: bird
mating optimizer. Int J Energy Res. 2013;37:1196‐1204. https://
doi.org/10.1002/er.2915
37. Agwa AM, El‐Fergany AA, Sarhan GM. Steady‐state modeling
of fuel cells based on atom search optimizer. Energies.
2019;12:1884. https://doi.org/10.3390/en12101884
38. Rao Y, Shao Z, Ahangarnejad AH, Gholamalizadeh E, Sobhani
B. Shark smell optimizer applied to identify the optimal param-
eters of the proton exchange membrane fuel cell model.
Energ Conver Manage. 2019;182:1‐8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
enconman.2018.12.057
39. Rubio JJ. Stable and optimal controls of a proton exchange
membrane fuel cell. Int J Control. 2014;87:2338‐2347. https://
doi.org/10.1080/00207179.2014.913201
FAWZI ET AL.
40. Talj RJ, Hissel D, Ortega R, Becherif M, Hilairet M. Experimen-
tal validation of a PEM fuel‐cell reduced‐order model and a
moto‐compressor higher order sliding‐mode control. IEEE Trans
Indust Electron. 2010;57:1906‐1913. https://doi.org/10.1109/
TIE.2009.2029588
41. Torres C, Rubio JJ, Aguilar‐Ibáñez CF, Pérez‐Cruz JH. Stable
optimal control applied to a cylindrical robotic arm. Neural
Comput Applic. 2014;24:937‐944. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s00521‐012‐1294‐6
42. Dabkowski P, Galkowski K, Bachelierd O, Rogers E, Sebek M,
Kummert A. Control of differential linear repetitive processes
using strong practical stability and H disturbance attenuation.
Int J Control. 2013;86:636‐649. https://doi.org/10.1080/
00207179.2012.756148
43. Sadollah A, Syyaadi H, Yadav A. A dynamic metaheuristic opti-
mization model inspired by biological nervous systems: neural
network algorithm. Appl Soft Comput. 2018;71:747‐782. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2018.07.039
44. AbouOmar MS, Zhang H‐J, Su Y‐X. Fractional order fuzzy PID
control of automotive PEM fuel cell air feed system using neural
network optimization algorithm. Energies. 2019;12:1435. https://
doi.org/10.3390/en12081435
45. Mann RF, Amphlett JC, Hooper MAI, Jensen HM, Peppley BA,
Roberge PR. Development and application of a generalised
steady‐state electrochemical model for a PEM fuel cell. J Power
Sources. 2000;86:173‐180. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378‐7753
(99)00484‐X
46. NedStack PS6 Product Data—Fuel Cell Markets www.
fuelcellmarkets.com/content/images/articles/ps6.pdf (Accessed,
4 August, 2018).
47. El‐Hay EA, El‐Hameed MA, El‐Fergany AA. Improved perfor-
mance of PEM fuel cells stack feeding switched reluctance
motor using multi‐objective dragonfly optimizer. Neural Comput
Applic. 2018;(In press. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521‐018‐3524‐z
48. El‐Hay EA, El‐Hameed MA, El‐Fergany AA. Performance
enhancement of autonomous system comprising proton
exchange membrane fuel cells and switched reluctance motor.
Energy. 2018;163:699‐711. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.
08.104
How to cite this article: Fawzi M, El‐Fergany
AA, Hasanien HM. Effective methodology based on
neural network optimizer for extracting model
parameters of PEM fuel cells. Int J Energy Res.
2019;1–12. https://doi.org/10.1002/er.4809