Proceedings of HT2005

Proceedings
2005 ASME Summer Heat Transfer of HT2005
Conference
2005 ASME
July 17-22, Summer
2005, San Heat Transfer
Francisco, Conference
California, USA
July 17-22, 2005, San Francisco, California, USA

HT2005-72460
HT2005-72460

ANALYSIS OF COMPACT HEAT EXCHANGERS AS AN INTERCOOLER IN PEMFC SYSTEMS

Takamasa Ito Jinliang Yuan

Department of Heat and Power Engineering Department of Heat and Power Engineering
Lund Institute of Technology Lund Institute of Technology
Box 118, 22100 Lund, Sweden Box 118, 22100 Lund, Sweden
Takamasa.Ito@vok.lth.se Jinliang.Yuan@vok.lth.se

Bengt Sundén
Department of Heat and Power Engineering
Lund Institute of Technology
Box 118, 22100 Lund, Sweden
Bengt.Sunden@vok.lth.se

ABSTRACT order to obtain a reasonable high voltage, the reactant air is

In Proton Exchange Membrane Fuel Cell (PEMFC)
systems, an intercooler contributes to proper thermal
management of the reactant air into the cathode. However, the
structure/performance of it is not clear yet. In this paper, two
case studies concerning an intercooler in a 100 kW PEMFC
system are carried out. Plate-fin and tube-fin heat exchangers
are analyzed as the intercooler, in terms of volume, pressure
drop and weight. The ε−NTU method is used.
As general characteristics of the intercooler, the volume is
increased with system operating pressure, while the pressure
drop is decreased due to the volume expansion. The plate-fin
intercooler contributes to the weight reduction of the system
because aluminum is used. However, at the high operating
pressure, space consumption is large. The tube-fin intercooler
contributes to the volume reduction because the coolant is a
liquid. However, the usage of stainless steel contributes to
weight increase.
The tube-fin intercooler in aluminum may contribute to
space and weight reduction. However, a liquid coolant, which
is proper for the PEMFC stack cooling without corrosion of
aluminum, is needed.
INTRODUCTION
Intercoolers are widely used in gas power engineering. The
aim is to cool the compressed gas in multistage compression, to
reduce energy input to the compressor and increase the system
output.
For Proton Exchange Membrane Fuel Cell (PEMFC)
systems, the intercooler is necessary for another purpose. In
usually supplied to the cathode at two to three bar. The
operating temperature of the PEMFC stack is around 80 oC.
After compression, the temperature of the reactant air is higher
than the stack operating temperature. Then the reactant air has a
low relative humidity and might damage the membrane of the
PEMFC stack. To maintain high efficiency and long life time of
the PEMFC stack, an intercooler is necessary.
On the cathode side of PEMFC systems, there are several
components to balance mass flow rate, relative humidity,
reactant air temperature, such as compressor, intercooler and
humidifier, etc. Depending on the system configuration, the
required heat transfer rate in the intercooler varies. According
to [1], the following operating conditions prevail:
• High system operating pressure
• High ambient temperature
• Low cathode operating temperature
• High stoichiometry of reactant
• System with internal humidification
• Large H2O gas-phase content for the humidification
However, the structure/performance of the intercooler is
not clear yet. In this paper, two case studies with different types
of intercooler are carried out for the 100 kW PEMFC system.
These are plate-fin and tube-fin intercoolers. In terms of the
pressure drop, volume and weight, the characteristics of these
intercoolers are analyzed.

1 Copyright © 2005 by ASME

Downloaded From: https://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on 06/18/2019 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 The intercooler is located between a compressor and a
NOMENCLATURE humidifier. After compression, the reactant air has higher
A Total heat transfer surface area [m2] temperature than the stack operating temperature. To keep a
Af Heat transfer surface area of the fin [m2] high relative humidity in the stack, an intercooler is employed
*
C Heat capacity rate ratio [-] to cool the reactant air. The required heat transfer rate in the
de Diameter of the circular fin [m] intercooler varies due to several parameters in each component.
di Inside tube diameter [m] The influences of them are discussed in [1].
do Outside tube diameter [m] This paper focuses on estimations of the pressure drop,
f Fanning friction factor [-] volume and weight of the intercooler. Therefore, system
G Core mass velocity [kg/m2s] parameters in the components are assumed as shown in Table 1.
h Heat transfer coefficient [W/m2K] Only the system operating pressure is a variable because of its
Kc Contraction loss coefficient [-] significant influence on the fuel cell stack voltage. If the system
Ke Expansion loss coefficient [-] operating pressure is changed from p1 to p2, the voltage of the
k Thermal conductivity [W/mK] RT ⎛ p 2 ⎞
fuel cell is changed as ∆V = ln⎜ ⎟ , according to the
4 F ⎜⎝ p1 ⎟⎠
L Flow length [m]
l Height of the fin [m]
m& Mass flow rate [kg/s] Nernst equation [4]. F, T and R stand for the Faraday constant
Nt Number of the tube [-] (F = 96485 coulomb), temperature and the molar gas constant
NTU Number of transfer units [-] (R = 8.314 kJ/(kmol K)), respectively. Accordingly, the voltage
P Pumping power for coolant [W] increases with an increase of the system operating pressure.
p Pressure [bar] However, the consumption of electricity for the compressor is
q Heat transfer rate [kW] also increased.
Ro Overall thermal resistance [oC/kW]
rh Hydraulic radius [m]
T Temperature [oC] H2O injection
U Overall heat transfer coefficient [W/m2K]
Reactant air
δ Thickness [m] (ambient)
ε Heat exchanger effectiveness [-]
ηf Fin efficiency [-]
ηo Extended surface efficiency [-] (1) (2) (3) (4)
ρ Fluid density [kg/m3]
σ Ratio of free flow area Coolant
to frontal area [-]
Figure 1. Location of the components in the cathode side of
Subscripts the PEMFC system; (1) compressor, (2) intercooler, (3)
c Cold stream humidifier and (4) the cathode of PEMFCs.
f Fin
h Hot stream Table 1. The details in each component in Fig. 1.
i Inlet (1) Compressor
m Mean Inlet temperature, reactant air (oC) 20
o Outlet
Mass flow rate (kg/s) 0.11 at stoichiometry=2
w Wall
Type Screw compressor in [4].
(3) Humidifier
PROBLEM STATEMENT
H2O injection temperature (oC) 80
The aim of this paper is to analyze two types of
intercoolers in PEMFC systems, such as plate-fin and tube-fin H2O phase Gas
heat exchangers. For comparison purpose, the thermal duty of (4) PEMFC cathode
the intercooler in the PEMFC system is fixed. However, the Temperature (oC) 80
materials and coolants of in each case vary because of the Fuel cell stack power (kW) 100
system constraint. The pumping power for the coolant is Cell voltage (V) 0.65
identical. This is based on the fan for the plate-fin intercooler Inlet relative humidity (-) 0.9
(SADC24B5, 16 W) referred to in [2]. In addition to those,
several heat transfer surface geometries in [3] are examined.
The system configuration and some other details of the Case study 1: Plate-fin intercooler
case studies are mentioned below. In this case study, a plate-fin heat exchanger is studied as
the intercooler in a 100 kW PEMFC system. It is assumed to
System configuration use ambient air as the coolant. Therefore, the additional fan is
Figure 1 shows the system configuration of cathode side in also assumed to be in the system. The pressure drop and mass
a 100 kW PEMFC system. This is a common configuration. flow rate of the coolant are determined by the capacity of the

2 Copyright © 2005 by ASME

Downloaded From: https://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on 06/18/2019 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 fan (SADC24B5, 16 W) referred to in [2]. Aluminum is
selected as material.
The details of the parameters surrounding the plate-fin
intercooler are mentioned in Table 2. Three types of heat
transfer surface geometries (six patterns) in [3] are studied as
shown in Table 3. Pictures of these geometries are shown in
Fig. 2. The semidescriptive method of designating surfaces
refers to the number of fins per inch transverse to the flow
direction. Thus, surface 12.00T has 12.00 fins per inch. The
additional letter T indicates the surfaces with definite triangular
passage. The louver-fins and strip-fins are designated by two
figures. The first refers to the length of the louvered fin in the
flow direction, the second to the number of fins per inch
transverse to the flow. The first for the strip-fin denoted by (s)
refers to the length of the strip. (D) stands for a double-passage
design. Plain fins are used in applications where the allowance
of pressure drop is low and the augmented interrupted surfaces
cannot meet the design requirement of the allowance of the
pressure drop for a desired fixed frontal area. Louver fins are
used extensively in the automotive industry due to their mass
production manufacturability and hence lower cost. Strip fins
are one of the most widely used enhanced fins in aircraft,
cryogenics and many other industries where mass production is
not required. The details of these fins are mentioned in [3]. In
this study, hot stream (reactant air) side and cold stream
(coolant) side are assumed to have the same heat transfer
surface geometries.
Table 2. Conditions of the plate-fin intercooler.
Flow arrangement Unmixed-unmixed crossflow
Coolant Ambient air
Mass flow rate (kg/s) 0.12
Inlet temperature (oC) 20
Material Aluminum
Pressure drop (kPa) 0.118
Table 3. Heat transfer surface geometries for the plate-fin
intercooler in [3].
Plain Louver Strip
10.27T 3/8-8.7 1/4(s)-11.1
12.00T 3/4-11.1 1/2-11.94(D)
to prevent shunt currents, see [6] and [7]. However, DI water is
known to be highly corrosive and it degrades many materials. It
will take metal ions into solution from the metal it is in contact
with. Therefore, if the coolant is commonly used with the
radiator, there is a material constraint in the intercooler, as well.
In this case study, two kinds of tube-fin intercoolers are
studied. One is made of aluminum with conventional coolant
for an automotive radiator. It is assumed to be water/ethylene-
glycol 50/50 (Vol.%), [8]. Another is made of stainless steel
(18Cr-8Ni) with DI water. The details of the tube-fin
intercooler are shown in Table 4.
The pumping power of the coolant P is defined as in Eq.
(1). The pump/fan efficiency is ηp = 0.75. m& and ρ are mass
flow rate and density of the coolant. For comparison, the
pumping power P of these coolants is maintained at 16 W as in
case study 1. Therefore, the pressure drop of the liquid in case
study 2 is much higher than for the gas coolant in case study 1
because of the high density of liquid coolant.
m& ∆p
P= (1)
ρη p
In addition to that, three geometries of tube-fin heat
exchangers in [3] are studied. These are circular tubes with
integral circular spiraled fins. Each geometry is examined with
each coolant and materials. These combinations are shown in
Table 5. The letters CF refer to circular fins. The numerals refer
to the number of fins per inch.
Table 4. Conditions of the tube-fin intercoolers.
Flow arrangement Mixed (hot stream) –unmixed
(cold stream) cross flow
Coolant (a) Water/ethylene glycol mixture
(b) DI water
Mass flow rate (kg/s) 2.5
Inlet temperature (oC) 75
Material (a) Aluminum
(b) Stainless steel
Pressure drop (kPa) 4.590
Table 5. Combinations of the geometry, material and
coolant for the tube-fin intercooler.

Geometry Material Coolant

in [3]
Case 1 CF7.34 Aluminum Water/Ethylene glycol
Case 2 CF8.72 Aluminum Water/Ethylene glycol

(a) (b) (c) Case 3 CF8.72(c) Aluminum Water/Ethylene glycol

Figure 2. Heat transfer surface geometries for plate-fin heat Case 4 CF7.34 Stainless steel DI water
exchanger; (a) plain-fin, (b) louver-fin and (c) strip-fin. Case 5 CF8.72 Stainless steel DI water
Case 6 CF8.72(c) Stainless steel DI water
Case study 2: Tube-fin intercooler
In this case study, tube-fin heat exchanger is studied as the
intercooler in a 100 kW PEMFC system. The coolant of the ANALYSIS METHOD AND EQUATIONS
radiator for the stack cooling is assumed to be commonly used In this study, the ε-NTU method is used to calculate the
in the intercooler. required volume of the intercooler. Pressure drops of the
In the current PEMFC stack design, the deionized water coolant shown in Table 2 and Table 4 are considered as critical
(DI water) is considered to be used as the coolant in the radiator for the intercooler design.

3 Copyright © 2005 by ASME

Downloaded From: https://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on 06/18/2019 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 The nondimensional parameters, such as the heat
exchanger effectiveness ε, the number of transfer units NTU,
the heat capacity rate ratio C*, have thermodynamic
significance. ε is defined as the ratio of the actual heat transfer
rate to the maximum possible value. NTU is the ratio of the
overall thermal conductance UA to the smaller heat capacity
rate. C* is the ratio of the smaller to larger heat capacity rate for
the two fluid streams.
Sizing problem by the ε-NTU method
In this paper, the heat transfer requirement q in the
intercooler is calculated by a commercial software, Integrated
Process Simulation Environment (IPSEpro). The volume
calculation in this paper is approached as a sizing problem. The
brief flow chart of the sizing problem in the ε-NTU method is
summarized.
1. Calculate ε from the specified inlet and outlet
temperatures, then C*, as well.
2. Determine NTU for known ε and C* for the given
flow arrangement from the ε-NTU formula.
3. Calculate the required heat transfer surface area A
from A=NTUּCmin/U.
ε-NTU formula for crossflow arrangement
In the second step in the flow chart, the ε-NTU formula is
used, if it is available. It depends on the flow arrangement.
Flow arrangements of plate-fin and tube-fin intercooler are
crossflow. However, due to the difference in structure, they
have different ε-NTU formulas. Equations (2) and (4) show ε-
NTU formulas of the plate-fin and tube-fin intercooler,
respectively, [5]. In a plate-fin intercooler, the flow passages on
both sides are separated by plates. It is referred to as unmixed.
However, for the tube-fin one, hot stream (reactant air) side is
mixed because of no object to separate.
[ ] ∞
core pressure drop, and the flow is mixed very well; hence,
values of Kc and Ke can be taken at infinite Re.
∆p G 2 ⎡ ⎛ ρi ⎞ L ⎛1⎞ ⎤ (6)
= ⎢2⎜⎜ − 1⎟⎟ + f ρi ⎜ ⎟ ⎥
p i 2 ρ i p i ⎣⎢ ⎝ ρ o ⎠ rh ⎜⎝ ρ ⎟⎠ m ⎦⎥
The calculation of the pressure drop of the tube-fin
intercooler is different for the inside and outside tubes. The
pressure drop inside tubes is determined in the same manner as
that for plate-fin surface as shown in Eq. (5). For the
calculation of the pressure drop outside tubes, the entrance and
exit pressure drops are not calculated separately, but they are
lumped into the friction factor f. Then, the total pressure drop
outside tube is described as Eq. (6), see [5].
Other equations
The fin efficiency ηf is the ratio of heat transfer rate
through an actual fin to the one through an ideal fin that has an
infinite thermal conductivity kf. Therefore, heat transfer rate
with an ideal fin is maximum for given circumstances. Figure 3
shows the extended surface geometries for plate-fin and tube-
fin intercooler. Equation (7) shows the fin efficiency for plate-
fin intercooler, [5]. This is for a fin with an adiabatic tip. In
most two-fluid plate-fin heat exchangers, the heat flow from/to
both sides is idealized as a symmetrical one. Therefore, there is
no heat transfer through the center of the fin and it is treated as
adiabatic. Therefore, the height of the fin l is assumed to be half
of the distance between the plates.
0.5
tanh ml ⎛ 2h ⎞
ηf = , m=⎜ ⎟ (7)
ml ⎜kfδ ⎟
⎝ ⎠
Equation (8) shows the fin efficiency of a tube-fin
intercooler, [5]. Since the theoretical solution of the

n =1
n
ε = 1 − exp(− NTU ) − exp − (1 + C * ) NTU ∑ C * Pn ( NTU )
temperature profile of the circular fin involves evaluating six
Bessel functions, approximations are used in this paper. Φ, a, n,
(2) b and r* are parameters to calculate the fin efficiency of the
where, the function Pn(NTU) is defined as, circular fin,
1 n (n + 1 − j )
Pn ( NTU ) = ∑ NTU n + j (3) ⎧a(ml e ) −b Φ > 0.6 + 2.257(r*) −0.445
(n + 1)! j =1 j! ⎪
η f = ⎨ tanh Φ
⎪ Φ ≤ 0.6 + 2.257(r*) −0.445
{[ ( )] }
ε = 1 − exp − 1 − exp − NTU ⋅ C * / C * (4) ⎩ Φ
(8)
where,
Pressure drop a = (r*) −0.246 , Φ = ml e (r*) n , n = exp(0.13mle − 1.3863) ,
∆p G2 ⎡ ⎛ ρi ⎞ L ⎛1⎞ ρ ⎤ r* ≤ 2
= ⎢1 − σ + K c + 2⎜⎜ − 1⎟⎟ + f ρi ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ − (1 − σ 2 − K e ) i ⎥
2

2 ρi pi ⎣⎢ ρ ρ ρ ⎧0.9107 + 0.0893r *
pi ⎝ o ⎠ r ⎝ ⎠m ⎥
o⎦ b=⎨
h
r* > 2
(5) ⎩0.09706 + 0.17125 ln r *
δ
Equation (5) is the total pressure drop on one fluid side for le = l f + , r* = d e / d o
a plate-fin intercooler, [5]. σ is the ratio of free flow area to 2
frontal area. Kc and Ke is a contraction and an expansion loss
coefficient, respectively. L is the flow length. rh is hydraulic
radius.
Equation (5) contains effects of entrance, momentum, core
friction and exit. For highly interrupted fin geometries, the
entrance and exit losses are generally small compared to the

4 Copyright © 2005 by ASME

Downloaded From: https://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on 06/18/2019 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Core mass velocity G
The core mass velocity (G=ρu) is one of the important
parameters for the intercooler design, because it influences
several parameters, such as Reynolds number, the Colburn j
and the Fanning friction factor f, etc. G changes with the
minimum free flow area Ao (m=GAo) of the intercooler as the
mass flow is constant.
(a) (b) Figure 5 shows an example of the core mass velocity G
Figure 3. Extended surface geometries for (a) plate-fin and and the volume of the plate-fin intercooler with the surface
(b) tube-fin intercooler. geometry 12.00T in [3]. The core mass flow G is decreased
with system operating pressure. This is because the volume
Equation (9) shows the extended surface efficiency, [5], expansion due to the increase of the required heat transfer rate.
involving the influence of the prime surface. Due to the reduction of the G value, Reynolds number is
also reduced. Therefore, increases of f and j values, reduction of
Af
ηo = 1 − (1 − η f ) (9) pressure drop, etc., are expected due to the increase of the
A system operating pressure.
In this paper, the influence of fouling is neglected.
12 Volume 0.03
Therefore the overall thermal resistance Ro in Eq. (10) is GHot stream (reactant)

Core mass velocity G (kg/m2s)

Volume of the intercooler (m3)

composed of three terms, i.e., hot and cold convection terms, 10 0.025
and the conduction one. 8 0.02

1 1 1 6 0.015
Ro = = + Rw + (10)
UA (η o hA) h (η o hA) c 4 GCold stream (coolant) 0.01

δw 2 0.005
In Eq. (10), R w = for the plate-fin intercooler, and 0 0
k w Aw
1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
ln(d o / d i )
Rw = for the tube-fin intercooler. Operating pressre (bar)
2πk w LN t
Figure 5. Core mass velocity G on both stream sides and
volume of the plate-fin intercooler; the surface geometry is
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 12.00T in [3].

Thermal duty of the intercooler in the PEMFC Results of case study 1: Plate-fin intercooler
systems
Temperatures at the inlet, outlet of the hot stream (reactant 0.04 10.27T
Volume of plate-fin intercooler

air) and required heat transfer rate in the intercooler are shown 0.035
12.00T
in Fig. 4. With an increase of the operating pressure, the inlet 3/8-8.7
0.03 3/4-11.1
temperature of the hot stream Th,i is increased. Accordingly, the 1/4(s)-11.1
0.025
required heat transfer rate q is also increased. These values are 1/2-11.94(D)
(m )
3

applied as the base values in the case studies. 0.02

0.015
0.01
T h,i
250 20
0.005
Required heat transfer rate

200 16 0
q
Temperature (oC)

1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4

150 12 Operating pressure (bar)
(kW)

100 T h,o 8
Figure 6. Volume of the plate-fin (gas-to-gas) intercooler.
50 4 Figures 6 and 7 show the volume and pressure drop of the
0 0
plate-fin intercoolers. The volumes with louver-fins and strip-
1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
fins are smaller than those with plain-fins. Especially, at high
operating pressure, this difference is obvious. This is because
Operating pressure (bar)
these two fins have interruptions to break the thermal boundary
layers and enhance the heat transfer at the same flow rate.
Figure 4. Temperatures at the inlet, outlet of the hot stream Therefore, the pressure drop with these fins are also higher than
(reactant air) and required heat transfer rate in the those with plain-fins, see Fig. 7. However, the difference of the
intercooler in 100 kW PEMFC system. pressure drop is less at higher operating pressure. This is

5 Copyright © 2005 by ASME

Downloaded From: https://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on 06/18/2019 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 because the reduction of the G value according to Fig. 5 and conductivity of the material kw is in the extended surface
Eq. (4). efficiency involved in the convective term. Therefore, the
For PEMFC systems, either stationary or portable, space volumes of tube-fin intercooler with stainless steel (cases 4 to
saving is critical. For the system with high operating pressure, 6) are larger than those with aluminum (cases 1 to 3).
intercoolers with interrupted fins are favorable. It also reaches Both efficiencies are increased with operating pressure.
the weight reduction. This is because the required heat transfer rate is increased.
In the case study 2, two kinds of coolant are examined.
10.27T
0.01 However, the coolants do not largely influence the intercooler
12.00T
Pressure drop design. The density of the water/ethylene glycol mixture is
Pressure drop of plate-fin

3/8-8.7
0.008 3/4-11.1 somewhat higher than that of DI water. However, the viscosity
intercooler (bar)

1/4(s)-11.1 of this mixture is around two times larger than that of DI water.
0.006 1/2-11.94(D)
As a result, the Reynolds number (Re=ρuD/µ) of
water/ethylene glycol mixture is lower than that of DI water at
0.004
the same mass flow rate.
0.002
However, the thermal resistance of the liquid-to-gas heat
exchanger is dominated in the gas side. Therefore, a small
0 change of the properties on the liquid side does not largely
1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 influence the total thermal resistance.
Operating pressure (bar)

Figure 7. Pressure drop of the plate-fin (gas-to-gas) 1 Case 1

Extended surface efficiency

intercooler.
0.9

0.8
Results of case study 2: Tube-fin intercooler Case 4
0.7
Case1
0.035 Case2 0.007 0.6
Case3
Volume of the tube-fin

0.03 0.006
Pressure drop (bar)

Case4 0.5
intercooler (m3)

0.025 Case5 0.005 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4

Case6
0.02 0.004 Operating pressure (bar)
Pressure drop
0.015 0.003
0.01 0.002 Figure 9. Extended surface efficiencies of aluminum (case 1)
0.005 0.001 and stainless steel (case 4) tube-fin intercoolers.
0 0
1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
Comparison of two case studies
Operating pressure (bar) For the comparison of the case studies, a plate-fin (12.00T
in Fig. 6) and two tube-fin (CF7.34 in case 1 and 4 in Table 5)
Figure 8. Volume and pressure drop of the tube-fin (liquid-
intercoolers are selected. Pressure drop on the hot stream
to-gas) intercooler.
(reactant air) side of these three intercoolers are set to be
Figure 8 shows the volume and pressure drop of the tube- identical with the plate-fin (12.00T) intercooler in Fig. 7.
fin intercoolers in Table 5. The pressure drop on the hot stream
(reactant air) side is maintained at the same level as for the 0.04
(c)
Volume of the intercooler (m3)

plate-fin intercooler with the 12.00T geometry in case study 1 0.035

to enable comparison. 0.03
The volumes with aluminum (cases 1 to 3) are smaller than 0.025
those with stainless steel (cases 4 to 6). The reason might be the 0.02 (b)
less extended surface efficiency ηo of the stainless steel 0.015 (a)
intercooler compared to the aluminum intercooler. 0.01
Figure 9 shows the extended surface efficiency ηo of the 0.005
tube-fin intercoolers CF7.34 (cases 1 and 4). Intercooler with 0
aluminum (case 1) has around 20 % higher efficiency than that 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
with stainless steel. For the same extended surface geometries Operating pressure (bar)
with the same boundary conditions, stainless steel obtains less
efficiency than aluminum. Figure 10. Volume comparison; (a) tube-fin intercooler
Overall thermal resistance is composed of three terms. (case 1 in Table 5), (b) tube-fin intercooler (case 4 in Table
These are convection terms for hot and cold streams and a 5) and (c) plate-fin intercooler (surface geometry is 12.00T
conduction term as shown in Eq. (9). Thermal conductivity kw in Fig. 6).
of the wall material is directly involved in the conduction term.
However, this resistance is generally much smaller than the Figure 10 shows the volume comparison. At low operating
convective resistance. The large influence of the thermal pressure, the volumes of the intercoolers do not differ.

6 Copyright © 2005 by ASME

Downloaded From: https://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on 06/18/2019 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 However, with increasing operating pressure, this difference is
increased. The volume increase of the plate-fin intercooler is
larger than that of tube-fin intercoolers. This is because the
tube-fin intercooler has high overall heat transfer coefficient U
due to the liquid coolant. In the ε-NTU method, the heat
transfer surface area is calculated by A=NTUּCmin/U.
Therefore, an intercooler with higher overall heat transfer
coefficient has a less volume increase. Therefore, the tube-fin
intercooler has a smaller volume than the plate-fin intercooler.
It can also contribute to the volume reduction of the system,
especially for high system operating pressure.
However, the tube-fin intercoolers in this case study
originally have high heat exchanger effectiveness. It has a risk
to dramatically increase the volume because the asymptotic
nature of the ε-NTU formula. To maintain a small volume of
the tube-fin intercooler, the improvement of the radiator is
important because it will supply a low inlet temperature of the
coolant to the intercooler.
Figure 11 shows the weight comparison of the intercoolers.
Because the density of stainless steel is around three times
higher than that of aluminum, the tube-fin intercooler with
stainless steel (b) is heaviest, though it has less volume than the
plate-fin intercooler. At low operating pressure (around 2 to 3
bar), weights of (a) and (c) do not differ. However, at high
operating pressure, (c) is almost two times heavier than (a). The
characteristics of the intercoolers are summarized in Table 6.
According to Fig. 11, the contribution of aluminum to the
weight reduction is large. The tube-fin intercooler has a
potential of volume reduction. However, from a practical point
of view, PEMFC needs to use DI water for the stack cooling.
Therefore, the usage of stainless steel is needed and it increases
the weight.
35
Weigth of the intercooler (kg)
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
1.5 2 2.5
Operating pressure (bar)
Figure 11. Weight comparison; (a) tube-fin intercooler (case
1 in Table 5), (b) tube-fin intercooler (case 4 in Table 5) and
(c) plate-fin intercooler (surface geometry is 12.00T in Fig.
6).
Table 6. The characteristics of the plate-fin and tube fin
intercoolers in PEMFC system.
Case study 1
Plain-fin
(Aluminum) (Stainless steel) (Aluminum)
Volume Large
Weight Light
Downloaded From: https://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on 06/18/2019 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
CONCLUSION
In this paper, two case studies with different types of
intercoolers in a 100 kW PEMFC system are studied. As the
intercooler, plate-fin and tube-fin heat exchangers are analyzed
in terms of volume, pressure drop and weight.
As general characteristics of the intercooler in 100 kW
PEMFC system, the volume of the intercooler is increased with
system operating pressure, while the pressure drop is decreased
due to the volume expansion. Depending on the material,
coolant and intercooler type, the volume and weight varied.
The advantage of the plate-fin intercooler is the allowance
to use aluminum. It contributes to the weight reduction of the
system. It can be used for portable systems, in which the weight
limitation is critical. However, at high operating pressure, space
consumption is large.
The advantage of the tube-fin intercooler is less volume
than the plate-fin intercooler. However, because the material
constraint by the (DI water) coolant, stainless steel has to be
used. This contributes to the weight increase. Therefore,
stationary applications, such as residential systems, where the
space saving is critical rather than weight reduction, can be
appropriate.
The tube-fin intercooler in aluminum may contribute to
space and weight reduction. However, the liquid coolant, which
is proper for the PEMFC stack cooling without corrosion of
aluminum, is needed.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The current research is financially supported by the
National Fuel Cell Program by the Swedish Energy Agency.
REFERENCES
[1] Ito, T., Yuan, J. and Sundén, B., 2005, “Heat and Mass
(b) Balances of an Intercooler in PEM Fuel Cell Systems”, ASME
FUELCELL 2005-47031, to appear, Third International
Conference on Fuel Cell Science, Engineering and Technology,
(c) May 23-25, 2005, Michigan.
(a) [2] Japan Servo Co., Ltd. http://www.japanservo.jp/
[3] Kays, W. M., and London, A. L., “Compact Heat
Exchangers”, 3rd ed. McGraw-Hill, 1984.
3 3.5 4
[4] Larminie, J. and Dicks, A., 2003, “Fuel Cell Systems
Explained”, John Wiley & Sons Inc., Chichester, 2nd edition
pp. 316-319.
[5] Shah, R. K., and Sekulic, D. P., 2003, “Fundamentals of
Heat Exchanger Design”, J. Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, New
Jersey.
[6] Fronk, M. H., Wetter, D. L., Masten, D. A. and Bosco, A.,
Case study 2 2000, “PEM Fuel Cell System Solutions for Transportation”,
Tube-fin Tube-fin SAE 2000-01-0373.
Small Small [7] Cortese, M. E. and James, R. L., 2003, “A Study of Material
Heavy Light Compatibility with Deionized Water”, SAE 2003-01-0804.
[8] Deroo, A. M., 1997, “Fundamentals”, Atlanta, ASHRAE,
Chapter 20.
7 Copyright © 2005 by ASME